Looks Like ACC CCG Dergulation WIll Pass

[dayooper]

Clearly you are of the opinion that the best team in the nation isn't UConn. OK fine. So, who's the best team? And show me how you arrived at that conclusion. I would love to take a look at the data.

UConn was the best team at the time of the tournament. They earned the NCAA Championship, no questions asked. That being said, there are multiple "Best Teams" each year at different points in the season. They certainly were not the best team in January and Kentucky wasn't the 2nd best team all year until the end. I would say that Michigan wasn't even close to the 8th best team during the tournament (they lost to UK after being tied with 3 seconds left in the Elite 8), but earned the right to be a #2 seed by their play throughout the year.

If you use a one and done type of system, SMU, Stanford, and Louisville were better teams than UConn during the season and up through The AAC tourney as they had better head to head records against UConn. That takes nothing away from what UConn accomplished and you deserved the NCAA Tournament championship. Tournaments aren't about the best team all season, it's about the best team at the time. UConn was the best team in late March and Early April.

 

[businesslawyer]

I'm not talking about best team according to polls or perception... I'm talking best team based on the regular season and the statistical odds due to their results.

The best team isn't the one the wins. The one that wins is crowned champion, it isn't crowned "best team."

Because no one is crowned "best team." It's a meaningless concept, right up there with asking someone who they would vote for if the 2016 presidential election was today. Winning matters. Losing matters. Having someone say you are "best" when you didn't win is irrelevant if you are not a Syracuse fan.

 

[huskypantz]

UConn was the best team at the time of the tournament. They earned the NCAA Championship, no questions asked. That being said, there are multiple "Best Teams" each year at different points in the season. They certainly were not the best team in January and Kentucky wasn't the 2nd best team all year until the end. I would say that Michigan wasn't even close to the 8th best team during the tournament (they lost to UK after being tied with 3 seconds left in the Elite 8), but earned the right to be a #2 seed by their play throughout the year.

If you use a one and done type of system, SMU, Stanford, and Louisville were better teams than UConn during the season and up through The AAC tourney as they had better head to head records against UConn. That takes nothing away from what UConn accomplished and you deserved the NCAA Tournament championship. Tournaments aren't about the best team all season, it's about the best team at the time. UConn was the best team in late March and Early April.

UConn was statistically a top 20-25 team going into the tournament based on their performance during the entirety of the regular season, and the proceeded to beat 5 or so schools that were ranked above them using those same statistics. Teams that do well over the course of the season are rewarded with favorable early round tournament locations and matchups against lower seeds.

I think you're missing the principal point of sports - be the best at the end. It's like that for every sport.

 

[itgoeslike]

UConn was the best team at the time of the tournament. They earned the NCAA Championship, no questions asked. That being said, there are multiple "Best Teams" each year at different points in the season. They certainly were not the best team in January and Kentucky wasn't the 2nd best team all year until the end. I would say that Michigan wasn't even close to the 8th best team during the tournament (they lost to UK after being tied with 3 seconds left in the Elite 8), but earned the right to be a #2 seed by their play throughout the year.

If you use a one and done type of system, SMU, Stanford, and Louisville were better teams than UConn during the season and up through The AAC tourney as they had better head to head records against UConn. That takes nothing away from what UConn accomplished and you deserved the NCAA Tournament championship. Tournaments aren't about the best team all season, it's about the best team at the time. UConn was the best team in late March and Early April.

People remember champions that win Olympic Gold, not who was best in the prior year, or prior 6 moths. People remember the National Champion, not Best Team-Month of November. In many respects, the season is about preparing for the National Championship. You try certain things, you coach, you adjust, you mature. Talented, mentally strong, well-coached teams improve throughout the season and peak at the right time, and, most importantly. . .they execute when it counts. It's the same drill if you're training for the Olympics. A team that played well all season is rewarded with a higher seed (theoretically) which provides an easier path and improves their odds of attaining a national championship. However, the tournament routinely exposes the fallacy of subjective rankings influenced by special interests.

