ACC overrated?

[longislandcuse]

Seeing all these acc teams lose brings me all the way back to last week when all the dbag fans of all these dbag teams talked about how great Greensboro is and how we were so darn lucky to be in 'their' conference.

Really warms the heart to see Virginia, wake and fsu bow out so early. Hoping for similar conference embarrassment from the rest of the 'old guard'

If we didn't all of a sudden become a perennial bubble team, id feel the same.

The ACC strength got us in last year but couldn't save us this year. Still, the ACC was our only argument to even be in consideration.

 

[bpo57]

Who cares about bragging?

Sometimes teams go farther than they should, sometimes higher seeds like Villanova lose earlier than they should. Doesn't make Villanova "overrated" -- they had a terrific year, and were every bit as good as their seeding, despite losing today in round 2.

Crazy stuff happens the first weekend of the tourney. I don't think that the ACC's reputation was tied to how Miami or Wake Forest performed. If we end up with 3 of the top 16, or basically a quarter of the teams left, is the ACC suddenly NOT overrated?

Let's see how things play out before making proclamations.

That's why I said "so far". So far it's been fugly. It's clear that no matter what the other three do that the ACC is not head and shoulders above the others. Most of the other six teams didn't just lose, they got crushed.

 

[RF2044]

That's why I said "so far". So far it's been fugly. It's clear that no matter what the other three do that the ACC is not head and shoulders above the others. Most of the other six teams didn't just lose, they got crushed.

That feels like Pat Forde logic.

One team making it to the final four changes a conference's postseason fortunes. Having 2 or more get to the elite 8 or final 4 accomplishes the same. This story is still a long way off from being written.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Who cares about bragging?

Sometimes teams go farther than they should, sometimes higher seeds like Villanova lose earlier than they should. Doesn't make Villanova "overrated" -- they had a terrific year, and were every bit as good as their seeding, despite losing today in round 2.

Crazy stuff happens the first weekend of the tourney. I don't think that the ACC's reputation was tied to how Miami or Wake Forest performed. If we end up with 3 of the top 16, or basically a quarter of the teams left, is the ACC suddenly NOT overrated?

Let's see how things play out before making proclamations.

Yeah, tell that to the people who think Arizona have "flamed out" in recent years. Having to get those Kaminsky/Dekker UW teams in the E8 is a tough draw. They have had mighty impressive consistency.

But, yes, I'm waiting to see what happens down the road. Duke, UNC, and UL could all be in the F4. I don't really ever look at what conference does what in the tourney. It is ALL matchups, coaching, and luck in this type of setting. I will say that looking at Miami/MSU and Florida/UVA games with the personnel involved that Florida and MSU win 7/10 of those.

 

[bpo57]

That feels like Pat Forde logic.

One team making it to the final four changes a conference's postseason fortunes. Having 2 or more get to the elite 8 or final 4 accomplishes the same. This story is still a long way off from being written.

I agree that the story is not over. But it's not that complicated, RF. SO FAR the ACC has sheet the bed and they very clearly are not as good as they were cracked up to be. Forty eight hours of casual viewing would seem to have driven that home.

 

[RF2044]

I agree that the story is not over. But it's not that complicated, RF. SO FAR the ACC has sheet the bed and they very clearly are not as good as they were cracked up to be. Forty eight hours of casual viewing would seem to have driven that home.

Only if you put too much emphasis on teams like Miami, VT, and Wake Forest. Big deal.

Virginia and Notre Dame under-performed. But Virginia isn't as good as they've been the last couple of years. The three teams that were universally regarded as the top three teams in conference play tomorrow. If they advance, we can table the overrated conference talk.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I agree that the story is not over. But it's not that complicated, RF. SO FAR the ACC has sheet the bed and they very clearly are not as good as they were cracked up to be. Forty eight hours of casual viewing would seem to have driven that home.

I don't know. It is so subjective and all matchup driven. I have two ACC teams in the F4 but then had FSU losing to FGCU, VT losing to WIS, MIA losing MSU, UVA losing to UF.

 

[BomberOrange]

Yes you can. They're not just getting beat - several have been curb stomped over the last 48 hours.

So sorry "bpo57", I should've just started watching college hoops on 3/16 instead of November 2016 knowing that the only thing that matters is the last 48 hrs. My bad

 

[bpo57]

Only if you put too much emphasis on teams like Miami and Wake Forest. Big deal.

Virginia and Notre Dame under-performed. But Virginia isn't as good as they've been the last couple of years. The three teams that were universally regarded as the top three teams in conference play tomorrow. If they advance, we can table the overrated conference talk.

I don't think it can be tabled just for beating two 7s and an 8, which would be the case if they advanced beyond tomorrow. They need to do a lot more damage than that.

I agree on UVA, they were wildly overrated. Same with FSU. In hindsight those two wins at the Dome over those two don't look so significant. ND has talent limitations and did about well as one could expect. Same with VT. Miami is a dumb team that quit last night. Wake probably shouldn't even have gotten an invite.

 

[bpo57]

So sorry "bpo57", I should've just started watching college hoops on 3/16 instead of November 2016 knowing that the only thing that matters is the last 48 hrs. My bad

Sorry Bomber but that's how you judge conference strength - in the NCAA tourney.

