What really hurt the ACC this year

[UPitt '89]

None of this is news to any of you..... but there are things the ACC's bottom feeders need to address immediately.

Even in Pitt's infamous 0-18 ACC year.... Pitt had 8 non-conference wins. Teams simply *CANNOT* go 2-9 or 1-10 in the OOC like Louisville and FSU did this year. That CANNOT happen.

The best way for teams to avoid the dreaded Q3/Q4 losses is to NOT HAVE ANY Q3/Q4 TEAMS IN THEIR LEAGUE.

There is simply no excuse for an ACC team to be worse than 200 in NET. None.

Louisville, Notre Dame, FSU, Georgia Tech, and Boston College had inexcusable OOC performances. Even the worst team in the ACC should go above .500 in their OOC. If Pitt 2017-18 can win 8 OOC games, anybody can.

The reason the Big Ten got 8 teams in is because their bad teams didn't completely suck in the OOC. So their only potential Q3/Q4 losses were to Minnesota or to Nebraska (at home).

ACC teams had 8 or more chances for Q3/Q4 losses in the conference schedule and some upsets are going to happen.

Pitt is in Dayton because of two Q3/Q4 losses. Clemson is in the NIT because of FOUR of them. NC State avoided Dayton because of NONE of them.


There needs to be some soul-searching in the ACC - and these teams have to at least not embarrass the league in November. This year showed that a league cannot do anything to overcome a bad November.

 

[FireballZ]

Do you think there's a benefit to what the Big 12 / SEC did in playing an intra-conference showdown mid-year? Otherwise, you're kind of stuck with your pre-conference analytics, even if teams in your conference improve or get healthier throughout the season. In the new age of mass-transfers, when you need time to gel, maybe leaving room for some intra-conference games mid-year makes sense?

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Isn't NC State like 1-6 against Quad 1? It's stupid to care about Quad 4 losses more than Quad 1 wins. At the very least, let them cancel each other out.

It's also stupid that you can beat the best team in the country or the 75th best on the road and be rewarded the same.

This whole thing is stupid.

 

[wolf0717]

How about playing Robert Morris at Robert Morris instead of home vrs a +300 Alabama State. Play Duquesne and Youngstown State I know Capel needed a winning season to turn it around, but playing +300 teams in the future can't happen anymore.

 

[BballinsiderfromPitt]

Duquesne at Palumbo is a neutral site home game. Something Jamie perfected

 

[UPitt '89]

How about playing Robert Morris at Robert Morris instead of home vrs a +300 Alabama State. Play Duquesne and Youngstown State I know Capel needed a winning season to turn it around, but playing +300 teams in the future can't happen anymore.

Pitt's OOC schedule was a respectable 120-ish.

Clemson's was 320-ish.

 

[pittchagg]

How about playing Robert Morris at Robert Morris instead of home vrs a +300 Alabama State. Play Duquesne and Youngstown State I know Capel needed a winning season to turn it around, but playing +300 teams in the future can't happen anymore.

Our strength of schedule was pretty good, to be honest. We had no control over the fact that 25% of our conference games were Q4.

 

[UPitt '89]

Our strength of schedule was pretty good, to be honest. We had no control over the fact that 25% of our conference games were Q4.

Yes..... and the conference needs to hammer Louisville and FSU and GT and BC and Notre Dame for what they did in the OOC this year.

Absolutely zero excuse for an ACC team to ever be 1-10 or 2-9 in the OOC schedule.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Yes..... and the conference needs to hammer Louisville and FSU and GT and BC and Notre Dame for what they did in the OOC this year.

Absolutely zero excuse for an ACC team to ever be 1-10 or 2-9 in the OOC schedule.

In a sane world, I'm glad those teams suck. We went 7-2 against them and probably wouldn't have otherwise. Anybody can beat anybody in basketball, for the most part, so I'll take every conference win we can get.

In a NET world, we'd have probably been better off if all of them were "Quad 1" teams and we went 2-7 against them.

This. Is. So. Dumb.

 

[SteelCityChamps]

The conference can start by not catering to the teams from the state of North Carolina.

Pitt had the lowest NET of at large teams in the field.

I look at the bracket and I see these 4-6 seeds and I think to myself we aren't that far off.

Can't remember, have they announced us playing in any OOC Tournaments next year?

 

[pittchagg]

The conference can start by not catering to the teams from the state of North Carolina.

Pitt had the lowest NET of at large teams in the field.

I look at the bracket and I see these 4-6 seeds and I think to myself we aren't that far off.

Can't remember, have they announced us playing in any OOC Tournaments next year?

Yes, we’ll be in New York for the NIT preseason. Baylor, Florida, and someone else.

 

[Pitt2009]

Why is the Preseason NIT at Barclays and not MSG?

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Isn't NC State like 1-6 against Quad 1? It's stupid to care about Quad 4 losses more than Quad 1 wins. At the very least, let them cancel each other out.

