If everything breaks right, they can tie the Pac 12 from about 10 years ago and send a Power 5-low 16.7% of its teams to the NCAA Tournament. By that metric, this year's ACC would be tied for the worst single-season conference of all time and that's no small feat. The league has crumbled before our eyes and that's why I said something drastic needs to happen and it may happen if you look at my other post.
The ACC has a chance to pull off something historic at 6:30 tonight
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
No matter how much you want to sell it like it's a big deal, the conference commissioner telling the league's schools that they need to spend more money on the second most important sport isn't a big deal, and it barely qualifies as news.
It seems like it's a mandate to spend enough on basketball to be competitive with the SEC. Its embarrassing. It's one of the worst leagues of all time. If teams can't commit to this, maybe they will be kicked out.
lol. Yea they’re gonna kick out teams with all the instability. Kick Pitt out and replace them with your newest hero Sac St/Marion. I’m sure they’d go nuts spending tons on hoops as well.
The SEC is projected to have 13 to 14 teams in the tournament this year, they should only have 8.
The ACC is only going to get 3 but it should be 5 or 6.
Yes, the SEC did have a historic out of conference record this year but you need to take in account the conference records of some of those schools. Only 8 have records over 500, and some are 6-12, if you can't win at least half your games you should not be eligible for an at large bid.
When the Big East put 11 teams in the tournament in 2011 all of them were at least 500 in conference play.
So, if you want to keep building these mega conference's this should be the price you have to pay.
The ACC is only going to get 3 but it should be 5 or 6.
Yes, the SEC did have a historic out of conference record this year but you need to take in account the conference records of some of those schools. Only 8 have records over 500, and some are 6-12, if you can't win at least half your games you should not be eligible for an at large bid.
When the Big East put 11 teams in the tournament in 2011 all of them were at least 500 in conference play.
So, if you want to keep building these mega conference's this should be the price you have to pay.
They were 30-4 against us head to head. It's embarrassing to argue we deserve more .
My feelings exactly, for anyone to suggest the ACC should get 5-6 and the SEC only 8 is embarrassing. They literally beat the ACC’s (and everyone else’s) brains in this year.
The ACC is closer to the MAC than the SEC. The ACC was legitimately terrible this season and the SEC was legitimately incredible
Basically yes. If you don't spend like we tell you, you are gone. UConn is waiting for a spot. If BC can't spend $5 million-$6 million on bball player salaries then bye.
There is a 0.0% chance that anyone is going to get kicked out. Even by your standards it's dumb to suggest that they will.
BC better be careful. If they are given directives and fail to adhere, I do believe they are given an ultimatum.
You also believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.
And both of them are just as real as the ACC kicking out Boston College.
Embarrassing to argue? You should have to win at least 50% of your conference games to get an invite.
The SEC has 6 teams below .500 in conference play—no other conference even has one.
Sure, it’s great to have outstanding out-of-conference records, but you also need to prove you can win in conference play. A sub-.500 record shows you can’t.
Do we really need the tournament to highlight this imbalance and keep some deserving teams out? And no, I’m not just talking about ACC teams here.
In my bracket, I’ll be picking against these sub-.500 SEC teams. By this time next week, we’ll know if the selections were justified or not.
No you don't. Conference record is literally not on the team sheet and not considered at all. They are looking at 353 independents. The committee genuinely doesn't even know what the conference records of these teams are because it doesn't matter.
Pick against the B12 and MWC. They game and are always overrated. The SEC is for real.
In reality, it is more the other way around. If all you look at is the league games, you can't really tell how good a team is because you can't really know how good the league is. It's the inter-conference games that tell you if a league, and therefore the teams in the league, are good or not.
Non-conference games showed that the SEC is much better than the ACC. Going 8-10 in the SEC this year says a lot more good about a team than going 11-9 in the ACC did.
I get what your saying but keep in mind these games are played in November and December and with NIL and the portal teams are a lot different in March.
Last year the ACC had a good tournament run and I like the draws for this year's teams except Louisville.
Last year the ACC had a good tournament run and I like the draws for this year's teams except Louisville.
