ACC Regular Season Title Thread

[uh_no]

Apologies if there's already a thread on this....but with 6 games remaining, this thing is wiiiide open. I kind of want to break it down.

Eliminated:
GT
NCSU
Wake
BC

Control their own destiny:
UNC
Miami (still yet to play UNC)

Everyone else:
Virginia: If they win out, they pass miami on H2H, but still need UNC to pick up one more loss
ND: Need UNC to lose 2 games, and virginia to lose 1.
Duke: needs miami to lose once
UL: needs UNC to lose twice

The other 5, while not technically eliminated, have little chance, given that there are so many teams in front of them.

[pfrduke]

Apologies if there's already a thread on this...but with 6 games remaining, this thing is wiiiide open. I kind of want to break it down.

Eliminated:
GT
NCSU
Wake
BC

Control their own destiny:
UNC
Miami (still yet to play UNC)

Everyone else:
Virginia: If they win out, they pass miami on H2H, but still need UNC to pick up one more loss
ND: Need UNC to lose 2 games, and virginia to lose 1.
Duke: needs miami to lose once
UL: needs UNC to lose twice

The other 5, while not technically eliminated, have little chance, given that there are so many teams in front of them.

Don't we need Miami to lose twice? They get the tiebreaker at 14-4. And I think we also need ND to lose once.

[BandAlum83]

Don't we need Miami to lose twice? They get the tiebreaker at 14-4. And I think we also need ND to lose once.

Agreed. I do believe that if we win out, however, we stand a good chance both ND and Miami will help us out with losses.

I'm more interested in tourney seedings. At this point, looking at the standings, three post-season eligible teams are tied in the loss column. Only two double-bye spots are available. We beat UVA, but lost to ND. Anyone know how the 2 double-byes would be awarded? Who would get them?

The four double-bye teams have so much better chance to win the tourney.

[sagegrouse]

Agreed. I do believe that if we win out, however, we stand a good chance both ND and Miami will help us out with losses.

I'm more interested in tourney seedings. At this point, looking at the standings, three post-season eligible teams are tied in the loss column. Only two double-bye spots are available. We beat UVA, but lost to ND. Anyone know how the 2 double-byes would be awarded? Who would get them?

The four double-bye teams have so much better chance to win the tourney.

Al Featherston's Front Page article today went into great detail on one example.

[uh_no]

Don't we need Miami to lose twice? They get the tiebreaker at 14-4. And I think we also need ND to lose once.

I could be mistaken, but I don't believe ties are broken for title purposes. only for seeding...and i'm more concerned about hanging another banner than I am about a seed line in the ACC tournament. it's going to be hard whomever we play, and matchup considerations will likely be more effectual

[Kedsy]

Don't we need Miami to lose twice? They get the tiebreaker at 14-4. And I think we also need ND to lose once.

First of all, I believe uh_no is correct that ties are not broken for title purposes, only seeding purposes. But even if you want to talk about "first seed in the ACC tournament" instead of "title," Miami has to play at Notre Dame on March 2, so if Duke wins out, in order to get the #1 seed, we need that 3/2 game not to be canceled and then either Miami to lose twice OR both of them to lose once, depending on the result of the Miami/ND game.

Also, Miami has four of its six remaining games against ranked teams (two on the road), and Notre Dame has three straight road games before its matchup with Miami. So there's a pretty good chance they'll each lose at least one game. Of course, Duke has two games against UNC and a road game at Louisville, so there's a pretty good chance we'll lose at least one game too.

[Indoor66]

It is simple: keep winning. The rest will be what it will be. If we win, all will be fine.

[Olympic Fan]

Agreed. I do believe that if we win out, however, we stand a good chance both ND and Miami will help us out with losses.

I'm more interested in tourney seedings. At this point, looking at the standings, three post-season eligible teams are tied in the loss column. Only two double-bye spots are available. We beat UVA, but lost to ND. Anyone know how the 2 double-byes would be awarded? Who would get them?

The four double-bye teams have so much better chance to win the tourney.

Jim Boeheim took major issue with this point during today's teleconference. He argued (from experience) that it's a huge disadvantage to sit around for two days while other good teams get to play. He did say it was tough to win five games in five days, but thinks the single-bye teams -- those seeded No. 5 to No. 10 this year -- are in the best shape, especially in the quarterfinals. He was emphatic that he'd rather have the single bye than the double bye.

Not a lot of ACC history to go on. We've had just two tournaments with a double bye. Virginia, which had the No. 1 seed, won the 2014 tourney and Notre Dame, which had the No. 3 seed won the 2015 tournament. Virginia beat No. 3 seed Duke in the finals, while Notre Dame beat No. 5 seed UNC. So small sample size, but so far in the ACC, double bye teams are 2-for-2 in winning the title and 3-for-4 in reaching the title game.

But Boeheim has a lot of experience with the double bye in the Big East. I don't have all the Big East Tourney data, but I do know that Syracuse won the 2006 title out of the single bye situation. He also reached the finals in 2009 and 2013 out of the single bye situation. And Jamie Dixon won his only Big East title in 2008 out of the single bye. Rick Pitino had to win four games to win both of his Big East titles. And didn't UConn win the title in 2012 (?) by winning five games in the BE Tourney?

