How many NCAAT bids for the ACC?

[dukie8]

after listening to the nc st thrashing today, i have to admit that the acc is looking more and more like a 3 bid league. unc is all but a lock for a 1 seed and duke probably can go 7-9 and still get in given the ooc wins. i'm assuming that clemson's bad loss this week was a blip and they will learn to hit some fts and slide in. other than that, i don't think there is a single team in the acc that looks like a tournament team. here's what i see:

nc st -- after today forget about it. they have an rpi of 59, horrible losses to new orleans and east carolina, the loss today that the whole nation saw and at most 1 win against an ncaat team (villanova). hello nit.
bc -- an rpi of 108, a horrible loss to robert morris and 1 win against an ncaat team (rhode island).
virginia -- an rpi of 73, no horrible losses to bad teams but the seton hall one wasn't very good and giving up 61 to xavier in the first half is damaging and 1 win against an ncaat team (arizona).
fsu -- an rpi of 36, bad losses to cleveland st and south florida and maybe 1 win against an ncaat team (florida).
maryland -- an rpi of 139, bad losses to american and ohio and no wins against ncaat teams.
miami -- an rpi of 45, no bad losses (winthrop isn't a bad one) and maybe 2 wins against ncaat teams (providence and miss st).
wake forest -- an rpi of 56, bad losses to charlotte and georgia and maybe 1 win against an ncaat team (byu)

ga tech and va are so far from a bid it's not even worth summarizing them.

i don't think any of the above teams would get a bid right now. miami probably is the closest because of their lack of bad losses. i think having so many bad losses is going to hurt the acc this year and as of right now, it is a 3 bid league with miami on the bubble.

[Wander]

You think no one in the ACC other than UNC, Duke and Clemson is going to go to the NCAA tournament?

You're overreacting like crazy to one pathetic performance by State. Are you aware that the ACC is the top conference in the RPI right now?

[hondoheel]

Miami is a sure thing at 14-1. Beyond hilarious that they aren't in the top 25.

[Wander]

I think Miami will get in but they are far from a sure thing.

[Duvall]

You think no one in the ACC other than UNC, Duke and Clemson is going to go to the NCAA tournament?

You're overreacting like crazy to one pathetic performance by State. Are you aware that the ACC is the top conference in the RPI right now?

Conferences don't get bids, teams do, and aside from UNC, Duke, Clemson and Miami, it's hard to find a team in the ACC that's in good position to earn a bid. And even those teams still have to have decent conference records first, though I expect that they will.

[dukie8]

You think no one in the ACC other than UNC, Duke and Clemson is going to go to the NCAA tournament?

You're overreacting like crazy to one pathetic performance by State. Are you aware that the ACC is the top conference in the RPI right now?

i'm not overreacting to the nc st loss. as previously noted, conferences don't get bids -- teams do. the acc might not have any truly horrible teams like most other conferences do but the acc also is going to have a very miserable selection sunday unless some of its teams wake up very soon. miami probably would get in now but it by no means is a lock and miami very easily could pull a clemson 2007. which of these teams look like ncaat teams to you?

[Wander]

I'm well aware that teams get bids, but there is a reason that the ACC is the number 1 conference in the computer numbers right now - because it has good teams.

I don't know which of Miami, Boston College, FSU, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Maryland, NC State, Wake Forest, and Georgia Tech are going to be NCAA tournament teams. What I do know is that at least one of these teams will be in the NCAA tournament, and more likely two or three. Predicting that all nine of these teams are going to miss the NCAAs is just setting yourself up to look very foolish.

If you really want to force me to guess, I would say that Miami and Boston College will be NCAA teams, and maybe FSU too, depending on if/when they get their injured frontcourt back - I don't know the details of that situation.

[CameronCrazie]

When all is said and done BC or Virginia will definitely get in. I can't see Sean Singletary letting his team miss out... perhaps the same with Rice. those are two spectacular guards with decent talent around them. Maybe not both, but one or the other will make it. That makes it Duke, UNC, Clemson (though history says otherwise), Miami, and Virginia/BC (maybe both).

[jimsumner]

True, that conferences don't get bids--after the automatic one--in a technical sense. But trust me, the selection knows darn well how many bids each conference has and that does make a difference in the final picks.

Given the fact that there are relatively few non-conference games left, the ACC will continue to have a high RPI and this also will boost teams on the proverbial bubble.

I would be astonished to see the ACC with 3 bids.

There's a lot of basketball to be played. Last year Boston College lost to Vermont, Virginia lost to App State, Virginia Tech lost to Western Michigan and Marshall. Pretty bad loses. Yet all three of these teams not only made the NCAAs, they all finished ahead of Duke in the ACC Regular season and lasted longer in the NCAAs.

[dukie8]

I'm well aware that teams get bids, but there is a reason that the ACC is the number 1 conference in the computer numbers right now - because it has good teams.

I don't know which of Miami, Boston College, FSU, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Maryland, NC State, Wake Forest, and Georgia Tech are going to be NCAA tournament teams. What I do know is that at least one of these teams will be in the NCAA tournament, and more likely two or three. Predicting that all nine of these teams are going to miss the NCAAs is just setting yourself up to look very foolish.

If you really want to force me to guess, I would say that Miami and Boston College will be NCAA teams, and maybe FSU too, depending on if/when they get their injured frontcourt back - I don't know the details of that situation.

where did i predict 3 bids? i expressly stated that unless some of these teams get with it soon, the acc very well could be looking at 3 bids. that's hardly predicting it. pointing to the league rpi as a reason why the acc won't only get 3 bids actually makes you look foolish. a league with 2 or 3 very good teams and then 9 or 10 mediocre teams is going to have a higher rpi than a league with 2 or 3 good teams 7 or 8 mediocre ones and 1 or 2 horrible teams. the acc doesn't have any horrible teams like an oregon st or a rutgers to pull the rpi down but it does have a whole mess of mediocre teams that have done their best so far to damage their selection sunday resume.

i have no idea why you are predicting that bc will be in. their rpi, at 108, is getting pretty close to horrific, 5 of their wins were against teams with an rpi of 227 or higher, one of their losses was on national tv and an absolute bludgeoning at home by kansas and they do have a loss to robert morris. beating rhode island isn't going to get them in. i also will note that last year they were 10-6 in the acc, didn't get destroyed at home on national tv and also didn't feast on the truly terrible teams for easy ooc wins.

[Patrick Yates]

I predicted three at the begining of the season, and I still think only 3 teams will warrant a bid, but the rest of the nation appears down, outside the Pac 10 (it actually hurt me physically to write that). So I am sure that 4 will get in. Five may, but I wouldn't bet on it.

UNC, Duke, and Clemson are virtual locks. I gotta think UVA will get in. I think their familiarity with the other conference teams will help them. They excelled in conference play last year, and I expect that to continue despite their losses in personell.

BC, UMD, and VT are out, or soon will be. WFU is a wasteland. Miami is a paper tiger, having played nobody. I think they are arround .500 in the conf. Ga Tech is rapidly playing their way out. Today all but sealed NCSU's fate. That will leave a bad taste in the selection committee's mouth. FSU will collapse at some point.

Miami could be the fifth team, if they surpass my expectations.

Despite our lofty conf RPI I don't think the ACC will load up on bids. The RPI is helped tremendously by UNC, and it will hurt the rest of the league if they only lose 1 game (to us in CIS) or go undefeated. That makes the rest of the conf look bad if one team runs off with the regular season. Also, FSU, Miami, and a few others have suspect RPIs. They haven't played anybody, but at least they have beaten most of the Weak Sisters of Mercy that they were brave enough to schedule. Once teams start taking conf lumps, that RPI will dip.

