ACC Tourney and its many potential matchups

[JeremyCuse]

Would be nice if someone from the ACC could come out and clarify what the potential matchups are and the tiebreakers, as Quint noted its unclear if the tiebreakers have changed based on the change in the ACC format. The current potential matchups going around have UVA as the #1 obviously and then if ND wins, Duke is the #2 based on their win over UVA and because SU and ND both lost to UVA it goes to head to head which would make ND the three. and use the 4. The variation where UNC wins makes a lot less sense. Somehow they become the 2 seed which I can't figure out how as SU, Duke and UNC would all be tied with 2-2 records and SU has the head to head wins over both UNC and Duke so how is UNC the 2 seed? Bizarre.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

You're expecting the ACC to do something right?

 

[upperdeck]

do they compare head to head first when tied or record vs top team first? or do they still use total goals allowed?

 

[orange79]

HTH is the first tie-breaker. After that, record vs. next-highest team.

1. Head-to-head Conference game results among the tied teams. (a) If three or more teams are tied, the combined record of conference games among the tied teams involved will be compiled. Ties will be broken based on winning percentage of the combined conference records, and the higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group is unequal. (b) In the case of a three or more team tie, if procedure (a) reduces the tie by at least one team, procedure (1) will be followed, comparing only the remaining tied teams’ conference records. Procedures (2)-(5) will only be used if the tie cannot be reduced by at least one team in procedure (1).

2. Record versus team(s) occupying the higher position in the standings (or in case of a tie for first place, the next highest in the regular-season standings and continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage). When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team’s record against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tie-breaking procedures), rather than the performance against the individual tied teams. In the case of a three or more team tie, if procedure (2) reduces the tie by at least one team, procedure (1) will be followed, comparing only the remaining tied teams’ conference records. Procedures (3)-(5) will only be used if the tie cannot be reduced by at least one team in procedure (2).

3. Goals allowed in Conference games among the tied teams.

4. Goal differential in Conference games only (goals for, minus goals against among the tied teams).

5. Blind draw.

 

[ivorytower]

More in interested in who we will be playing 5/25th

 

[MD Cuse Fan]

So basically Cuse has to turn around and play UNC again, at their home after just beating them there.?
The ACC tournament has always been a great example in redundancy.

 

[orange79]

So basically Cuse has to turn around and play UNC again, at their home after just beating them there.?
The ACC tournament has always been a great example in redundancy.

That's what happens when you have a 5 team "conference".

 

[Hoo's That]

So basically Cuse has to turn around and play UNC again, at their home after just beating them there.?
The ACC tournament has always been a great example in redundancy.

1. I've always hated the ACC tournament. When it was 4 teams, I always viewed it as giving 2 teams losses when they could least afford them, neutral for the 2nd place team (1 win, 1 loss), and a minor benefit for the winner.

2. It just the "unluck of the draw" that SU has to play UNC in Chapel Hole twice. The venue was announced way before the season began. I would anticipate that next year it will either be in the Dome (assuming it's playable there) or at ND. It could very well work out that someone has to play the host on the road twice.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

1. I've always hated the ACC tournament. When it was 4 teams, I always viewed it as giving 2 teams losses when they could least afford them, neutral for the 2nd place team (1 win, 1 loss), and a minor benefit for the winner.

2. It just the "unluck of the draw" that SU has to play UNC in Chapel Hole twice. The venue was announced way before the season began. I would anticipate that next year it will either be in the Dome (assuming it's playable there) or at ND. It could very well work out that someone has to play the host on the road twice.

ND next.

 

[Hoo's That]

ND next.

Then it could happen to us because we go to ND next year.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

We're homeless for 1/2 the season in 2020.

 

[MD Cuse Fan]

1. I've always hated the ACC tournament. When it was 4 teams, I always viewed it as giving 2 teams losses when they could least afford them, neutral for the 2nd place team (1 win, 1 loss), and a minor benefit for the winner.

2. It just the "unluck of the draw" that SU has to play UNC in Chapel Hole twice. The venue was announced way before the season began. I would anticipate that next year it will either be in the Dome (assuming it's playable there) or at ND. It could very well work out that someone has to play the host on the road twice.

