Conference vs. Conference

[Olympic Fan]

This keeps popping up in other threads. I thought we should have a place to discuss conference performance in this year's NCAA Tournament.

Full disclosure -- I am a strong ACC advocate. I think it helps Duke to have the ACC perceived as the nation's best conference. The ACC's spectacular NCAA performances in 2015 and 2016 helped convince commentators that the ACC is the nation's strongest conference.

But it's important that the ACC do well this season to keep that narrative alive.

After the first round, I get these conference numbers. By winning percentage:

1. Pac 12 5-0 (USC 2-0, UCLA 1-0, Arizona 1-0, Oregon 1-0)
2. The Big West 2-0 (Gonzaga 1-0, St. Mary's 1-0)
3. SEC 4-1 (Florida 1-0, Arkansas 1-0, South Carolina 1-0, Kentucky 1-0; Vanderbilt 0-1)
4. Big Ten 5-2 (Purdue 1-0, Northwestern 1-0, Wisconsin 1-0, Michigan 1-0, Michigan State 1-0; Maryland 0-1, Minnesota 0-1)
(tie) Big 12 5-2 (West Virginia 1-0, Kansas 1-0, Baylor 1-0, Iowa State 1-0; Kansas State 1-1; Oklahoma State 0-1)
6. ACC 6-3 (Duke 1-0, UNC 1-0, Virginia 1-0, Notre Dame 1-0, FSU 1-0, Louisville 1-0; Wake Forest 0-1, VPI 0-1, Miami 0-1)
7. Atlantic 10 2-2 (Rhode Island 1-0, Cincinnati 1-0; VCU 0-1, Dayton 0-1)
8. Big East 3-4 (Villanova 1-0, Butler 1-0, Xavier 1-0; Providence 0-1, Seton Hall 0-1, Creighton 0-1, Marquette 0-1)

On the surface, that's not a good look for the ACC. But there is another way to measure it. Number of teams in the Round of 32:

1. ACC 6 (Duke, UNC, FSU, Louisville, Virginia, Notre Dame)
2. Big Ten 5 (Purdue, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan State)
3. Pac 12 4 (UCLA, Oregon, Arizona, Southern Cal)
(tie) Big 12 4 (Kansas, West Virginia, Baylor, Iowa State)
(tie) SEC 4 (Kentucky, Florida, South Carolina, Arkansas)
6. Big East 3 (Villanova, Butler, Xavier)
7. Big West 2 (Gonzaga, St. Mary's)
(tie) Atlantic 10 2 (Rhode Island, Cincinnati)

That's makes the ACC look a little better. True, it's because the league got nine bids, but that's because of the perception that the ACC was the best conference. The six teams in the round of 32 matches what we had a year ago (when six of seven teams won their first game). The real key to the ACC's record-setting performance a year ago was that all six of those teams won in the second round -- giving the ACC a record six Sweet 16 teams. Heck, five Sweet 16 teams (which the ACC did in 2015) has only been done like three times.

The key to the ACC's performance in the 2017 NCAA is pretty much going to be determined today and Sunday. The ACC is seeded to get four teams into the Sweet 16 (Duke, UNC, FSU and Florida State). Do that, and the ACC will be perceived as having a good NCAA Tournament. If Virginia and/or Notre Dame can join them, then another five or six Sweet 16 performance would continue the ACC's historic postseason run (2015 and 206 were arguably the two best conference performances in NCAA history).

PS I just checked and saw that Duke played 13 games against teams that reached the Round of 32 (UNC 3 times, Louisville, Notre Dame and FSU twice each, Virginia, Kansas, Michigan State and Rhode Island). Duke was 9-4 in those games. I guess it will be 14 games after we face South Carolina ...

[wavedukefan70s]

I hope the irish turn it around its 10 to 0 wvu up.

[Wander]

I don't understand why we keep having these conversations without talking about the size of the conferences. The Big 12 is doing just as well as the ACC so far (60% of teams in the tournament, 40% of teams in the 2nd round). Maybe that will change soon, but right now we are even.

[gam7]

I guess it will be 14 games after we face South Carolina ...

Well, it will be however many games we play from here on out...

[BlueDevil2K]

PS I just checked and saw that Duke played 13 games against teams that reached the Round of 32 (UNC 3 times, Louisville, Notre Dame and FSU twice each, Virginia, Kansas, Michigan State and Rhode Island). Duke was 9-4 in those games. I guess it will be 14 games after we face South Carolina ...

Florida?

[Troublemaker]

The Big East, which started with 7 teams in the tourney, might be down to 0 teams in the tourney after Day 3.

Nova losing to Wiscy was the big one.

Two pending results for today:

MTSU vs Butler
FSU vs Xavier (which is close to tipping)

They really do have a shot at sending 0 teams to the Sweet 16.

No matter how badly the tourney has gone for the ACC, it probably will do better than the Big East.

[Troublemaker]

The Big East, which started with 7 teams in the tourney, might be down to 0 teams in the tourney after Day 3.

Nova losing to Wiscy was the big one.