Also, I knew the ACC was in trouble last year when EVERY single team was a dissappointment. I can't remember if anyone survived the first weekend other than UNC, and that ^$%^$%^$%^$%ie bomb they laid vs G Town is fresh in everyone's mind. Given how badly the league teams performed last year in the tourney, I have to believe this year's selection committee holds that against us.

If few mid majors emerge, ie a few mid majors each run away with their conf races, then a few more ACC squads sneak in. But I doubt it.

Patrick Yates

[Wander]

You said "As of right now, the ACC is a 3 bid league." And "The ACC is looking more and more like a 3 bid league." Neither of these statements are reasonable at all.

Pointing out the conference's RPI isn't an end-all argument, but it certainly is a legitimate piece of evidence. You're being a little extremist right now.

[dukie8]

You said "As of right now, the ACC is a 3 bid league." And "The ACC is looking more and more like a 3 bid league." Neither of these statements are reasonable at all.

Pointing out the conference's RPI isn't an end-all argument, but it certainly is a legitimate piece of evidence. You're being a little extremist right now.

again, where did i predict that in march the acc will get 3 bids? the title of the thread even had a question mark in it.

the league rpi is COMPLETELY irrelevant. as has been pointed out now by 3 people, the committee looks at TEAMS not the conference. even at the team level, the rpi is just 1 of a myriad of factors the committee looks at. this isn't rocket science so i don't know why you are having a hard time understanding that the committee does not care what the conference rpi is. if you still think that it does, please post a link supporting that incorrect claim. there's nothing extremist recognizing that the acc is looking pretty mediocre halfway through the season -- and this is after last year's thud in the ncaat.

[Classof06]

Miami is a sure thing at 14-1. Beyond hilarious that they aren't in the top 25.

A la Lee Corso, not so fast my friend. Clemson started last year 18 or 17-0 and didn't make it. Miami looks like they're on the right track but their schedule hasn't been too tough and they have a long ways to go.

As of right now, I would bet that UNC, Duke and Clemson will make it. I'm still a little iffy on Clemson after they reiterated their inconsistencies of last year by playing UNC to the buzzer (probably should have won the game) but then losing to Charlotte at home the very next game.

UVA can make it but I wouldn't put them today. And I agree with what some of the other people said, I think the committee will see the ACC for what it is; a very young league right now. I don't think we're going to get extra bids just because we're the ACC. The beauty of it all is that we get to see it unfold over the next 2 months.

[sandinmyshoes]

Well, right now Clemson is going into their second OT with FSU. If they lose this game it will be like deja-vu (all over again) for their fans after last year.

[feldspar]

Wow.

You do realize it's only the first week of ACC play, right?

[JasonEvans]

again, where did i predict that in march the acc will get 3 bids? the title of the thread even had a question mark in it.

the league rpi is COMPLETELY irrelevant. as has been pointed out now by 3 people, the committee looks at TEAMS not the conference. even at the team level, the rpi is just 1 of a myriad of factors the committee looks at. this isn't rocket science so i don't know why you are having a hard time understanding that the committee does not care what the conference rpi is. if you still think that it does, please post a link supporting that incorrect claim. there's nothing extremist recognizing that the acc is looking pretty mediocre halfway through the season -- and this is after last year's thud in the ncaat.

Dukie8,

It is not arguing in good faith to suggest things might happen (3 bids), back up your suggestion with your arguments, and then get angry and dismissive of people who call you on it by saying "I never predicted that!" You are using tiny semantics in an effort to make your point and are doing it in a very aggressive and abrasive manner, in my opinion.

I urge you to make your points with less venom. I also urge you to understand that when people disagree with you, they are not your enemy. They are merely attempting to have a discussion -- a process that requires cooperation and understanding on both sides.

Thanks.

FWIW, I agree that the ACC is quite weak and there appear to be few good teams in the league... but then again that appears to be the case with most of the other power conferences. The bottom line for the NCAA Selection Committee is finding 65 teams to fill the field. Someone has to win each ACC game. Unless you think Duke, UNC, and Clemson win all their games against the other teams in the league (so unlikely as to be laughable) there will be a couple teams that find their way to 8-8 or 9-7. Those teams will likely get NCAA bids and I think the ACC will end up with 4 or, more likely, 5 NCAA bids on selection Sunday. To me, it is just a matter of math... even if the rest of the conference appears to suck at times.

--Jason "by the way, this whole thread makes me think Virginia is gonna beat Duke tonight-- yikes!!" Evans

[Buckeye Devil]

only gets 3 bids, the Big 10 should only get its tournament winner.

[Buckeye Devil]

It's a little hard for me to believe the that selection committee holds previous tournament failure against an entire conference. As a league, the Big 10 seems to bomb on a fairly consistent basis but almost always manages to get 4-6 teams in each year. That thinking could possibly come into play for a low to mid-major, but less likely for a conference like the ACC.

[JasonEvans]

It's a little hard for me to believe the that selection committee holds previous tournament failure against an entire conference. As a league, the Big 10 seems to bomb on a fairly consistent basis but almost always manages to get 4-6 teams in each year. That thinking could possibly come into play for a low to mid-major, but less likely for a conference like the ACC.

The committee has one job-- create the best 65-team field it can based on how teams played this year (and how they are playing at the end of the season). While I think it might be possible that the committee would give a tiny bit of weight to a truly horrid tournament history for a conference (for example, I think there were a couple years in a row recently where the Big Ten went like 1-6 or so in the Tourney -- just an embarrassing record), the ACC is not anywhere near that level of tournament futility.

I think the performance of the conference last year (we went 7-7, a bad record for the ACC but hardly an abject failure) will have no bearing at all upon NCAA selections this season. I am fairly sure it is not even allowed to be discussed during the deliberations on each team.

--Jason "I'm of the belief that the selection process is a lot less nefarious and sneaky than others think" Evans

[Buckeye Devil]

that the ACC has not reached the depths of poor tournament results like the Big 10 in recent years. My point is that based on the Big 10 experience, the previous year has little if anything to do with how many teams get in from a given conference. If that is true for the Big 10, it should be all the more so for the ACC.

[JasonEvans]

that the ACC has not reached the depths of poor tournament results like the Big 10 in recent years. My point is that based on the Big 10 experience, the previous year has little if anything to do with how many teams get in from a given conference. If that is true for the Big 10, it should be all the more so for the ACC.

Yup, I was just seeking to re-enforce your point.

-JE

[dukie8]

Dukie8,

It is not arguing in good faith to suggest things might happen (3 bids), back up your suggestion with your arguments, and then get angry and dismissive of people who call you on it by saying "I never predicted that!" You are using tiny semantics in an effort to make your point and are doing it in a very aggressive and abrasive manner, in my opinion.

I urge you to make your points with less venom. I also urge you to understand that when people disagree with you, they are not your enemy. They are merely attempting to have a discussion -- a process that requires cooperation and understanding on both sides.

Thanks.

FWIW, I agree that the ACC is quite weak and there appear to be few good teams in the league... but then again that appears to be the case with most of the other power conferences. The bottom line for the NCAA Selection Committee is finding 65 teams to fill the field. Someone has to win each ACC game. Unless you think Duke, UNC, and Clemson win all their games against the other teams in the league (so unlikely as to be laughable) there will be a couple teams that find their way to 8-8 or 9-7. Those teams will likely get NCAA bids and I think the ACC will end up with 4 or, more likely, 5 NCAA bids on selection Sunday. To me, it is just a matter of math... even if the rest of the conference appears to suck at times.