1. You're exactly right!
2. Again you are correct just kind of sucks the way it worked out here. I would always rather play a team I lost to than have to beat a team again.

 

[wvlax]

Unofficially, here are Anish Shroff’s calculations.

If UNC wins the ACC seeds are:
1. Virginia
2. North Carolina
3. Syracuse
4. Duke
5. Notre Dame

If ND wins:
1. Virginia
2. Duke
3. Notre Dame
4. Syracuse
5. North Carolina
So either way, it'll be 'Cuse vs. Carolina and Duke vs. Notre Dame.

 

[ivorytower]

UNC has upside going forward. Good young talent and diversified offense.

If UNC can beat ND this weekend then Cuse could potentially host ACC final if they won rematch as I believe Duke would likely beat ND in a #4/5 game and then #1 UVA again.

Slow starts obviously not preferred but Cuse plays from behind with confidence, suggests strong mental makeup , faith in abilities, good conditioning and in game adjustments. Credit to players but also staff for such.

Having said that, playing sixty minutes is best path to a Final Four.

 

[raf4488]

Unofficially, here are Anish Shroff’s calculations.

If UNC wins the ACC seeds are:
1. Virginia
2. North Carolina
3. Syracuse
4. Duke
5. Notre Dame

If ND wins:
1. Virginia
2. Duke
3. Notre Dame
4. Syracuse
5. North Carolina
So either way, it'll be 'Cuse vs. Carolina and Duke vs. Notre Dame.

Not that it matters much, but I don't understand the first scenario. If UNC wins, shouldn't it be:

1. Virginia 3-1
2. Syracuse 2-2 (2-0 vs. UNC/Duke)
3. North Carolina 2-2 (1-1 vs. Duke/SU)
4. Duke 2-2 (0-2 vs. UNC/SU)
5. Notre Dame 1-3

 

[JeremyCuse]

Not that it matters much, but I don't understand the first scenario. If UNC wins, shouldn't it be:

1. Virginia 3-1
2. Syracuse 2-2 (2-0 vs. UNC/Duke)
3. North Carolina 2-2 (1-1 vs. Duke/SU)
4. Duke 2-2 (0-2 vs. UNC/SU)
5. Notre Dame 1-3

That was my point as well, there must be some angle or path were missing. It might be that if everyone is tied at 2-2 the initial tie-breaks is not head to head if its three times tied. Still I don't get it.

 

[orange79]

That was my point as well, there must be some angle or path were missing. It might be that if everyone is tied at 2-2 the initial tie-breaks is not head to head if its three times tied. Still I don't get it.

ACC Tourney and its many potential matchups

 

[JeremyCuse]

ACC Tourney and its many potential matchups

Thanks, I did see that, and it would appear that based on that scenario SU should be the #2 seed if UNC wins Sat. I don't get how UNC would be the 2.

 

[orange79]

Thanks, I did see that, and it would appear that based on that scenario SU should be the #2 seed if UNC wins Sat. I don't get how UNC would be the 2.

Agreed. We play UNC no matter what, but I don't see how they can be the 2 seed.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[Zack80]

1. I've always hated the ACC tournament. When it was 4 teams, I always viewed it as giving 2 teams losses when they could least afford them, neutral for the 2nd place team (1 win, 1 loss), and a minor benefit for the winner.

I have doubts about this being right.
The four ACC teams back then were usually pretty highly ranked, and had pretty high RPIs.
Losing to a top team didn't hurt that much, and playing another top team was a large boost to the SOS.
It certainly wasn't neutral for the 2nd place team, 1 win against a top team along with a loss to a top team was usually a plus. (Adding 2 top teams was a big plus for the SOS.) Perhaps this would only detrimental if your team was in the running for the #1 seed in the NCAA tmt.

In the end, what did you care if two from Duke, UNC or UMd were the 2 teams to pick up losses, all you cared about was UVa. Friday night in the ACC tmt gave UVa another quality opponent on their schedule.