It's also stupid that you can beat the best team in the country or the 75th best on the road and be rewarded the same.

This whole thing is stupid.

Yes. Q3 and Q4 losses seemed to have been weighted more heavily than Q1 wins. NC State getting in was a crime and they arent even in Dayton. But no Q3/4 losses.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

None of this is news to any of you..... but there are things the ACC's bottom feeders need to address immediately.

Even in Pitt's infamous 0-18 ACC year.... Pitt had 8 non-conference wins. Teams simply *CANNOT* go 2-9 or 1-10 in the OOC like Louisville and FSU did this year. That CANNOT happen.

The best way for teams to avoid the dreaded Q3/Q4 losses is to NOT HAVE ANY Q3/Q4 TEAMS IN THEIR LEAGUE.

There is simply no excuse for an ACC team to be worse than 200 in NET. None.

Louisville, Notre Dame, FSU, Georgia Tech, and Boston College had inexcusable OOC performances. Even the worst team in the ACC should go above .500 in their OOC. If Pitt 2017-18 can win 8 OOC games, anybody can.

The reason the Big Ten got 8 teams in is because their bad teams didn't completely suck in the OOC. So their only potential Q3/Q4 losses were to Minnesota or to Nebraska (at home).

ACC teams had 8 or more chances for Q3/Q4 losses in the conference schedule and some upsets are going to happen.

Pitt is in Dayton because of two Q3/Q4 losses. Clemson is in the NIT because of FOUR of them. NC State avoided Dayton because of NONE of them.


There needs to be some soul-searching in the ACC - and these teams have to at least not embarrass the league in November. This year showed that a league cannot do anything to overcome a bad November.

Hamilton did one of the all-time worst coaching jobs. That team had no less talent than us. Take away a lottery pick from his roster and he cant beat mid-majors. Terrible coach. Payne is in over his head, no need to discuss further. GT is GT so you have to expect they will suck but not Lou and FSU. Earl Grant at BC is good but they didnt have Quinton Post early.

The ACC also needs to stop scheduling so many Q4 games. Use the Mountain West's model.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Duquesne at Palumbo is a neutral site home game. Something Jamie perfected

Should be 2 for 1. They can play their home game vs us at PPG if they want. 3 for 1 with RMU. Would be cool (and easy W) for Pitt to go to Moon every 4 years. Really nice arena

 

[TD_6082]

Hamilton did one of the all-time worst coaching jobs. That team had no less talent than us. Take away a lottery pick from his roster and he cant beat mid-majors. Terrible coach. Payne is in over his head, no need to discuss further. GT is GT so you have to expect they will suck but not Lou and FSU. Earl Grant at BC is good but they didnt have Quinton Post early.

The ACC also needs to stop scheduling so many Q4 games. Use the Mountain West's model.

BC sucked with Quinton Post.

GT program has potential.

Louisville is probably going to be placing some calls to your namesake this time next year.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

BC sucked with Quinton Post.

GT program has potential.

Louisville is probably going to be placing some calls to your namesake this time next year.

BC went 9-11 in the ACC with Post. They were decent

 

[BballinsiderfromPitt]

Should be 2 for 1. They can play their home game vs us at PPG if they want. 3 for 1 with RMU. Would be cool (and easy W) for Pitt to go to Moon every 4 years. Really nice arena

You’re missing the point. At palumbo, it’s a neutral site game. But basically a home game. It’s how Jamie used to game RPI.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

It's also stupid that you can beat the best team in the country or the 75th best on the road and be rewarded the same.

That's my problem with the whole thing. The Quads are really important, and the Quads don't really make any sense.

 

[UPitt '89]

That's my problem with the whole thing. The Quads are really important, and the Quads don't really make any sense.

The cutoff for the quads is arbitrary. Why 30? Why not 20 or 25 or 40?

Beat the 30th team at home, and "QUAD 1 WIN! YAY!" Beat the 31st team at home, and "QUAD 2 WIN. yay."

Team A beats #28, #29, and #30..... 3 QUAD 1 WINS!
Team B beats #1 and #2..... 2 QUAD 1 wins.

Team B obviously did something much better than Team A.

So dumb.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

The cutoff for the quads is arbitrary. Why 30? Why not 20 or 25 or 40?

Beat the 30th team at home, and "QUAD 1 WIN! YAY!" Beat the 31st team at home, and "QUAD 2 WIN. yay."

Team A beats #28, #29, and #30..... 3 QUAD 1 WINS!
Team B beats #1 and #2..... 2 QUAD 1 wins.

Team B obviously did something much better than Team A.

So dumb.

I think if they are going to do it this way, instead of four Quads they should have five, I don't know, Pents?

