CBS Podcast on ACC and MWC

[Sean Miller Fan]

Wanted to jump through the screen. You wont find 2 bigger MWC lovers and ACC bathers than these 2. Their takeaway is that nothing that happens after Selection Sunday means anything in terms of league quality. Its ok to have that opinion but then you can't ALSO have the opinion that November basketball defines league quality. It makes no sense. What they are essentially saying is that November defines your league, not March.

Talked about Pitt a good deal and thought they still shouldn't have been in. These CBS guys are the biggest MWC cheerleaders. They have the MWC TV contract and it shows. Wished ESPN would give ESPN the same treatment but they have Lunardi bashing it at every chance. You'll love this. They explained away Utah State's 80 point loss to Purdue as them being underseeded. Thought they should have gotten a better seed so they coukd have avoided the 1 seed. Not even making this up.

 

[BballinsiderfromPitt]

View embedded media

Wanted to jump through the screen. You wont find 2 bigger MWC lovers and ACC bathers than these 2. Their takeaway is that nothing that happens after Selection Sunday means anything in terms of league quality. Its ok to have that opinion but then you can't ALSO have the opinion that November basketball defines league quality. It makes no sense. What they are essentially saying is that November defines your league, not March.

Talked about Pitt a good deal and thought they still shouldn't have been in. These CBS guys are the biggest MWC cheerleaders. They have the MWC TV contract and it shows. Wished ESPN would give ESPN the same treatment but they have Lunardi bashing it at every chance. You'll love this. They explained away Utah State's 80 point loss to Purdue as them being underseeded. Thought they should have gotten a better seed so they coukd have avoided the 1 seed. Not even making this up.

Would’ve been smarter to explain away Utah State’s loss as their coach house Huntington in Seattle during the game. He obviously was torn between caring about Utah State and moving to Washington. Would’ve been an easy win.

They’re correct on the tournament thing though. Not saying November means anything they all mean the same. It doesn’t make sense to say someone like say Rothstein is wrong when he says the ACC is top heavy then the top heavy portion does well? Easy to spin NC State as underachieving and hot.

Talked to JR last night and he’s still adamant on his position on ACC

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Would’ve been smarter to explain away Utah State’s loss as their coach house Huntington in Seattle during the game. He obviously was torn between caring about Utah State and moving to Washington. Would’ve been an easy win.

They’re correct on the tournament thing though. Not saying November means anything they all mean the same. It doesn’t make sense to say someone like say Rothstein is wrong when he says the ACC is top heavy then the top heavy portion does well? Easy to spin NC State as underachieving and hot.

Talked to JR last night and he’s still adamant on his position on ACC

My point is you cannot say March means nothing for conferences but then also say November means everything. March is a better guage than November. Beating a team in a hotel ballroom in November does not mean as much as a game in a sold out NBA arena in March.

 

[BballinsiderfromPitt]

My point is you cannot say March means nothing for conferences but then also say November means everything. March is a better guage than November. Beating a team in a hotel ballroom in November does not mean as much as a game in a sold out NBA arena in March.

They mean the same

 

[NCanton Panther]

My point is you cannot say March means nothing for conferences but then also say November means everything. March is a better guage than November. Beating a team in a hotel ballroom in November does not mean as much as a game in a sold out NBA arena in March.

I get a kick out of people praising or dumping on a conference based on their W’s and L’s in a one n done tournament. Yeah, getting the W is the most important outcome. But touting or dumping on a conference’s W/L record for what often are very close games that could have gone either way sure isn’t the whole story.

There’s only a few teams or conferences that sweep through their games without breaking a sweat. Except of course UCONN last year and so far again this year.

 

[Dointhatrag]

I get a kick out of people praising or dumping on a conference based on their W’s and L’s in a one n done tournament. Yeah, getting the W is the most important outcome. But touting or dumping on a conference’s W/L record for what often are very close games that could have gone either way sure isn’t the whole story.

There’s only a few teams or conferences that sweep through their games without breaking a sweat. Except of course UCONN last year and so far again this year.

From a one off perspective I agree. But we have years of data on which conferences perform better in the tournament which makes those results significantly meaningful.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

My point is you cannot say March means nothing for conferences but then also say November means everything. March is a better guage than November. Beating a team in a hotel ballroom in November does not mean as much as a game in a sold out NBA arena in March.