 

[SAMCRO]

I'm not talking about best team according to polls or perception... I'm talking best team based on the regular season and the statistical odds due to their results.

The best team isn't the one the wins. The one that wins is crowned champion, it isn't crowned "best team."

The team that wins the championship is the champion. Rankings are flawed and subjective, results on the court are not. Win when it matters. Works the same way in the NFL. You play the season for positioning, you play the post season for the only thing that really matters...the title. What you're sorta talking about is the European Football model of true home and home round robins against every team in the league, with no playoffs and the champion is crowned on total results of the entire season.

 

[upstater]

UConn was the best team at the time of the tournament. They earned the NCAA Championship, no questions asked. That being said, there are multiple "Best Teams" each year at different points in the season. They certainly were not the best team in January and Kentucky wasn't the 2nd best team all year until the end. I would say that Michigan wasn't even close to the 8th best team during the tournament (they lost to UK after being tied with 3 seconds left in the Elite 8), but earned the right to be a #2 seed by their play throughout the year.

If you use a one and done type of system, SMU, Stanford, and Louisville were better teams than UConn during the season and up through The AAC tourney as they had better head to head records against UConn. That takes nothing away from what UConn accomplished and you deserved the NCAA Tournament championship. Tournaments aren't about the best team all season, it's about the best team at the time. UConn was the best team in late March and Early April.

Did SMU, Stanford and Louisville go undefeated during the season? Because Louisville lost to Memphis 2x, Kentucky 2x. UConn was 4-0 against those 2 teams while Louisville was 0-4. So... Again, how do you make the case? SMU similarly had trouble with teams UConn handled easily. And again, while people were making excuses for Florida injuries, some people seem to have not noticed that Deandre Daniels was injured in the middle of the season for UConn and he missed several games.

I can't see how anyone can make sense of this: Louisville loses 2x to Memphis who loses 3x to UConn who loses 2x to Louisville. Louisville loses 2x to Kentucky who loses 1x to UConn who beats Florida 2x who beats Kentucky 3x. Feel free to make sense of this to determine somehow that SMU is a better team than UConn, but I don't think that makes much sense. UConn in the past has won multiple games without a loss against the eventual national champion, and no one on this board was making claims about UConn being the best team or better than that team.

We also saw UConn fairly dominate Villanova, Iowa St., Michigan St., and Florida. And outside of the foul trouble that hit their 2nd and 3rd best player (on phantom calls) they handled Kentucky as well. You can make a case that UConn was about 10 pts better than the Champions of the B1G, SEC, SEC runner-up, B12 and BE.

 

[djct1999]

The way UConn was playing at the end of March clearly demonstrated that at that point in time UConn was in fact the best team in the country. As Upstater posted, UConn beat the champions of the B1G, SEC, B12, and BE. That is fact. What has made UConn elite over the years is partly correlated with our coaching staff's ability to pace their teams. The season is long grind and UConn understands that. Some teams inflate their early season rankings and records by playing the likes of LeMoyne, Colgate, Hoftstra, etc while never leaving campus. Even at 25-0, I was arguing that Syracuse was not even close to being the best team in the country. Sometimes it takes common sense and you have to look a little bit beyond the record itself. Which brings me back to UConn. During the first weekend in April, there was simply no team in this country that was better than us. Look beyond the record.

 

[Ldandy]

Geezus this thread went off the rails. IIRC UCONN hoisted the trophy at the end of the tournament. You guys were the best team for 2013/2014 end of story.

 

[Ha Who]

Geezus this thread went off the rails. IIRC UCONN hoisted the trophy at the end of the tournament. You guys were the best team for 2013/2014 end of story.

Maybe we should start a bash UCONN thread and all the trolls can go at it, leaving legitimate conversations which relate to the topic in the subject to be discussed

 

[dayooper]

Did SMU, Stanford and Louisville go undefeated during the season? Because Louisville lost to Memphis 2x, Kentucky 2x. UConn was 4-0 against those 2 teams while Louisville was 0-4. So... Again, how do you make the case? SMU similarly had trouble with teams UConn handled easily. And again, while people were making excuses for Florida injuries, some people seem to have not noticed that Deandre Daniels was injured in the middle of the season for UConn and he missed several games.

