Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 33
  1. #1

    Is the ACC Tournament important? What can be done?

    I went to Duke in the Stone Ages. To get to the NCAAs you had to win the ACC Tournament. The ACC T was huge.

    Obviously now if yout team has to win the ACC T to go to the NCAA T then it still is potentially big. But for many, what does it really matter? Same for the other major conferences. Kansas, Kentucky, Syracuse and Duke will get 1 or 2 seeds regardless of how they do in their tournaments.

    One idea would be to make it a rule that the top seeded team from each conference has to be the conference tournament winner. Obviously if say Miami wins the ACC it makes things interesting. This would mean that the top teams had something to play for.

    Another would be that if they go to a 96 team tournament (which I think is the dumbest idea in the history of sports) then give the conference tournament winners the first round byes.

    Or are you happy with the conference tournaments as they are?

    Your thoughts
    SoCal
    Last edited by SoCalDukeFan; 03-13-2010 at 12:55 AM. Reason: spelling

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Toledo
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan
    But for many, what does it really matter?
    It determines the legit ACC Champion for that season. So, yes, it matters. The regular season first place finisher banner is nice and all, but it isn't legit. Not in this conference. That's what makes the ACC so special. We're the only conference that still recognizes are tournament winner at The Champ.

    And it couldn't make ACC Tournament weekend anymore exciting each and every year. I live for this thing. It is, simply, heaven.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Toledo
    I should make it known that I wasn't insinuating that you didn't know those attributes of the ACC tourney, SoCal. Merely stating why I love it.

  4. #4
    If you pay attention on selection Sunday year to year, the ACC tournament as well as all other major conference tournaments matter greatly. Teams regularly move up or drop 2-4 seeds in the big dance based on performance in conference tournaments. Take this year for example. If we lose Saturday and OSU and WVU both win out, our #1 seed could be in jeopardy. If we win out we are all but assured a top seed. Conference tournaments certainly don't mean as much as they used to but they are still very important.

  5. It WILL be in jeopardy. If we lose to Miami -- a semi bad loss -- and OSU and/or WVU win their conference tournaments we will most certainly be demoted to a 2 seed.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    In my mind if anything should be changed it should be that regular season champs should get the automatic bids. Yes, I know, they go to the NCAA anyway...at least that is what you think. The smaller conferences often see their conference regular season champs sitting at home while a cellar dweller that ran off 3 games or so in row in three days ends up in the NCAA field. That my friend is totally unfair!

    I think conference tournament games should simply be seen as games on the schedule and taken into consideration as part of a teams total body of work. In other words a team that is, say, 7-23 should not go to the NCAA just because 3 of those wins brought them a conference tourny title. If UNC would have rattled off 4 wins they would have finished the season at 20-15. In my opinion they still would have been hard pressed to get in the NCAA unless those 4 wins would have come against the highest seeded opponent possible.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    I went to Duke in the Stone Ages. To get to the NCAAs you had to win the ACC Tournament. The ACC T was huge.

    Obviously now if yout team has to win the ACC T to go to the NCAA T then it still is potentially big. But for many, what does it really matter? Same for the other major conferences. Kansas, Kentucky, Syracuse and Duke will get 1 or 2 seeds regardless of how they do in their tournaments.

    One idea would be to make it a rule that the top seeded team from each conference has to be the conference tournament winner. Obviously if say Miami wins the ACC it makes things interesting. This would mean that the top teams had something to play for.

    Another would be that if they go to a 96 team tournament (which I think is the dumbest idea in the history of sports) then give the conference tournament winners the first round byes.

    Or are you happy with the conference tournaments as they are?

    Your thoughts
    SoCal
    In my mind if anything should be changed it should be that regular season champs should get the automatic bids. Yes, I know, they go to the NCAA anyway...at least that is what you think. The smaller conferences often see their conference regular season champs sitting at home while a cellar dweller that ran off 3 games or so in row in three days ends up in the NCAA field. That my friend is totally unfair!

    I think conference tournament games should simply be seen as games on the schedule and taken into consideration as part of a teams total body of work. In other words a team that is, say, 7-23 should not go to the NCAA just because 3 of those wins brought them a conference tourny title. If UNC would have rattled off 4 wins they would have finished the season at 20-15. In my opinion they still would have been hard pressed to get in the NCAA unless those 4 wins would have come against the highest seeded opponents possible.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris4UNC View Post
    In my mind if anything should be changed it should be that regular season champs should get the automatic bids. Yes, I know, they go to the NCAA anyway...at least that is what you think. The smaller conferences often see their conference regular season champs sitting at home while a cellar dweller that ran off 3 games or so in row in three days ends up in the NCAA field. That my friend is totally unfair!

    I think conference tournament games should simply be seen as games on the schedule and taken into consideration as part of a teams total body of work. In other words a team that is, say, 7-23 should not go to the NCAA just because 3 of those wins brought them a conference tourny title. If UNC would have rattled off 4 wins they would have finished the season at 20-15. In my opinion they still would have been hard pressed to get in the NCAA unless those 4 wins would have come against the highest seeded opponents possible.
    Your solution would work fine if there was a double round-robin balanced schedule. Since there isn't, the best way to determine the true champion of the ACC is the tournament. Check out Georgia Tech's schedule vs. Virginia Tech's ACC schedules to see how fair it would be to go solely based on regular season results.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris4UNC View Post
    In my mind if anything should be changed it should be that regular season champs should get the automatic bids. Yes, I know, they go to the NCAA anyway...at least that is what you think. The smaller conferences often see their conference regular season champs sitting at home while a cellar dweller that ran off 3 games or so in row in three days ends up in the NCAA field. That my friend is totally unfair!
    The Ivy League sends their regular season champ to the NCAAs, but of course they don't have a conference tournament. I thought there was at least one other conference that did this, but I can't find which one to check if they have a conference tournament or not. I was under the impression that the conferences had the option to choose how their automatic bid was given out. I'm all for the current way, however.

