|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
Editor [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43446
Joined: 12/12/12
|
TNET: Bracketology: Where Clemson stands going into conference tournaments
1
Mar 7, 2023, 11:33 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
MVP [541]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 560
Joined: 5/19/12
|
Re: TNET: Bracketology: Where Clemson stands going into conference tournaments
2
Mar 7, 2023, 12:09 PM
|
|
Well they can't help it if the ACC sucks this year but they have made their own bed in making their non-conference schedule and then wetting it by the losses to the poor teams they lost too. I hope they do get in but even more importantly I hope they manage to get over the one-and-done pattern we have been in for so long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1849]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2077
Joined: 7/29/03
|
Re: TNET: Bracketology: Where Clemson stands going into conference tournaments
1
2
Mar 7, 2023, 12:14 PM
|
|
We made the sweet 16 2019. Haven’t had a chance to be one and done since. In Shaka we trust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [849]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 1800
Joined: 9/24/01
|
Shaka? Its a pipe dream to think he's leaving Marquette for
2
Mar 7, 2023, 1:29 PM
|
|
Clemson. Makes me laugh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16058]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 24595
Joined: 5/14/02
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [457]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 919
Joined: 10/29/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6877]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9157
Joined: 7/11/03
|
Most of the competition has 0 Quad 4 losses. I agree
2
Mar 7, 2023, 12:24 PM
|
|
Clemson will have to make the finals on Sat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13421]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8897
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: Most of the competition has 0 Quad 4 losses. I agree
1
Mar 7, 2023, 1:03 PM
|
|
JK said we are already in and you can take it to the bank...
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11428]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 13601
Joined: 10/27/04
|
Re: Most of the competition has 0 Quad 4 losses. I agree
1
2
Mar 7, 2023, 1:07 PM
|
|
JK said we are already in and you can take it to the bank...
then glad JK is not my financial advisor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13421]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8897
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: Most of the competition has 0 Quad 4 losses. I agree
1
Mar 7, 2023, 1:07 PM
|
|
Don't you need the writeoffs for tax purposes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [43992]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32924
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Look who's back!
1
1
Mar 7, 2023, 1:09 PM
[ in reply to Re: Most of the competition has 0 Quad 4 losses. I agree ] |
|
How are you feeling about your Boston College Eagles and Earl Grant? You were really high on them at the start of the season, and felt that they would be better than Clemson.
Glad you aren't my financial advisor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11428]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 13601
Joined: 10/27/04
|
Re: Look who's back!
1
2
Mar 7, 2023, 1:16 PM
|
|
How are you feeling about your Boston College Eagles and Earl Grant? You were really high on them at the start of the season, and felt that they would be better than Clemson.
Glad you aren't my financial advisor.
uh, Earl Grant is is just his 2nd year at BC. finnaly has a full healthy roster this season in the last 3 weeks anf have improved.
oh, and scoreboard this season. BC beat the Tigers. Earl is 2-1 vs Brad the last two seasons.
oh, and Earl has a better record vs UVa then Brad does.
Earl wont be coaching Clemson but showing more potential in 2 seasons, then Brad is in 13 seasons...
also, watch Pat Kelsey punch his ticket tonight. CofC was smart in locking him up with a new $1 million a year contract ext...
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1746]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4362
Joined: 11/4/01
|
Both Grant and Kelsey
Mar 7, 2023, 2:15 PM
|
|
are solid coaches and while I do think Grant gets BC to the NCAAT soon, the verdict is still out on how great he will be. He did fine at CofC but the program seemed to dip his last few years there. I dont think he is any better than Brad, despite his wins.
As for Kelsey, he deserves a bigger job and will get that soon. Its nice CofC ponied up the cash for him but its a win only for Kelsey, not CofC. He's won 30 games this season and has to win tonight to get into the tourney....that tells you all you need to know about that job. You cant really do anything more than you have. Somebody will swoop him and give him a shot very soon...maybe this year. heck, the Gamecocks should fire Paris and hire Kelsey.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [43992]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32924
Joined: 2/22/03
|
No, I said that I believe we are in now.
Mar 7, 2023, 1:08 PM
[ in reply to Re: Most of the competition has 0 Quad 4 losses. I agree ] |
|
I didn't guarantee anything or say that you can "take it to the bank."
A lot can happen in conference tournaments, for us and for other teams. This is a fluid situation.
