Bracketology 2024

[Northeast Stinger]

No chowderhead, it should be teams that play someone and earn it. Unlike Wake and Pitt. ****ing ridiculous.

I know, it shouldn’t matter who you play AS LONG AS YOU PLAY IN THE ACC BC YOURE A FAN OF THE ACC and that’s all that matters. Beleive it or not, there is basketball outside of the ACC. Good basketball that makes good coaching hires and schedules out of conference games in order to avoid drama come tournament selection time. And that is how this conference has become a joke all around the country and will soon join the Pac12 when its premiere programs leave. Enjoy. Keep the dream alive.

Chowderhead? Is he from New England too?

 

[slugboy]

No chowderhead, it should be teams that play someone and earn it. Unlike Wake and Pitt. ****ing ridiculous.

Maybe Pitt would have gone on a tear. I definitely picked against Grand Canyon University, who only had one Quad 1 game before the tournament. Their NET is 50 and Pitt’s is 40.

I’m more open to the argument that UVA took Pitt’s spot in the tournament.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

Pitt could have been in the Playoff game vice UVA. Their OOC schedule was pitiful at best. They lost home games to Missouri (0-18 9n SEC play) and Florida (good team) . They beat Oregon State (5-15 in Pac-12 last place) at home and WVA (4-14 Big 12 - last place) away. Those were their only P6 OOC games. One good team and 3 awful teams. That hurt them badly!

Ok. Now, do the other teams I listed. Also, compare all of their games. Is Pitt's resume really any worse than the other teams I listed? I think not.

 

[GT33]

No chowderhead, it should be teams that play someone and earn it. Unlike Wake and Pitt. ****ing ridiculous.

Keep sucking the sec bone. Historically those weak scheduling ACC teams do far worse than those hard scheduling sec teams. Yeah the data CLEARLY says that. CLEARLY, Espn media hype style.

 

[stinger78]

Maybe Pitt would have gone on a tear. I definitely picked against Grand Canyon University, who only had one Quad 1 game before the tournament. Their NET is 50 and Pitt’s is 40.

I’m more open to the argument that UVA took Pitt’s spot in the tournament.

FWIW, my point is not that Pitt is any great shakes, but they’re as good as Mississippi St, TAMU, USCe, TX Tech, and the likes. Why do those conferences get 8-9 invites and the ACC gets only 5? It’s money, and it’s narrative that keeps getting built unjustly. Just even it out. If we’re talking second level teams (8-10 seeds), why do SEC/B12 get 3x more than the ACC? There is no rationale for that regardless of how much Peacone whines.

 

[stinger78]

Ok. Now, do the other teams I listed. Also, compare all of their games. Is Pitt's resume really any worse than the other teams I listed? I think not.

They just don’t get it, bro.

 

[GT33]

There is no rationale for that regardless of how much Peacone whines.

Those types watch their tv, repeat whatever their heroes say they’re supposed to say. No independent analysis or thought. Stare at hard data and give you a thousand reason why it’s not what it is.

 

[Root4GT]

Ok. Now, do the other teams I listed. Also, compare all of their games. Is Pitt's resume really any worse than the other teams I listed? I think not.

It’s not better so why should they get in without a better resume. Losing to Missouri is one of the 3 worst possible P6 losses. That is a dagger for a resume. Pitt is likely in beating Missouri. They had their chance and blew it.

 

[Peacone36]

Those types watch their tv, repeat whatever their heroes say they’re supposed to say. No independent analysis or thought. Stare at hard data and give you a thousand reason why it’s not what it is.

You mean like schedules and results? Would that be considered data?

 

[Peacone36]

FWIW, my point is not that Pitt is any great shakes, but they’re as good as Mississippi St, TAMU, USCe, TX Tech, and the likes. Why do those conferences get 8-9 invites and the ACC gets only 5? It’s money, and it’s narrative that keeps getting built unjustly. Just even it out. If we’re talking second level teams (8-10 seeds), why do SEC/B12 get 3x more than the ACC? There is no rationale for that regardless of how much Peacone whines.

Pitt is as good as Texas Tech and South Carolina? That should tell everyone everything they need to know right there.

So Pittsburgh, was a top ten team this season? Because USCe ranked from 11-20th the last 7 weeks of the season. I cant remember which one of my heroes told me to say that.

TTU was a top 25 seven weeks after the New Year.

Is that data or just repeating?

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Maybe we should invite some Pittsburgh fans on here to get their insights.

Wake fans could jump in with some solid fact checking for some of us.

Meanwhile, ever notice how little infighting takes place in the SEC? Wonder why.

