They are absolutely hammering Baylor tonight. Ahead by 23 with 8 minutes left in the game as I type this.
Really Bad Start for the ACC
- Thread starter FireballZ
- Start date
They are absolutely hammering Baylor tonight. Ahead by 23 with 8 minutes left in the game as I type this.
I'm not very high at all on Baylor. They already have a 30 point loss on their resume. They had plenty of help from St John's in last night's comeback win.
Tennessee is an elite defensive team. On the offensive end, Chaz & Milicic are the only 2 dependable scorers. ZZ is hit or miss & turns it over way too much. Can the Vols beat a really good team when Chaz has an off night?
No doubt Tennessee is a good team. I just don't think they have enough scorers to be a great team. Tennessee is also a team chock full of seniors and I don't think there is as much upside with them as there are a lot of other teams. At least that's my opinion of the Vols as of today.
I don't know. Great is a really strong term. I'm not sure I'd ever call any team great in November. But UConn was certainly worthy of that description in March the last two years.
As good as Tennessee is defensively, (and they are very good defensively) they are going to have to show me a lot more before I call a team with 2 scorers and a 5'9" turnover prone point guard a great team.
It's tough to defend the ACC at this point, but teams are so much different in January - March than they were in November, so it still sucks for the strength of a conference to be determined so early.
I know it's unrealistic to say that the ACC teams will improve at a higher rate than the other conferences' teams, but it sure seemed that way last year - Pitt and NC State not being the least of which.
I know it's unrealistic to say that the ACC teams will improve at a higher rate than the other conferences' teams, but it sure seemed that way last year - Pitt and NC State not being the least of which.
Been saying for a few years that the ACC should play a few really early conference games to prepare their teams for these make or break Thanksgiving games.
These aren't really make or break games. A big reason Pitt & UVA found themselves squarely on the bubble last year is because they lost 7 or 8 conference games, in a league that isn't as strong as the Big 12 or SEC. If you expect this team to lose 8 games in the ACC, then yeah, they probably are games Pitt needs to win.
Last edited:
Give him a break, he really does not understand how this all works. But still feels a compulsion to act like he does.
And Pitt is going to lose 7-ish conference games this season. When you play 20 conference games, even against teams who arent that good, you are going to lose a few road games, have at least 1 WTF home game and then lose to Duke & UNC. The ACC is the worst case scenario to make the NCAAT out of because its best teams are very very hard to beat and then you have a bunch of NIT-type teams who can beat you.
Didn't you have Duke down as 2 guaranteed losses last year? I think you drove that talking point home several times in December and January. What happened?
Pitt has beat North Carolina in 5 of its last 8 games.
I think it’s changed where teams used to play easier OOC schedules with the intent to improve and peak in February/March. Now OOC games in November are more important than conference games in February. I understand they want to equally value all regular season games, but by doing that they aren’t getting the best 68 teams in the NCAA Tournament.
The best way to make the tourney is to establish yourself early with strong OOC results and then you have the momentum in all the brackets to survive some conference losses. It’s harder to move up than go down. We saw that with teams like Northwestern and Michigan State last year.
So a strong finish used to be rewarded but now a strong start is more important.
So a strong finish used to be rewarded but now a strong start is more important.
Here's the thing. If you lose seven (or more) conference games and some of them are to teams that aren't good and one of them is a WTF home loss then all you have done is to show that if you are on the bubble that's probably exactly where you belong.
Want to make the tournament? Don't lose games to bad teams, conference game or not. Don't have a WTF home loss. Do that and your only worry on selection Sunday is how high your seed is going to be.
Yea, you dont get it. When you play like 14 conference games against non-NCAAT teams, 7 of them on the road, you are going to lose a few. Anybody would. The ACC's problem is that most of the teams are in that 75-120 range so they are teams you should beat but for a bubble team like Pitt, you can't expect them to go like 12-2 in these games. There's too many and the teams arent THAT bad. Its not like they are MEAC teams. If you play ND or SMU on the road, you could lose.