Still say we beat Gonzaga on that ship if the floor didn't start sweating.

 

[Vader_Storm]

View embedded media

Wanted to jump through the screen. You wont find 2 bigger MWC lovers and ACC bathers than these 2. Their takeaway is that nothing that happens after Selection Sunday means anything in terms of league quality. Its ok to have that opinion but then you can't ALSO have the opinion that November basketball defines league quality. It makes no sense. What they are essentially saying is that November defines your league, not March.

Talked about Pitt a good deal and thought they still shouldn't have been in. These CBS guys are the biggest MWC cheerleaders. They have the MWC TV contract and it shows. Wished ESPN would give ESPN the same treatment but they have Lunardi bashing it at every chance. You'll love this. They explained away Utah State's 80 point loss to Purdue as them being underseeded. Thought they should have gotten a better seed so they coukd have avoided the 1 seed. Not even making this up.

I didnt see anything really wrong or really out of place with what he said except, a conference that gets a lot of teams in as the best conference doesn't perform as well or something along those lines. That was a garbage answer and a cop out.

For example, in 2009, the Big East was the best conference in the country and everyone knew it. The Big East put 5 teams in the Sweet 16 (tournament record), 4 teams in the elite 8 (tournament record), 2 teams in the final 4. A conference that is supposed to be Elite that is trying to flex on the rest of the country does something like this.

A conference that is not Elite and is no where close to the hype performs like the SEC and the Big 12 this year. Sorry, the NCAA Tournament holds quite a bit more weight than what these guys care to admit. If the entire conference or most of it folds like a cheap tent, the league is way overrated.

For the record, Norlander was a huge Pitt hater in the offseason and said we had low D1 quality guards, I even linked that video on here. Its hard for people to admit when they are wrong, especially when they are really wrong on something.


The narrative next year is going to change big time. Duke will be the preseason number 1 team in the country and it looks like the top of the ACC should be quite strong going into next year, but we have to see how the rosters are finalized.

 

[ChiefJusticeMarshall]

The ACC has alot of smart people who graduated from smart schools. I don't know how they don't mount some counter attacks.

 

[Vader_Storm]

The ACC has alot of smart people who graduated from smart schools. I don't know how they don't mount some counter attacks.

Im not sure if its even necessary at this point.

The ACC has performed well in the tournament. The ACC has a ton of talent coming into the conference next year from the high schools ranks and most of the elite of the elite is ACC bound. Again, we will see how the rosters finalize, but the ACC should look strong in the preseason rankings next year, especially Duke and North Carolina.

The people talking shit on the ACC on social media and on this board better get it out of their system real soon. Because the ACC is going to be a lot different come next season.

btw, the ACC commissioner is doing something. He's already looking at reducing the total amount of ACC games from 20, something I said that should happen 3 months ago.

 

[Pitt_Boss]

The ACC is still only getting 4-5 teams in next year. It's fait accompli. If NC State had not won the ACCT, it would have been just 4 this year. I am expecting four next year, but five is possible...though just 3 is also a possibility.

 

[Vader_Storm]

The ACC is still only getting 4-5 teams in next year. It's fait accompli. If NC State had not won the ACCT, it would have been just 4 this year. I am expecting four next year, but five is possible...though just 3 is also a possibility.

The mountain west isnt getting 6 teams next year. I guarantee that. Coaches are getting cherry picked along with the top players in the league.


Any day now the mass exodus at Utah State will start. And the hits keep coming for New Mexico.

The little midmajor mountain west already reached its high point. They have 1 more year for the 5th and 6th year 25 year old seniors, then the downfall starts and its back to reality.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

The people talking shit on the ACC on social media and on this board better get it out of their system real soon. Because the ACC is going to be a lot different come next season.

"And that's a promise, Sting. I'm coming for you at Clash of the Champions, brother."

 

[Vader_Storm]

Interesting, Richard Pitino was reported the top candidate for Louisville. Uh oh, New Mexico.

Niko Medved one of the top choices for Oklahoma State. Uh oh, Colorado State.

