I think it's only a matter of time before Texas comes to the SEC. The Big 12 is doomed, no matter what they might try to say. Trust me, as a midwest guy with lots of family who went to those schools everyone I know thinks it's over. No Missouri v. KU in basketball, no more Nebraska in football, it's just a matter of time until the remaining schools split up between the big ten and various western conferences.

Texas and one other (maybe Oklahoma) to the SEC within 5 years.

2/3/2012 2:50:07 PM

Quote :

"UNC offers more than NCSU but both schools give you the same markets hadn't really considered the media connection aspect"

ESPN would never let UNC and Duke split up, and the SEC will never add Duke.

Texas A&M has a HUGE tv market and a huge alumni base. It doesn't really matter that they haven't been good at football in years. Texas will never go to the SEC because they have their own goddamn network (which the SEC wouldn't allow) that makes them more money than being in any other conference would.

2/3/2012 2:53:20 PM

You're probably right, but I'd love to see them go independent as a big Fuck You to the whole realignment saga. They're the one public institution who could pull it off, and pretty easily so. Their GDP rivals small countries.

2/3/2012 2:54:10 PM

Quote :

"Trust me, as a midwest guy with lots of family who went to those schools everyone I know thinks it's over."

The ACC's been done to me for years.

2/3/2012 3:08:12 PM

fuck me, this is lame as shit. Just found out about this UNC crap....

2/3/2012 4:11:39 PM

...

WELP

2/3/2012 4:46:05 PM

As a Basketball season ticket holder they better work it out where we have at least a duke or unc home game every season.

paying for tickets and not getting a UNC or Duke game would suck major ass. this is total bullshit.

add 2 more teams so we can go to pods!!

2/3/2012 8:15:16 PM

woah nevermind.

sidenote: i'm really not that mad about this unc thing. it'd be good for us to just try to do our own thing instead of worrying about unc all the time.

[Edited on February 3, 2012 at 9:11 PM. Reason : you can build a good program w/o giving yourself the shadow of unc, you know]

2/3/2012 9:09:51 PM

Ok, now tell me going to the SEC would be stupid.

And I don't care if you think it's not going to happen or not.

If we get the offer, we should go.

2/3/2012 9:30:17 PM

^^playing them once a year in basketball instead of twice isn't going to stop people from worrying about UNC all the time

the only thing thats going to dictate our bball rivalry is if we can become good enough to beat them every now and then

^my first reaction is no but i'd have to give it some thought

it'd be tough to leave though since we founded the fucking conference, but times change

[Edited on February 3, 2012 at 9:41 PM. Reason : .]

2/3/2012 9:32:15 PM

That founding deal is way overblown in my opinion. Did we not help found the Southern Conference?

[Edited on February 3, 2012 at 9:55 PM. Reason : Syracuse was a founder of the Big East, nobody cares]

2/3/2012 9:52:51 PM

haha only a mod could have made this thread. but yes it does suck.

2/3/2012 10:33:33 PM

Fyi he wasn't a mod when he made the thread

2/3/2012 10:52:48 PM

it was on his resume, however

2/3/2012 11:23:37 PM

here's my guess at the new ACC tourney format

looks pretty fucked up, but it works, 14 teams is just retarded

Wednesday:
#1-8 seeds have byes
#9 vs #14
#10 vs #13
#11 vs #12

Thursday:
#1-5 seeds have byes
#6 vs #11/12
#7 vs #10/13
#8 vs #9/14

Friday:
#1 vs #8/9/14
#2 vs #7/10/13
#3 vs #6/11/12
#4 vs #5

Saturday:
#1/8/9/14 vs #4/5
#2/7/10/13 vs #3/6/11/12

Sunday:
Finals

2/4/2012 3:20:35 PM

No way they have the top teams have two byes. If that happens, they'll lose money.

2/4/2012 3:56:41 PM

NOT OUR RIVALS - CLAP....CLAP...CLAP.CLAP.CLAP

2/4/2012 4:00:39 PM

in the Big East, the top 4 teams have 2 days of byes

my format has 3 games, 3 games, 4 games, 2 games, 1 game

tried a few other ways but it never worked out mathematically without starting Tuesday or having like 6 games in one day

plus anything that adds an extra day of games with paying advertisers isnt gonna lose money, even though only fans of a half dozen teams would care about the wednesday or thursday games

[Edited on February 4, 2012 at 4:13 PM. Reason : .]

