Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 35 of 35

Thread: State of the ACC

  1. #21
    The ACC is not as deep as usual, it hasn't been since expansion. The last top year was 2005 but it's not a bad conference. I think the Pac 10 and Big 12 are far and away the 2 best and the ACC is in there w/ the BE next in line. The BE will always have more Tourney teams b/c they have more overall teams but the BE also has more bad teams and more easy wins.

    The ACC would be ranked lower except the Big 10 and SEC are also down.

  2. #22
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    home of the hot guy in my avatar.. oh baby!
    Posts
    4,455
    If it werent for duke and carolina the ACC would be like a small conference.. like the mac or something. those two programs carry the ACC.

    GO BLUE DEVILS!!!!!

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by BigBensAngel7 View Post
    If it werent for duke and carolina the ACC would be like a small conference.. like the mac or something. those two programs carry the ACC.

    GO BLUE DEVILS!!!!!
    This is just silly. Maybe this year, but there are a lot of legit basketball schools in this conference that are just having bad years. Clemson is solid, Maryland is pretty good (they were a lot better with 6:00 left in sundays game), and Virginia Tech is coming strong.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by nyjunc View Post
    The ACC is not as deep as usual, it hasn't been since expansion. The last top year was 2005 but it's not a bad conference. I think the Pac 10 and Big 12 are far and away the 2 best and the ACC is in there w/ the BE next in line. The BE will always have more Tourney teams b/c they have more overall teams but the BE also has more bad teams and more easy wins.

    The ACC would be ranked lower except the Big 10 and SEC are also down.
    I really don't buy the Big 12. Kansas & Texas are both contenders, but Oklahoma, A&M, Kansas State, Texas Tech are just way too inconsistent. And when they are bad they are really bad. I can't buy Baylor either just because they are Baylor, but I am rooting for them. Nebraska has had some decent wins lately though.

    I do agree about the Pac 10 being so deep and the best conference, but I don't think those teams are built to go deep in the tourney other then UCLA. Stanford IMO relies to much on the Lopez's and Washington State can struggle to score at times.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by BigBensAngel7 View Post
    If it werent for duke and carolina the ACC would be like a small conference.. like the mac or something. those two programs carry the ACC.

    GO BLUE DEVILS!!!!!
    i am sorry but you are wrong on this one. The ACC is having a down year I agree but even still they are 8-7 against the mighty big east.


    lets not get carried away.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by sjjetfan View Post
    I really don't buy the Big 12. Kansas & Texas are both contenders, but Oklahoma, A&M, Kansas State, Texas Tech are just way too inconsistent. And when they are bad they are really bad. I can't buy Baylor either just because they are Baylor, but I am rooting for them. Nebraska has had some decent wins lately though.

    I do agree about the Pac 10 being so deep and the best conference, but I don't think those teams are built to go deep in the tourney other then UCLA. Stanford IMO relies to much on the Lopez's and Washington State can struggle to score at times.
    The Pac-10 is loaded this year and the Big 10 is in shambles.

    I look at the big 12 in two ways: I see it as a very difficult conference to play in because the road games/opposing gyms tend to be very difficult places to play but come tourney time I don't think the teams are good enough to string together 4 wins to get to the final four (with the exception of Kansas and Texas)

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetfan_Johnny View Post
    i am sorry but you are wrong on this one. The ACC is having a down year I agree but even still they are 8-7 against the mighty big east.


    lets not get carried away.
    8-7? The ACC is 12-7 against the BE.

    Quote Originally Posted by sjjetfan View Post
    I really don't buy the Big 12. Kansas & Texas are both contenders, but Oklahoma, A&M, Kansas State, Texas Tech are just way too inconsistent. And when they are bad they are really bad. I can't buy Baylor either just because they are Baylor, but I am rooting for them. Nebraska has had some decent wins lately though.

    I do agree about the Pac 10 being so deep and the best conference, but I don't think those teams are built to go deep in the tourney other then UCLA. Stanford IMO relies to much on the Lopez's and Washington State can struggle to score at times.
    The Big 12 is very good and it is better than the BE. Everyone dismisses non-conf play and focuses on the good records of these BE teams in conf but they struggled mightily as a conf in non-conf play. The Big 12 on the other hand had alot of big wins.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by nyjunc View Post
    8-7? The ACC is 12-7 against the BE.



    The Big 12 is very good and it is better than the BE. Everyone dismisses non-conf play and focuses on the good records of these BE teams in conf but they struggled mightily as a conf in non-conf play. The Big 12 on the other hand had alot of big wins.
    Hey it was early when i was counting wins I was sure I overlooked something.

    The Big East is a hard conference to judge because it is way too big. The non balanced schedules give you no apples to apples comparison at all. With the exception of GTown and Louisville I haven't been impressed with the BE. Oh and the UCONN win in Indiana was a very nice out of conference win.

    But I think Texas and Kansas have as good of a chance as any to win the whole tourney.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by nyjunc View Post


    The Big 12 is very good and it is better than the BE. Everyone dismisses non-conf play and focuses on the good records of these BE teams in conf but they struggled mightily as a conf in non-conf play. The Big 12 on the other hand had alot of big wins.
    I think the Big East has some solid teams, but if you have 16 friggin teams you are going to. Because they are 16 deep I have a hard time comparing them to the other conferences. I like the tourney teams the Big East will send with the exception of Pitt (Georgetown, Louisville, UCONN, Marquette, Notre Dame, & West Virginia) but the bubble teams are weaker then ever and the bottom is a wreck. If Pitt didn't beat Duke I don't think they would get in and Syracuse and Villanova are blah.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by sjjetfan View Post
    I think the Big East has some solid teams, but if you have 16 friggin teams you are going to. Because they are 16 deep I have a hard time comparing them to the other conferences. I like the tourney teams the Big East will send with the exception of Pitt (Georgetown, Louisville, UCONN, Marquette, Notre Dame, & West Virginia) but the bubble teams are weaker then ever and the bottom is a wreck. If Pitt didn't beat Duke I don't think they would get in and Syracuse and Villanova are blah.
    The big east expansion went way to far. I don't think it is good for the league , college basketball on a whole of any of the teams outside of the top 4-5 programs. I think it is just bad all around. Maybe they should look at doing an east / west like the SEC does.

  11. #31
    DUKEEEEEEEEE will take over #1 tonight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  12. #32
    Put on ESPN right now... 21 secs left tied up Va Tech vs UNC

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by SUJets1988 View Post
    Put on ESPN right now... 21 secs left tied up Va Tech vs UNC
    Duke lost. It doesent mean anything bad for them right? I know the winners of the conference are autmatically in, but Duke will make it I think. So this loss really doesent do anyhting right?

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by JetFan54 View Post
    Duke lost. It doesent mean anything bad for them right? I know the winners of the conference are autmatically in, but Duke will make it I think. So this loss really doesent do anyhting right?
    This loss may push duke down to a three seed. That is a big deal because while #1 and #2 seeds rarely lose (right Cuse fans lol) the three seeds are only .500 over the past few years.

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetfan_Johnny View Post
    This loss may push duke down to a three seed. That is a big deal because while #1 and #2 seeds rarely lose (right Cuse fans lol) the three seeds are only .500 over the past few years.
    Oh ok thanks.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us