HTH.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13421]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8897
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: No, I said that I believe we are in now.
Mar 7, 2023, 1:12 PM
|
|
You said in another post you think we are already in and that it really shouldn't matter what we do in the ACCT. You are pretty much on an island with that opinion as I can't find anyone else that does this for a living making that argument. From everything I am reading, we probably have to make the final to have any real shot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13421]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8897
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: No, I said that I believe we are in now.
Mar 7, 2023, 1:15 PM
|
|
And I quote:
"I’m not convinced that a win on Thursday helps. We’ve beaten NC State twice, by a large margin. What does beating them a third time prove? On the flip side, what does losing to them prove? I don’t think the outcome moves the needle.
I also don’t think a win over Notre Dame or Virginia Tech means much, since we are clearly better than both teams and are undefeated against them in the regular season. A loss could knock us out of the NCAA Tournament, but I don’t think a win helps.
I believe we are in right now. I don’t see how the committee can keep the third place ACC team with 20+ wins and a winning record against quad 1 teams out of the tournament."
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [43992]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32924
Joined: 2/22/03
|
You aren’t a detail guy, are you?
Mar 7, 2023, 2:22 PM
[ in reply to Re: No, I said that I believe we are in now. ] |
|
I said that I believe we are in right now.
That could change.
I stand by what I said about our potential first round opponents. Wins over any of them probably don’t help. A loss to a lower seeded team could knock us out of the NCAAs.
I never said that what we do in the ACC Tournament does not matter. Losing the first round game could hurt us. I didn’t comment about subsequent rounds, but obviously winning those could help us in our seeding.
Having to make the ACCT finals to have a shot is something that a few of you have thrown out as your opinion. It’s based on nothing more than conjecture.
Please try to read and reason better next time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13421]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8897
Joined: 8/30/18
|
Re: You aren’t a detail guy, are you?
Mar 7, 2023, 3:25 PM
|
|
I agree with you that the first game does not help us much other than it gets us to the second game which is the most important one and I agree with you as well that losing the first game probably takes us out.
With that logic in place, it also means we need to probably win the second game, particularly if UNC happened to be the opponent because I think both of us will not get in and whoever wins that game is going to have the advantage. And if it's UVA we play, a second loss to them is not horrible but it is not helpful, and given where we seem to be sitting at just slightly on the wrong side of the bubble is why many of us believe that 2nd win is a must.
And I read and reason just fine. I know it sucks for you that things aren't lining up as you want them but it is what it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [43992]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32924
Joined: 2/22/03
|
Not necessarily true.
Mar 7, 2023, 1:07 PM
[ in reply to Most of the competition has 0 Quad 4 losses. I agree ] |
|
It depends on what the committee prioritizes.
If it's record against quad 1 teams, we are easily in over teams that have higher NET rankings but a sub .500 record against quad 1 teams.
If it's bad losses, then we have a lot to overcome.
The problem is that their criteria isn't as clear as it should be. It's clear as mud, in fact. That's why it seems to change from year to year what they find most important.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [43992]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32924
Joined: 2/22/03
|
I still contend that record against quad 1 and quad 2 teams
3
Mar 7, 2023, 1:06 PM
|
|
should significantly outweigh bad losses.
As it stands, it seems that preference is given to strength of schedule, even if that strong schedule has resulted in an unimpressive W-L record. We have teams with high NET rankings who have losing records against quad 1 teams, but that is evidently okay since they play a "tough schedule." That's not how it should be.
Penalizing teams who don't play as many quad 1 games, but have done well against the ones they have played, and ranking them behind teams who beefed up their strength of schedule by losing to a bunch of quad 1 teams, is illogical.
I would much rather have teams in the Big Dance who have done well against the best teams on their schedule (i.e., quad 1 and quad 2 teams), rather than teams who have played more good teams but have a losing record against them.
I realize that it doesn't matter what I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [182]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 240
Joined: 8/3/21
|
Re: TNET: Bracketology: Where Clemson stands going into conference tournaments
Mar 7, 2023, 7:31 PM
|
|
It would be hard to imagine 18-13 Rutgers making it over us. We have 4 bad losses and 4 good wins, 22 wins overall and beat Duke & UNC in ACC standings. There is just enough different rankings to confuse people enough to where they can choose certain teams on the bubble. The NCAA committee desperately wanted UNC to beat Duke so they could say UNC is in. That narrative was all over the news. GO TIGERS!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