Steve Alford's name getting floated around for multiple schools, Nevada's coach. Uh oh, Mountain West

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

btw, the ACC commissioner is doing something. He's already looking at reducing the total amount of ACC games from 20, something I said that should happen 3 months ago.

This isn't necessary and I'd hate that if it happens. Yea, that 19th and 20th game you lose could be 2 bad teams but what if we lost the wins @ Duke and vs Wake?

The ACC simply needs to game the NET better. Thats it. More D2 games, more winnable road games. Run up the score when possible. Shoot, I'd add the number of conference games instead of removing them. What if we beat UVa at home and VT away instead of beating FGCU and Binghamton? If it were me, I'd do this:

22 ACC games
SEC Game
3 more P6 games
2 good mid-majors (like a Duquesne if yoiu considser them MM)
1 Q4
1 D2

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Interesting, Richard Pitino was reported the top candidate for Louisville. Uh oh, New Mexico.

Niko Medved one of the top choices for Oklahoma State. Uh oh, Colorado State.

Steve Alford's name getting floated around for multiple schools, Nevada's coach. Uh oh, Mountain West

Very impressed with the MWC coaching. I watched that tournament and while the players competely suck, they are all well coached, well-drilled, and run good offenses. Someone has to take the Boise coach.

 

[Vader_Storm]

Very impressed with the MWC coaching. I watched that tournament and while the players competely suck, they are all well coached, well-drilled, and run good offenses. Someone has to take the Boise coach.

Im seriously hating on this league all because of the bullshit media pushing this non stop hype trying to tell me that this league is great and way better than the ACC.


Watching all their coaches get cherry picked and this league crashing and burning would be, in the words of Jon Rothstein, the epitome of brutality.


And I hope it happens.

 

[Pitt_Boss]

The mountain west isnt getting 6 teams next year. I guarantee that. Coaches are getting cherry picked along with the top players in the league.


Any day now the mass exodus at Utah State will start. And the hits keep coming for New Mexico.

The little midmajor mountain west already reached its high point. They have 1 more year for the 5th and 6th year 25 year old seniors, then the downfall starts and its back to reality.

Agree 100% on Mountain West. We'll see how everything shakes out, but I would expect them to drop from 6 bids to 4, maybe even 3. The PAC 12 will also be putting their 4 bids in play. So 6-7 bids probably moving from MWC/PAC12 to other places next year. We'll assume any current bid stealers will be replaced with similar bid stealers next year so in aggregate the A10, AAC, WCC, etc will remain a net zero change.

However, I don't expect those 6-7 bids to move from MWC/PAC12 to ACC. The big concern is the Big Ten - they only had 6 bids this year. I expect the media, TV execs, selection committee, etc to bend over backwards to get the Big Ten 8-9 bids next season. They are too big too fail. It will be 8 bids at least for them and I will say 9.

The SEC will certainly grab 1 more bid next year to get to 9 also. Too many people want to see the SEC and Big Ten with 9 bids each for it not to happen.

That leaves 2-3 bids available for the ACC to maybe squeeze a sixth bid. However, the Bg 12 might grab one of those to get to 9 also, especially with the teams they are adding. Then the Big East with just 3 bids this year could also move to 4-5 next year, though they faces many of the same challenges as the ACC.

So, good chance the ACC stays at 5 bids next year. And unfortunately that should probably be considered a win, because the power that be would definitely like to trim it to 4. Adding 3 new teams next year might help us hold onto 5 just due to the size of the conference, but really those 3 teams aren't improving the basketball value/reputation of the ACC.

 

[Vader_Storm]

Agree 100% on Mountain West. We'll see how everything shakes out, but I would expect them to drop from 6 bids to 4, maybe even 3. The PAC 12 will also be putting their 4 bids in play. So 6-7 bids probably moving from MWC/PAC12 to other places next year. We'll assume any current bid stealers will be replaced with similar bid stealers next year so in aggregate the A10, AAC, WCC, etc will remain a net zero change.

However, I don't expect those 6-7 bids to move from MWC/PAC12 to ACC. The big concern is the Big Ten - they only had 6 bids this year. I expect the media, TV execs, selection committee, etc to bend over backwards to get the Big Ten 8-9 bids next season. They are too big too fail. It will be 8 bids at least for them and I will say 9.

