ACC:... “The 4 teams they have added since 2013 are hurting more than helping.” | The Boneyard

ACC:... “The 4 teams they have added since 2013 are hurting more than helping.”

.-.
I keep seeing this screenshot in the replies anytime someone discusses the ACC, and I want someone to tell me I'm crazy but I'm pretty sure it's BS. I quadruple checked and I'm 99.9% sure it's a lie and/or factually incorrect...

ACC_Screenshot.jpeg


When I first saw it I was skeptical, tried searching for the original article and couldn't find anything, which made me even more suspicious.

The time frame being discussed is the NCAA Tournaments from 2019-2023 (skipping 2020 Covid year, no Tourny)
The ACC is supposed to have 47 Wins and a .681 Win % (computes to 22 losses) according to the screenshot. Unless I'm crazy, the ACC only won 40 games during that period and has 23 losses, which comes out to .635 Win %. Every other Conference Win Total and % is correct according to what I checked.

I have to assume the reason I can't find the article anywhere is because it was taken down once they realized it was factually incorrect and didn't support the narrative. Funny enough, the ACC still has the highest Win % of those 6 conferences even with the correct numbers, but does not have the highest win total - which is to say the ACC has still had strong tournament success and that point could have been made without fudging the numbers.

Anyway, I'm kind of tired of seeing the ACC dorks insta-post that screenshot on every thread, so someone feel free to call them on it if the numbers really are inaccurate
 
Well.... when you add freakin Canadian schools. This is hoops, not hockey.
 
The ACC is the Typhoid Mary of conferences. Schools that touch them turn putrid.
 
.-.
Skies17 said:
I keep seeing this screenshot in the replies anytime someone discusses the ACC, and I want someone to tell me I'm crazy but I'm pretty sure it's BS. I quadruple checked and I'm 99.9% sure it's a lie and/or factually incorrect...

View attachment 96783

When I first saw it I was skeptical, tried searching for the original article and couldn't find anything, which made me even more suspicious.

The time frame being discussed is the NCAA Tournaments from 2019-2023 (skipping 2020 Covid year, no Tourny)
The ACC is supposed to have 47 Wins and a .681 Win % (computes to 22 losses) according to the screenshot. Unless I'm crazy, the ACC only won 40 games during that period and has 23 losses, which comes out to .635 Win %. Every other Conference Win Total and % is correct according to what I checked.

I have to assume the reason I can't find the article anywhere is because it was taken down once they realized it was factually incorrect and didn't support the narrative. Funny enough, the ACC still has the highest Win % of those 6 conferences even with the correct numbers, but does not have the highest win total - which is to say the ACC has still had strong tournament success and that point could have been made without fudging the numbers.

Anyway, I'm kind of tired of seeing the ACC dorks insta-post that screenshot on every thread, so someone feel free to call them on it if the numbers really are inaccurate
Expand ...
If it's true it is because of, and only because of, puke and unc. 2 bluebloods who make the tourney every year. Meanwhile the rest of the conference sucks.
 
Kolumbo said:
If it's true it is because of, and only because of, puke and unc. 2 bluebloods who make the tourney every year. Meanwhile the rest of the conference sucks.
Expand ...
I’ll throw in Miami who’s been to two Final Fours recently too and that’s really it.
 
.-.
Kolumbo said:
If it's true it is because of, and only because of, puke and unc. 2 bluebloods who make the tourney every year. Meanwhile the rest of the conference sucks.
Expand ...
Mostly true, but Virginia did win a title in there
 
freescooter said:
Oh come on. What would the NBE be without Villanova and UConn?
Expand ...
What? Read the post I was replying to and you might understand my response. The post claims that the ACC receives fewer bids but wins more games. Whether that is true, who knows. Either way, UNC and Duke carry that conference because they make the tourney every year and win a few games. It doesn't mean the ACC deserves more bids because it probably doesn't.
 
.-.
What’s worse is the ACC now adding SMU, Cal and Stanford. They should have considered UConn add. Now, not sure we would even want to join, especially with UNC and others likely to leave
 
I get That everyone hates the ACC. But I think there are a couple of things that you really need to consider here. It is true that the additions to the ACC have declined in performance. But a couple of others have improved. Miami is one example. The other thing is Syracuse is kind of mis-characterized. They did go to the Final Four in 2016; and the Sweet16 in 2018 and 21, so portraying them as slouches is a little disintenuous. Their Hall of Fame coach just retired and we know how that can go, as does Villanova. The other thing is that these changes weren’t made for basketball. While I’m sure they are disappointed that Louisville and Pitt declined precipitously, the traditional powers are continuing and some newer ones are showing signs of becoming relevant again. UNC, Duke and Virginia are still good despite 2 HOF coaching changes, and Miami has improved., despite falling off this year. Wake and Clemson are making strides and are at least bubble teams. And as bad as there bad teams are, none approaches the awfulness that is Georgetown. And certainly none is even on the same planet as our token D3 member, the horror show known as DePaul*.

* Caution, the Surgeon General has determined that watching DePaul basketball may cause irreparable damage to your eyes.
 
freescooter said:
I get That everyone hates the ACC. But I think there are a couple of things that you really need to consider here. It is true that the additions to the ACC have declined in performance. But a couple of others have improved. Miami is one example. The other thing is Syracuse is kind of mis-characterized. They did go to the Final Four in 2016; and the Sweet16 in 2018 and 21, so portraying them as slouches is a little disintenuous. Their Hall of Fame coach just retired and we know how that can go, as does Villanova. The other thing is that these changes weren’t made for basketball. While I’m sure they are disappointed that Louisville and Pitt declined precipitously, the traditional powers are continuing and some newer ones are showing signs of becoming relevant again. UNC, Duke and Virginia are still good despite 2 HOF coaching changes, and Miami has improved., despite falling off this year. Wake and Clemson are making strides and are at least bubble teams. And as bad as there bad teams are, none approaches the awfulness that is Georgetown. And certainly none is even on the same planet as our token D3 member, the horror show known as DePaul*.

* Caution, the Surgeon General has determined that watching DePaul basketball may cause irreparable damage to your eyes.
Expand ...
Someone is certainly being disingenuous here. BC hasn't made the NCAA tournament in the past 15 seasons and they've never made a final 4.
 
freescooter said:
Oh come on. What would the NBE be without Villanova and UConn?
Expand ...
Still better at basketball than you are at claiming to be a UConn fan. And better at basketball than you are at posting here.

You fight unfairly by presenting yourself at a disadvantage.
 
superjohn said:
Someone is certainly being disingenuous here. BC hasn't made the NCAA tournament in the past 15 seasons and they've never made a final 4.
Expand ...
Hey, he said, "disintenuous."

Shh. Haven't you ever noticed that he soars above us like a lone Eagle?
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,566
Messages
4,583,289
Members
10,493
Latest member
Mwil1032


Top Bottom