ACC Regular Season vs. ACC Tournament Conversation

[Olympic Fan]

I completely agree... although I think the addition of "unbalanced" in front of "regular season" at the end seems biased. Because the tournament is much more unbalanced than the regular season. Both are unbalanced, one moreso than the other. It would be more appropriate to say "you might think that a better regular season record is a more rational way..." or "you might think that a better unbalanced regular season record is a more rational way of choosing a champion than winning an even-more unbalanced tournament." Either would be fine. But tossing in the "unbalanced' on one side seems slanted.

But that said, yes, the official ACC champion is the one that wins the ACC tournament. The regular season champion is just the regular season champion. Both are things, but the official representative of the ACC as champion is defined as the tournament winner. And as such, if referencing the regular season championship it should be noted that it is "the regular season championship" and not "the championship."

Well, the NCAA Tournament is unbalanced too.

How many of us confuse finishing No. 1 in the regular season (as we did in 1999, 2000 and 2002) with winning "the championship".

The NCAA determines its champion the same way the ACC does -- with an unbalanced, one-and-done tournament.

[CDu]

Well, the NCAA Tournament is unbalanced too.

How many of us confuse finishing No. 1 in the regular season (as we did in 1999, 2000 and 2002) with winning "the championship".

The NCAA determines its champion the same way the ACC does -- with an unbalanced, one-and-done tournament.

I completely agree that the NCAA tournament is unbalanced. It is one of its biggest limitations, borne somewhat of necessity (there are perhaps better ways, but less profitable/exciting and thus not considered). My point was simply that it is inappropriate to call the regular season out as unbalanced and omit that the tournament is more unbalanced.

[Indoor66]

I completely agree that the NCAA tournament is unbalanced. It is one of its biggest limitations, borne somewhat of necessity (there are perhaps better ways, but less profitable/exciting and thus not considered). My point was simply that it is inappropriate to call the regular season out as unbalanced and omit that the tournament is more unbalanced.

Give everyone a participation trophy and move on. Heck, even life is unfair.

[freshmanjs]

Well, the NCAA Tournament is unbalanced too.

How many of us confuse finishing No. 1 in the regular season (as we did in 1999, 2000 and 2002) with winning "the championship".

The NCAA determines its champion the same way the ACC does -- with an unbalanced, one-and-done tournament.

No one is arguing against anything you say here. Only that citing imbalance as a reason why the regular season does not determine the champion of the conference is odd.

[CDu]

No one is arguing against anything you say here. Only that citing imbalance as a reason why the regular season does not determine the champion of the conference is odd.

Bingo! Both the regular season and (to a greater extent) the tournaments are unbalanced. They are what they are, and I think most if not all of us accept that reality. Just don't use lack of balance as a reason to downplay one when the other is even more unbalanced.