The SEC will certainly grab 1 more bid next year to get to 9 also. Too many people want to see the SEC and Big Ten with 9 bids each for it not to happen.

That leaves 2-3 bids available for the ACC to maybe squeeze a sixth bid. However, the Bg 12 might grab one of those to get to 9 also, especially with the teams they are adding. Then the Big East with just 3 bids this year could also move to 4-5 next year, though they faces many of the same challenges as the ACC.

So, good chance the ACC stays at 5 bids next year. And unfortunately that should probably be considered a win, because the power that be would definitely like to trim it to 4. Adding 3 new teams next year might help us hold onto 5 just due to the size of the conference, but really those 3 teams aren't improving the basketball value/reputation of the ACC.

Good luck with all that.

The Big Ten has massive player losses coming this offseason, starting with Zach Edey and Terrence Shannon of Illinois.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

btw, the ACC commissioner is doing something. He's already looking at reducing the total amount of ACC games from 20, something I said that should happen 3 months ago.

Of course they switched from 18 to 20 in the first place because coaches schedule way too many crap OOC games, and the thought was that at least two more ACC games would be better than two more bad OOC games.

Instead, what ended up happening is that the coaches decided to ditch two decent OOC games and keep all the crap. Because coaches get judged, in part, on wins. As long as you let the coaches set all or most of a school's OOC schedule, some coaches are always going to schedule to get as many wins as possible.

For example, if we play 18 conference games next year and they do that by dropping two of our home and home opponents, we are losing games against one of Louisville and Syracuse, probably Louisville, and North Carolina. What are the chances we schedule two games equal or better to that? I mean Louisville, sure, they'll probably still be bad next year. But we aren't going out and scheduling anyone better than North Carolina. Or even in the same stratosphere as North Carolina.

Unless you mean someone like North Carolina A&T. They are, in one way, in North Carolina's neighborhood.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Of course they switched from 18 to 20 in the first place because coaches schedule way too many crap OOC games, and the thought was that at least two more ACC games would be better than two more bad OOC games.

Instead, what ended up happening is that the coaches decided to ditch two decent OOC games and keep all the crap. Because coaches get judged, in part, on wins. As long as you let the coaches set all or most of a school's OOC schedule, some coaches are always going to schedule to get as many wins as possible.

For example, if we play 18 conference games next year and they do that by dropping two of our home and home opponents, we are losing games against one of Louisville and Syracuse, probably Louisville, and North Carolina. What are the chances we schedule two games equal or better to that? I mean Louisville, sure, they'll probably still be bad next year. But we aren't going out and scheduling anyone better than North Carolina. Or even in the same stratosphere as North Carolina.

Unless you mean someone like North Carolina A&T. They are, in one way, in North Carolina's neighborhood.

Which is why I'm in favor of more conference games, not less. I'd rather have 24 or 26 than 16 or 18.

What they need to do is schedule more conference challenge games as a conference. Have challenges vs the SEC, B10, B12, and Big East. That's 24 P6 games. Throw in 2 for your holiday tournament and you can still schedule 5 HBCU teams if you must

 

[MarshallGoldberg]

Go to 18. More flexibility. If we schedule too many weak teams at home after knowing the NCAA is so focused on non conference SoS and NET, that means you overrule or fire the coach or AD for keeping you out of the tournament. I'd like to see us play Duquense and add a game against someone usually good like St John's, Villanova, or even UConn that we have some history with. Even if it's not a true home and home. Attendance is going up, we can afford an extra road game for NET I bet.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Go to 18. More flexibility. If we schedule too many weak teams at home after knowing the NCAA is so focused on non conference SoS and NET, that means you overrule or fire the coach or AD for keeping you out of the tournament. I'd like to see us play Duquense and add a game against someone usually good like St John's, Villanova, or even UConn that we have some history with. Even if it's not a true home and home. Attendance is going up, we can afford an extra road game for NET I bet.

If we went to 18, then make your 13 OOC schedule. Lets see it. I see no reason why we cant play 20 ACC, 5-6 P6 and then 5 or so cupcakes.

