ACC Going Nuts today

Sean Singletary (UVA): 41 pts
Jack McClinton (Miami):34 pts
Tyrese Rice (Boston College) 34 pts at halftime!
Chas McFarland (WF): 28 pts.

Hansbrough is also on pace to drop 30 today.

jesus, 34 at half?


how many tres?

7 or 8. There are going to be two guys who drop 40 today and both will lose. Could be wrong but the last 3 guys in the NCAA to score 40 have lost. Rice, SS, and Harangody the other day had 40.

did the guy from houston who scored 52 win?

ACC is where real basketball is played....

Amen

acc will probably wind up with 6 teams in the tourney

i think it SHOULD be that way but the most i see them giving the ACC is 5...and that will be tough...4 is probably a better estimate

at this moment in time you could make an argument for UNC, Duke, Clemson, VT, Maryland and Wake all getting bids...i think the loser of Tuesdays Wake-VT game will have a huge hill to climb to get in

and i think VT still needs to beat both Wake and Clemson to get in

right now i see dook, unc, clemson, miami, maryland, with vt still having a chance

forgot about miami...and if it comes down to a VT v.s. Maryland thing I'm not sure how you can keep out the team who swept the series...unless of course VT drops their final 2 which is a possibility

wake still has a shot too...the tournament is gonna be very important this year

maryland has the advantage

more quality wins

im not sure how that is an advantage over head to head...the rpi of the two are pretty close

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vthokie22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">im not sure how that is an advantage over head to head...the rpi of the two are pretty close </div></div>
because if maryland winds up with the same record but more ACC wins......that should carry enough weight to get them in

actually neither team has much when it comes to quality wins...here's the resume

VT...rpi 64...0-5 v.s. top 50...4-3 v.s. 51-100...8-3 v.s. 101-200...5-0 v.s. 200+

Md...rpi 59...1-5 v.s. top 50...5-4 v.s. 51-100...9-2 v.s. 101-200...3-0 v.s. 200+

both are 6-4 in their last 10...pretty comparable to each other, except VT is 2-0 v.s. Maryland head-to-head...and if Md wins their last 2 and moves into the top 50, then that gives VT more quality wins than MD, also if VT beats Clemson then VT would move to 3-5 in the top 50...so does Maryland have to drop one to get in??

VT needs Maryland to keep winning and FSU to keep winning and win the last 2 or split and win a tournament game

maryland beat the #1 team in the country

that carries weight for them

VT beat Maryland...twice

that carries weight for them

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vthokie22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">VT beat Maryland...twice

that carries weight for them </div></div>
if everything else is close (overall, acc, rpi) they will look at SOS and quality wins

maryland has the advantage in both areas

dont forget maryland has one more win right now anyway

is they finish with more overall wins.......thats one more thing they have in their favor

if they win the last 2 they get to the all important 20 wins

they would have to beat a 20 win clemson team to get there

to me......that makes them the 5th acc team

i understand you are a hokie homer......but right now.....maryland has the better resume

i think the chokies have to win the last 2 plus at least one acc game to secure a spot

if not i think they may get shutout because there are other schools from big conferences with similar resumes who would get in on name alone

lets face it......VT isnt a basketball name......if it came down to them and say a villanova......nova gets in

this has 6 acc teams.......from 2/29
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bracketology

PAC 10 doesnt deserve 6 bids

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vthokie22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">PAC 10 doesnt deserve 6 bids </div></div>
asu gets in because they beat stanford and xavier

zona gets in because of a top 5 SOS

usc would get in because they beat so ill and ucla......if they close out by beating stanford they are a lock

wazzou, ucla, and standford are all ranked

they deserve to get 6 bids

ASU does not deserve a bid...they're 4-8 in their last 12

last place Virginia beat Arizona...@ Arizona

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vthokie22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">ASU does not deserve a bid...they're 4-8 in their last 12

last place Virginia beat Arizona...@ Arizona</div></div>

Every team has a bad loss, same could be said about VT losing to ODU and Richmond. The committee will take into consideration Arizona's record with and without Wise and/or Bayless. They've had their entire team together about 8-10 times the whole year and are likely a top 10-15 team with both of those guys in the lineup and dont tell me they dont look at that either. Look no further than Cincy when they lost Kenyon Martin even though they hadnt lost any games to get dropped.

Arizona probably gets blasted today but they are battle tested. I'd feel comfortable picking at least one #7 through #9 team in the pac-10 this year to make it to the sweet sixteen. To say they dont deserve six is funny, they probably deserve 8-9 based upon the quality of the conference.

