The New ACC Basketball Schedule Format Is Kinda Awkward For Everyone Not Named BC Or Syracuse
by Brian Favat on Feb 3, 2012 1:18 PM EST
in Boston College Basketball
Email
PrintIn addition today's announcement of the future ACC football schedule and new football divisions, the conference also released details around the new men's and women's basketball schedule format.
The conference will play an 18-game schedule starting in 2012-13 (previously announced). When Pitt and Syracuse join the fold ... whenever ... each school will have just one primary partner -- Boston College and Syracuse; Clemson and Georgia Tech; Duke and North Carolina; Florida State and Miami; Maryland and Pitt; N.C. State and Wake Forest; Virginia and Virginia Tech.
That means BC will get a home-and-home with Syracuse annually, which is a good thing. Probably the best situation possible for the Eagles. This also means BC avoids playing both Virginia Tech and Miami twice a season. Another win, as those primary partners always seemed a little forced in a "football rivals aren't the same as hoops rivals" sort of way. For the ACC's other 12 programs, BC will see the likes of Duke, North Carolina and Pitt four times in three years.
While BC-Syracuse become locked at the hip in hoops (as they should be), not everyone is all that pleased with the new scheduling format.
Since the conference is scaling back the number of primary partners from two to one (the Coach K scheduling model), a few ACC programs are none too pleased.
Maryland is the biggest loser in all of this, as the Terps replace 12 games with Duke and Virginia over a three-year span for six with new primary partner Pitt and eight with Duke and Virginia. I'm sure N.C. State fans can't be thrilled either that they lose a home-and-home each season with UNC and keep two with just Wake Forest.
Every other program besides BC and Maryland loses just one primary partner. Clemson-Florida State, Duke-Maryland, Georgia Tech-Wake Forest, Miami-Boston College, N.C. State-North Carolina, Virginia-Maryland and BC-Virginia Tech will now be played just four times over a three-year span instead of six times as they do today.
With only one primary partner, you're probably never going to make N.C. State or Maryland fans totally happy. But this awkwardness could have at least been partially avoided if the league instead paired Maryland with Virginia and Virginia Tech with Pittsburgh.
Football rivalries do not always equal hoops rivalries, and while Maryland and Pittsburgh share a state border, an annual basketball rivalry seems way too forced. Much like BC-Virginia Tech and BC-Miami always seemed forced, as the three schools share little in common other than a shared history on the gridiron, not the hardwood.
In other awkwardness, the conference announced that all 14 league members will compete in the Men's and Women's Basketball Tournaments. While I'm all for giving out trophies and trips to Greensboro to everyone, why not keep the tournament at 12 teams?
I've always felt the Big East made a major misstep (one of many) when they started inviting everyone and their little brother to MSG for the Big East Tournament. Should you really reward a team for going winless in conference play with a trip to the conference's tournament (oh, hai DePaul)?
Keeping the tournament at 12 teams creates compelling matchups at both the top of the conference standings as teams vie for the top four spots and a first-round bye AND at the bottom of the standings, fighting for a spot in the postseason tournament. Forgive the college hockey analogy, but this is precisely how the Hockey East tournament is set up. Teams simultaneously fight to earn home ice in the Hockey East quarterfinals and to make the field at all, with the bottom two teams in the league standings forced to sit it out.
Besides, why change the ACC Tournament format in the first place? It's still one of the best college basketball tournaments in the country. Leave it alone.
If you thought that you'd never hear the end of ACC hoops purists whining about ACC expansion to BC, Virginia Tech and Miami (and the death of the round-robin), just wait until the ACC stages its first 14-team ACC men's basketball tournament. The web servers at the Raleigh News & Observer might overload.
16 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
My vote
Two play-in games on the Tuesday before the tournament.
11 vs. 14
12 vs. 13
Games played at the higher seed’s home court.
Winners earn spots in the existing 12-team format ACC Tournament.
Editor, BC Interruption
This gives every program a shot at the title. It also helps the 5 and 6 seeds Tournament chances since they’d likely be getting a slightly better first-round opponent (which doesn’t have as great a negative impact on RPI, SOS).
Editor, BC Interruption
Like this idea better. So the tournament would technically have to start on Wednesday.
Don’t understand the 5/6 logic though…Wouldn’t they be playing a poor team regardless?