The 2022-23 non-con was pretty perfect:

Michigan
VCU (they are basically a P6)
Vandy
NW
WVU

This year we substituted the Mich loss for Florida, the VCU loss for an Oregon State win. The Vandy loss for the Mizzou loss. The WVU loss for a WVU win. Big difference was that NW wasnt replaced.

I do wonder if we had, say, lost to VCU or someone like that instead of beating Oregon State and lost to a Top 5 WVU team instead of beating a bad team, if we would have gotten in since we would've gotten non-con SOS points just for showing up.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

If we went to 18, then make your 13 OOC schedule. Lets see it. I see no reason why we cant play 20 ACC, 5-6 P6 and then 5 or so cupcakes.

The 2022-23 non-con was pretty perfect:

Michigan
VCU (they are basically a P6)
Vandy
NW
WVU

This year we substituted the Mich loss for Florida, the VCU loss for an Oregon State win. The Vandy loss for the Mizzou loss. The WVU loss for a WVU win. Big difference was that NW wasnt replaced.

I do wonder if we had, say, lost to VCU or someone like that instead of beating Oregon State and lost to a Top 5 WVU team instead of beating a bad team, if we would have gotten in since we would've gotten non-con SOS points just for showing up.

I mean, the odds of getting an 0-18 team in the SEC and WVU being this bad again are about 0%. If we just keep doing exactly what we did, it should be fine.

But I would probably want to take advantage of it a little more, rather than just doing the bear minimum. Schedule some beatable mid-majors whose NETs are probably going to be high enough to stack up some Q1/Q2 wins.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I mean, the odds of getting an 0-18 team in the SEC and WVU being this bad again are about 0%. If we just keep doing exactly what we did, it should be fine.

But I would probably want to take advantage of it a little more, rather than just doing the bear minimum. Schedule some beatable mid-majors whose NETs are probably going to be high enough to stack up some Q1/Q2 wins.

And beat some of those mid-majors on the road. The MWC goes to decent WCC and Big West schools. Go beat YSU or Cleveland State on the road and even though its probably just a Q3 win, could be Q2, you get extra NET points for roadies.

As for WVU, lets say Huggy stays and WVU is Top 5 and beats us. Our non-con SOS has to jump up 80 or so spots. I wonder if that is enough to get us in.....a loss against a better team. As stupid as that sounds, I think it may have.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

And beat some of those mid-majors on the road. The MWC goes to decent WCC and Big West schools. Go beat YSU or Cleveland State on the road and even though its probably just a Q3 win, could be Q2, you get extra NET points for roadies.

As for WVU, lets say Huggy stays and WVU is Top 5 and beats us. Our non-con SOS has to jump up 80 or so spots. I wonder if that is enough to get us in.....a loss against a better team. As stupid as that sounds, I think it may have.

I mean, we were 1-4, with two thumpings, against respectable teams in the non-conference schedule the season before last, and somehow we made the tournament. That ought to be an indication of how stupid this is.

Maybe the ACC will start pitting some of the teams it expects to be in tournament contention against better SEC teams. Not sure how that works, but it seemed like Duke played Michigan State a hell of a lot in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I mean, we were 1-4, with two thumpings, against respectable teams in the non-conference schedule the season before last, and somehow we made the tournament. That ought to be an indication of how stupid this is.

Maybe the ACC will start pitting some of the teams it expects to be in tournament contention against better SEC teams. Not sure how that works, but it seemed like Duke played Michigan State a hell of a lot in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge.

I think these conference challenge games should be in Jan/Feb with matchups announced 2 weeks before.

I think we can all agree that this Pitt team is better than last year's but we beat NW in the non-con and lost to 4 good teams. Just showing up in the non-con is important. Its great to win but if you just get off the bus, the selection committee loves that.

Last year we were
4-4
3-5
5-1
10-1
NET 67

This year
4-6
5-3
6-2
7-0
NET 40

Last year, our SOS was worse. It was 90. This year, its 79 thanks to a difficult ACC schedule. But we got in last year because although our overall SOS wasnt great, our non-con was 144. This year it was 343. This is why I say had Huggy never took that drive, maybe taking an L in Morgantown to an elite team was all we needed. Dont even get me started.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I think these conference challenge games should be in Jan/Feb with matchups announced 2 weeks before.

