ACC vs BIG 12 | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

ACC vs BIG 12

I agree with most of what u say but Houston was a legit top three team. I think it's quite likely they'd still be alive if Shead didn't get hurt.
Depends on how many fouls were called and on whom. Houston was rather lucky to get to the Sweet 16.
 
Just because the ACC has been quite good in tourney play the last 3 years, doesn't change the actual fact that the conference played like crap in 2022 OOC and 2023 OOC,. Not good in 2024 either, but not a huge gap like the prior two years either. But that has its impacts downstream. It's not just NET manipulation (although there was some of it this year) its largely just W and L's, and we are always behind the top. Until conferences decide to start playing lots against each other in Jan and Feb, which would be great, it is what it is. November and December performance as a group matters, that is the system. We have benefitted from our conference mates stellar play in the past, and the ACC should have enough pedigree teams to do in the future as well.

Syracuse is lucky that we have never been hard on the bubble line these last 3 years so it didn't bite us in the butt. Hopefully, we start playing better .. and start playing well above the bubble line in future years so it doesn't matter how good the ACC did OOC compared to others. And hopefully the ACC gets better at that time of the year too.

None of the above is a defence of the weaknesses in the NET.

They are not changing to a system where they consider prior season tournament play to assess current year seeds. They never have, and they will not going forward unless its publicly announced as a new format (which would be surprising) They may certainly tweak the NET - I have given my suggestion on how to do that before.
all they need to do is stop valuing november and december so heavily ...and the net rankings will much better align with the final format of the NCAAT

having all of these conferences begin conference play already knowing how many bids their conferences are going to be divvying up amongst themselves is madness...theyre essentially turning the meat of the schedule into a mere appetizer

conference play should matter more than the OOC.
 
Depends on how many fouls were called and on whom. Houston was rather lucky to get to the Sweet 16.
Lucky to win? They led pretty much the entire way and were up 11 with < 1:30 left. It was a fluke that that game went to OT. And the refs called every foul under the sun - basically fouled out half of Houston's team and they still won over a pretty good A&M team. But for you to minimize Shead's loss makes me think you haven't seen him play much.
 
ESPN began talking down ACC basketball years ago, when it made the decision go 100% with the SEC for everything. It seemed to many that ESPN bashing ACC football was just kind of expected because of SEC football, but knocking ACC basketball when you have all of it? That was the sign that ESPN meant to do some very serious harm to the ACC.
Yet they employ all sorts of ACC alumni on their broadcasts. Jay Williams, Seth Greenberg, Jay Bilas to name just a few.
 
Given that they went 25-1 in those games, I’m thinking not many.
that is the big 12 I am talking acc. 8 losses, how many of them were against Syracuse? Half or more? We all know the big 12 is skewed because of their extremely low sos
 
that is the big 12 I am talking acc. 8 losses, how many of them were against Syracuse? Half or more?

OK that makes your question makes more sense! I misread your comment.

The 26-8 number was all OOC games. It was calculated sometime in February on the data I accumulated. Its down to 6 losses - but unfortunately that is because 2 of them became Q4 losses.

Pitt vs Missouri
Florida St vs Georgia
Florida St vs Lipscomb **
Georgia Tech vs UMass Lowell
Notre Dame vs Western Carolina
Notre Dame vs Georgetown **
Louisville vs Arkansas St
Louisville vs Chattanooga

** now Q4 losses.

Fairly or unfairly, duds also bring down the conference at a total level. When they blow bad games OOC and don't do their part, and then go 10-10 or even 7-13 in conference, it ends up hurting everybody.

We need to be better - but there is some names there that have all been good relatively recently that we need to turn around -- unless of course we just the hell to the bubble moving forward which would be nice.
 
ESPN began talking down ACC basketball years ago, when it made the decision go 100% with the SEC for everything. It seemed to many that ESPN bashing ACC football was just kind of expected because of SEC football, but knocking ACC basketball when you have all of it? That was the sign that ESPN meant to do some very serious harm to the ACC.
They were talking down the ACC for good reason… football has been terrible outside of Clemson and a brief appearance from Fl St. as for basketball, it’s been the same 3 teams every year in UNC, Duke and Virginia, most times 2 of those 3 have been awfully overrated. ESPN isn’t choosing to talk down about the ACC, they’re just being realistic.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
168,385
Messages
4,771,980
Members
5,949
Latest member
Laxmom2317

Online statistics

Members online
151
Guests online
793
Total visitors
944


Top Bottom