I don't know the answer, but I would suggest that winning the double bye -- while it does represent regular season success -- is not a slam dunk when it comes to the path to the tourney title.

[uh_no]

[QUOTE=BandAlum83;859137]Agreed. I do believe that if we win out, however, we stand a good chance both ND and Miami will help us out with losses.

I'm more interested in tourney seedings. At this point, looking at the standings, three post-season eligible teams are tied in the loss column. Only two double-bye spots are available. We beat UVA, but lost to ND. Anyone know how the 2 double-byes would be awarded? Who would get them?

The four double-bye teams have so much better chance to win the tourney.QUOTE]

Jim Boeheim took major issue with this point during today's teleconference. He argued (from experience) that it's a huge disadvantage to sit around for two days while other good teams get to play. He did say it was tough to win five games in five days, but thinks the single-bye teams -- those seeded No. 5 to No. 10 this year -- are in the best shape, especially in the quarterfinals. He was emphatic that he'd rather have the single bye than the double bye.

Not a lot of ACC history to go on. We've had just two tournaments with a double bye. Virginia, which had the No. 1 seed, won the 2014 tourney and Notre Dame, which had the No. 3 seed won the 2015 tournament. Virginia beat No. 3 seed Duke in the finals, while Notre Dame beat No. 5 seed UNC. So small sample size, but so far in the ACC, double bye teams are 2-for-2 in winning the title and 3-for-4 in reaching the title game.

But Boeheim has a lot of experience with the double bye in the Big East. I don't have all the Big East Tourney data, but I do know that Syracuse won the 2006 title out of the single bye situation. He also reached the finals in 2009 and 2013 out of the single bye situation. And Jamie Dixon won his only Big East title in 2008 out of the single bye. Rick Pitino had to win four games to win both of his Big East titles. And didn't UConn win the title in 2012 (?) by winning five games in the BE Tourney?

I don't know the answer, but I would suggest that winning the double bye -- while it does represent regular season success -- is not a slam dunk when it comes to the path to the tourney title.

2011, and 5 in 5.

it's doable....especially when the team you'd have to play in the first game is a pushover in this year's ACC.

[BandAlum83]

Al Featherston's Front Page article today went into great detail on one example.

Just saw the article. Very good article..we really need to get ahead of the logjam!

[Doria]

I think Boeheim's point is well taken, but in the specific case of Duke this year, I think we'd really much prefer the double bye. Back-to-back games is going to be very difficult on this team, no matter how well we're playing or how motivated we are. That isn't to say I believe we couldn't win four straight games, but I think it's asking a lot from a very thin bench.

But all we can do is play our hardest, and the rest will sort itself out. I agree, though, it was a very interesting article, laying out the various possibilities.

[kmspeaks]

Jim Boeheim took major issue with this point during today's teleconference. He argued (from experience) that it's a huge disadvantage to sit around for two days while other good teams get to play. He did say it was tough to win five games in five days, but thinks the single-bye teams -- those seeded No. 5 to No. 10 this year -- are in the best shape, especially in the quarterfinals. He was emphatic that he'd rather have the single bye than the double bye.

Not a lot of ACC history to go on. We've had just two tournaments with a double bye. Virginia, which had the No. 1 seed, won the 2014 tourney and Notre Dame, which had the No. 3 seed won the 2015 tournament. Virginia beat No. 3 seed Duke in the finals, while Notre Dame beat No. 5 seed UNC. So small sample size, but so far in the ACC, double bye teams are 2-for-2 in winning the title and 3-for-4 in reaching the title game.

But Boeheim has a lot of experience with the double bye in the Big East. I don't have all the Big East Tourney data, but I do know that Syracuse won the 2006 title out of the single bye situation. He also reached the finals in 2009 and 2013 out of the single bye situation. And Jamie Dixon won his only Big East title in 2008 out of the single bye. Rick Pitino had to win four games to win both of his Big East titles. And didn't UConn win the title in 2012 (?) by winning five games in the BE Tourney?

I don't know the answer, but I would suggest that winning the double bye -- while it does represent regular season success -- is not a slam dunk when it comes to the path to the tourney title.


I think Boeheim's point is well taken, but in the specific case of Duke this year, I think we'd really much prefer the double bye. Back-to-back games is going to be very difficult on this team, no matter how well we're playing or how motivated we are. That isn't to say I believe we couldn't win four straight games, but I think it's asking a lot from a very thin bench.

But all we can do is play our hardest, and the rest will sort itself out. I agree, though, it was a very interesting article, laying out the various possibilities.

I think Doria hit the nail on the head with regards to this year's team but I'm curious about Boeheim's hypothesis in general. If the ACC had a more regular schedule throughout the year it may have more of an effect. However, with one week being Sat/Mon turnarounds followed by a 5 days of rest, then the next a more spread out Wed/Sat I don't know if the "getting in a groove" thing outweighs the "fresh legs" thing since the guys are more used to long periods of rest followed by multiple games in a short stretch.