  10. #10
    According to Inside Carolina message boards (the most reputable authority out there), the ACC tournament is a waste of time and only "losers like Duke" win the thing.

    Wait a minute? Other threads on that same board are complaining about how easy it will be for Duke to win and how unfair that is. Maybe it does matter to some.

  11. #11

    I can banned

    from Inside Carolina because I was trying to find an NIT selection show viewing party in Chapel Hill.

    SoCal

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    from Inside Carolina because I was trying to find an NIT selection show viewing party in Chapel Hill.

    SoCal
    I love it! If they do get in, looking forward to the Presbyterian fan in attendance.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Back in the dirty Jerz
    Other ACC teams have cared a lot about the ACCT even after the NCAA expanded to more than just the automatic qualifier. It seems that most other schools stopped caring about the ACCT around 1998 or so when Duke started owning it. Funny that.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    What about if you win the regular season you get an automatic bid to the tournament and do not have to play in your conference tournament.

    The pros would be that you avoid an injury to an important player in the conference tournament.

    The con is that you have a one week or more layover without playing.

    I have not figured out what to do if there is a tie for the regular season though .

    Maybe you give each confeence the choice to adapt the above proposal.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by DukeFencer View Post
    The Ivy League sends their regular season champ to the NCAAs, but of course they don't have a conference tournament. I thought there was at least one other conference that did this, but I can't find which one to check if they have a conference tournament or not. I was under the impression that the conferences had the option to choose how their automatic bid was given out. I'm all for the current way, however.
    Yes, the conferences have the choice. They chose money over securing the best representative for their conference. The Ivy is the only holdout. The Big-10 and Pac-10 used to not have conference tournaments. The Big-10 started tourneys in 1998. The Pac-10 briefly had a tournament in the late-80s but dropped it. They brought it back in 2002.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by NSDukeFan View Post
    Your solution would work fine if there was a double round-robin balanced schedule. Since there isn't, the best way to determine the true champion of the ACC is the tournament. Check out Georgia Tech's schedule vs. Virginia Tech's ACC schedules to see how fair it would be to go solely based on regular season results.
    I'm not sure that I agree that it's the best way, but it is an alternative way to determine the "true" champion. Do you really think that NC State and Miami were among the four best teams in the conference? Because that's what the tourney would suggest.

    I agree that the double round-robin would be the best solution. I just don't think that a single-elimination tournament is actually better than a not-quite round-robin schedule in determining a champion. At least with the regular season, you don't see a truly awful team winning it.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Halifax, Nova Scotia

    True

    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I'm not sure that I agree that it's the best way, but it is an alternative way to determine the "true" champion. Do you really think that NC State and Miami were among the four best teams in the conference? Because that's what the tourney would suggest.

    I agree that the double round-robin would be the best solution. I just don't think that a single-elimination tournament is actually better than a not-quite round-robin schedule in determining a champion. At least with the regular season, you don't see a truly awful team winning it.
    You're right, the regular season is probably a better way to determine the champ, but at least the tournament is a more fair way to determine the champ, though a balanced regular season would be the ideal way.

  18. #18
    From the standpoint of purest competition, without a balanced regular season schedule you cannot truly determine a champion and the only way to crown one is a seeded tournament. With a truly balanced schedule there was/is absolutely no reason for a tournament. It only existed as a money grab. (Yeah, this is my pet peeve and I have been in big argument on this board about it in previous years. )

    There is nothing that needs to be changed about the current ACC tournament except maybe the rest of the ACC raising its game to Duke's levels and act like winning it matters. They could also possibly turn down some of the lights over the stands in the Greensboro Coliseum so it doesn't look like the game is being played on the sun.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    This article from Ken Pomeroy addresses this very question using statistics. He concludes: "Giving up the excitement (and revenue) that a conference tourney brings is not nearly worth it considering that tourneys also do a good job crowning the best team."

    I also think the conference tournament experience is one that fans would miss. I know it's difficult or impossible for a lot of ACC fans to travel to the ACC tournament, but I think there's something unifying about getting everyone in the conference together, seeing other teams, meeting fans from other schools, etc. With all the conference shifting that happens these days, I think conference tournaments make conferences more than just alliances of convenience/revenue, which in turn makes the regular season games more enjoyable.

  20. #20

    one other potential possiblity

    One other potential possibility is that the ACC tournament helps to identify the hottest teams at the moment and therefore the teams most likely to represent the ACC in postseason play positively.

    I would agree that perhaps the 4 best teams weren't the 4 remaining teams in the tournament, but they may have been the four hottest. I mean let's face it, teams do peak at different times, take Wake for example.

    I would also agree that with an unbalanced schedule the regular season champ means much less AND there is still a great deal of prestige associated with being the Official Conference Champ. Back before they did away with the round robin this argument was much harder for me to decide on, unfortunately now it's just academic.

Similar Threads

  1. Important notice from the FBI
    By Maxwell1977 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-21-2009, 01:02 PM
  2. With Coach K...this is what is really important
    By drksuh in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-17-2007, 12:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •