Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="jncuse, post: 2092822, member: 1969"] It's relevant and not relevant. Let me explain. How you perform in the ACC is relevant to your overall results of 30-35 games. But it is not a subset of 18 games that matters to the committee. They don't give two craps about that 18 game record in comparing teams. Consider your results as about 32 individual games. They use subsets of those 32 games for analysis such as top 50 wins, top 50 performance, top 100 road wins, road wins, OOC SOS. They also give your team an individual ranking based on 32 games -- not 18 games. [B]They are extremely explicit that conference record does not matter as a metric or subset of information. [/B] Of course if you do well in the ACC or poorly in the ACC you are more likely to do better or worse in the relevant metrics or subsets. But it is not a 100% correlation either. Which is why you see teams like Clemson and Pitt linger. [/QUOTE]