They don't equally value all regular season games. These November games carry significant more value than Feb/Mar conference games. The ACC cant keep shitting the bed every November and expect to get a reasonable amount of teams in the tournament. They have to do something different. Playing at least 2 ACC games to prepare for these Thanksgiving games makes all the sense.
It is hilarious how SMF talks about his scenarios with such certainty as if they are literal fact… and yet it’s all just random bullshit narratives he has in his head.
Truly A+ effort that he’s still committed to the bit after all these years.
Truly A+ effort that he’s still committed to the bit after all these years.
not sure that "rule" applies to all teams from all conferences equally, thinking maybe MWC and Boise last year but there could be others I don't recall
a perceived weak conference by media narrative or actual performance which lately the ACC is and may truly be this year means each team can't afford any slip-ups unless they have padded their resume which these early games for Pitt would do
tomorrow would go a long way as would the OSU and Miss St games
seems like there's some not acknowledging that ACC teams need to get these early OOC wins to both help establish their conference and set up their own resume and at this point no team in the ACC should count on needing to do anything less that perfect
for Pitt that includes winning 2 of these next few big games, "leave no doubt" imo requires that more than usual in this year's ACC
Of course it doesn't apply to all teams from all conferences equally. Because all teams and all conferences aren't equal. If you play in the Big 12 you are going to be able to lose a few more games than if you play in the ACC, because the Big 12 is obviously better, both on the whole and at the top. So you end up with more games where a win is a good mark on your resume but a loss doesn't hurt you.
Or in other words, more games like playing Wisconsin at a neutral site or Ohio State or Mississippi State on the road.
it should always apply equally, not necessarily same outcomes but application fairness is what I'm referring to
Well what specifically is not being applied fairly?
And I don't mean that we didn't make the tournament last year. I think most of us think that we should have. But of course most of us are just a little bit biased. I mean how, for instance, did they judge us differently than they did a Big 12 team or an SEC team? What criteria did they use for us that they did not use for them, or vise-versa?
do you need real data on that because clearly opinion and anything else I might believe is meaningless
so rather than thinking back and making the case completely for me the play at the end of the year and the beatdown of UVA at UVA when they got a bid are part of the case the committee apparently didn't value
that and a 14 loss Mich St team that didn't win their conference or tournament iirc
Michigan State ended up 24th in the NET rankings. We ended up 40th. There was no chance, none what so ever, that we were getting in ahead of them.
And they are a perfect example of what I am talking about. They played a lot of games where a win would really help them but a loss wouldn't hurt them at all. That's why they could lose three more times than us and yet still be in a much better position than we were.
I do get that and frankly that they end up at 24th net while losing 5 of last 7 games to finish their season and also finish 10-10 in clearly NOT the top 1 or even 2 conferences says the criteria(which isn't only net) has problems
and then of course they get in as a solid #9 and beat a marginal Miss St team that limped in too having lost 5 of their last 7 and finishing an even worse 8-10 in their stronger SEC but....
and really not necessarily that NET has problems but that you should take far more into account than stats and black and white data with selections
but then of course another can of worms opens so I get it
the one thing I fall back on because it's entertainment and all this is simply fun to argue and pass time is that any team in that bubble range frankly needs to do a lot more to earn their at-large bid and if not, there's the NIT, the CBI, the CIT for us losers
In related news, Kennesaw St is taking it to Rutgers. The game would be over if not for Kennesaw missing a bunch of FTs down the stretch.
Why did Rutgers play a road game at Kennesaw State? Was this some agreement for that big GA recruit they got so all his friends and family can come?
No matter how good they are, its hard to win with freshmen. Expectations were sky high for Rutgers because of these 2 but I dont think they'll make the NCAAT.
I assume it was so Ace Bailey could play a game at home, without the chance to actually lose like if they would have played Georgia Tech or even Georgia.
Oops.
Similar threads