Also it was you that said nonconference games dont mean anything earlier in the year so I guess that uva game doesnt mean anything. Those teams are completely different teams than they were then just like I'd hope for your sake that VT is completely different from when they played ODU and Richmond.

Its pretty easy to have 11 loses when you lose 2 of your 5 best players for half the year and have the #1 SOS in the nation. If theres ever such a thing as impressive losses, Arizona's season has defined it. They have lost 6 games on the last possession or in OT even without Bayles and Wise.

Arizona had 4 losses this season with both Wise and Bayless in the lineup and 3 of those were lost on the last possession. At Kansas, at Stanford, UVA at home, and blown out by UCLA at Pauley.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Arizona probably gets blasted today but they are battle tested. I'd feel comfortable picking at least one #7 through #9 team in the pac-10 this year to make it to the sweet sixteen. To say they dont deserve six is funny, they probably deserve 8-9 based upon the quality of the conference. </div></div>

Couldn't agree more. The Pac 10 is the best conference this year and it's not even close. There's none better from the best team to the 6th or 7th or 8th best team.

let me clarify...i wasn't saying that Arizona shouldn't or won't get in...just that they're not a lock yet...Arizona State was the one who i think shouldn't get in

If VT and Maryland end up with the same ACC record VT should get in. I do feel though that if VT played the same schedule Maryland did they wouldn't even be on the bubble though. VT got a huge break in ACC scheduling, and they got Penn St. in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge (which they lost to). If Maryland wins tonight they should be in, I don't see them not taking a 9-7 Terp team who beat UNC/Clemson and has the number of ACC road wins the Terps do. This game wont be easy though, Clemson always give Maryland fits.

UVA went to Arizona and won. I really wish people would get off the Pac-Ten hype. You don't see any Oregon St.'s running around in the ACC. I really wish they did a Pac-Ten/ACC Challenge every year, it would be more competitive than this Big Ten mess. You play it down:
UNC vs. UCLA
Duke vs. Stanford
Clemson vs. Washington St
Maryland vs. USC
VT vs. Arizona St.
Miami vs. Arizona
Wake vs. Washington
GT vs. Oregon
FSU vs. Cal
BC vs. Oregon St.

I think the ACC wins the bottom 4 easily with the top ones going either way. Every Pac-Ten basically gets two free wins from Oregon St. put Arizona in the ACC see if they roll over UVA/BC the same way they do Oregon St. It's not happening, it's sickening how the ACC is being perceived this year. I really think beyond UCLA/Stanford your going to have a hard time finding another one of those teams who could win 9 games in the ACC. Especially if they played 4 games against UNC/Duke.

Yeah the ACC does have an Oregon State, they are Virginia. If Jay John were still coaching and Oregon State hadnt quit, they would give Virginia a great game if not beat them, especially in Corvallis. So Virginia went to Arizona and won, thats one game and extremely early in the year. Like I said, you could say the ACC stinks because ODU and Richmond both beat Tech. The conference thing is silly anyway. You could have several different games that are mismatches. Duke for example would have a better shot at beating UCLA than they probably would against Stanford. Its a corny debate. Its one Superbeast would come up with every week. Every game has a set of circumstances. Arizona could not have played any worse against Virginia than they did and it still came down to the last possession. Even in their last elite 8 year which really could have put them in a national title game had they not had the meltdown against Illinois, Arizona still lost to Virginia. That game meant nothing. Year in year out, the Pac 10 almost always has a strong ncaa tournament. I could care less if people think they are better or worse than the ACC, but I do believe they are a good conference with almost all good teams.

USC lost to Mercer, but does it really matter? Probably about the same amount as Carolina losing to Santa Clara early in a given season as has happend before. Tired tired arguement.

98: Carolina in the final four, pac ten had nobody
99: Duke in the final four, pac ten had nobody
00: Carolina in the final four, pac ten had nobody
01: Duke and Maryland in the final four, pac ten had Arizona
02: Maryland in the final four, pac ten had nobody
03: neither conference had a final four team
04: Ga. Tech/Duke in the final four pac ten had nobody
05: UNC in the Final Four pac ten had nobody
06: UClA in the final four, acc had nobody
07: UCLA in the final four, acc had nobody

Yea man, the PAC Ten really compares to the ACC in the tournament. In the last ten years the ACC has 9 Final Four appearances to the PAC Ten's three. The ACC has 3 National Titles to zero for the Pac Ten. It's not even comparable.