I can't see how anyone can make sense of this: Louisville loses 2x to Memphis who loses 3x to UConn who loses 2x to Louisville. Louisville loses 2x to Kentucky who loses 1x to UConn who beats Florida 2x who beats Kentucky 3x. Feel free to make sense of this to determine somehow that SMU is a better team than UConn, but I don't think that makes much sense. UConn in the past has won multiple games without a loss against the eventual national champion, and no one on this board was making claims about UConn being the best team or better than that team.

We also saw UConn fairly dominate Villanova, Iowa St., Michigan St., and Florida. And outside of the foul trouble that hit their 2nd and 3rd best player (on phantom calls) they handled Kentucky as well. You can make a case that UConn was about 10 pts better than the Champions of the B1G, SEC, SEC runner-up, B12 and BE.

I think we have differences in what The NCAA Champion means, and that's fine. I may be in the minority and I accept that. There have been many tournaments in many sports where the champion wasn't the best team. I understand what Kyle is trying to say and I will add that The NBA, NHL, and MLB have the best system in determining their champion as the best team usually wins the round. In a one and done tournament, not always. I will also say that I don't see a better way to determine the champion. Playoff series are not viable and the tournament is about as exiting as it gets in sports.

That being said, I hope you aren't thinking I'm saying that UConn doesn't deserve their accolades. They were one of the best, and in a small group that is in the discussion of being the best. I tend to believe that "The Best Team" is the one that wins consistantly throughout the season, and for the most part, you did.

 

[pj]

Kyle needs to recognize that the season isn't long enough for teams to reach their peak performance and then to play enough games to generate statistically significant evidence for the best team. UConn played much better in the tourney than it did in the regular season; so did Kentucky. It took UConn all season to develop its remarkably synchronized teamwork that won the championship, and Kentucky all season for its freshmen to figure out how to play. How each team played in November or December or January is not necessarily a valid indicator of which was the best team by the end of the season. And if you restrict yourself to late-season games, there is not enough data.

In the end, the tourney is the best indicator we have of the best team.

 

[upstater]

I think we have differences in what The NCAA Champion means, and that's fine. I may be in the minority and I accept that. There have been many tournaments in many sports where the champion wasn't the best team. I understand what Kyle is trying to say and I will add that The NBA, NHL, and MLB have the best system in determining their champion as the best team usually wins the round. In a one and done tournament, not always. I will also say that I don't see a better way to determine the champion. Playoff series are not viable and the tournament is about as exiting as it gets in sports.

That being said, I hope you aren't thinking I'm saying that UConn doesn't deserve their accolades. They were one of the best, and in a small group that is in the discussion of being the best. I tend to believe that "The Best Team" is the one that wins consistantly throughout the season, and for the most part, you did.

I'm not contesting the idea that the best team doesn't always win tournaments. After all, the 64th ranked team could have won it all. FGCU may have won it all last year. I was saying to you that if you're going to say the best team didn't win, tell me who you think was the best team. I don't see any team the entire season that could have beaten the best team UConn put on the floor. Furthermore, I can't see how you can argue that SMU or Louisville were better than UConn unless you ignore all the games those teams lost.

Again, this has nothing to do with the nature of a one-and-done tournament. If anything, people were astonished about UConn because of their poor seed, which was clearly undeserved. We were talking about UConn as being a 4 seed prior to the tournament but at the very least a 5 seed based on RPI and SOS which were stronger than many of the candidates seeded ahead of them. UConn actually finished the season ranked #18 in the AP.

 

[dayooper]

Maybe we should start a bash UCONN thread and all the trolls can go at it, leaving legitimate conversations which relate to the topic in the subject to be discussed

When did I bash UConn? In fact, I have been very complimentary of UConn during my time on this forum and congratulated you after you won. I have also been very vocal about wanting you in the Big10. Just because we see things differently about what The NCAA Tournament means, doesn't mean I'm bashing UConn.

