Bracketology 2024

[stinger78]

That’s the kind of argument the ACC could use, but

1. That explains why to let in Duke, UNC, and teams that go to the Sweet 16–the best of the ACC is reliably ready for that round. How does it get Pitt and Wake into the tournament?
2. Is .459 that different from .419? Didn’t we just say the SEC got way too many teams in? Is the difference one more for us and one less for them?
3. Don’t games in November and December count? Shouldn’t Wake and Pitt actually schedule good teams to play?

Is it wrong to schedule weaker teams when you know your team needs to grow as a season progresses? I guess that depends on motives, which are hard to assess. Perhaps a serial under-schedule might be penalized but I'm just not sure. The bigger issue (IMPO) is what does it do the team itself? Does it make them weaker, or does it help them develop. I see no inherent good in scheduling a killer non-con slate. Sometimes it's good and sometimes it's harmful. The major issue to me is more of did you do with the better teams you played. If you beat them that should stand on its own with no penalty. I don't like OOC SOS at all, generally, as a determinative metric. It doesn't tell you how good or bad a team is. It is not determinative unless you schedule weak and lose to them. I'd rather go by good wins. It's a much stronger metric that is determinative.

As for the chart above, the ACC and BE got better from 2014-18 to 2019-24. The winning percentage increased over that range while the SEC, B1G, and B12 WP all fell. So which conferences have gotten stronger? The pretty clear explanation for that is the ACC got fewer invites 2019-24 and so more of their invites were the better teams. Very true. I would make two observations though. 1) The ACC was the top conference even when they got more invites than any other (2014-18). 2) The performance of the SEC/B1G/B12 were very bad - on average - when their middle teams began to get invites (2019-24) - much worse than the ACC in the prior set.

I don't advocate for the ACC to dominate. I advocate for the ACC to get equity in invites. Just equity, that is all. Same for football.

 

[lv20gt]

I'm not sure which is worse, trying to use a single elimination tournament to make a claim about the overall level of competition between conferences or trying to use results from 5+ years ago to make an argument about why teams this year should have been gotten in instead.

The next closest ACC team to being in was Pitt, and they played one of the worst non con schedules in the country, where their best win was the last place team in the big 12 followed closely by Purdue Fort Wayne. They also lost to a Mizzou team that went winless in the SEC. By almost every computer metric they came up short compared to the worst SEC team to make it. They weren't robbed of a spot. It's not about potential, it's about resume, and their's was lacking.

The ACC should be making noise from a PR standpoint, but no teams left out have a great argument for being in, and the success of Duke/Unc/Clemson/NCSU isn't a success for Pitt. The reality is conferences don't play the games even if the money is distributed through the entire conference.

 

[stinger78]

I'm not sure which is worse, trying to use a single elimination tournament to make a claim about the overall level of competition between conferences or trying to use results from 5+ years ago to make an argument about why teams this year should have been gotten in instead.

The next closest ACC team to being in was Pitt, and they played one of the worst non con schedules in the country, where their best win was the last place team in the big 12 followed closely by Purdue Fort Wayne. They also lost to a Mizzou team that went winless in the SEC. By almost every computer metric they came up short compared to the worst SEC team to make it. They weren't robbed of a spot. It's not about potential, it's about resume, and their's was lacking.

The ACC should be making noise from a PR standpoint, but no teams left out have a great argument for being in, and the success of Duke/Unc/Clemson/NCSU isn't a success for Pitt. The reality is conferences don't play the games even if the money is distributed through the entire conference.

Obviously, we disagree. I don't know what is worse, relying on useless metrics to determine quality (SOS) or denying on-court production in deference to those metrics.

To each his own.

 

[Root4GT]

I'm not sure which is worse, trying to use a single elimination tournament to make a claim about the overall level of competition between conferences or trying to use results from 5+ years ago to make an argument about why teams this year should have been gotten in instead.

