redwing42
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 8,023
- Reaction score
- 987
Or you could say a Duke loss opens up the possibility of Wake getting to the #2 spot.So it's better for us if Duke wins..
Or you could say a Duke loss opens up the possibility of Wake getting to the #2 spot.So it's better for us if Duke wins..
This has nothing to do with the quad system and everything to do with the conference shitting the bed in the OOC schedule. If the ACC was out there kicking ass and taking names in the pre-conference games like they used to, we would still be getting 8-9 bids.Down goes #7 duke @ home to now 2-5 ACC pitt!
Back in the day, this would be a sign of a great, competitive, deep conference. GO FIGURE.... and it seems to still be the case w/ sec and big20 football, so why not ACC hoops?!
Now? Not so much unfortunately w/ all the nebulous quad and NET BS that Forbes dislikes so much.
What we had in the past was soooo much better! (And usually 8-9 ACC NCAAT bids as a result which is how it should be given the ACC's deep NCAAT runs vs the big20 yearly flame outs).
Wow rly? i looked they’ve played one (!!) game against the top-11 teams in the standings.duke's conf sch so far pitt x2 gt x2 nd cuse. 4-2
Sent from my SM-S711U using Tapatalk
I’ll bite. This allows zero room for growth. A lot of the teams in major conferences have an entirely new team every year bc of the portal. It’s natural that they’re going to get better as the season goes along and they gel. These teams end up losing to shitty but well formed and sometimes coached teams before they have their act together. Then they get to ACC season and they’ve figured it out. It’s bullshit.This has nothing to do with the quad system and everything to do with the conference shitting the bed in the OOC schedule. If the ACC was out there kicking ass and taking names in the pre-conference games like they used to, we would still be getting 8-9 bids.
I’ve stopped looking at it myself, but it’s hard to even read about college basketball without being given the NET implications.y’all need to ban yourselves from looking at the NET until March 1
I’m curious what the head-to-head records were. I’m sure they weren’t terrible. For instance, the SEC/ACC challenge was 7-7 and there’s a chance the SEC gets 9 bids and the ACC gets 2.People here would crap their pants if the ACC slaughtered the B1G in non-conference play and then the committee gave the B1G more bids with the rationale of, "Based on the eye test, we really thought those B1G teams got to conference play and figured it out and improved a lot more than the ACC teams did."
I NEED more stuff like this in college basketball
Duke fans whining about how “classless” it was, as if Duke students have been the epitome of class.
I think there are reasons for this. It is the massive driver determining at-large bids for the NCAA Tournament. Used to be a bunch of guys did that after the season. NET is updated in near real time. So all the data from games across the country is rapidly compiled and the impacts on all teams are known quickly.I’ve stopped looking at it myself, but it’s hard to even read about college basketball without being given the NET implications.
duke actually picks up a Q1 win from their game at Pitt a week ago since they lost to Pitt last night. NET sure is swell!!Down goes #7 duke @ home to now 2-5 ACC pitt!
Back in the day, this would be a sign of a great, competitive, deep conference. GO FIGURE.... and it seems to still be the case w/ sec and big20 football, so why not ACC hoops?!
Now? Not so much unfortunately w/ all the nebulous quad and NET BS that Forbes dislikes so much.
What we had in the past was soooo much better! (And usually 8-9 ACC NCAAT bids as a result which is how it should be given the ACC's deep NCAAT runs vs the big20 yearly flame outs).
So a Q2 loss at home and Q1 road win against the same team. Gotta love it.duke actually picks up a Q1 win from their game at Pitt a week ago since they lost to Pitt last night. NET sure is swell!!