 

[SAMCRO]

When did I bash UConn? In fact, I have been very complimentary of UConn during my time on this forum and congratulated you after you won. I have also been very vocal about wanting you in the Big10. Just because we see things differently about what The NCAA Tournament means, doesn't mean I'm bashing UConn.

I Think (not sure) that was directed at another poster in this thread, and a number of ND, UVa, BC, and FSU visitors on multiple other threads.

 

[Ha Who]

When did I bash UConn? In fact, I have been very complimentary of UConn during my time on this forum and congratulated you after you won. I have also been very vocal about wanting you in the Big10. Just because we see things differently about what The NCAA Tournament means, doesn't mean I'm bashing UConn.

It was not directed at you. Just that several of these threads are boring me to no end

 

[MSNDfan]

When did I bash UConn? In fact, I have been very complimentary of UConn during my time on this forum and congratulated you after you won. I have also been very vocal about wanting you in the Big10. Just because we see things differently about what The NCAA Tournament means, doesn't mean I'm bashing UConn.

Join the club. I came here to say that I think UConn belongs in the ACC and that the likely to be adopted new NCAA rule regarding divisions will mean the ACC could add UConn without a partner, and immediately the attacks fly, most directed at the ACC, some at ND.

Some UConn fans here are so eaten up with bitterness that if a BC fan were to post that BC football needs to play UConn annually, which would benefit both, they would bash BC, the ACC, the BC poster, ND, Catholic colleges generally, denying that UConn needs any help from any of that brood of vipers to do anything.

And that bitterness that occasionally comes out against someone like you, probably will grow against your conference and its members the longer you do not add UConn.

 

[SubbaBub]

That's statistically incorrect. Going into the year, even the best team in the country has only about a 33 percent chance of reaching a Final Four, give or take some percent based on the team's dominance and regional draw.

Here's an example of the ridiculousness of people harping on Final Four runs: Wisconsin had drawn a lot of criticism for a lack of tournament success under Bo Ryan through the years. However, I went back, using Sagarin odds, and did the probability of them making a Final Four at least one time from 2002 through 2013. The result? Fifty seven (57) percent. So basically not much more than a coin flip that they should have advanced in that time. Yet people had authoritatively claimed Bo Ryan was a terrible 'tournament coach' because they'd not made the Final Four.

A person trying to do a statistical research project in academia would be laughed out of the field if he tried supporting a hypothesis on the basis of population/sample of 15-20 when he ignored hundreds of perfectly reasonable datapoints to do so.

It's flat out silly to base a team or league based on what happens in a single-elimination tournament. It doesn't matter how important a championship is to people, it's without merit in terms of qualitative analysis.

Hey, that's an interesting....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

 

[SubbaBub]

I'm talking about national championships. We regularly see overrated, over-seeded teams win two fluff games and put together a string of two wins to find their way into a final four. It gets statistically harder to win the final two games in three days against qualified competition. When you look at all the teams and all the variables, there is nothing happenstance about 4 national championships in sixteen seasons.

Every other team lost. If this were CFB they wouldn't be #1. In 2014, the only team that has a case is Wisconsin. Every other team was dumped by a non-FF team or directly by UConn.

Nearly every team save WSU and FL have 6+ losses going in. WSU got beat by UK and we beat FL twice. UConn was the best team in 2014.

 

[Thirdelement]

I have noticed some members criticizing the UConn fans for being bitter. I myself am a fan and graduate of Notre Dame.

I would like to say that I feel that the UConn fans have every right to be bitter. They should have not have been left out of the P5. If they can't be bitter on their own site, where can they?

I understand their anger at BC for all the reasons they have noted.

I understand their frustration with the ACC for all the reasons they have noted.

I also understand their displeasure with ND. ND does have the right to remain independent. Independence is part of the institution's identity. However, teaching community service and consideration of the needs of others and fair play are also hallmarks of the institution's identity. So, when we hold onto our independence, and do not seem to be "team players" in terms of trying to formulate a rational post season for football, we need to be open to criticism, because it's probably pretty fair.