2/4/2012 4:05:36 PM

12 plays 13, 11 plays 14

then current format with 1-4 byes, 5v12/13, 6v11/14, 7v10, 8v9

2/4/2012 4:54:29 PM

that makes more sense and is more even

2/4/2012 5:07:01 PM

A rivalry with South Carolina would be better than one with Wake Forest.

2/17/2012 12:29:06 AM

14 team tournament isn't complicated. It is just a 16 team bracket with 1/2 getting byes.

1/2 get first round bye.
3/14,4/13,5/12,6/11,7/10,8/9

From there just matches up the rest of the way like the NCAA tournament...
1v8/9,2v7/10 etc...
Unless I'm missing something.

2/17/2012 1:49:00 AM

this is what'd it'd be over 4 days, though I'm not sure the seeding I did (in red) is right. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's wrong.


[Edited on February 17, 2012 at 8:51 AM. Reason : .]

2/17/2012 8:50:31 AM

Yes it is wrong.... It isn't that complicated....

If you want an easy way to visualize pretend it is a 16 team tournament and the 15th and 16th seed in the tournament are teams named "Bye 1" and "Bye 2." the bracket sets up just like a 16 team tourney with 1/2 getting a bye.

2/17/2012 10:06:39 AM

6 games on Thursday? is the first one gonna tip off at 7am or are they somehow going to have multiple games played at the same time on the same court?

since its not at all complicated, i'm wondering how you've already figured out the logistics to that little timeframe issue

i think semloh's format definitely makes the most sense

[Edited on February 17, 2012 at 2:01 PM. Reason : .]

2/17/2012 1:55:19 PM

I say we have 3 games in William Neal Reynolds Coliseum
works for women's aau tournaments

2/17/2012 2:01:23 PM

I thought after last night State was banned from all postseason play

2/17/2012 2:06:59 PM

Quote :

"i think semloh's format definitely makes the most sense"

I agree but it'd suck to be a bottom four team, have to win 5 games in 5 days to make it

2/17/2012 4:59:55 PM

I, for one, am thrilled at the notion of being able to lose less to UNC and Duke. Those asking to play them more are still stuck in 1974 and / or 1983.

EDIT: Of note, my stance has changed dramatically on this issue as I've grown older and stopped caring so deeply about a subpar athletics program. Interesting.

[Edited on February 17, 2012 at 5:03 PM. Reason : .]

2/17/2012 5:01:27 PM

^ i'm totally w/ you.

2/17/2012 6:02:47 PM

If that's your mentality, then we should leave the fucking ACC altogether and join the Colonial Athletic Association, so we can enjoy being top dogs and not worrying about having to face teams that more than likely will beat us once or twice a year.

Hell with the way the media ranks some of those mid-major schools, we can easily get to 24-0 after beating up on Delaware State, Towson, and Wilmington all season. That will for sure get us as far as Murray St and Creighton got this year.

2/17/2012 6:52:07 PM

Quote :

"That will for sure get us as far as Murray St and Creighton got this year."

i'll take it

2/17/2012 7:32:17 PM

Quote :

"6 games on Thursday? is the first one gonna tip off at 7am or are they somehow going to have multiple games played at the same time on the same court? since its not at all complicated, i'm wondering how you've already figured out the logistics to that little timeframe issue i think semloh's format definitely makes the most sense "

You play 3 of the first round games Wednesday and the next 3 Thursday, then go Fri/Sat/Sun. It is a much more fair and balanced bracket. You have to go 5 days either way. So yeah, I have figured out the timeframe issue and no it isn't that complicated.

2/17/2012 10:21:36 PM

ok that works for scheduling

but how do you rationalize making the 6-11 seeds play on Wednesday while the 12-14 seeds get byes on the first day? you finish 6th in the conference and play on Wednesday, you finish 14th in the conference and don't have to play until Thursday? doesnt seem fair or balanced

something along the lines of this makes more sense than having so many first round games you cant even play them all on the same day



[Edited on February 17, 2012 at 10:39 PM. Reason : pic]

2/17/2012 10:36:41 PM

Simple. 10 teams get in. The bottom 4 have to fire their coach or move to Conference USA.