Two pending results for today:

MTSU vs Butler
FSU vs Xavier (which is close to tipping)

They really do have a shot at sending 0 teams to the Sweet 16.

No matter how badly the tourney has gone for the ACC, it probably will do better than the Big East.

Then again, the ACC might just be that putrid (in tourney performance).

Great job by Xavier in dominating FSU.

I'll shut up now until the ACC places 1 team in the Sweet 16.

(Not that it really matters. I wouldn't care if the conference sent only 1 team as long as that team is Duke. [Hey, it's not like the rest of the conference roots for Duke during the postseason.])

[arnie]

[Hey, it's not like the rest of the conference roots for Duke during the postseason.])

Now that's an understatement.

[dudog84]

This keeps popping up in other threads. I thought we should have a place to discuss conference performance in this year's NCAA Tournament.

Full disclosure -- I am a strong ACC advocate. I think it helps Duke to have the ACC perceived as the nation's best conference. The ACC's spectacular NCAA performances in 2015 and 2016 helped convince commentators that the ACC is the nation's strongest conference.

But it's important that the ACC do well this season to keep that narrative alive.

After the first round, I get these conference numbers. By winning percentage:

1. Pac 12 5-0 (USC 2-0, UCLA 1-0, Arizona 1-0, Oregon 1-0)
2. The Big West 2-0 (Gonzaga 1-0, St. Mary's 1-0)
3. SEC 4-1 (Florida 1-0, Arkansas 1-0, South Carolina 1-0, Kentucky 1-0; Vanderbilt 0-1)
4. Big Ten 5-2 (Purdue 1-0, Northwestern 1-0, Wisconsin 1-0, Michigan 1-0, Michigan State 1-0; Maryland 0-1, Minnesota 0-1)
(tie) Big 12 5-2 (West Virginia 1-0, Kansas 1-0, Baylor 1-0, Iowa State 1-0; Kansas State 1-1; Oklahoma State 0-1)
6. ACC 6-3 (Duke 1-0, UNC 1-0, Virginia 1-0, Notre Dame 1-0, FSU 1-0, Louisville 1-0; Wake Forest 0-1, VPI 0-1, Miami 0-1)
7. Atlantic 10 2-2 (Rhode Island 1-0, Cincinnati 1-0; VCU 0-1, Dayton 0-1)
8. Big East 3-4 (Villanova 1-0, Butler 1-0, Xavier 1-0; Providence 0-1, Seton Hall 0-1, Creighton 0-1, Marquette 0-1)

On the surface, that's not a good look for the ACC. But there is another way to measure it. Number of teams in the Round of 32:

1. ACC 6 (Duke, UNC, FSU, Louisville, Virginia, Notre Dame)
2. Big Ten 5 (Purdue, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan State)
3. Pac 12 4 (UCLA, Oregon, Arizona, Southern Cal)
(tie) Big 12 4 (Kansas, West Virginia, Baylor, Iowa State)
(tie) SEC 4 (Kentucky, Florida, South Carolina, Arkansas)
6. Big East 3 (Villanova, Butler, Xavier)
7. Big West 2 (Gonzaga, St. Mary's)
(tie) Atlantic 10 2 (Rhode Island, Cincinnati)

That's makes the ACC look a little better. True, it's because the league got nine bids, but that's because of the perception that the ACC was the best conference. The six teams in the round of 32 matches what we had a year ago (when six of seven teams won their first game). The real key to the ACC's record-setting performance a year ago was that all six of those teams won in the second round -- giving the ACC a record six Sweet 16 teams. Heck, five Sweet 16 teams (which the ACC did in 2015) has only been done like three times.

The key to the ACC's performance in the 2017 NCAA is pretty much going to be determined today and Sunday. The ACC is seeded to get four teams into the Sweet 16 (Duke, UNC, FSU and Florida State). Do that, and the ACC will be perceived as having a good NCAA Tournament. If Virginia and/or Notre Dame can join them, then another five or six Sweet 16 performance would continue the ACC's historic postseason run (2015 and 206 were arguably the two best conference performances in NCAA history).

PS I just checked and saw that Duke played 13 games against teams that reached the Round of 32 (UNC 3 times, Louisville, Notre Dame and FSU twice each, Virginia, Kansas, Michigan State and Rhode Island). Duke was 9-4 in those games. I guess it will be 14 games after we face South Carolina ...

My only quibble, and I'm probably in the vast minority on this, is that I really discount play-in games. Doesn't make a huge difference in your calculations, thanks for the write-up. I also keep track of the ACC every year. Doesn't help that FSU just lost a home (state) game.

[dukelifer]

Then again, the ACC might just be that putrid (in tourney performance).

Great job by Xavier in dominating FSU.

I'll shut up now until the ACC places 1 team in the Sweet 16.

(Not that it really matters. I wouldn't care if the conference sent only 1 team as long as that team is Duke. [Hey, it's not like the rest of the conference roots for Duke during the postseason.])

Butler in.

[dukelifer]

Oh Boy- UVa down 14 at the half.