--Jason "by the way, this whole thread makes me think Virginia is gonna beat Duke tonight-- yikes!!" Evans

except that isn't exactly what happened. what actually happened is that i threw it out there that the acc isn't looking very good and if the mismosh of teams in the middle don't start winning games, the league very well could get only 3 bids. then, a poster comes on and says that that is hogwash because the league has the number 1 rpi and that i am going to look foolish predicting 3 bids when the league's rpi will get it more than that. several posters pointed out that the league rpi is completely irrelevant and he/she continued with the league rpi argument so i said fine, post a link that shows league rpi has any bearing on the ncaat selection process.

i do agree that it's not just the acc that looks weak -- the big 10, big east and sec all look very mediocre and i think that there is going to be a giantic mismosh of bcs bubble teams (moreso than normal) with warts all over their ncaat resumes come march. and, yes, another thing that helps acc teams is that each game produces a win so no matter how mediocre the teams are, when they play, someone walks away with a win. however, 8-8 and 9-7 in the acc isn't going to exactly wow the same committee that left out an 8-10 fsu team (including the acct) team last year that also beat the number 1 team in the country (florida) and duke.

in any event, it is worth discussing given how badly some of the acc teams have looked so far and 3 bids is not unprecendented as it happened in 2000. fwiw, i think that at least 1 of the teams outlined earlier will get enough wins over the next 2 months to sneak in. certainly the biggest thing most of those teams can do over that time period is beat either unc or duke, which isn't exactly the best thing for us.

[dukie8]

Yup, I was just seeking to re-enforce your point.

-JE

fwiw, the ncaat committee repeatedly has said that past performances in the ncaat (whether good or bad) have zero relevance in the selection process.

[JasonEvans]

in any event, it is worth discussing given how badly some of the acc teams have looked so far and 3 bids is not unprecendented as it happened in 2000. fwiw, i think that at least 1 of the teams outlined earlier will get enough wins over the next 2 months to sneak in. certainly the biggest thing most of those teams can do over that time period is beat either unc or duke, which isn't exactly the best thing for us.

Agreed it is worth discussion how poor the conference middle looks and that a number of teams will need to do some work in their conference slate to get NCAA consideration -- I certainly agree with you on that.

But, just to be clear, talking about the ACC only getting 3 teams in during the 2000 season and saying that has any bearing on the league today is sorta silly seeing as there were 9 teams in the ACC then and 12 teams today. 3 out of 9 is the same as 4 out of 12. If the ACC is as bad as it has looked lately, then I think 4 bids is a reality... and that would be as bad as the year we only got 3 bids in 2000.

--Jason "I think the middle teams can succeed and impress by beating each other -- not just by beating Duke, UNC, and (to a lesser extent) Clemson" Evans

[devildeac]

--Jason "I'm of the belief that the selection process is a lot less nefarious and sneaky than others think" Evans


And you also think that unc has to be good for us to be good...(:D)

[Bob Green]

...here's what i see:

fsu -- an rpi of 36, bad losses to cleveland st and south florida and maybe 1 win against an ncaat team (florida).


FSU's loss to Cleveland State doesn't look so bad now.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=280170325

[dukie8]

FSU's loss to Cleveland State doesn't look so bad now.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=280170325

no it doesn't -- but their 51 rpi and zero top 50 wins do.

[IStillHateJimBain]

Earlier on this board there was a post that the ACC might be a three-bid league this year. That seems unlikely but not wholly impossible. There's a lot of jockeying going in the bottom 10 right now. You would think at least two other ACC teams will get in besides Duke and that team in second place right now. What about it?

[Matches]

No more than four. Duke and UNC are locks. Clemson and Maryland look like the 3-4 teams, but both have been inconsistent and it's always difficult to judge Maryland based only on the UNC and Duke games.

We're going to load up the NIT this year, though. Lots of teams right below NCAA-level.

[camion]

I expect the ACC will get four or five bids. Who might get them? There are an awful lot of games to be played among the "other ten" and someone has to win them. I would bet on Clemson and Maryland at this point if Booker isn't too badly injured, but I wouldn't bet more than a quarter. Any of the ten can beat any other on a given night and it's not really an upset so I think we'll just have to wait for the games to be played. I do our NIT representatives will kick some butt.

From every game I've seen this year Duke is the only team that has clearly been playing better than the others in the league. UNC has the talent and reputation, but hasn't been playing much better than the ten. The Duke/UNC comparison is really interesting. UNC has obvious strengths and subtle weaknesses while Duke has obvious weaknesses and subtle strengths. Because of this I've been repeatedly surprised at how teams can hang with the heels, but Duke just accelerates past them.

[4decadedukie]

Four.

[billybreen]

In order of likeliness, I'm saying 4, 5, 3.

[gw67]

With the apparent parity of 9-10 of the ACC teams and the unbalanced schedule, it appears to me that the remaining six weeks of the ACC season will be very interesting and that the ACC tournament may be a nightmare for the league as far as seeding is determined. For now, I see two top teams, a team that is fighting to stay on top and the rest. I went through the schedule and the following is my prediction for the final league standings:

1. Duke 14-2
2. UNC 13-3
3. Clemson 9-7
4. Ga. Tech 8-8
5.(tie) FSU, Md, Miami, NCSt, Va Tech 7-9
10.(tie) BC, Wake 6-10
12. Virginia 5-11

The amazing part is that the bottom nine teams can be scrambled if a couple win on the road or pull an upset. I expect the ACC to get four bids and for several teams to populate the NIT.

gw67

[pamtar]

Four, with the possibility of 5. Miami, NCSU, Clemson being the bottom 3.

[pfrduke]

I expect the ACC will get four or five bids. Who might get them? There are an awful lot of games to be played among the "other ten" and someone has to win them. I would bet on Clemson and Maryland at this point if Booker isn't too badly injured, but I wouldn't bet more than a quarter. Any of the ten can beat any other on a given night and it's not really an upset so I think we'll just have to wait for the games to be played. I do our NIT representatives will kick some butt.

One of the problems the ACC is having is that the teams that have looked the best in conference play (outside of Duke/UNC) looked the worst in non-con. Take Maryland and Georgia Tech - Maryland had ugly losses to Ohio and American at home in preseason play. So even if they go 10-6, they'll be 20-12 with two very, very bad home losses and only 1 good win (unless they can get Duke in Cameron or Clemson at Comcast). And that's assuming they finish 10-6 - which would take no fewer than 3 road wins out of the 6 remaining road games. Georgia Tech has 2 conference road wins and an oh-so-close UNC game that many people remember, but their non-con was even worse than Maryland's, with losses to Winthrop, Georgia, and UNC-Greensboro (at home). 10-6 for them gets just a 17-12 record with 2-3 bad losses. They really need to be 12-4 or 11-5 to get consideration, and would need to either beat Duke in Cameron or sweep Clemson to get good wins.

On the other side, Miami is off to a 2-3 start and still has 3 games against Duke and Clemson; Virginia is 1-4 (with some heartbreaking losses - they could very easily be 4-1); and FSU (the win over Florida keeps looking better) is 2-4 with 2 home losses.

It looks like it's going to be very, very hard to meaningfully differentiate among teams after Duke and UNC (and maybe Clemson). Which could mean we get 6 in, with three teams around 9-11 seeds. Or we get 3 in, with everyone else beating each other just enough that they're all on the outside looking in. I'd like to think a 10-6 ACC record is NCAA-worthy, but if it's Georgia Tech, Maryland, or Wake putting up that record, it may not be enough. The ACC-tournament could be filled with play-in games on both Thursday and Friday - the 3/6 and 4/5 games could be huge.