2/17/2012 10:40:11 PM

I'd go 2 games Wednesday, 3v14 and 4v13, then assuming they win, 1-4 have a day off Thursday while everybody else plays

[Edited on February 17, 2012 at 10:51 PM. Reason : with titans scenario]

2/17/2012 10:50:57 PM

you dont think 11/14 and 12/13 makes a little more sense than making the 3rd and 4th best teams all year play on Wednesday?

Florida State, congratulations on beating both UNC and Duke this year and finishing 3rd in the conference...your first ACC tourney game is Wednesday at 4:30 pm

thats why semloh's makes the most sense all around...easy format, no more than 4 games in any round, and the teams that have good regular seasons actually get rewarded for having good regular seasons instead of punished

[Edited on February 17, 2012 at 10:54 PM. Reason : .]

2/17/2012 10:52:25 PM

well i'd think they can beat GT, so they'd then get a day off Thursday and only have to play 3 straight days. their reward is the second day off, 1-2 get both days off.

2/17/2012 10:56:29 PM

12-14 don't get byes on the first day.

The first day would be :
3v14
4v13
5v12

You let 3/4/5 play the first day because you assume they win and get a day to rest(reward for being 3-5). Obviously there can be upsets and good for those teams if they do it but when making a bracket and schedule you assume higher seed wins.

2nd day is
6v11
7v10
8v9

Then on Friday you have :
(A)1v winner 8/9, (B)2v winner 7/10, (C)winner3/14 v winner 6/11, (D)winner 4/13 v winner 5/12

Saturday is Winner A v. Winner D/Winner B v. Winner C

And I'm hoping at this point I don't have to explain Sunday.

Why does it matter how many first round games? There isn't a rule that all the same rounds have to be played on the same day. The big east is setup as it is because they want to heavily reward the higher seeds. It is a system put in place that makes it damn hard to win if you are 9-16. With only 14 teams you can reward 1/2 with byes, and reward 3-5 if they take care of business with a day off. And you can win the whole tournament worse case in 4 games, not 5 in 5 days. Why make a team win 5 games if there is a setup that can reward the high seeds and make it so there is no more than 4 needed?

2/17/2012 10:57:45 PM

i just can't endorse any system where you finish 3rd overall in a 14 team conference and have to play on Wednesday...it makes absolutely no sense

2/17/2012 10:59:26 PM

Playing on Wednesday and getting a day off is a lot better for a team than playing four games in a row. I can't imagine any coach in the ACC that would prefer playing 4 games straight over getting a rest day in between one of them. I seriously can't see how anyone disagrees with titans78. If you want to try and guarantee that the top seeded regular season teams are always making the finals, then giving them 2 byes is a good idea.

Keep in mind, whatever plan the ACC comes up with will probably be shittier than anything so far proposed, because that's just how we roll in the past ten years.

2/17/2012 11:11:03 PM

allow me to break down semloh's format since I've been repeatedly saying it makes the most sense

Wednesday: 12v13 11v14
Thursday: 5v12/13 6v11/14 7v10 8v9
Friday: (A)1v8/9 (B)2v7/10 (C)3v6/11/14 (D)4v5/12/13
Saturday: AvD, BvC
Sunday: obvious

we can agree to disagree, but this format has:

- no more than 4 games per round/day
- teams don't get penalized for finishing right behind Duke and UNC

Quote :

"Playing on Wednesday and getting a day off is a lot better for a team than playing four games in a row."

Quote :

"If you want to try and guarantee that the top seeded regular season teams are always making the finals, then giving them 2 byes is a good idea. "

if you don't want to play 4 straight games to win the tourney...finish in the top 4, simple as that...i don't look at it as "giving" the top 4 teams 2 byes...i look at it as rewarding them for being the best 4 teams over the previous few months of basketball

2/17/2012 11:19:52 PM

We get your version. You don't have to type it out like I had to do for you, this stuff isn't rocket science I am not confused by what you are supporting.

You seem to be hung up on some sort of weird TV Schedule/symmetry issue of wanting 4 games a day, all from the same round. Who gives a shit if it is 3 games on 2 different day from the same round?

My issues with your version :
1 - Why make a team win 5 games in 5 days if there is a setup that makes sure the most you have to win is 4 and the least is 3.

2 - Why are you in such a hurry to reward the 3/4th place teams? Who gives a shit about them. Finish first get a reward. Finish as the runner up, OK reward them. 4th place? I've seen to many years in the ACC where the difference between the 3rd place team and the 8th place team is marginal at best, I don't see finishing 3/4th as such a huge deal that you need to get the same reward as 1/2. Plus 3-5 still get a reward of easy first round games and then a day off.