[arnie]

Butler in.

Looking like only Duke, UNC, Louisville have a shot. UVA also stinking it up.

[dukelifer]

Looking like only Duke, UNC, Louisville have a shot. UVA also stinking it up.

17 pts? What is that.

[Olympic Fan]

I'm massively disappointed.

Florida State loses by 25 points to a Xavier team that struggled down the stretch?

Notre Dame is never in the game with West Virginia?

And now Virginia is down 14 at the half to Florida?

Duke, UNC, Louisville are all be favored Sunday, but unless they sweep, the ACC is due for a lot over stories about how overrated the conference was this year. And we deserve it.

[Wander]

17 pts? What is that.

A season high for UVA?

[brevity]

Oh Boy- UVa down 14 at the half.


UVA also stinking it up.


17 pts? What is that.

My only explanation is that a Wisconsin-Virginia Sweet 16 matchup sounds as unappealing to Virginia as it does to the rest of us.

[dukelifer]

I'm massively disappointed.

Florida State loses by 25 points to a Xavier team that struggled down the stretch?

Notre Dame is never in the game with West Virginia?

And now Virginia is down 14 at the half to Florida?

Duke, UNC, Louisville are all be favored Sunday, but unless they sweep, the ACC is due for a lot over stories about how overrated the conference was this year. And we deserve it.

wore each other out?

[dukelifer]

My only explanation is that a Wisconsin-Virginia Sweet 16 matchup sounds as unappealing to Virginia as it does to the rest of us.

Basketball Gods may have issued a veto on that match up.

[eddiehaskell]

I think it's official...if Virginia gets blown out, people will say the ACC was overrated this year. Didn't the same happen to the big east 4-5 years ago when they put in like 9 teams?

Granted, the tourney isn't exactly a scientific test for finding out which conference had better teams. For example, ND made the elite 8 last year - were they really that much worse this year? Louisville/holes/Duke winning would still give the ACC 3 of 16, but it does look bad when your teams that aren't 1-2 seeds can't win more than a game.

[dukelifer]

I think it's official...if Virginia gets blown out, people will say the ACC was overrated this year. Didn't the same happen to the big east 4-5 years ago when they put in like 9 teams?

Granted, the tourney isn't exactly a scientific test for finding out which conference had better teams. For example, ND made the elite 8 last year - were they really that much worse this year? Louisville/holes/Duke winning would still give the ACC 3 of 16, but it does look bad when your teams that aren't 1-2 seeds can't win more than a game.

The losses aren't surprising- the margins are.

[Olympic Fan]

I think it's official...if Virginia gets blown out, people will say the ACC was overrated this year. Didn't the same happen to the big east 4-5 years ago when they put in like 9 teams?

Granted, the tourney isn't exactly a scientific test for finding out which conference had better teams. For example, ND made the elite 8 last year - were they really that much worse this year? Louisville/holes/Duke winning would still give the ACC 3 of 16, but it does look bad when your teams that aren't 1-2 seeds can't win more than a game.


In 2011, the 16-team Big East put 11 teams in the field -- still the NCAA record.

Only two of the 11 reached the second weekend -- Marquette lost in the Sweet 16 and UConn won the national title.

I agree with Dukelifer -- its not the losses that are so bad, but the margin. Of the six ACC teams to lose so far (counting Virginia which is dead) only Wake's play-in loss to K-State ands VPI's loss to Wisconsin was even competitive.

[DukieInBrasil]

ACC trying really hard not to represent. FSU got absolutely destroyed today and UVA Is getting humiliated, they're down by more than they might score for the game. Good thing all of the other high seeds won their 1st game at least.

[Saratoga2]

In 2011, the 16-team Big East put 11 teams in the field -- still the NCAA record.

Only two of the 11 reached the second weekend -- Marquette lost in the Sweet 16 and UConn won the national title.

I agree with Dukelifer -- its not the losses that are so bad, but the margin. Of the six ACC teams to lose so far (counting Virginia which is dead) only Wake's play-in loss to K-State ands VPI's loss to Wisconsin was even competitive.

I think Notre Dame put up a good fight against a very aggressive and physical team. One player had an awful cold spell shooting which was what really killed them.

[DukieInBrasil]

In 2011, the 16-team Big East put 11 teams in the field -- still the NCAA record.

Only two of the 11 reached the second weekend -- Marquette lost in the Sweet 16 and UConn won the national title.

I agree with Dukelifer -- its not the losses that are so bad, but the margin. Of the six ACC teams to lose so far (counting Virginia which is dead) only Wake's play-in loss to K-State ands VPI's loss to Wisconsin was even competitive.

Notre Dame lost by 12. That's not an uncompetitive game.

[dukelifer]

Notre Dame lost by 12. That's not an uncompetitive game.

ND never seemed to make it very interesting but certainly not as bad a what UVA did today.

[flyingdutchdevil]

So what? All that counts is last team standing.

Cry me a river if you think ACC is the best conference. They're not.