 

[bpo57]

I don't know. It is so subjective and all matchup driven. I have two ACC teams in the F4 but then had FSU losing to FGCU, VT losing to WIS, MIA losing MSU, UVA losing to UF.

I agree that it's matchup driven. If they lost a few 50/50 games then you can more easily look past it. That wasn't the case. In none of the six losses did you get the feeling that the ACC team was the better team.

 

[BomberOrange]

Sorry Bomber but that's how you judge conference strength - in the NCAA tourney.

No it's not.. but you can believe that. So if Duke and Carolina make the final four, the acc is good again?

 

[RF2044]

I agree that it's matchup driven. If they lost a few 50/50 games then you can more easily look past it. That wasn't the case. In none of the six losses did you get the feeling that the ACC team was the better team.

When you get 9 teams in, they aren't all cut from the same cloth.

Just the way it is with super conferences.

Again, doesn't make a ton of sense to draw inferences from the lower grouping. And I get your point--a couple of those teams weren't that good, a couple under performed [minorly]. If for example Louisville loses, I'll readily admit I'm wrong.

I don't expect that to happen with the three remaining teams. Any of whom could reach the final four, and will consider this post-season a disappointment if they don't.

 

[bpo57]

No it's not.. but you can believe that. So if Duke and Carolina make the final four, the acc is good again?

Then it would be a top heavy conference whose quality depth was exaggerated prior to the tourney. Btw if you get 9 invites it would seem at least one or two should be able to do some damage. Kind of the law of averages.

 

[bpo57]

When you get 9 teams in, they aren't all cut from the same cloth.

Just the way it is with super conferences.

Again, doesn't make a ton of sense to draw inferences from the lower grouping. And I get your point--a couple of those teams weren't that good, a couple under performed [minorly]. If for example Louisville loses, I'll readily admit I'm wrong.

I don't expect that to happen with the three remaining teams. Any of whom could reach the final four, and will consider this post-season a disappointment if they don't.

I know we're going round and round here. We'll see how it plays out. Personally I would be surprised if more than one of those three make it to the F4. There are a lot of good teams out there, all across the country.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I agree that it's matchup driven. If they lost a few 50/50 games then you can more easily look past it. That wasn't the case. In none of the six losses did you get the feeling that the ACC team was the better team.

Agreed. We'll see what happens. It's weird. Committee probably got it right with the bids. I mean could Syracuse compete with USC? Sure doesn't look like it.

 

[two3zone]

You can't judge a conference by a one and done tournament. The year round grind of the acc is tougher than any other conference, period!

That said the acc is s&@tting the bed this year.

If we can't judge by the one and done tournament then how can we judge ourselves by two final fours in 5 years?

 

[HOFCeluck]

I agree that it's matchup driven. If they lost a few 50/50 games then you can more easily look past it. That wasn't the case. In none of the six losses did you get the feeling that the ACC team was the better team.

It is matchup driven*

*Only if we do bad. Last year when we put 6 teams in the sweet 16 4 in the elite eight and two in the final four it was because we were the bestest.

 

[Trueblue25]

In Duke, UNC, Louisville we trust.


Unfortunate that the ACC's 4th heavy hitter had its worst year in decades and bounced the bubble.

 

[Cusefan0307]

In Duke, UNC, Louisville we trust.


Unfortunate that the ACC's 4th heavy hitter had its worst year in decades and bounced the bubble.

 

[SWC75]

This is very much like when the Big East set the record with 11 teams a few years ago. it wasn't because the top of the conference was anything special. We just had that many NCAA quality teams. This is far from the best Duke, UNC or Louisville teams. Virginia didn't immediately replace the players they lost. Florida State certainly under-performed. But it was the sheer number of good teams and the fact that even the bottom teams weren't bad teams. Boston College could have had a winning record in most conferences. Georgia Tech, Pitt, Clemson and NC State might have been contenders in other conferences. There were just no easy games. I think every team in the conference would have won at least 1-2 more wins in any other conference. But that doesn't mean we are going to dominate in the NCAA tournament, which is full of teams just as good as the ACC teams, some that were better.

 

[bpo57]

This is very much like when the Big East set the record with 11 teams a few years ago. it wasn't because the top of the conference was anything special. We just had that many NCAA quality teams. This is far from the best Duke, UNC or Louisville teams. Virginia didn't immediately replace the players they lost. Florida State certainly under-performed. But it was the sheer number of good teams and the fact that even the bottom teams weren't bad teams. Boston College could have had a winning record in most conferences. Georgia Tech, Pitt, Clemson and NC State might have been contenders in other conferences. There were just no easy games. I think every team in the conference would have won at least 1-2 more wins in any other conference. But that doesn't mean we are going to dominate in the NCAA tournament, which is full of teams just as good as the ACC teams, some that were better.

You lost me with the Boston College sentence and everything thereafter.

 

[SWC75]

You lost me with the Boston College sentence and everything thereafter.

They beat the you know what out of us.

 

[bpo57]

They beat the you know what out of us.

And so did plenty of others. That doesn't mean BC would have had a winning record in other conferences, unless you're talking about the Patriot League. I didn't think that was our frame of reference.

 

[HOFCeluck]

What leagues were four win Pitt and NC State going to contend in?

I'm not saying that ACC wasn't a strong conference but we can never seem to avoid blowing it up to mythical proportions.