 

[57jacket]

Quad system, tiers, any system that tries to analytically determine the best 64 teams is doomed. Nothing beats good old fashion judgement . After selecting the auto qualifiers, just watch some damn games, especially late in the year. Use some judgement for god's sake. You can't write a computer program to do your job.

 

[MWBATL]

Meanwhile, ever notice how little infighting takes place in the SEC? Wonder why.

Don’t bet on that. Certain fan bases intensely dislike others. One year after LSU beat Ole Miss by getting off 2 plays in the final 4 seconds ( in Baton Rouge, of course), Ole Miss fans put up a billboard on the interstate as you left Mississippi to enter Louisiana saying “ Now entering Louisiana, set your clocks back 4 seconds”.

 

[stinger78]

Pitt is as good as Texas Tech and South Carolina? That should tell everyone everything they need to know right there.

So Pittsburgh, was a top ten team this season? Because USCe ranked from 11-20th the last 7 weeks of the season. I cant remember which one of my heroes told me to say that.

TTU was a top 25 seven weeks after the New Year.

Is that data or just repeating?

Since when is 11th to 20th top 10? At the end of the year, I believe Pitt was a top 25 team. Of course, you believe the SEC teams are just better, even though they mostly just go home. Even your precious NET rankings have TXT 27, Pitt 40, and USCe 51. Even KenPom has TXT 33, Pitt 36, and USCe 52. LOL.

Texas Tech was a 6 seed. They were a top 20-25 team most of the season. They did somehow make it to #15 before getting waxed by TCU and Baylor in the same week. Oh, they reached #11 by beating mighty OU. The one left out.

S Carolina was another 6 seed. They somehow floated around the top 15-20 most of the year. They did manage to beat UT and UK, but got torched by Bama and Auburn (2x), and lost to Clemson, UGA and LSU. The 6 seed showed what the tournament folks thought about them. Just another 20-25 team.

Yes, at the end of the season, Pitt was as good as both. But it doesn’t have to be TXT and USCe, there’s a handful of 2nd level teams from those two conferences to pick from. Invites for those type teams should have been distributed far more evenly. Period.

 

[slugboy]

Maybe we should invite some Pittsburgh fans on here to get their insights.

Wake fans could jump in with some solid fact checking for some of us.

Meanwhile, ever notice how little infighting takes place in the SEC? Wonder why.

I don’t know if it’s true about the lack of SEC infighting, but the ACC does seem to be self-sabotaging.

GT seems to do that too.

 

[Peacone36]

Since when is 11th to 20th top 10? At the end of the year, I believe Pitt was a top 25 team. Of course, you believe the SEC teams are just better, even though they mostly just go home. Even your precious NET rankings have TXT 27, Pitt 40, and USCe 51. Even KenPom has TXT 33, Pitt 36, and USCe 52. LOL.

Texas Tech was a 6 seed. They were a top 20-25 team most of the season. They did somehow make it to #15 before getting waxed by TCU and Baylor in the same week. Oh, they reached #11 by beating mighty OU. The one left out.

S Carolina was another 6 seed. They somehow floated around the top 15-20 most of the year. They did manage to beat UT and UK, but got torched by Bama and Auburn (2x), and lost to Clemson, UGA and LSU. The 6 seed showed what the tournament folks thought about them. Just another 20-25 team.

Yes, at the end of the season, Pitt was as good as both.

If you are better than the 11th ranked team in the nation that puts you.....

Hold on....I gotta check the tv.

 

[stinger78]

I don’t know if it’s true about the lack of SEC infighting, but the ACC does seem to be self-sabotaging.

GT seems to do that too.

See my reply to Peacone above. Why genuflect TXT and USCe? I just don’t get it

 

[Peacone36]

Quad system, tiers, any system that tries to analytically determine the best 64 teams is doomed. Nothing beats good old fashion judgement . After selecting the auto qualifiers, just watch some damn games, especially late in the year. Use some judgement for god's sake. You can't write a computer program to do your job.

Agreed. Everything from Kenpom to the NET is just a sorting tool to create this type of discussion. Watching the games does wonders.

 

[stinger78]

If you are better than the 11th ranked team in the nation that puts you.....

Hold on....I gotta check the tv.

Peacone, very weak sauce.

The final AP rankings have USCe at #16 (but they were a 6 seed) and TXT at #22 (also a 6 seed). The ACC? UNC #5 and Dook #13. That’s it. Somehow, the ACC has 4 teams in the Sweet 16.

LOL.

 

[Peacone36]

Peacone, very weak sauce.

The final AP rankings have USCe at #16 (but they were a 6 seed) and TXT at #22 (also a 6 seed). The ACC? UNC #5 and Dook #13. That’s it. Somehow, the ACC has 4 teams in the Sweet 16.

LOL.

oooooook?