P1 would be high level wins, something like top 20 at home and top 30 on the road (and I'm just pulling numbers off the top of my head here, the specific numbers aren't important). And then P2 would be good wins, not great wins, but good wins. So something like top 50 at home and top 70 on the road. And then the middle group should be much larger than the other four, the teams that a good team should beat most of the time but that don't completely suck. So maybe up to 150 at home and 200 on the road. And then P4 and P5 would kind of mirror the top two, P5 would be the really awful teams, the ones that you should never lose to if you want to make the tournament, like the bottom 60 at home and the bottom 40 on the road. And P4 would be everyone in between P3 and P5.

That way wins over P1s would be huge for a team's resume. Losses to P5s would be almost disqualifying. You could maybe lose a game to a P4 and be OK if you make that up with some P1 wins. And the other thing that would do is to drive schools to not schedule teams that have a pretty good chance to end up in P5, because if you happen to lose one of them you are screwed.

 

[NCanton Panther]

That's my problem with the whole thing. The Quads are really important, and the Quads don't really make any sense.

Aren’t the Quads just an easy way to summarize and highlight a team’s results in non-numerical layman’s terms.

I sure would expect that if the committee has 2 or more teams closely ranked they then look more into the details or specifics of where exactly teams they beat or lost to fell in the given Quad.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Aren’t the Quads just an easy way to summarize and highlight a team’s results in non-numerical layman’s terms.

I sure would expect that if the committee has 2 or more teams closely ranked they then look more into the details or specifics of where exactly teams they beat or lost to fell in the given Quad.

They absolutely look at the individual resumes. They have every result for every team at their fingertips.

 

[NCanton Panther]

They absolutely look at the individual resumes. They have every result for every team at their fingertips.

Yeah, that’s why I think people are complaining too much about this Quad concept. Much ado about nothing, just a means to summarize a team’s record accounting for quality of opponent.

If one really wants to get into the details, only thing to debate is the Quad cutoff points for home and away games. But again, doesn’t matter if the committee goes to the specific results to differentiate between 2 or more close teams.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

The cutoff for the quads is arbitrary. Why 30? Why not 20 or 25 or 40?

Beat the 30th team at home, and "QUAD 1 WIN! YAY!" Beat the 31st team at home, and "QUAD 2 WIN. yay."

Team A beats #28, #29, and #30..... 3 QUAD 1 WINS!
Team B beats #1 and #2..... 2 QUAD 1 wins.

Team B obviously did something much better than Team A.

So dumb.

They shouldn't even have "quads." On the team sheet, it should just list your wins and losses arranged by NET rank. The grouping throws people off.

 

[Cap pitt]

When acc teams beat duke and North Carolina and these 2 teams arent 30-1 or ranked 1 or 2 the conference is not so good, not that it could be parity,

 

[UPitt '89]

In a sane world, I'm glad those teams suck. We went 7-2 against them and probably wouldn't have otherwise. Anybody can beat anybody in basketball, for the most part, so I'll take every conference win we can get.

In a NET world, we'd have probably been better off if all of them were "Quad 1" teams and we went 2-7 against them.

This. Is. So. Dumb.

In a sane world.... even sucky ACC teams should be able to go 7-4 or 8-3 in the OOC schedule.

Pitt won 8 OOC games in 2017-18... and we might have been the worst ACC team in history.

 

[Drew1208]

Had cutoff for the quads is arbitrary. Why 30? Why not 20 or 25 or 40?

Beat the 30th team at home, and "QUAD 1 WIN! YAY!" Beat the 31st team at home, and "QUAD 2 WIN. yay."

Team A beats #28, #29, and #30..... 3 QUAD 1 WINS!
Team B beats #1 and #2..... 2 QUAD 1 wins.

Team B obviously did something much better than Team A.

So dumb.

Absolutely makes no sense. The 30/31st team should bare almost no discerning difference.

 

[MarshallGoldberg]

I posted the below on March 6th about Big 10 vs ACC. I am a Big 10 hater but we had some much worse losses.


---


As said before, it's not complicated. The Big 10 is 115-37 against other conferences where the ACC is 108-52. We were one game better head to head but had some much worse losses as a conference.

The Big 10 was 87-2 against what I'd call minor and mid-major conferences.

The ACC had 6 losses against the Atlantic 10 and America East alone, 2 against the Sun Belt, and 1 each against the MAC, Metro, Colonial, Horizon, and Patriot. That's an extra 12 bad losses.

Some of those losses were to truly bad teams -- Louisville to Wright State and Bellarmine; Florida State by Siena, Stetson, and Troy; Boston College to Maine and New Hampshire; Notre Dame to St. Bonaventure; Syracuse to Bryant; Clemson to Loyola of Chicago(!) Clemson is supposed to be one of our good teams. but they lost by 18 to a 10-20 Loyola-Chicago ranked 268th in NET. Losses to teams that are like 200-300th in the country are bad enough, but some were also by double digits which is truly a NET killer.

The Big 10 may crap the bed yet again in the NCAA tournament -- I hope so -- but the ACC is more than a step back from where it used to be, and needs to recruit and retain talent better.