[Classof06]

Locks
Duke
Carolina
Clemson

On the Bubble
Miami (not in yet but yesterday's win was huge)
Maryland (needs to get it together--quick)
NC State (see Maryland)
Ga Tech (something tells me not to count this team out yet)

[dukerev]

Clemson is not a lock right now and are starting to revert to typical form (quick start, a tough loss on the road in conference play, then the almost predictable collapse). Whether they'll turn it around this year or not remains to be seen, but Clemson has NOT gotten in yet. Of course no one is IN for sure yet, but with their reputation, they'll need to finish strong and have an over .500 record in ACC play to get in.

I think that Maryland'll play their way in and Georgia Tech will give it a run as well. Both will need to win at least one tourney game to get in. I agree that those teams both hurt themselves with bad out of conference losses but are showing up strongest in conference play.

None of this is going to help the discussions about Duke's strength of schedule. That'll get all of us fired up throughout the next six weeks or so, feeling like we're being slighted. The ACC has a tougher bottom and top of the conference than any other in the country, but a very soft middle this year. Odd.

[CDu]

I think five, maybe six. Right now, I'd say there are only two locks: Duke and UNC. After that, there will HAVE to be some teams who get to 7-8 wins in conference play.

If I had to guess, Clemson will get in with 20+ win seasons and at least 7 wins in conference play. I think Boston College will get at least 8 wins in conference and make it as well. And I think at least one of Miami and Maryland will get in. That's five teams. And that ignores NC State, who is lurking and has talented players. And Georgia Tech, who seems to have found a good mix of players. Those last two are long shots, but not out of the question.

I could even see six or seven if things played out great, depending upon how the teams finish up. Only Duke and UNC will be higher than a #4 seed, and probably the rest will be in the #7-10 seed ranges. But I do believe they'll still get in.

[patentgeek]

I suspect that much will depend on (a) whether a team can get to 9-7 in conference and (b) what teams manage to beat Duke and/or the hated Heels. There aren't a lot of impressive non-conference wins out there for the other 10 teams, and there are some atrocious losses (e.g., MD losing to American). Since the bottom 10 teams don't have great non-conference wins to fall back on, they're going to have to rely on either great conference wins (Duke or UNC) or a strong conference performance (which I think this year means 9-7 or better). For most of these teams, I don't think an 8-8 conference record, when combined with the remainder of their resume, is going to be good enough. PFRDUKE's comment that the ACC tournament 1st and 2nd round games may be like play-in games for a lot of these teams may be spot on.

[Cameron]

Clemson is going nowhere real fast (surprise, surprise), Miami will stuggle to win big games down the stretch, NC State looks much worse than the 'Canes, and Maryland will probably have too many bad losses to even get looked at unless they win the ACC Tournament or at least advance to the Finals.

Georgia Tech has looked pretty good at times, but the Jackets have a 10-9 record at the time being, which will have to drastically change in order for them to sniff a post season. Boston College has a decent ACC record right now, sitting in third place at 3-2 (12-6 overall), but most likely won't hold it. Like Clemson, Boston College better start treasuring every SINGLE game or the dream is over.

This is definitely the most top heavy are conference has been in a long time. Teams three through twelve are the most unpredictable I've seen in years. I have no idea which of those teams will be invited at this point. Absolutely none. I would definitely say Clemson is the early front-runner, but I also wouldn't be surprised to see Oliver's club drop four in a row at some point in February.

Right now, I would say three teams at most get in.

[CDu]

I suspect that much will depend on (a) whether a team can get to 9-7 in conference and (b) what teams manage to beat Duke and/or the hated Heels. There aren't a lot of impressive non-conference wins out there for the other 10 teams, and there are some atrocious losses (e.g., MD losing to American). Since the bottom 10 teams don't have great non-conference wins to fall back on, they're going to have to rely on either great conference wins (Duke or UNC) or a strong conference performance (which I think this year means 9-7 or better). For most of these teams, I don't think an 8-8 conference record, when combined with the remainder of their resume, is going to be good enough. PFRDUKE's comment that the ACC tournament 1st and 2nd round games may be like play-in games for a lot of these teams may be spot on.

Clemson is #26 in RPI right now according to Ken Pomeroy. Miami is number 33. Both of those teams have 15 wins. So if they get to 8-8, they'll have 20 wins, 8-8 in one of the "top" conferences, and will have RPI ratings better than #40. That would make it VERY difficult to keep them out, in my opinion. I don't know that I've ever seen a scenario in which that happens. Remember: you don't HAVE to have marquis wins to get into the tournament. In the ACC, 20 wins, 8-8 in conference, and a solid RPI will absolutely get you in.

Boston College will probably have to get to 9 wins to be comfortable. They're at 3-2 in conference but are only #84 in RPI right now. That said, I think they have a good chance to get to 9-7 in conference, as they have good balance and a top-tier guard. And if they do, their RPI will move up accordingly. And quietly, NC State is lurking with 13 wins, a 2-3 ACC mark, lots of talented players, and the #49 RPI. They could make their presence felt if they can figure out how to play together.

[patentgeek]

I'm not sure it's quite that formulaic, although I could be wrong. I'm thinking, for example, of Florida State in 2006 - they finished 19-9 overall, 9-7 in the conference (although with an RPI of around 60) and stayed home. Maryland that year went 8-8 in the conference, 19-12 overall, with an RPI in the high 40s, and stayed home. I realize that these don't fit your exact scenario, but they're not far off. And don't forget that Fla. State beat Duke that year.

My feeling is that the "8-8 in the ACC gets you in" guideline depends a lot on the perceived strength of the conference. Because there aren't a lot of OOC marquee wins, there is a perception that the ACC is down somewhat irrespective of what the RPI might say. I also think that sometimes the committee uses conference tournaments as a tool to sort out teams - to use the example above, Fla St lost to a 12-place Wake team in the first round of the ACC tournament that year, which was probably their death knell.

I also think that if, as it looks like may happen, there are 4-5 teams at the 8-8 or 7-9 range, they will be very difficult for the committee to sort out, and it's been my sense that they often don't try - unless one or two of those teams stand out (by head-to-head wins, marquee wins, strength of schedule, or conference tournament performance), the committee seems to prefer to just leave all of them at home.

[pfrduke]

Clemson is #26 in RPI right now according to Ken Pomeroy. Miami is number 33. Both of those teams have 15 wins. So if they get to 8-8, they'll have 20 wins, 8-8 in one of the "top" conferences, and will have RPI ratings better than #40. That would make it VERY difficult to keep them out, in my opinion. I don't know that I've ever seen a scenario in which that happens. Remember: you don't HAVE to have marquis wins to get into the tournament. In the ACC, 20 wins, 8-8 in conference, and a solid RPI will absolutely get you in.

Boston College will probably have to get to 9 wins to be comfortable. They're at 3-2 in conference but are only #84 in RPI right now. That said, I think they have a good chance to get to 9-7 in conference, as they have good balance and a top-tier guard. And if they do, their RPI will move up accordingly. And quietly, NC State is lurking with 13 wins, a 2-3 ACC mark, lots of talented players, and the #49 RPI. They could make their presence felt if they can figure out how to play together.

Clemson and Miami will see their RPI fall if they end up at 8-8. I don't know if it'll fall below 40, but it would almost certainly fall lower than the current numbers.

FSU two years ago went 19-9,9-8 (with a 1st round ACCT loss) and was on the outside looking in. I believe their RPI was in the mid-40s. 20 wins is not the magic number it used to be with the expansion of number of games played - I believe most schools now play 30 in the regular season, not 27 as was previously the limit. Just last year FSU went 20-12 and didn't make it.