The next closest ACC team to being in was Pitt, and they played one of the worst non con schedules in the country, where their best win was the last place team in the big 12 followed closely by Purdue Fort Wayne. They also lost to a Mizzou team that went winless in the SEC. By almost every computer metric they came up short compared to the worst SEC team to make it. They weren't robbed of a spot. It's not about potential, it's about resume, and their's was lacking.

The ACC should be making noise from a PR standpoint, but no teams left out have a great argument for being in, and the success of Duke/Unc/Clemson/NCSU isn't a success for Pitt. The reality is conferences don't play the games even if the money is distributed through the entire conference.

Well put. However the true SEC haters who think the Media controls the selection committees will never acknowledge that the ACC teams need to win more OOC games against quality opponents.

I am not a fan of the Quad system but it is the major, not the only metric, but the major one the committee used. There are unsupported rumors of the Big 12 "Gaming" the Quad system with their scheduling. It's easy to look over the Big 12 teams OOC schedules and see they look very similar to the ACC team's OOC schedules.

Teams simply can't lose Quad 4 games and Quad 3 losses hurt a lot. Once the OOC season is over and Conference teams have NET rankings there is little that can be done in conference play to get additional teams into the NCAAT except to do what NCST did.

The system is flawed. The 20 Conference Game schedule likely hurts the ACC teams as it takes out a couple of OOC games that could be important games and replaces them with, for the committee, fairly meaningless games.

 

[Peacone36]

Playing terrible teams definitely proves you’re a good team. Losing to terrible teams proves…

 

[leatherneckjacket]

Washington State, Nevada, Northwestern, South Carolina, and TCU all had weak out of conference schedules and all are arguably in worse conferences than Pitt. Pitt could have and should have received a bid over any of these teams.

 

[stinger78]

Playing terrible teams definitely proves you’re a good team. Losing to terrible teams proves…

What? My point was that playing and beating weaker teams proves nothing. Playing and losing to weaker teams means you suck. Therefore, playing and beating weaker teams should not penalize you when you also play and beat good-very good teams.

Pitt beat Duke, Wake (2x), NCSU (2x), and BC - all 20 game winners. Pitt was 22-11 overall but 12-8 in the ACC. They started slow but finished strong winning 12 of their last 16 games.

 

[Root4GT]

Washington State, Nevada, Northwestern, South Carolina, and TCU all had weak out of conference schedules and all are arguably in worse conferences than Pitt. Pitt could have and should have received a bid over any of these teams.

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!

 

[ESPNjacket]

What? My point was that playing and beating weaker teams proves nothing. Playing and losing to weaker teams means you suck. Therefore, playing and beating weaker teams should not penalize you when you also play and beat good-very good teams.

Pitt beat Duke, Wake (2x), NCSU (2x), and BC - all 20 game winners. Pitt was 22-11 overall but 12-8 in the ACC. They started slow but finished strong winning 12 of their last 16 games.

As I understand the metrics, number 181 is the middle of the pack of 362. To a team that is on the bubble, there is pretty much no difference between team 200 and 362. I don't think the models adjust for that.

 

[Root4GT]

What? My point was that playing and beating weaker teams proves nothing. Playing and losing to weaker teams means you suck. Therefore, playing and beating weaker teams should not penalize you when you also play and beat good-very good teams.

Pitt beat Duke, Wake (2x), NCSU (2x), and BC - all 20 game winners. Pitt was 22-11 overall but 12-8 in the ACC. They started slow but finished strong winning 12 of their last 16 games.

The system dictates this. You can argue until the cows come home but the Quad/Net system is what drives the selection metrics. Pitt's OOC schedule was pathetic at best. They played one P6 team of the 4 they played that didn't finish last in their conference. They lost to Missouri at home who was 0-18 in the SEC. All that is important in the QUAD/Net system.

I don't like the Net/Quad system at all as it makes conference play less meaningful because NET rankings are established prior to conference play. The ACC needs to go back to an 18 game conference schedule. 20 conference does not allow for enough opportunity to have a few meaningful OOC wins.