5 would still likely play 12, and 6 vs. 11 … but teams like 10-11 Wake Forest would likely be eliminated before the tournament on-site.
Take last year for example. In the end, BC’s NCAA Tournament resume was hurt by having to play Wake Forest in back-to-back games at the end of the season in the 5 vs. 12 matchup. Shoulda beat Harvard and Yale, sure, but if BC had knocked off a better first-round opponent (and hadn’t played a Wake team with an RPI 200+), our resume would have been slightly improved and gotten us in the Dance.
Editor, BC Interruption
Example
For sake of argument, add Pitt and Syracuse into last year’s ACC Tournament field. Pittsburgh was 15-3 last year, Syracuse 12-6. Let’s say that was good enough to give Pitt the #2 seed (UNC was 14-2) and Syracuse the #4 seed (Duke was 13-3).
The rest goes (5) Florida State, (6) Virginia Tech, (7) Boston College, (8) Clemson, (9) Maryland, (10) Virginia, (11) Miami, (12) N.C. State, (13) Georgia Tech and (14) Wake Forest.
If seeds hold, (11) Miami beats (14) Wake Forest in the play-in round and (12) N.C. State beats (13) Georgia Tech.
You are left with a first round of:
(5) Florida State vs. (12) N.C. State
(6) Virginia Tech vs. (11) Miami
(7) Boston College vs. (10) Virginia
(8) Clemson vs. (9) Maryland
Those are better matchups for teams 5-8 when it comes to strengthening RPI and SOS than having to play that year’s ACC bottom feeder.
Contrast this with the 2-bye set-up. First round matchups would then be:
(3) Duke vs. (14) Wake Forest
(4) Syracuse vs. (13) Georgia Tech
(5) Florida State vs. (12) N.C. State
(6) Virginia Tech vs. (11) Miami
(7) Boston College vs. (10) Virginia
(8) Clemson vs. (9) Maryland
Now in a normal year, granted the 3 and 4 seed shouldn’t care about taking a hit to RPI/SOS by playing a bottom feeder in the first round, but if those teams pull off the upset, then you have a team that will drain everyone else’s tournament numbers in the quarterfinals and beyond.
Pitting 11 vs. 14 and 12 vs. 13 eliminates two of the weakest ACC teams before the first-round, which benefits all the other teams in the tournament so there’s no RPI drain situations like BC had facing an RPI 200+ team back-to-back so late in the year.
Editor, BC Interruption
Makes sense. I wholeheartedly agree that I like the 11/14 12/13 play-in model more for the primary reason you listed…get rid of the RPI killers.
I’m against double byes but I don’t think this isn’t like the BE double-bye.
so you think it is like the BE double bye, then?
well, you’re correct, it is.
It’s exactly the same as the BE double bye set up, except run with 14 teams instead of sixteen.
I’d prefer a standard tournament with #1 and #2 getting a first-round bye (and #3 and #4 getting a day off if they win).
Day 1 is 3/14 and 4/13
Day 2 is 5/12, 6/11, 7/10, 8/9
then continue as an 8-team tournament.
Just realized my double-negative. Whoops.
I’d prefer Brian’s model. Let the bottom 4 battle it our for the right to participate in the traditional 12-team model.
I like the model with the play-in round also, but
then you force a team like 11th seeded Miami, to have to play 5 games in 5 days like the BE has their teams do now. This makes the bad teams worse then they already are and wears the team down even more after a long season.
However, I do like that 10 teams get byes for one round, and 4 get byes for two. I feel like these teams have earned their spot.
I do feel that all teams should be sent to NYC or Charlotte (or wherever the tourney moves to) and no games should be on-campus.
I also think that most
years the 4 double byes would go to the ’Cuse, UNC, Duke, and most likely PITT or FSU
that would be logical
But if they take lessons from how the Big East set up a 16-team tournament, maybe not…
The problem is you can’t play more than four games a day in one building (at least, not if you want anyone to watch them on TV), so a 13 to 16 team tournament either spreads the opening round over multiple days, spreads the opening round over multiple sites, or ends up with oddball double bye nonsense.
All BC Needs in Next Year's 2012-2013 Season
One of 68 NCAA Bids!
Then let Clifford The Big Maroon Dog eat 6 or 7 wins!
LOL!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on BC Interruption
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