Certainly marquee wins are not a requirement. But they're extremely helpful, particularly when trying to differentiate among teams that are looking pretty indistinguishable. That is especially the case for the teams with bad losses, which is almost all of them (BC to Robert Morris, FSU to Cleveland St and S Florida, GT to UNCG, Miami to Winthrop (with a v. weak non-con schedule - could hurt if they end up 8-8), Maryland to American and Delaware, NCSU to New Orleans and ECU (and the single worst win of anyone in the ACC - 50-43 over Presbyterian), VT to Penn St and Richmond. The teams UVA lost to are all decent, although the Xavier loss was ugly. Ditto Wake, replacing Xavier with Georgia, and they don't have an Arizona win on their record.

Clemson is certainly "safest." But if they go 8-8 and finish 6th, behind 3 teams that somehow went 9-7, it could be very hard to take them. If those 9-7 teams are GT, NCSU, and FSU, the conference could be in real bid trouble. The ACC needs a team (or two) to go on an 8 or 9 win tear, or finish the season winning 8 or 9 of their last ten. If teams keep trading wins and losses, it's worry time.

[wilson]

Clemson is going nowhere real fast (surprise, surprise), Miami will stuggle to win big games down the stretch, NC State looks much worse than the 'Canes, and Maryland will probably have too many bad losses to even get looked at unless they win the ACC Tournament or at least advance to the Finals.

Georgia Tech has looked pretty good at times, but the Jackets have a 10-9 record at the time being, which will have to drastically change in order for them to sniff a post season. Boston College has a decent ACC record right now, sitting in third place at 3-2 (12-6 overall), but most likely won't hold it. Like Clemson, Boston College better start treasuring every SINGLE game or the dream is over.

This is definitely the most top heavy are conference has been in a long time. Teams three through twelve are the most unpredictable I've seen in years. I have no idea which of those teams will be invited at this point. Absolutely none. I would definitely say Clemson is the early front-runner, but I also wouldn't be surprised to see Oliver's club drop four in a row at some point in February.

Right now, I would say three teams at most get in.

This sounds exactly right to me. It's weird that the conference could be quite competitive on the whole, yet experience such a dearth of truly tournament-worthy squads.

[HumboldtDevil]

Anybody that thinks this league can get 5 or 6 bids this season is crazy. The ACC just isn't that good this year. There are talented teams that are improving, but are they legitimately good? No.

Clemson has already started a spiral that it'll have to pull itself out of. In addition to three recent ACC losses they lost at home to Charlotte (8-5 then, 13-6 now that they've gotten into A-10 play) right after the UNC game. Clemson actually played and beat some decent teams OOC for once, so they should get in at 8-8 in conference. There's no guarantee they won't tank completely, though.

Maryland has shown in its last two games that it has the talent to make a run in the ACC and play its way into the tournament, but they do have to play their way in. The Terps weren't even on the bubble before UNC and still aren't in the tournament. They'll need to have a winning record in conference or possibly 8-8 with wins in the bigger games. A winning conference record means going at least 7-4 from here, but the Terps haven't been very good or very consistent this year.

Miami had a good OOC record, but has come back down to earth. I don't think it'll do enough to get into the tournament. Like everyone besides Clemson, it'll need to have a winning record in the ACC, I think.Losing to Winthrop at home is noticeable, even with solid wins against VCU, Providence, Miss. St.

Georgia Tech needs to go at least 10-6 in the ACC. They're playing much better, but are only 10-9 overall (3-3 ACC) with some bad OOC losses. And even at 10-6 GT will only be 17-12 entering the conference tournament. Don't expect GT to suddenly be good enough to go 7-3 in conference from this point.

NC State hasn't even played as good as its 13-6 record and is 2-3 in conference. They have the pieces to make a run, but no PG at all. Another team that has to with 9+ in conference, but will they do it?

VA, VT, BC, WF, FSU can be lumped because I'm tired of writing the same thing for every team. Looking at the league right now I think it isn't as bad as I thought because there are basically 10 even teams and two really good teams. These teams besides Duke and UNC aren't terrible, but none of them are clearly good right now. Clemson is the only school that could get away with 8-8. You could make an argument for Miami, but that's it. Every other team needs 9+ wins and have shown almost no sign that they'll be able to do it.

NCAA Tournament prediction: Duke, UNC, Clemson (find a way to 8-8 guys).

I barely have confidence in Clemson, so how can I expect anyone else to play well enough to make the tournament when they all have more to do?

[The1Bluedevil]

Never imagined the ACC could ever be this bad.

[Surfsideron]

Earlier on this board there was a post that the ACC might be a three-bid league this year. That seems unlikely but not wholly impossible. There's a lot of jockeying going in the bottom 10 right now. You would think at least two other ACC teams will get in besides Duke and that team in second place right now. What about it?

I think they will get in at least 5 teams.

Georgia Tech, if they finish 8-8 will definately get a bid. Someone mentioned their non-conference schedule but hey, they almost beat Indiana at Indiana and they had a solid chance to beat Kansas, losing by only 5. Of course we know how close they came to beating UNC.

If the Big 10 is being touted to get 5-6 tams then the ACC should get 10 teams! The Big 10 is the worst conference in the country as the ACC proved in the Challenge.

I like Duke, UNC, G. Tech, Clemson and Maryland with an outside chance for FSU which is a much better team than what they appear.:rolleyes:

[Surfsideron]

Never imagined the ACC could ever be this bad.

If you think the ACC is bad, what if you were a BIG 10 fan!

The ACC is better than what most think. As a unit they dominated their non-conference opponents.

The conference games have been nail-biters for the most part. Both Clemson and G. Tech should have beaten UNC who was #1 at the time. Hell, all Clemson had to do was make one stinking foul shot in regulation! All Tech had to do was get just one fair call from the refs in the last two minutes!

No, the ACC isn't at their best but they are far from being "bad.":cool:

[CDu]

Anybody that thinks this league can get 5 or 6 bids this season is crazy. The ACC just isn't that good this year. There are talented teams that are improving, but are they legitimately good? No.

Clemson has already started a spiral that it'll have to pull itself out of. In addition to three recent ACC losses they lost at home to Charlotte (8-5 then, 13-6 now that they've gotten into A-10 play) right after the UNC game. Clemson actually played and beat some decent teams OOC for once, so they should get in at 8-8 in conference. There's no guarantee they won't tank completely, though.

Maryland has shown in its last two games that it has the talent to make a run in the ACC and play its way into the tournament, but they do have to play their way in. The Terps weren't even on the bubble before UNC and still aren't in the tournament. They'll need to have a winning record in conference or possibly 8-8 with wins in the bigger games. A winning conference record means going at least 7-4 from here, but the Terps haven't been very good or very consistent this year.

Miami had a good OOC record, but has come back down to earth. I don't think it'll do enough to get into the tournament. Like everyone besides Clemson, it'll need to have a winning record in the ACC, I think.Losing to Winthrop at home is noticeable, even with solid wins against VCU, Providence, Miss. St.

Georgia Tech needs to go at least 10-6 in the ACC. They're playing much better, but are only 10-9 overall (3-3 ACC) with some bad OOC losses. And even at 10-6 GT will only be 17-12 entering the conference tournament. Don't expect GT to suddenly be good enough to go 7-3 in conference from this point.

NC State hasn't even played as good as its 13-6 record and is 2-3 in conference. They have the pieces to make a run, but no PG at all. Another team that has to with 9+ in conference, but will they do it?