Also the Committee has said they cunt every game the same from game 1 to game 30+. I agree with you that is not a good policy but it is what is in place.

 

[Peacone36]

Goodness turn the heat down, oh my! Look at Wake Forest just torching Charleston Southern, NJIT, Delaware State and Elon. Don’t forget that big win over Presbyterian. To be fair Louisville was better than their 8 wins would suggest. This team is obviously better than Seton Hall or Providence.

Actually, I was wrong, the committee got it correct by taking Miss State and A&M over this garbage. The SEC deserved every bid it rcvd if this was one of the contenders.

 

[cpf2001]

Just how good would you want the replacements for Charleston Southern, NJIT, Delaware State and Elon on that schedule to be before you'd think it's tourament-worthy?

Is the real issue that those teams were super-terrible instead of merely most-terrible, or is it that they lost to Utah and Georgia instead of beating more teams at least that good?

 

[lauraee]

You'll get no arguments from me on the SEC. In my mind, there was no reason to put Miss. State or A&M in this field. The MW and the Big 12 gamed the system, yes. I don't have the time or desire to run all over Warren Nolan again but I don't disagree.

My only point was that the ACC was not more deserving than two teams from the Big East. Which has been my stance since the bracket was released.

Totally agree the Big East should have gotten 2 more teams in.

 

[Peacone36]

Just how good would you want the replacements for Charleston Southern, NJIT, Delaware State and Elon on that schedule to be before you'd think it's tourament-worthy?

Is the real issue that those teams were super-terrible instead of merely most-terrible, or is it that they lost to Utah and Georgia instead of beating more teams at least that good?

Better.

Yes.

 

[cpf2001]

Hm. IMO the weakness of the weak teams on a schedule shouldn't matter much at all, but you should have at least a few OOC wins in the top-100 unless you have a LOT of conference wins in the top 50ish...

 

[Peacone36]

Just how good would you want the replacements for Charleston Southern, NJIT, Delaware State and Elon on that schedule to be before you'd think it's tourament-worthy?

Is the real issue that those teams were super-terrible instead of merely most-terrible, or is it that they lost to Utah and Georgia instead of beating more teams at least that good?

Actually ya know what, basically, what I mean is, if you’re gonna BP&M about not making it and only schedule MOTR teams (generous) you better ****ing beat em. Because that other garbage doesn’t get it. You’d think winning 25 games a couple of years ago and not dancing while playing nobody wouldn’t have woken Forbes up.

 

[Peacone36]

Not to switch goal posts here, but do you think Indiana St. or New Mexico gets in? I just can't fathom that these two teams are considered "on the bubble" when their NET ratings are higher than Clemson. Of course, now that I say these things, Clemson will make a deep run in the tourney and make me look like a fool for even bringing this up.

This is where I deviate from logic and start potentially being incorrect. I’d have taken Indiana State for a couple of reasons. The story of Cream Abdul Jabar and they’re a 28 win team. Who’s going to play that team? After a 23 win campaign last season? Not many, certainly noones going there to play. Point is, they played their schedule and won 28 games. I’m taking that team over a garbage Wake Forest team simply for the story. I’m not taking a first four team that has no shot but I’ll take a shot on a team like the Sycamores that have the potential to be a really fun story. Of course, they could have just beaten Drake and this conversation never has to take place

 

[GT33]

The ACC is not underrepresented in this tournament. The ACC criminally underperformed during the regular season and was lucky to get five teams into the dance.

Yeah because the ONLY ACC that should be allowed to be invited are those that are GUARANTEED to make the Sweet 16

 

[Peacone36]

Yeah because the ONLY ACC that should be allowed to be invited are those that are GUARANTEED to make the Sweet 16

Oooooooook

 

[Peacone36]

Yeah because the ONLY ACC that should be allowed to be invited are those that are GUARANTEED to make the Sweet 16

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.