I think we can all agree that this Pitt team is better than last year's but we beat NW in the non-con and lost to 4 good teams. Just showing up in the non-con is important. Its great to win but if you just get off the bus, the selection committee loves that.

Last year we were
4-4
3-5
5-1
10-1
NET 67

This year
4-6
5-3
6-2
7-NET 40

Last year, our SOS was worse. It was 90. This year, its 79 thanks to a difficult ACC schedule. But we got in last year because although our overall SOS wasnt great, our non-con was 144. This year it was 343. Dont even get me started.

Than again, it's tough to tell what actually mattered vs what they said after the fact. Because if you take away the bid stealers this past season and swap the '22-'23 bubble with this past season's bubble, we might have been even more safely in. I don't know.

But I do think this coming season will be a lot different. I don't think as many mid-majors are going to be getting in after you have 7/8 ACC and Big East teams now in the Sweet 16. The souring on the MWC has seemingly began with the seeding.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

PAC dissolving is also going to free up some spots. One less auto bid and then those teams are going to cannibalize each other in other conferences. Not like the Big 12 is going to get 12 teams in.

 

[Saboteur II]

The ACC is still only getting 4-5 teams in next year. It's fait accompli. If NC State had not won the ACCT, it would have been just 4 this year. I am expecting four next year, but five is possible...though just 3 is also a possibility.

peut-être

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

PAC dissolving is also going to free up some spots. One less auto bid and then those teams are going to cannibalize each other in other conferences. Not like the Big 12 is going to get 12 teams in.

Not sure that will matter a great deal. The B12/P12/B10 got 18 teams in. The B10 will have 18 members next year and the B12 will have 16. I would expect that 18 bid total between next year's B12/B10 to be the same.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Not sure that will matter a great deal. The B12/P12/B10 got 18 teams in. The B10 will have 18 members next year and the B12 will have 16. I would expect that 18 bid total between next year's B12/B10 to be the same.

We'll see; I think you might start to see some Big Ten/Big 12 fatigue with the committee. Nine from each (or ten and eight) is a lot, especially when the records are a bit more muddied.

I'd like to see them implement something that says you have to be at least .500 in conference play to be eligible for the tournament. That's something that is objectively tangible and fair, and it encompasses the entire season.

 

[Pitt_Boss]

PAC dissolving is also going to free up some spots. One less auto bid and then those teams are going to cannibalize each other in other conferences. Not like the Big 12 is going to get 12 teams in.

No, but the Big Ten and SEC will get 9 bids each going forward

 

[ChiefJusticeMarshall]

And beat some of those mid-majors on the road. The MWC goes to decent WCC and Big West schools. Go beat YSU or Cleveland State on the road and even though its probably just a Q3 win, could be Q2, you get extra NET points for roadies.

As for WVU, lets say Huggy stays and WVU is Top 5 and beats us. Our non-con SOS has to jump up 80 or so spots. I wonder if that is enough to get us in.....a loss against a better team. As stupid as that sounds, I think it may have.

This is what I have been saying. If we say played Kentucky/Tennessee/Auburn in the SEC challenge and WVU was what was expected, even losing to both, it boosts the whole OOC/Net stuff that we likely were a 9 seed like a NW or TCU.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

If we schedule too many weak teams at home after knowing the NCAA is so focused on non conference SoS

We scheduled all those weak teams this year, and if we didn't know that the NCAA has been using non-conference SOS as one of their big metrics for the past several decades then some people need fired, not because they scheduled poorly per se, but because someone that dumb and that ignorant shouldn't be in a position of authority over anyone.

It's just like people talking about how they just figured out that running up the score would help your NET ranking. If there is a coach or basketball administrator who really did not know that about five minutes after they first read what the NET was and what was included in that, then they need to be fired because they are a moron.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

This is what I have been saying. If we say played Kentucky/Tennessee/Auburn in the SEC challenge and WVU was what was expected, even losing to both, it boosts the whole OOC/Net stuff that we likely were a 9 seed like a NW or TCU.

And that is so stupid its maddening!!!! You shouldn't get extra points for an 11 game non-con SOS when there is this thing they have called overall SOS which takes into account 32+ games.