[CDu]

If we win out, I would say with like 99% certainty we would be the #1 seed. Miami and Notre Dame have enough tough games left that they should lose one or (in Miami's case) two more.

The harder part will be handling our own business and winning out.

[NSDukeFan]

If we win out, I would say with like 99% certainty we would be the #1 seed. Miami and Notre Dame have enough tough games left that they should lose one or (in Miami's case) two more.

The harder part will be handling our own business and winning out.

If we won out and the 1% happened and we weren't the #1 seed, I would be ok with that. 😊

[uh_no]

Apologies if there's already a thread on this...but with 6 games remaining, this thing is wiiiide open. I kind of want to break it down.

Eliminated:
GT
NCSU
Wake
BC

Control their own destiny:
UNC
Miami (still yet to play UNC)

Everyone else:
Virginia: If they win out, they pass miami on H2H, but still need UNC to pick up one more loss
ND: Need UNC to lose 2 games, and virginia to lose 1.
Duke: needs miami to lose once
UL: needs UNC to lose twice

The other 5, while not technically eliminated, have little chance, given that there are so many teams in front of them.


I should note that after miami's win, FSU and VT have been eliminated. This is since UNC and Miami play each other...guaranteeing that one of them will have at most 7 losses. You know it's a tough year in the ACC when 10-8 doesn't get you a league title.

Furthermore, joining UNC and Miami in controlling their destiny:
UVA, who has games yet against both miami and UNC

Duke needs miami to lose one more game
ND needs UNC to lose one more game
Louisville, were they eligible, would also need UNC to lose one more game

So that puts Duke fans in the potentially precarious position of cheering for UNC to beat miami this weekend....as that would - should we beat UL - allow us to control our own destiny as well.

HOWEVER...miami's next three games are against UVA, UL, and ND....so I think it's likely they lose one of those anyway....allowing for us to freely cheer against the heels.

That all said, I think it unlikely duke wins out. KP has our game against UL as only a 32% chance of winning...and we still have challenging games against pitt and UNC. I think at best we do 13-5, beating UNC, then hoping miami beats UNC, and miami picks up a couple of Ls down the stretch....in this scenario, we'd also need UVA, UL, and ND to pick up another loss...and I can see one of them winning out....especially if they have to give miami losses.

I think, unfortunately, that the title is still a bit of a stretch....not because we're not good enough, but because there are 6 really good teams with <=4 losses....and all things being equal, that would only give us 1/6 chance.

If someone offers you "X or the field"...always take the field.

[rasputin]

I should note that after miami's win, FSU and VT have been eliminated. This is since UNC and Miami play each other...guaranteeing that one of them will have at most 7 losses. You know it's a tough year in the ACC when 10-8 doesn't get you a league title.

Furthermore, joining UNC and Miami in controlling their destiny:
UVA, who has games yet against both miami and UNC

Duke needs miami to lose one more game
ND needs UNC to lose one more game
Louisville, were they eligible, would also need UNC to lose one more game

So that puts Duke fans in the potentially precarious position of cheering for UNC to beat miami this weekend...as that would - should we beat UL - allow us to control our own destiny as well.

HOWEVER...miami's next three games are against UVA, UL, and ND...so I think it's likely they lose one of those anyway...allowing for us to freely cheer against the heels.

That all said, I think it unlikely duke wins out. KP has our game against UL as only a 32% chance of winning...and we still have challenging games against pitt and UNC. I think at best we do 13-5, beating UNC, then hoping miami beats UNC, and miami picks up a couple of Ls down the stretch...in this scenario, we'd also need UVA, UL, and ND to pick up another loss...and I can see one of them winning out...especially if they have to give miami losses.

I think, unfortunately, that the title is still a bit of a stretch...not because we're not good enough, but because there are 6 really good teams with <=4 losses...and all things being equal, that would only give us 1/6 chance.

If someone offers you "X or the field"...always take the field.

I don't understand the bolded statement.

Also, I don't root for Carolina to win. Ever. Anything.

Finally, I enjoyed looking at the league standings this morning and seeing that the Cheaters had been bounced from the top line. They're tied, but still.

[CDu]

IFurthermore, joining UNC and Miami in controlling their destiny:
UVA, who has games yet against both miami and UNC

Duke needs miami to lose one more game
ND needs UNC to lose one more game
Louisville, were they eligible, would also need UNC to lose one more game



Technically, Louisville is eligible to win the regular season title. They just aren't eligible for the postseason.

If we're talking about #1 seed in the ACC, then only UNC and Miami control their own chances at this point. Well, Louisville does too, in a different way I guess. :)

[uh_no]

I don't understand the bolded statement.


It was tongue in cheek...since I was pointing out teams that were officially eliminated (having a "best possible record" of 10-8, when either miami or UNC will have 7 or fewer), but realistically had no chance of winning while also making a joke that those teams might try to blame it on being a tough year in the ACC...but in reality, they just stink.