Why just go by the final four though? Theres alot of great teams that dont make the final four. 1996 Kansas didnt make the elite 8 and they would blow any team in the nation away the last 2-3 years. When did I compare the two conferences in the tournament anyway? I just said, the pac 10 has represented well in the tournament. Did I say, hey look at all of those final fours? And when do years past mean anything if we are talking about this year. I know its the lpd forum way to always decide THE BEST but its lame, theres never a best and never will be, rarely do you ever get a best, UNLV was the best, oops, maybe not. Lets just say both conferences are good. You can play 6 games of poker, post in between and it still dont mean shat. I will say though that it does mean something when Billy Packer, Jay Bilas, and Hubert Davis all say that that Pac 10 is the best conference. It doesnt mean they are right nor does it mean they are wrong but it does at least show deserved respect.

I mean if you really want to throw out stats and stuff, here:

UCLA 11 > ACC 10

You can go ahead and lock the thread now Rock

ACC>PAC Ten. Without UCLA the PAC Ten is a joke, and you know that. We can come back here at the end of the season and re-examine this, I feel pretty confident in the fact that the ACC will win more games than the PAC Ten in this years NCAA Tournament even if the PAC Ten gets more teams in. You can listen to Billy Backer, Jay Bilas or whoever you want I'll look at history and the facts.

Again, I thought we were talking about this year? Youre saying the pac-ten is a joke this year? That makes no sense, not even stats can make that look like a valid claim.

And youre saying without ucla the pac ten is a joke, thats like saying unc or duke never existed. wtf is that? Damn, anyone can randomly come up with stuff like that. Well if John Crockett never existed, pv would have 5 national titles and a win over Oak Hill lmao, absurd.

Did I ever say that Billy Packer, Bilas, or Davis were right? Again, nooooope. But they are guys that actually do have alot more credibility than say, you and they are guys that are HUGE ACC supporters. I never said your opinion was wrong either, but youre not even on the same page with this one. You must have skipped half of what I posted.

The facts as you call them are that youre arguing with yourself in this thread. I didnt say anything about the pac ten being better than the acc so Im not even sure why you keep making it a point to say otherwise. I didnt compare the two conferences, why do you keep doing it?

the problem ppl run into with rating conferences is thinking that if someone says "Conf A is better than Conf B" then a fan of Conf B seems to think they mean their conference sucks

I don't think the PAC 10 sucks at all...at the very worst they're one of the top 3 in the nation...but at the same time I don't think they should get 60% of their conference in the tourney

UK 7 Natl titles..

look for #8 in 2055

I think pvfan missed the boat on that one. Thats exactly what Im saying. I never said anything about the ACC. They are a seperate entity and its impossible to evaluate one conference against another without sufficient data to support any claim. With 64 teams though, we get a nice variety of teams and some pretty watered down teams that dont deserve to make it. 65 teams is enough to determine a champion though.

Which goes back to another point that I keep saying, there isnt any best team. You could play the ncaa tournament 10 times and it come out 10 different ways with 10 different winners. If you watch basketball and play basketball enough, you know that(especially the college level) its a game of inches. Thats why the ncaa tournament becomes so crazy. Most teams are evenly matched and thats when you throw the retarded conference debate out the window. Any team that makes the ncaa tournament is a dangeous team and a pretty good team. Simple as that. Conference affiliation means very little.

You keep moving back and forth between the past and the present. Who really knows what the hell you are even talking about? I don't think the PAC Ten is terrible, I do think the ACC is better and I think the numbers past, today, and the future will support that.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Why just go by the final four though? Theres alot of great teams that dont make the final four. 1996 Kansas didnt make the elite 8 and they would blow any team in the nation away the last 2-3 years. When did I compare the two conferences in the tournament anyway? I just said, the pac 10 has represented well in the tournament. Did I say, hey look at all of those final fours? <span style="color: #FF6666">And when do years past mean anything if we are talking about this year.</div></div></span>


Isn't this a little hypocritical......when we're talking about VT being good in football, the argument about no national championships vs Miami's many national championships comes up.

I don't like to live in the past though...if a team is good at the present, then a person has a reason to brag.

By the way, I like both VT and Miami....Miami had the best team in the history of college football a few years ago but VT has the upper hand right now (this will probably change in a couple of years with Miami having the upper hand again and probably winning a few more national titles).

Liking both teams, I'll root for the ACC conference...it's just a pride thing.

I'm just happy VT is in the position they are in...i thought coming into the season we would have 13-15 wins and finish around 7th in the conference

VT was picked last in the conference at the beginning of the year and if they win out will finish third and go to back-to-back NCAA tournaments which is pretty unheard of for VT basketball, and it looks to only get better barring attrition

and mega is right, winning the title in bball requires talent, experience and a WHOLE lotta luck...especially this year when there's about 15 different teams who could win it all depending on matchups

Maryland doesn't deserve to go to the NCAA Tournament.

that's a heartbreaker...i almost turned it off when Maryland went up 59-39