ESPN: ACC to meet about changing men's hoops narrative

[CuseJacket]

Commish: ACC will meet to alter hoops narrative

After the ACC got just five bids to the men's tournament, commissioner Jim Phillips said he will met with his league's coaches and ADs to be more "proactive" about changing the narrative of the conference.

www.espn.com

ACC commissioner Jim Phillips told ESPN Saturday he will meet with his league's men's basketball coaches and athletic directors as soon as the season ends to discuss ways to be more "proactive" and "aggressive" in changing the narrative surrounding the conference.

The ACC only got five bids this season to the NCAA men's tournament, a big disappointment to both Phillips and those inside his league. He remains steadfast in his belief that Clemson and North Carolina should have made the tournament.

"We have to portray ourselves in a different way and maybe it's our scheduling, maybe it's our providing information back to the committee, but we're going to be aggressive in how we look at it -- but we're also going to be proactive," Phillips said. "We feel the narrative hasn't been quite right the last two years. We're going to try to do something about that in the offseason.

 

[CuseJacket]

For what it's worth, this is a point that Boeheim made in one postgame press conference.

He said you can watch the B1G network, or SEC network, and their show hosts/color commentators are unapologetically pumping up their leagues, saying 10 or 12+ teams from those conferences should make the NCAAT every year. They do this regardless of on-court results. Meanwhile, we got Boozer, Hancock, etc. on the ACCN making the case, or minimally allowing the popular media narratives to persist, that fewer ACC teams should be in the NCAAT.

Say what you want about the quality of ACC ball of late, pro or con, but the media does have influence. Boeheim made this point to Phillips during this season despite 'Cuse not even being in the mix.

I'm interested to see what other specifics Phillips has in mind.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

The SEC was writing their own narrative for years long before the narrative was supported by facts. They did this in both football and basketball. They even got credit for “good losses.” Do this consistently over time and it pays off. The operative word is “pays.”

 

[dtm1997]

I forget if it was Gavitt or Tranghese, but a bunch of years ago, they consulted for the SEC and told them to dump money into hoops.

How many once laughable programs have motored on past ACC schools? Auburn. Bama. Tennessee was good under Pearl and then fell off a cliff before getting resurrected by Barnes. Even the less successful ones are heavily invested.

 

[ESPNjacket]

I forget if it was Gavitt or Tranghese, but a bunch of years ago, they consulted for the SEC and told them to dump money into hoops.

How many once laughable programs have motored on past ACC schools? Auburn. Bama. Tennessee was good under Pearl and then fell off a cliff before getting resurrected by Barnes. Even the less successful ones are heavily invested.

While this is correct, don't underplay the value of marketing. The SEC gets it. They have since the '90s. Heck, Big 12 fans just make up positive things about their league that are based in nothing. The Pac fans are more negative than the ACC fans.

There are A LOT of very casual college football and basketball fans that watch most of their team's games but really don't have any idea about the sport. These people hear how "the SEC has passed the ACC in basketball" enough times and they start to repeat it. I've said this before in other threads but it bears repeating. ACC fans have to understand that the more they bang the drum that the league is bad, the more you contribute to the narrative. It is part of the problem.

 

[Root4GT]

The 20 game conference schedule does no favors to ACC teams. The ACC has had several very bad teams at the bottom of the conference the past few years. Playing several games against such teams really hurts the upper tier ACC teams. Miami was a 5 seed. Their losses to GT and FSU likely kept them from being a 3 or 4 seed. With NET you get screwed with Quad 3 & 4 losses. I see no real advantage to playing 20 conference games. Conference standings mean little in NCAAT selection / seeding. Try and play some Late January games against other P6 conferences. If the conference is really good than the good teams should show that they are.

 

[kg01]

They can sit in the conference room say words if they want. The reality is all they need to do is show them how much money they can make for the network per team put into the tourney. The network will make the right direction and adjustments on their own.

 

[OlaJacket]

The 20 game conference schedule does no favors to ACC teams. The ACC has had several very bad teams at the bottom of the conference the past few years. Playing several games against such teams really hurts the upper tier ACC teams. Miami was a 5 seed. Their losses to GT and FSU likely kept them from being a 3 or 4 seed. With NET you get screwed with Quad 3 & 4 losses. I see no real advantage to playing 20 conference games. Conference standings mean little in NCAAT selection / seeding. Try and play some Late January games against other P6 conferences. If the conference is really good than the good teams should show that they are.