VA, VT, BC, WF, FSU can be lumped because I'm tired of writing the same thing for every team. Looking at the league right now I think it isn't as bad as I thought because there are basically 10 even teams and two really good teams. These teams besides Duke and UNC aren't terrible, but none of them are clearly good right now. Clemson is the only school that could get away with 8-8. You could make an argument for Miami, but that's it. Every other team needs 9+ wins and have shown almost no sign that they'll be able to do it.

NCAA Tournament prediction: Duke, UNC, Clemson (find a way to 8-8 guys).

I barely have confidence in Clemson, so how can I expect anyone else to play well enough to make the tournament when they all have more to do?

You seem to be neglecting that it's a down year across ALL of college basketball. The Big 12 is terrible. The Big 10 is terrible. The Big East is terrible. The PAC-10 is good. Yet somehow, we have the top RPI and second-best OOC record.

No conference looks great after their best 3-4 teams. Every conference is in the same boat as the ACC, with teams with shaky resumes. That's why, when it all shakes out, we're going to get 5-6 teams.

Duke and UNC are locks. That's the only certainty. But SOMEBODY is going to get 9 wins, and some other teams are going to get to 8 wins. Right now, I'd say the likely suspects are Clemson (3-3 now), Boston College (3-2 in conference and a good combination of inside scorers and guard play), and Miami (15 wins so far, solid RPI). If any of those teams stumble, it gets murkier. But if they DO stumble, someone else will emerge with a good conference record.

[CDu]

Clemson and Miami will see their RPI fall if they end up at 8-8. I don't know if it'll fall below 40, but it would almost certainly fall lower than the current numbers.

FSU two years ago went 19-9,9-8 (with a 1st round ACCT loss) and was on the outside looking in. I believe their RPI was in the mid-40s. 20 wins is not the magic number it used to be with the expansion of number of games played - I believe most schools now play 30 in the regular season, not 27 as was previously the limit. Just last year FSU went 20-12 and didn't make it.

Certainly marquee wins are not a requirement. But they're extremely helpful, particularly when trying to differentiate among teams that are looking pretty indistinguishable. That is especially the case for the teams with bad losses, which is almost all of them (BC to Robert Morris, FSU to Cleveland St and S Florida, GT to UNCG, Miami to Winthrop (with a v. weak non-con schedule - could hurt if they end up 8-8), Maryland to American and Delaware, NCSU to New Orleans and ECU (and the single worst win of anyone in the ACC - 50-43 over Presbyterian), VT to Penn St and Richmond. The teams UVA lost to are all decent, although the Xavier loss was ugly. Ditto Wake, replacing Xavier with Georgia, and they don't have an Arizona win on their record.

Clemson is certainly "safest." But if they go 8-8 and finish 6th, behind 3 teams that somehow went 9-7, it could be very hard to take them. If those 9-7 teams are GT, NCSU, and FSU, the conference could be in real bid trouble. The ACC needs a team (or two) to go on an 8 or 9 win tear, or finish the season winning 8 or 9 of their last ten. If teams keep trading wins and losses, it's worry time.

Their RPI won't fall that much, because nearly everybody in that neighborhood is going to collect losses in conference.

As for the Florida State example, that's an anomaly. I believe it is the only team a team with that many wins and a .500 record in ACC play hasn't made the tournament.

As for your scenario of Clemson going 8-8 in conference and finishing 6th, I don't think that happens. I'll be surprised if 5 teams are better than 8-8 this year. If NCSU gets to 8-8, with their RPI in the 40s/50s, they're probably in.

The 20-win, 8-8 record thing is a virtual lock. The list of ACC teams who haven't made it with those credentials is REALLY short (if existent at all).

And while the conference lacks "marquee" wins, we have the best conference RPI, and the 2nd-best OOC record. That suggests to me that while it's a down year in the ACC, it's a down year for everybody.

Instead of looking at how bad the ACC teams are, it might be a good exercise to look at how bad the teams in the other conferences are as well.

[HumboldtDevil]

I think they will get in at least 5 teams.

Georgia Tech, if they finish 8-8 will definately get a bid. Someone mentioned their non-conference schedule but hey, they almost beat Indiana at Indiana and they had a solid chance to beat Kansas, losing by only 5. Of course we know how close they came to beating UNC.

If the Big 10 is being touted to get 5-6 tams then the ACC should get 10 teams! The Big 10 is the worst conference in the country as the ACC proved in the Challenge.

I like Duke, UNC, G. Tech, Clemson and Maryland with an outside chance for FSU which is a much better team than what they appear.:rolleyes:

If GT finishes 8-8 in the ACC they'll be 15-14 overall entering the ACC Tournament w/ losses to Greensboro and Winthrop. Doesn't matter how close you come against good teams if you can't even beat the bad teams. They'll need to win at least 10 in the ACC or do something dramatic in the ACC Tourney.

While the Big 10 may not be very good they do have three locks (Wisconsin, Indiana, and MSU), which is more than the ACC does, and has two more teams (OSU, Purdue) that are playing their way in by winning conference games. In the ACC you have two locks, a couple teams playing their way out (Clemson, Miami), and a bunch of teams that need to play their way in, but have shown no sign they will. Any tournament-worthy team in the ACC has to be able to win games against teams 3-12 in conference. If they can't do that then how could you possibly call them a tournament team?

Yeah, the Big 10 has some bad teams, but at least there are a couple teams that are in the middle of the pack that have separated themselves a bit.

As of now the ACC is a three-bid league at most.

[HumboldtDevil]

You seem to be neglecting that it's a down year across ALL of college basketball. The Big 12 is terrible. The Big 10 is terrible. The Big East is terrible. The PAC-10 is good. Yet somehow, we have the top RPI and second-best OOC record.

No conference looks great after their best 3-4 teams. Every conference is in the same boat as the ACC, with teams with shaky resumes. That's why, when it all shakes out, we're going to get 5-6 teams.

Duke and UNC are locks. That's the only certainty. But SOMEBODY is going to get 9 wins, and some other teams are going to get to 8 wins. Right now, I'd say the likely suspects are Clemson (3-3 now), Boston College (3-2 in conference and a good combination of inside scorers and guard play), and Miami (15 wins so far, solid RPI). If any of those teams stumble, it gets murkier. But if they DO stumble, someone else will emerge with a good conference record.

You can look at the RPI and other conferences as a whole, but the fact of the matter is that individual teams make the tournament and every other power conference has more teams in position to make the tournament than the ACC does. Here are teams that have a decent shot - if they don't finish below .500 or keep up current conference form - at the NCAA Tournament from the big boy conferences:

Big 12 - Baylor, Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M (6)

Big East - Connecticut, Georgetown, Louisville, Marquette, Notre Dame, Pitt, Syracuse, Villanova, West Virginia (9)

Big Ten - Indiana, Michigan State, Ohio St., Purdue, Wisconsin (5)

Pac-10 - Arizona, Arizona St., Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington St. (7)

SEC - Florida, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Arkansas, Mississippi, Mississippi St. (6)

ACC - Duke, Miami, North Carolina, Clemson (4)

So that is 37 power conference schools, six of which will presumably get automatic berths by winning their conference tournament. That means you've got 31 power conference teams for 34 at large spots. But, remember, mid-majors have been getting tons of at-large spots lately, so it is safe to assume at least 3-5 at-large spots will go to mid-majors. So, in that case, you could have 32 of these teams vying for maybe 26-28 spots.

Looking at potential at-large recipients from smaller conferences you've got:

VCU and George Mason (Colonial); Memphis, Houston, Tulane, and UAB (USA); Kent St., Akron, and Ohio (MAC); Drake, Illinois St., and Creighton (MVC); UNLV, BYU, and San Diego St. (Mtn. West); Gonzaga and St. Mary's (West Coast); Utah St. and Boise St. (WAC)

In any of these conferences you're in good shape for an at-large if the regular-season champion doesn't win the conference tournament. And what if some crappy team surprises everybody? What if Memphis doesn't win the conference tourney or something like that?