3 - I don't have a 3 at this moment. But making a list with 2 things looks stupid.

2/17/2012 11:32:15 PM

1 - if you finish 11th or worse, you had a shitty season, and the road to an automatic NCAA bid shouldn't be easy

2 - maybe its just me going off what other conferences have done and relying too much on the Big East's current format for ideas, but if the current 12-team ACC gives first round byes to 1-4, and the current 16-team Big East gives first round byes to 1-4, why should a 14-team conference have to revert to only giving the top 2 seeds byes?

besides, the format i came up with a week and a half ago has 3 games on Wed and 3 games on Thurs just like your format, but once semloh posted his it just made a lot more sense

mine works out numbers wise but has odd byes (1-8, then 1-5)...yours works out numbers wise but has odd byes (1-2...then 1-5?)...semloh's seems like the best

hypothetical: lets say Pitt and Syracuse are in the ACC this year...in your system, either Duke, UNC or Syracuse is going to have to play on Wednesday...does that make any sense whatsoever

2/17/2012 11:40:57 PM

i'll just add this though...one of the reasons the NCAA has generally increased the NCAA tournament size by numbers that are multiples of 4 is because its a shitload easier to figure out good fair seeding...granted its a different animal and theres no issue with overlapping games since they're played in different venues early on, but it makes the math so much easier

and to quote my original post about a format

Quote :

"looks pretty fucked up, but it works, 14 teams is just retarded"

2/18/2012 12:04:15 AM

You can't use previous brackets about 1-4 getting byes because in a 12 team bracket you basically have to set it up that way(or at least it is pretty much inarguable that it is how you setup a 12 team bracket). The 12 team bracket isn't set up because they got in a room and said "hey 1-4 should be rewarded!" it is because that is what makes sense for 12 teams.

Honestly, I don't care about rewarding anyone but 1 and possible 2. If it works for the sake of a bracket that makes sense and more teams get byes that is fine. In this case you can get what you need with byes for 1 and 2 no more are needed.

I don't get why you feel it is a punishment to play on Wednesday. Is it like a bad day to play basketball? Is it because there might be less fans? I mean they play on Wednesdays during the regular season... That is like saying it is worse to play on Thursday for the NCAA tournament than Friday. Who cares. Earlier in the week doesn't really mean anything, you just have it in your head that early in the week is for the shitty teams. You are on the same amount of rest as your opponent. Yes in my version Syracuse plays on Wednesday if they finish 3rd. They would play the worse team in the conference. They will win by 50 points, rest most of their players, then get a day off to play another OK/weaker team on Friday who just got done playing the day before. Sounds like a good deal for Syracuse to me.

2/18/2012 12:09:02 AM

Quote :

"you just have it in your head that early in the week is for the shitty teams"

yep...and Wednesday as a day of the week doesnt mean shit, its obviously just easier than typing "on the first day of the tournament"

ok now i have 3 questions for you

1. what problem(s) do you have with semloh's format, why is it so bad

2. there have been a lot of conferences over the years, most of whom changed their number of teams at times. has any conference in history ever had a format where their postseason basketball tournament gives a team a day off in the middle of the tournament after they have already played? seems extremely unconventional to me

3. you're criticizing me for wanting to reward the teams that had good seasons...why do you want to reward the teams that had shitty seasons by decreasing the number of games they'd have to win?

[Edited on February 18, 2012 at 12:19 AM. Reason : i thought of a 3rd]

2/18/2012 12:17:12 AM

In my perfect world, 9-14 place teams wouldn't even get an invite. 1st-8th then play a straight up format. This could cause issues if there was say a 3 team tie for 9th, but fuck it, it's my perfect world.

In the fucked up conference realignment world we live in, TreeTwista10's format is obviously the best one.

2/18/2012 12:31:48 AM

its not my format its semloh's

if i didn't give enough credit to semloh i apologize to semloh

would still be curious as to titan78's answers on the questions though

[Edited on February 18, 2012 at 12:37 AM. Reason : 14 teams is just retarded]

2/18/2012 12:35:35 AM

Make a deal with Southern Conference that our bottom 2 teams get relegated to that league for the next season and keep tourney like it is.

2/18/2012 7:29:47 AM