You are exactly right, the 20 game conference schedule has hurt the conference. Also, when the Big Ten would win the ACC-B1G Challenge, they would claim to be the best conference in the country and would be rewarded accordingly. The ACC won it this year and they get eight and we get five. I think they have gotten 17-18 teams in the tourney the last two years and how many have made the Elite 8? I think ZERO! SEC is the same way. The woofing by both of those conferences is not supported by results. Typical media fake news. The ACC has been down the last few years but not as much as the committee and Lunardi think. Lunardi is a whole 'nother story. I really think his "bracketology" has been bad for college basketball. I don't necessarily think history should guide team choice but conference performance in the tournament should count for something.

 

[cpf2001]

While this is correct, don't underplay the value of marketing. The SEC gets it. They have since the '90s. Heck, Big 12 fans just make up positive things about their league that are based in nothing. The Pac fans are more negative than the ACC fans.

There are A LOT of very casual college football and basketball fans that watch most of their team's games but really don't have any idea about the sport. These people hear how "the SEC has passed the ACC in basketball" enough times and they start to repeat it. I've said this before in other threads but it bears repeating. ACC fans have to understand that the more they bang the drum that the league is bad, the more you contribute to the narrative. It is part of the problem.

Yeah, SEC fans were pounding that message about SEC football dominance in 2003 for the LSU vs USC title debate, even while the media was on the fence and USC got the AP votes. At the time, the last champs were Ohio State, Miami, Oklahoma, FSU, and Tenn. I have no doubt that the incessent marketing and belief, as more people were convinced by the repetition, helped the dominance on the field follow.

20 years later and, if we didn't have a playoff, imagine a non-SEC team getting the AP title over an SEC team that won the BCS championship game in today's media landscape.

 

[iceeater1969]

While this is correct, don't underplay the value of marketing. The SEC gets it. They have since the '90s. Heck, Big 12 fans just make up positive things about their league that are based in nothing. The Pac fans are more negative than the ACC fans.

There are A LOT of very casual college football and basketball fans that watch most of their team's games but really don't have any idea about the sport. These people hear how "the SEC has passed the ACC in basketball" enough times and they start to repeat it. I've said this before in other threads but it bears repeating. ACC fans have to understand that the more they bang the drum that the league is bad, the more you contribute to the narrative. It is part of the problem.

On no! TFG could have been doing one thing correctly.

 

[iceeater1969]

I forget if it was Gavitt or Tranghese, but a bunch of years ago, they consulted for the SEC and told them to dump money into hoops.

How many once laughable programs have motored on past ACC schools? Auburn. Bama. Tennessee was good under Pearl and then fell off a cliff before getting resurrected by Barnes. Even the less successful ones are heavily invested.

But the 200,000,000$ view of Downtown ATL from the North stands is so beautiful at night.

 

[seedjckt]

You are exactly right, the 20 game conference schedule has hurt the conference. Also, when the Big Ten would win the ACC-B1G Challenge, they would claim to be the best conference in the country and would be rewarded accordingly. The ACC won it this year and they get eight and we get five. I think they have gotten 17-18 teams in the tourney the last two years and how many have made the Elite 8? I think ZERO! SEC is the same way. The woofing by both of those conferences is not supported by results. Typical media fake news. The ACC has been down the last few years but not as much as the committee and Lunardi think. Lunardi is a whole 'nother story. I really think his "bracketology" has been bad for college basketball. I don't necessarily think history should guide team choice but conference performance in the tournament should count for something.

ACC needs to call all games like the NCAA tournament refs. Duke has talent and would not go down much in the rankings. But they would be ready for ref calls in the big dance! It seems the ACC refs have the tightest called games. The other conference champs don’t seem to fall apart bec lack of calls

 

[orientalnc]

20 conference games is not our disadvantage. We need to win the OOC games against top teams.

 

[TooTall]

Gee if only the conference had some sort of deal that would give the schools money equal to what other conferences do and sell our soul to win. You can't fly a rocket to the moon when you're on a pedal car budget.