[eddiehaskell]

The losses aren't surprising- the margins are.I think the number of loses is surprising on its own. But yeah, the margins just make it pitiful.

ND - eeks out a 2pt win vs Princeton and gets manhandled by WV.

FSU - only beats FGCU by 6 and gets waxed by an 11 seed.

WF - never close vs KSU

Miami - pulverized by MSU

VT - somewhat respectable performance

Virginia - probably one of the worst beat downs ever given to a 5 seed in the 2nd round.

[dukelifer]

So what? All that counts is last team standing.

Cry me a river if you think ACC is the best conference. They're not.

The losses hurt in the revenue sharing. The more the teams advance - the more money the league makes.

[eddiehaskell]

I was talking to someone about the ACC being far and away better than the Pac12 - their response was that both conferences were about the same with 3 elite teams capable of going deep in the tourney. Unless UCLA, USC and Oregon all lose, I'd say they were probably right.

[Kfanarmy]

I think Notre Dame put up a good fight against a very aggressive and physical team. One player had an awful cold spell shooting which was what really killed them.

Well...that and their opponent relies on overwhelming the referees to sustain their style of play.

[throatybeard]

Notre Dame lost by 12. That's not an uncompetitive game.

Ah, litotes.

[devildeac]

ACC trying really hard not to represent. FSU got absolutely destroyed today and UVA Is getting humiliated, they're down by more than they might score for the game. Good thing all of the other high seeds won their 1st game at least.

Except, I'd have been ecstatic with a Texas Southern upset. Screw the cheaters.

[KandG]

I'm an ACC partisan all the way, but every game I watched Florida State, Notre Dame, Virginia and Miami play this weekend was a disappointment. i didn't expect to be entertained as much as I was by teams like Northwestern, St. Mary's, Purdue and Iowa State, but those teams played with much more force and verve (even in their shakiest moments) than the vast majority of ACC teams.

Again, if teams lose, that's one thing, but getting blown out and barely putting up a fight is another. I knew a few people that had Virginia and Notre Dame as sleeper picks to the Final Four. Oops.

[-bdbd]

"Bloody Saturday" for the ACC this weekend for the ACC...
FSU, ND and UVA all with terrible showings, all losing by double figures, two as blowouts, despite two being favored...

Please, Louisville, NC and Duke redeem us!!!

[eddiehaskell]

NC? No! However, I'm perfectly fine with Louisville and Duke putting the conference on their backs and making the FF (and title game). I'd rather not take a chance by kinda/sorta/in a way rooting for UNC as a representative of the ACC. Having them 3 games from another title shot is way too close.

[kshepinthehouse]

"Bloody Saturday" for the ACC this weekend for the ACC...
FSU, ND and UVA all with terrible showings, all losing by double figures, two as blowouts, despite two being favored...

Please, Louisville, NC and Duke redeem us!!!

I hate UNC infinitely more than I love the ACC.

[accfanfrom1970]

I hate UNC infinitely more than I love the ACC.

Agreed - uncheats can lose every time, everywhere, ACC be dammed. Every time, every where....cheats can burn in h.....

[Bob Green]

I knew a few people that had Virginia and Notre Dame as sleeper picks to the Final Four. Oops.

Anyone who had Virginia as a Final Four team hasn't been paying attention. The Wahoos struggled down the stretch run due to an inability to score. My bracket had them losing in the 1st Round to UNCW.

[kshepinthehouse]

Anyone who had Virginia as a Final Four team hasn't been paying attention. The Wahoos struggled down the stretch run due to an inability to score. My bracket had them losing in the 1st Round to UNCW.

Same. I had a friend of mine say Virginia was gonna smashing Florida, I assumed he meant the Virginia of last year, or maybe two months ago.

[YmoBeThere]

My bracket had them losing in the 1st Round to UNCW.


Ummm, so you had it wrong?

[Saratoga2]

Anyone who had Virginia as a Final Four team hasn't been paying attention. The Wahoos struggled down the stretch run due to an inability to score. My bracket had them losing in the 1st Round to UNCW.

Me too and we were nearly right.

[davekay1971]

I was surprise by Florida State's lousy showing, not so much by UVAs...that team has been fading badly for a month.

Agreed with the general sentiment that the ugliness yesterday wasn't so much the 3 losses...it was the ugliness of two of the three losses.

Still, UNC, Louisville, and Duke are the ACCs 3 best teams. I think the ACC goes 3-0 today, although 2-1 would be just fine as long as it's the right 1...

[slower]

I guess I'm different from many of you. Beyond Duke winning and UNC losing, I couldn't care less about the rest of the ACC.

Although, I must admit that I enjoyed seeing Wake, FSU and ND lose. I really don't like those guys.

[Bob Green]

Ummm, so you had it wrong?

Absolutely!

[camion]

I guess I'm different from many of you. Beyond Duke winning and UNC losing, I couldn't care less about the rest of the ACC.

Although, I must admit that I enjoyed seeing Wake, FSU and ND lose. I really don't like those guys.

Since I strongly believe in transitivity (when it supports my arguments) I generally want ACC teams to do well when they aren't playing us.

There is an exception to this rule.

[Wander]

I guess I'm different from many of you. Beyond Duke winning and UNC losing, I couldn't care less about the rest of the ACC.


Totally agree. Doesn't really help or hurt Duke for 2 reasons. One, strength of schedule is taken into account in seeding. If the ACC were worse, an 8 loss Duke team wouldn't get a 2 seed.... but if the ACC were worse, Duke wouldn't be an 8 loss team. Two, seeding and selection already happened! What are you guys scared of, that the committee is going to reseed us into a 8 seed for the Sweet 16?

[budwom]

I was surprise by Florida State's lousy showing, not so much by UVAs...that team has been fading badly for a month.

Agreed with the general sentiment that the ugliness yesterday wasn't so much the 3 losses...it was the ugliness of two of the three losses.

Still, UNC, Louisville, and Duke are the ACCs 3 best teams. I think the ACC goes 3-0 today, although 2-1 would be just fine as long as it's the right 1...

Yeah, UVA has been horrendous of late....quite amusing that KenPom's algorithm still had them as a top 10 team before yesterday's abomination...now they've fallen to 14 or so (?) which is still too high.

[Troublemaker]

Yeah, UVA has been horrendous of late...quite amusing that KenPom's algorithm still had them as a top 10 team before yesterday's abomination...now they've fallen to 14 or so (?) which is still too high.

Yeah, they've fallen to 14. But all anyone will remember is the final number. Going forward, when the season isn't fresh in our minds, we'll not remember that kenpom had UVA as a top 10 team all season, often top 5, and even top-2 when Duke went to play at UVA. They'll just remember that kenpom had UVA as 14. Chad Ford is blushing...

[Indoor66]

Yeah, they've fallen to 14. But all anyone will remember is the final number. Going forward, when the season isn't fresh in our minds, we'll not remember that kenpom had UVA as a top 10 team all season, often top 5, and even top-2 when Duke went to play at UVA. They'll just remember that kenpom had UVA as 14. Chad Ford is blushing...

Actually, most people don't care.

[uh_no]

Yeah, UVA has been horrendous of late...quite amusing that KenPom's algorithm still had them as a top 10 team before yesterday's abomination...now they've fallen to 14 or so (?) which is still too high.

they lost 2 OT games in february, and had 3 convincing wins to end the regular season. While I thought florida would win because they're actually a really really good team, I didn't think UVA would lose like THAT.

Anyway, judging by the performances so far, it seems that several teams in the ACC were artificially propped up by decent OOC performances.

[devildeac]

Well, even if Looville goes down, it's still Go Hogs and Go Devils!

[kmspeaks]

I guess I'm different from many of you. Beyond Duke winning and UNC losing, I couldn't care less about the rest of the ACC.

Although, I must admit that I enjoyed seeing Wake, FSU and ND lose. I really don't like those guys.

I'm with you here. I've never had a fan of another ACC school tell me they're rooting for Duke in the tournament or even the ACC-Big(can't count past)10 challenge. uNC cheats, I'm not a fan of the way Virginia, Louisville, or FSU play, and Boeheim is a giant whiner, they and the rest of the league can all go kick rocks as far as I'm concerned.

[CDu]

Looking like the ACC is going to fall to 6-7. Two losses in games they were substantial favorites, 0-5 in 50/50 matchups.

[dukelifer]

Looking like the ACC is going to fall to 6-7. Two losses in games they were substantial favorites, 0-5 in 50/50 matchups.

Over- ACC won't live this down

[Troublemaker]

Embarrassing. Absolutely embarrassing.

But let's continue the embarrassment for a few more hours, shall we? Let's cease at around 8:40pm Eastern.

[dukelifer]

Embarrassing. Absolutely embarrassing.

But let's continue the embarrassment for a few more hours, shall we? Let's cease at around 8:40pm Eastern.

If UNC loses we know the basketball gods are very angry at the ACC.

[eddiehaskell]

The ACC was a fraud this year. Apparently all teams were bad so beating each other didn't mean parity...it just meant everyone was bad enough to lose a lot. Hopefully Duke was just starting to peak toward the end...and would've otherwise been a 1-2 loss team in this sad conference.

[DukieInBrasil]

well, unless both UNC and Duke make the Finals, i don't see how the ACC can argue it should have had more teams or that it was the best conference. Louisville bowed out gracelessly, and now there's only 2 left. There might be a Sweet 16 without ANY teams from the ACC. A far cry from the 6 to 8 that many (including myself) predicted.
Well, at least Villanova bowed out.

[duke4ever19]

The ACC isn't exactly inspiring confidence right now.

I'm fighting the temptation to use the 'ol 'transitive property' comparison, but I truly think we are a tough team. So is Louisville, but they met a inspired team today. Boy oh boy.

[BandAlum83]

Maybe the Big 10 did a better job than the ACC of getting better as the year went on?

[KandG]

Embarrassing. Absolutely embarrassing.

But let's continue the embarrassment for a few more hours, shall we? Let's cease at around 8:40pm Eastern.

This is the best take.

[Devil549]

Duke and UNC only 2 left..... Heels win easily IMO Duke has a tough game. ACC a little overrated but still very competitive league.

IMO very hard to judge the leagues that play unbalanced schedules....but then again all bUT Big12 play one.

GO DUKE!!!!!!!

[bradvinjack]

I'm with you here. I've never had a fan of another ACC school tell me they're rooting for Duke in the tournament or even the ACC-Big(can't count past)10 challenge. uNC cheats, I'm not a fan of the way Virginia, Louisville, or FSU play, and Boeheim is a giant whiner, they and the rest of the league can all go kick rocks as far as I'm concerned.

Having a strong conference helps in so many areas. Recruits want to play against the best. If your conference is the strongest they know they will be going up against top competition every week. Which will only help them at the next level. As well if Duke was not playing in such a tough conference then maybe we would not be as prepared when the tournament comes. Coach K has always supported the conference and I do as well except for one team. The better your conference performs the better TV deals it gets as well which helps keep it strong and not have teams get poached by more financially succesful conferences. Which we have seen happen over the past few years. It is disappointing to see the ACC due so poorly this year. I just hope that Duke takes care of business and can represent the conference in the same way it has 5 previous times.

[dukelifer]

The ACC was a fraud this year. Apparently all teams were bad so beating each other didn't mean parity...it just meant everyone was bad enough to lose a lot. Hopefully Duke was just starting to peak toward the end...and would've otherwise been a 1-2 loss team in this sad conference.

Not sure they are frauds as much as the delta between teams and leagues is not as big as some made out to be. I will be very surprised if the Big 10- with 3 teams in so far - win it all. The Big 10 drought is pretty long. Nevertheless- this is a very strange weekend for the ACC.

[throatybeard]

I'm enjoying watching Rick Pitino explain what ha- happened to Tracy Wolfson.

Which basically amounted to, "I never could get it through their heads that they have to play defense after they miss a shot."

[Saratoga2]

Louisville went down after a hard fought battle with Michigan. That makes 7 of 9 out and we have two to go before being out of the first week. Not very impressive.

When watching Michigan and Louisville, I was struck by how much hooking and banging the Michigan bigs were allowed when getting to the basket. Their physicality finally undid Louisville. We don't have any starter who could have stopped their bigs if they are allowed to bull the way to the basket. Even Louisville who has a number of big and mobile front court players couldn't stop them with the way the game was called.

[devildeac]

Louisville went down after a hard fought battle with Michigan. That makes 7 of 9 out and we have two to go before being out of the first week. Not very impressive.

When watching Michigan and Louisville, I was struck by how much hooking and banging the Michigan bigs were allowed when getting to the basket. Their physicality finally undid Louisville. We don't have any starter who could have stopped their bigs if they are allowed to bull the way to the basket. Even Louisville who has a number of big and mobile front court players couldn't stop them with the way the game was called.

Yet, when we play Loovile, grabbing, bumping, elbowing and face-slapping goes mostly uncalled on their part. Karma? SMH.

[elvis14]

Wow with L'ville losing, we are down to 1 legitimate ACC team and the Cheaters. I'm an ACC fan and want all the legitimate ACC teams (meaning all but the Cheaters) to have good tournaments for the sake of our conference. Heck, being good for the conference is one way to feel less bad about UNCheat wins. And just for fun, Clemson laid an egg in the first round of the NIT as well. Wow, what a weird tournament after what seemed like a strong regular season for the ACC.

[weezie]

Meh, me not so much. ACC hates us, boos us in supposedly neutral gyms (Greenville for example) boos GA like it's their collective passion, boos K, disparages the W-L record, whine when we win and on and on.

To hell with the rest of the ACC, new or old members. They just ain't that good this year.

[A-Tex Devil]

Worrying about how a conference fares in the tourney or in bowls is the last refuge of teams that aren't playing anymore (or didn't make/lost their bowl game).

[Ballboy1998]

Funny to think that, if the refs didn't totally choke in the unc game, the ACC would have ended up with 0 teams making it to the second week. Wild.

[eddiehaskell]

After this years massacre, can we really say the ACC had ANY top 25 teams? 1 team barely edged out a top 30 team. I think UNC will get blown out by a true top 25 team. For the last 3 months they've played nobodies.

[DangerDevil]

After this years massacre, can we really say the ACC had ANY top 25 teams? 1 team barely edged out a top 30 team. I think UNC will get blown out by a true top 25 team. For the last 3 months they've played nobodies.

They played us twice

[CDu]

They played us twice

Thrice, actually.

[DangerDevil]

Thrice, actually.

I thought my calendar math might be off, thanks for the help/correction

[eddiehaskell]

They played us twiceWe obviously weren't as good as the ACC tourney run would've led us to believe. We were truly the 5th or 6th best team in pretty weak conference. I don't see any other way to explain it.

[DangerDevil]

We obviously weren't as good as the ACC tourney run would've led us to believe. We were truly the 5th or 6th best team in pretty weak conference. I don't see any other way to explain it.