 

[Stray_Dog]

When did I bash UConn? In fact, I have been very complimentary of UConn during my time on this forum and congratulated you after you won. I have also been very vocal about wanting you in the Big10. Just because we see things differently about what The NCAA Tournament means, doesn't mean I'm bashing UConn.

I don't think this was directed at you. At least IMO, I find you articulate your arguments in a logical and concise manner. I enjoy your posts and I can think of a few UConn Fans that I would like to post no further such as NelsonMR.Munts

 

[Stray_Dog]

I have noticed some members criticizing the UConn fans for being bitter. I myself am a fan and graduate of Notre Dame.

I would like to say that I feel that the UConn fans have every right to be bitter. They should have not have been left out of the P5. If they can't be bitter on their own site, where can they?

I understand their anger at BC for all the reasons they have noted.

I understand their frustration with the ACC for all the reasons they have noted.

I also understand their displeasure with ND. ND does have the right to remain independent. Independence is part of the institution's identity. However, teaching community service and consideration of the needs of others and fair play are also hallmarks of the institution's identity. So, when we hold onto our independence, and do not seem to be "team players" in terms of trying to formulate a rational post season for football, we need to be open to criticism, because it's probably pretty fair.

WOW! Totally Impressed and for that post I no longer dislike ND 100% just 95% - but heck it is an improvement!

 

[SubbaBub]

I have noticed some members criticizing the UConn fans for being bitter. I myself am a fan and graduate of Notre Dame.

I would like to say that I feel that the UConn fans have every right to be bitter. They should have not have been left out of the P5. If they can't be bitter on their own site, where can they?

I understand their anger at BC for all the reasons they have noted.

I understand their frustration with the ACC for all the reasons they have noted.

I also understand their displeasure with ND. ND does have the right to remain independent. Independence is part of the institution's identity. However, teaching community service and consideration of the needs of others and fair play are also hallmarks of the institution's identity. So, when we hold onto our independence, and do not seem to be "team players" in terms of trying to formulate a rational post season for football, we need to be open to criticism, because it's probably pretty fair.

ND has always been straight about what's it's desires are. My only issue was ND siding with the BB schools when issues of FB/BB related friction arose. They should have said, we're ND we'll figure it out. Whatever you guys want to.do is good with us.

They voted against the side they would have been on, had they been full members. Other than that, I have no real problem with ND.

 

[huskeynut]

I have noticed some members criticizing the UConn fans for being bitter. I myself am a fan and graduate of Notre Dame.

I would like to say that I feel that the UConn fans have every right to be bitter. They should have not have been left out of the P5. If they can't be bitter on their own site, where can they?

I understand their anger at BC for all the reasons they have noted.

I understand their frustration with the ACC for all the reasons they have noted.

I also understand their displeasure with ND. ND does have the right to remain independent. Independence is part of the institution's identity. However, teaching community service and consideration of the needs of others and fair play are also hallmarks of the institution's identity. So, when we hold onto our independence, and do not seem to be "team players" in terms of trying to formulate a rational post season for football, we need to be open to criticism, because it's probably pretty fair.

After following this thread and some of the posters who think they know something (when they know nothing) - we finally have a poster who understands how UCONN fans feel.

Thank you!

 

[The Funster]

Join the club. I came here to say that I think UConn belongs in the ACC and that the likely to be adopted new NCAA rule regarding divisions will mean the ACC could add UConn without a partner, and immediately the attacks fly, most directed at the ACC, some at ND.

Some UConn fans here are so eaten up with bitterness that if a BC fan were to post that BC football needs to play UConn annually, which would benefit both, they would bash BC, the ACC, the BC poster, ND, Catholic colleges generally, denying that UConn needs any help from any of that brood of vipers to do anything.

And that bitterness that occasionally comes out against someone like you, probably will grow against your conference and its members the longer you do not add UConn.

As if you haven't fanned the flames with some of your recent posts

Why don't you leave?

 

[kyleslamb]

Hey, that's an interesting....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Sorry that it's too advanced a concept for your paradigm.