Seriously, if you compared what these teams have done in relation to what everyone in the ACC has done outside of Duke, UNC, and Clemson, then there's no way you can say with any confidence that the ACC is seriously a 5-6 bid league right now. Could this change? Yes. But Clemson and Miami are the only ACC schools on the bubble that could go 8-8 and make the tournament. Even then Miami might be in trouble. And of the other teams that have to better than 8-8, who has shown that they might actually do it? Maryland is 2-3 w/ six road games left. State, Wake, FSU, Virginia, and Miami are all 2-3 in conference and have to have a winning record in conference from here on out just to get to .500. VT is 3-3, but isn't a tourney team. BC is 12-6, 3-2, but isn't a tourney team yet and just lost to VT at home.

In every other power conference there are teams that have solid OOC results and winning conference records. Duke and Carolina are the only two ACC schools that can make that same claim. Everybody else has done too poorly OOC or is doing too poorly in coinference, or just needs to go .500 in the ACC and is struggling to do that.

Face it, if the ACC is gonna have more than 2 or 3 bids somebody is gonna have to step up. As of now nobody has distanced itself from the pack (other than the obvious) and the one other team (BC) with a winning record has three games against UNC/Duke and six road games left.

Things aren't looking good for the ACC.

[dukie8]

I'm not sure it's quite that formulaic, although I could be wrong. I'm thinking, for example, of Florida State in 2006 - they finished 19-9 overall, 9-7 in the conference (although with an RPI of around 60) and stayed home. Maryland that year went 8-8 in the conference, 19-12 overall, with an RPI in the high 40s, and stayed home. I realize that these don't fit your exact scenario, but they're not far off. And don't forget that Fla. State beat Duke that year.

My feeling is that the "8-8 in the ACC gets you in" guideline depends a lot on the perceived strength of the conference. Because there aren't a lot of OOC marquee wins, there is a perception that the ACC is down somewhat irrespective of what the RPI might say. I also think that sometimes the committee uses conference tournaments as a tool to sort out teams - to use the example above, Fla St lost to a 12-place Wake team in the first round of the ACC tournament that year, which was probably their death knell.

I also think that if, as it looks like may happen, there are 4-5 teams at the 8-8 or 7-9 range, they will be very difficult for the committee to sort out, and it's been my sense that they often don't try - unless one or two of those teams stand out (by head-to-head wins, marquee wins, strength of schedule, or conference tournament performance), the committee seems to prefer to just leave all of them at home.

how about fsu last year? rpi 41, 20-12 overall and 7-9 in the acc, they actually won their first round acct game and they also beat duke AND nc florida. they got stuffed with the nit. i can't see too many teams in the middle of the acc mishmosh having a better profile than that.

also, uva a few years ago got left out with a 9-7 record in the acc. i think that with an unbalanced schedule, 9-7 doesn't mean what it used to mean.

[dukie8]

the basis of this thread isn't looking that outlandlish 2 weeks later...

[pfrduke]

Instead of looking at how bad the ACC teams are, it might be a good exercise to look at how bad the teams in the other conferences are as well.

I don't think the "other 10" ACC teams are bad. On the contrary, the ACC's problem this year is the lack of bad teams. It's the only conference in the country where you could make a plausible argument for why each team could make the NCAA tournament. Oregon State is terrible. Nebraska and Colorado are not good. South Carolina and LSU stink. The Big East has several cellar dwellers (although Rutgers has been frisky lately - right after me calling them awful). And the Big 10 has Northwestern and Michigan. Those teams are all going to have very, very bad conference records. If any one of them gets 5 conference wins it's a huge accomplishment. That's free wins for the rest of the conference, most importantly for the bubble-ish teams looking for extra wins.

I really believe the gap between 4 and 12 in the ACC is negligible, and Clemson is trying hard to convince me there's not much gap between 3 and 4 either. I couldn't pick a single 12 loss team from that group - if forced, I'd say NCSU and Wake are the most likely candidates, but they're also both capable of at least 7 wins.

What the other conferences have is separation, with a very clearly defined bottom (and a top larger than 2). Right now the ACC is clumped together, both in conference record, but more importantly in overall record - we have 8 teams with 5-8 losses. The Big East has 6. The Pac-10 has 6. The Big 10 has 3. The Big 12 has 5. And the SEC has 6. So the ACC's problem is too many teams that are above average to good, with none that are bad.

[pfrduke]

By the way, Bilas says (http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/insider/columns/story?columnist=bilas_jay&id=3177968&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fncb %2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumnist%3dbilas_j ay%26id%3d3177968) there will be 11 ACC teams in the post-season. I don't have Insider, so I can't tell who he leaves out, but I find it hard to disagree with the premise. I just hope there are fewer than 7 in the NIT.

And for the record, I do believe that the ACC teams are better than their counterparts in the middle of other conferences (Pac-10 excluded). I would likely be willing to wager that the 12th place team in the ACC could take one of the "last four in" on a neutral court, depending on how the rest of the season plays out. I hope I'm wrong, and that the committee realizes how good the ACC was as a conference, and how there are zero free wins like those available in other conferences. Of course, that argument would have been easier to make without the non-conference losses to teams like ECU, Robert Morris, American, UNCG, South Florida, Richmond, etc.

[duke2x]

I can't remember the last time a power conference got less than 33% of its teams in the NCAAs. The ACC had 3/9 several times when we didn't have an ACC representative on the selection committee, but I think Craig Littlepage (UVA) is still on. Between that and being the RPI #1 conference, I would expect the ACC to get 4 bids even if the 4th is a stretch to be a 12 or 13 seed. Who actually will finish 8-8 or better and who would get selected out of that group is a mystery at this point. The historical trend of a 13 loss ceiling for at-large teams probably will keep GT, FSU, and Maryland out of the equation at this point.

[Uncle Drew]

True, that conferences don't get bids--after the automatic one--in a technical sense. But trust me, the selection knows darn well how many bids each conference has and that does make a difference in the final picks.

Given the fact that there are relatively few non-conference games left, the ACC will continue to have a high RPI and this also will boost teams on the proverbial bubble.

I would be astonished to see the ACC with 3 bids.

There's a lot of basketball to be played. Last year Boston College lost to Vermont, Virginia lost to App State, Virginia Tech lost to Western Michigan and Marshall. Pretty bad loses. Yet all three of these teams not only made the NCAAs, they all finished ahead of Duke in the ACC Regular season and lasted longer in the NCAAs.


As usual Jim is right in saying there is a whole lot of regular season basketball left to be played. We aren't at the mid season point in the conferences yet, and the ACC tourney has yet to be played. Every season you have teams that look pretty good at this point go into a downward spiral and teams that look average at best get hot. It's way to early to say who will get in and who won't. But it's interesting to speculate of course.

Me thinks one could go conference by conference and pick teams that figure to get in and figure teams that won't. With only 65 tickets to the prom someone is going to be sitting at home watching American Idol. Some of the "bad" losses for ACC teams may end up coming from a smaller conference champion. (Or of course maybe not.) So those losses might not look as bad come selection Sunday. And as we all know the committee likes to reward teams that are "hot" and have won X number of their last Y games. (Despite early season losses.) You could fill out 100 brackets right now as to what teams will make the field and probably all of them would be off, especially when it comes to how high a seed some schools get. Someone repost on this thread in a month and THEN we have a MUCH better idea of who might go to the NCAA's / NIT and who's looking ahead to next season.


On a site note thanks DBR for the birthday wishes this morning. I'm glad they moved the UNC vs. Duke game into early February. There were a few years where whether I had a happy birthday was contingent on the outcome of a game I had no control over. Go to hell Carolina, go to hell!

[mbd1mbd1]

Pomeroy's predictions have the league finishing like this:

Duke 14-2
UNC 12-4
Clemson 10-6
Maryland 8-8
VaTech 8-8
Miami 7-9
GaTech 7-9
BC 7-9
FSU 6-10
Wake 6-10
UVa 5-11
State 5-11

I think that scenario would leave us with only 3 locks (Duke, UNC, Clemson) and probably 5 teams on the bubble.

[camion]

I'm pretty close to agreeing with Pomeroy.

I took the current records and added the remaining games that the other 10 have with Duke and UNC as losses to see how much ground the teams would have to make up to get to the magic 8-8. Below are the adjusted team records assuming Duke and UNC split and Duke/UNC win all of their other games.

Duke _ 6-1 _ +5
UNC _ 5-2 _ +3
Clemson _ 3-4 -1
Ga Tech _3-4 _ -1
Va Tech _ 3-4 _ -1
Maryland _ 2-4 _ -2
Boston College _ 3-5 _ -2
Miami _ 2-5 _ -3
Wake Forest _ 2-5 _ -3
FSU _ 2-6 _ -4
NCSU _ 2-6 _ -4
Virginia - 1-6 _ -5

As you can see Clemson, Ga Tech and Va Tech are in reasonable shape. At least one of them can make it. Maryland and BC are possible. The others are hurting.

[Klemnop]

All of you folks talking about "the sky is falling" on Clemson should dig a little bit deeper into the facts.

Clemson is currently 27 in the RPI. SOS is 15. They've lost 4 of their last 7 - which is apprarently what qualifies as a collapse. Home vs. #4 UNC (OT). Home vs. #75 Charlotte (hangover). Road vs. #5 Duke (some of you may recall that that game went toe-to-toe for 37 minutes.) Road vs. #29 Miami (by three points and with arguably their best player out with injury for 3/4 of the game.) The only other blemish on the record is a neutral court 3 point loss to #14 Ole Miss.

Aside from the Charlotte game Clemson hasn't lost a bad game. And even the Charlotte loss isn't terrible - they're a Top 100 RPI team. It just so happened that the front end of Clemson's ACC schedule was loaded with three of the four most difficult games. It is entirely possible that Clemson can close the season on an 8-2 or 9-1 regular season run. Here's the remaining schedule:

vs. BC
@UVa
@UNC
vs. GaTech
@NCState
@FSU
vs. Miami
@Maryland
@GaTech
vs. VaTech

Yes, FT shooting continues to be a problem this year - although there is a marked difference between the haves and the have nots as opposed to previous years when nobody on the roster could hit one. And, yes, the games still need to be played. But assuming that Booker comes back healthy after an opportune week-long break in the schedule I think Clemson is poised to finish 3rd in the conference (easily) and perhaps garner a Top 4/5 seed for the NCAAs.

FWIW, Pomeroy favors Clemson in 9 of 10 remaining games.

The real shame of the unbalanced schedule this year is that we're all deprived of what would have likely been a fantastic match-up of Duke v. Clemson in Littlejohn. Clemson has historically played Duke very well at home and had already acquitted themselves quite well at CIS. I suppose an ACC Tourney semis or Final match-up would have to suffice as replacement. :)

[arnie]

Since Duke and Carolina will both go 13-3 and all remaining teams will go 7-9 in the conference creating a 10-way tie for 3rd (or last depending on how you view it); I predict only two teams make the tourney.

I cannot discern any difference in the bottom 10 teams.

[devildeac]

:D
All of you folks talking about "the sky is falling" on Clemson should dig a little bit deeper into the facts.

Clemson is currently 27 in the RPI. SOS is 15. They've lost 4 of their last 7 - which is apprarently what qualifies as a collapse. Home vs. #4 UNC (OT). Home vs. #75 Charlotte (hangover). Road vs. #5 Duke (some of you may recall that that game went toe-to-toe for 37 minutes.) Road vs. #29 Miami (by three points and with arguably their best player out with injury for 3/4 of the game.) The only other blemish on the record is a neutral court 3 point loss to #14 Ole Miss.

Aside from the Charlotte game Clemson hasn't lost a bad game. And even the Charlotte loss isn't terrible - they're a Top 100 RPI team. It just so happened that the front end of Clemson's ACC schedule was loaded with three of the four most difficult games. It is entirely possible that Clemson can close the season on an 8-2 or 9-1 regular season run. Here's the remaining schedule:

vs. BC
@UVa
@UNC
vs. GaTech
@NCState
@FSU
vs. Miami
@Maryland
@GaTech
vs. VaTech

Yes, FT shooting continues to be a problem this year - although there is a marked difference between the haves and the have nots as opposed to previous years when nobody on the roster could hit one. And, yes, the games still need to be played. But assuming that Booker comes back healthy after an opportune week-long break in the schedule I think Clemson is poised to finish 3rd in the conference (easily) and perhaps garner a Top 4/5 seed for the NCAAs.

FWIW, Pomeroy favors Clemson in 9 of 10 remaining games.

The real shame of the unbalanced schedule this year is that we're all deprived of what would have likely been a fantastic match-up of Duke v. Clemson in Littlejohn. Clemson has historically played Duke very well at home and had already acquitted themselves quite well at CIS. I suppose an ACC Tourney semis or Final match-up would have to suffice as replacement. :)

good insight/analysis, Klem. But what about Clemson playing well/winning in chappaheeya this year? Can't you guys run the table? I'd still bet some folks at DBR would help you with a bail bond for runnin' nekkid down Franklin St. this year or ANY year:D .

[Uncle Drew]

:D

good insight/analysis, Klem. But what about Clemson playing well/winning in chappaheeya this year? Can't you guys run the table? I'd still bet some folks at DBR would help you with a bail bond for runnin' nekkid down Franklin St. this year or ANY year:D .

While I wouldn't put the rent money on it, I think Clemson will have a really good showing at Chapel Hell this year as compared to other years. If you're capable of taking a team to the wire on your home court and almost winning you're capable of winning on their court too. It's just a matter of execution. I for one have been waiting my entire life (but haven't we all?!) for the tigers to beat the heels at UNC to put the distinction of 0-?? to bed. Hypothetically I think whatever UNC team actually loses to Clemson at home will be looked at like the infamous 8-20 UNC team that ended all their streaks. It's got to happen some time, why not this year? Go tigers! For one game at least!

[Matches]

I don't think Clemson plays at CH this year, do they?

[Indoor66]

I don't think Clemson plays at CH this year, do they?

2/10/2008 Clemson at UNC

http://tarheelblue.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/sched/unc-m-baskbl-sched.html

[Matches]

My bad.

[Uncle Drew]

I don't think Clemson plays at CH this year, do they?

Sun, Feb 10 at (4) North Carolina 6:30 pm, mark it on your calenders and don your lucky tiger striped underwear. Wait that last part was just for me!

[Duvall]

Sun, Feb 10 at (4) North Carolina 6:30 pm, mark it on your calenders and don your lucky tiger striped underwear. Wait that last part was just for me!

If we're lucky, the underwear won't be needed.

[Cameron]

Home vs. #75 Charlotte (hangover).

:D....................










............:D

[pfrduke]

The madness continues in the ACC, with Miami dropping a two-point loss at Wake.

By the way, one more notable thing about the ACC - no school will have 10 losses before February. The ACC is the only conference in the country that this can be said about.