 

[bke1984]

Winning some tournament games with the five teams you got in would actually help the argument too though…two lose in first round, two lose in second. Miami might make the final four, but they were the regular season ACC champs and really shouldn’t have been seeded down at 5 - they’re good (not sure how we beat them). Virginia can’t go losing to Furman like that. Other than that the teams all lost to higher seeds. Seems like they got it right.

 

[g0lftime]

ACC needs to call all games like the NCAA tournament refs. Duke has talent and would not go down much in the rankings. But they would be ready for ref calls in the big dance! It seems the ACC refs have the tightest called games. The other conference champs don’t seem to fall apart bec lack of calls

How about refs calling basic stuff like walking (players change their pivot foot) and palming the ball which is rampant with point guards now.

 

[CEB]

ACC needs to call all games like the NCAA tournament refs. Duke has talent and would not go down much in the rankings. But they would be ready for ref calls in the big dance! It seems the ACC refs have the tightest called games. The other conference champs don’t seem to fall apart bec lack of calls

Like Purdue, or Arizona, or Marquette? Throw in Kansas... regular season winner.

It’s a tournament... favorites lose. Yes, the games are not called as tightly but I also think several of the top seeds had holes and they all ran up against pretty experienced groups. I think the extra covid year and transfers hanging around had a pretty profound effect this year. Might next year too.
For what it’s worth, I am not sure that tournament performance is a great indicator either. Teams change too much year to year. I think the UVA loss to UMBC was unnecessarily damaging... but they didn’t get nearly the bump for winning it all. ACC perception was trending down anyway perhaps? Will be interesting to see how this affects the Big Ten next year (if at all). Think they get fewer bids? Purdue won the regular season and the conference tournament in pretty dominant fashion and owns arguably the worst tourney loss in history for it... That should be a big mark on the conference, right? I don’t expect it will be.
I’m not sure why the ACC is getting a raw deal, but I am starting to lean toward the messaging / marketing campaigns also. The money and the 24/7 advertising the SEC and BIG are getting is becoming pretty hard to overcome.

 

[g0lftime]

I worked with a guy that was a very good ref for HS in Raleigh area. He also did some ACC women games. He said in order to ref in the ACC back then (in the 80's), he would have to pay to go to sessions run by the ACC basketball commissioner. If you didn't do that, no chance. He also said the commissioner decided points of emphasis. Some were NCAA but some were ACC. Dean Smith was known to have a lot of influence on what those were. Over the back, block/charge, principle of verticality. Dean was a stickler for detail. Heard he critiqued every game for fouls not properly called (according to Dean) and sent the video to the commissioner.

 

[seedjckt]

I worked with a guy that was a very good ref for HS in Raleigh area. He also did some ACC women games. He said in order to ref in the ACC back then (in the 80's), he would have to pay to go to sessions run by the ACC basketball commissioner. If you didn't do that, no chance. He also said the commissioner decided points of emphasis. Some were NCAA but some were ACC. Dean Smith was known to have a lot of influence on what those were. Over the back, block/charge, principle of verticality. Dean was a stickler for detail. Heard he critiqued every game for fouls not properly called (according to Dean) and sent the video to the commissioner.

Not surprisin, but Dean and Coach K are no longer coaching.
ACC teams are not getting the same opportunities when beating Duke or UNC these days.
Clemson beat Duke this year and was 14-6 in ACC games

 

[CEB]

Just for grins... and I did this quickly. Based on SEEDING (not actual favorites / betting lines)

SEC = 9-8 overall. They were 7-4 as the favored seed and 2-3 as the lower seed. They are 0-1 in “neutral” games; MSU lost the 11 seed play in to Pitt.

BIG = 6-8 overall. They were 4-3 as a favorite and 2-5 as underdog.

ACC = 6-4 overall (Miami still playing).
ACC is 2-1 as a favorite, 3-3 as a dog and 1-0 neutral.
Miami results pending but they’re obviously an underdog the rest of the way.

I don’t know that this means but as you would expect, most conferences hold serve as a favorite and have a losing record as a dog. The ACC stacks up favorably right now, although it will tighten some with a Miami loss. But I don’t think it’s a pronounced difference and I don’t think it will move the needle next year.