Yep your explanation makes a lot of sense, I guess that we were the 5th or 6th best team in the league and that's why we were able to beat the 4th seed, 3rd seed, (both tied for 2nd place during the regular season) and 1st seed on back to back to back nights with less rest. Pretty obvious.

[PackMan97]

WTH just happened....the ACC totally imploded and those cursed refs went and screwed Arkansas in the final minutes to put the Cheats into the Sweet 16.

[duke09hms]

Wow with L'ville losing, we are down to 1 legitimate ACC team and the Cheaters. I'm an ACC fan and want all the legitimate ACC teams (meaning all but the Cheaters) to have good tournaments for the sake of our conference. Heck, being good for the conference is one way to feel less bad about UNCheat wins. And just for fun, Clemson laid an egg in the first round of the NIT as well. Wow, what a weird tournament after what seemed like a strong regular season for the ACC.

Why does anyone care about how a conference does? ACC don't do anything for Duke. I just don't get it. There are even Duke fans that root for UNC because of ... "ACC pride?"

What does the ACC do for Duke?

[uh_no]

What does the ACC do for Duke?

Ask Uconn what a successful conference does for a program....i'm sure they'd be glad to trade places.

[duke09hms]

Ask Uconn what a successful conference does for a program...i'm sure they'd be glad to trade places.

Same # of titles as Duke since 2000 ... if you got a killer program, you got a killer program.

[eddiehaskell]

Yep your explanation makes a lot of sense, I guess that we were the 5th or 6th best team in the league and that's why we were able to beat the 4th seed, 3rd seed, (both tied for 2nd place during the regular season) and 1st seed on back to back to back nights with less rest. Pretty obvious.Yet look at the "success" the teams we beat have had. There were 5 or 6 decent teams in the ACC and we probably weren't much better than any of them. The ACC tourney run was awesome...we were on fire, but I don't see how that 4 day period can really define the season overall. We looked like a 4 or 5 seed to end the regular season and we played like a 5+ seed in the tourney.

[uh_no]

Same # of titles as Duke since 2000 ... if you got a killer program, you got a killer program.

they've fallen way off a cliff in terms of attendance, recruiting, and on court performance in the past couple years. even the 2014 title was won with calhoun players recruited under the shadow of the old big east. Now? not so much.

[PackMan97]

Aside from the Cheaters still playing, the ACC team that's had the best post-season just might be NC State. So sad.

[CDu]

they've fallen way off a cliff in terms of attendance, recruiting, and on court performance in the past couple years. even the 2014 title was won with calhoun players recruited under the shadow of the old big east. Now? not so much.

I would argue that they fell off in recruiting not because of the demise of the Big East but rather the retirement of Calhoun. I think if Calhoun was still healthy and coaching, UConn would still be a formidable program. Ollie hasn't proven able to continue the recruiting success that Calhoun had.

[dudog84]

I've always been "root for the conference outside of the conference...except for uNC", but I understand the sentiment of "who cares, what have they done for us besides boo us?".

I just think it elevates Duke to be the best program in the best conference. Would you rather be Gonzaga? I honestly don't even know what conference they are in.

[CDu]

I've always been "root for the conference outside of the conference...except for uNC", but I understand the sentiment of "who cares, what have they done for us besides boo us?".

I just think it elevates Duke to be the best program in the best conference. Would you rather be Gonzaga? I honestly don't even know what conference they are in.

This morning? I'd rather be Gonzaga for this season. Overall? Yeah, I'm fine with Duke being Duke.

[dudog84]

This morning? I'd rather be Gonzaga for this season. Overall? Yeah, I'm fine with Duke being Duke.

I think you're kinda joking. Hope you are. I'd always rather be Duke, regardless of outcomes or moments in time.

[CDu]

I think you're kinda joking. Hope you are. I'd always rather be Duke, regardless of outcomes or moments in time.

I was semi-joking. I'm a Duke guy through and through. My point was I'd rather be still playing, like Gonzaga is. Their conference doesn't seem to be hurting them this year at least.

[uh_no]

I would argue that they fell off in recruiting not because of the demise of the Big East but rather the retirement of Calhoun. I think if Calhoun was still healthy and coaching, UConn would still be a formidable program. Ollie hasn't proven able to continue the recruiting success that Calhoun had.

possibly. though ollie was doing much of the recruiting even on the tail end of calhoun's days. after winning the titles in '11 and '14 based off stellar, a team in a major conference would be able to grab more top guards, but it hasn't worked that way at uconn. People want to be on TV playing big games week in and week out. We got that in the big east when every game was a big game, but that is gone now. It's probably a combination of both.

[Wander]

I would argue that they fell off in recruiting not because of the demise of the Big East but rather the retirement of Calhoun.

Yeah, no kidding.

Let's also be honest in that UConn has been lucky. If you're consistently elite for a long period of time, you'll eventually average out and get the number of titles you "should" have. Seasons like 1991 Duke and 1999 Duke will sorta cancel out. If you're not as consistent, but occasionally elite, you run the risk of small sample size throwing your numbers off. Arizona and UConn are good examples of programs that probably have less and more tournament success than they "should" have.

[CDu]

Yeah, no kidding.

Let's also be honest in that UConn has been lucky. If you're consistently elite for a long period of time, you'll eventually average out and get the number of titles you "should" have. Seasons like 1991 Duke and 1999 Duke will sorta cancel out. If you're not as consistent, but occasionally elite, you run the risk of small sample size throwing your numbers off. Arizona and UConn are good examples of programs that probably have less and more tournament success than they "should" have.

This is true. The 2011 and 2014 titles certainly fall in the "they had no business winning" category. Decent teams? Yes. But not among the nation's true best. They were really fortunate to get hot at the right time.

UConn has had a few other elite years that didn't pan out. But they really maximized on their best teams, and got lucky on a few not-so-good teams.

[Utley]

So want the heck happened to the ACC this weekend? How does a conference get all this hype and falls so flat on its face - especially a year after having the opposite happen.

I know memory is a tricky thing but did the teams in the ACC seem stronger this year than last to you? They did to me. What about Duke? Which team do you think was "better" - this year's or last? Again I would lean to this year's team despite last year's team going further. For arguments sake - let's define better as the team that would win a series of games - let's say best of 5. I guess given the volatility of this year's team - let's say that this team Was the one from the 7 game win streak on as I think it best defined this team's potential.

i guess in light of the ACC's strong NCAA tourney performance last year - either last year teams were better or this just highlights the randomness of a one and done tourney. I'm curious as to the Board's thoughts.

[eddiehaskell]

So want the heck happened to the ACC this weekend? How does a conference get all this hype and falls so flat on its face - especially a year after having the opposite happen.

I know memory is a tricky thing but did the teams in the ACC seem stronger this year than last to you? They did to me. What about Duke? Which team do you think was "better" - this year's or last? Again I would lean to this year's team despite last year's team going further. For arguments sake - let's define better as the team that would win a series of games - let's say best of 5. I guess given the volatility of this year's team - let's say that this team Was the one from the 7 game win streak on as I think it best defined this team's potential.

i guess in light of the ACC's strong NCAA tourney performance last year - either last year teams were better or this just highlights the randomness of a one and done tourney. I'm curious as to the Board's thoughts.Doesnt seem like ACC teams were any worse than last year. It sorta makes me wonder if there's anything to the thought of NCCAT officiating being different than ACC officiating this year. It's hard to imagine most of these ACC-beating schools coming into the ACC and being among the best for entire season. However, teams like Florida, Xavier and SC made "good" ACC teams look like 16 seeds.

[Wander]

So want the heck happened to the ACC this weekend? How does a conference get all this hype and falls so flat on its face - especially a year after having the opposite happen.

I think the answer is that people assign too much importance to conference strength in general. The gap between the ACC, Big 10, Pac 12, Big East, SEC, and Big 12 is just rarely as big as the average fan thinks. Without actually going back through the years, I'm willing to bet that most seasons, whatever conference is considered the best performs worse than expected in the tournament and whatever power conference is considered the worst performs better than expected in the tournament.

[PackMan97]

Doesnt seem like ACC teams were any worse than last year. It sorta makes me wonder if there's anything to the thought of NCCAT officiating being different than ACC officiating this year. It's hard to imagine most of these ACC-beating schools coming into the ACC and being among the best for entire season. However, teams like Florida, Xavier and SC made "good" ACC teams look like 16 seeds.

I think what you are forgetting about is what happened in the ACC this season....


NC State 104 vs VT 78
VT 89 vs Duke 75
NC State 56 vs Cheaters 107
NC State 84 vs Duke 82
Wake Forest 96 vs Miami 79
UVA 71 vs ND 54
Louisville 106 vs Pitt 51
Pitt 88 vs UVa 76
Ptt 80 vs FSU 66
Duke 110 vs GT 57
FSU 109 vs Clemson 61
FSU 104 vs BC 72

Just a representive sample, but this was perhaps the most volitale season in ACC memory. There have been plenty of threads about how balanced and strong the ACC has been...or has it just been erratic? What we saw in the NCAA is just every ACC team having a bad game on the same weekend. Inconsistent output was the story in the ACC this season.

How does NC State blow out VT, then get embarassed by UNC and somehow beat ACC Camp, Duke?
Or FSU hand 100+ on Clemson and BC but then get owned by Pitt?
or GT get run aover by 53 against Duke and then beat FSU and ND in back to back games?
UVA scored in the 40's twice this season, it's no surprise that a top 20 team held them near that.

I think it's fair to say that most of the ACC teams had ceilings higher than the roof, but their floors were lower than the basement.

[brevity]

I think it's fair to say that most of the ACC teams had ceilings higher than the roof, but their floors were lower than the basement.

That would also explain why UNC advanced. They were recently advised to make no such distinction.

[dukelifer]

ACC's bad week continues. Notre Dame women lose their best player to an ACL tear.