ACC Tournament vs NCAA tournament

[EaglesTalon]

If you were told that BC could either win a national championship or an ACC championship, I'm sure everybody would opt for the national championship. If you were told that BC could either make it as far as the round of 64 or win an ACC championship, I'm sure everybody would opt for the ACC championship.


My question is, at which round of the NCAA tournament would the decision be a tough one?

For me, it's the elite eight. I view BC's Big East tournament championships as a greater accomplishment as the sweet sixteen. If you told me that this year, BC could either win the ACC tournament or make it as far as the S16, the ACC title would be a no-brainer. If you told me that this year, BC could either win the ACC tournament or make it as far as the elite eight, I'd be indifferent. If you told me that this year, BC could either win the ACC tournament or make it as far as the final four, the final four would be a no-brainer.

[EaglesTalon]

Another way of looking at this is to consider the 2006 season.

BC lost to Duke in the ACC championship and later lost to Villanova in the sweet sixteen.

If you were offered the chance to go back in time and change the outcome of only one of those games, which would it be? Would you go back and change the ACC championship game, giving BC a conference title? Or would you go back and change the Sweet Sixteen game knowing that BC would definitely lose in the Elite Eight?

[branchinator]

For me, it's all about the NCAA tournament. I'd gladly sacrifice a conference tournament title for a deeper NCAA tournament run.

[branchinator]

as many have said in the other posts that oj contradicts himself, the "elite 8" is kind of hinky. its the same weekend as the sweet sixteen, doesn't result in additional travel and (most importantly) doesn't generate an additional week of hype. the final four and the conference champion DOES garner the additional hype.

therefore, i would trade nothing short of a final 4 appearance for the conference championship in this hyperbole hypothetical

I'm going to give you 2 choices and am curious to see which one you'd prefer. Assume BC is a #2 or #3 seed:

1) Conference title but embarrassing 1st weekend exit

2) No conference title but make it to the Elite Eight

[Eagledom]

as many have said in the other posts that oj contradicts himself, the "elite 8" is kind of hinky. its the same weekend as the sweet sixteen, doesn't result in additional travel and (most importantly) doesn't generate an additional week of hype. the final four and the conference champion DOES garner the additional hype.

therefore, i would trade nothing short of a final 4 appearance for the conference championship in this hyperbole hypothetical

I'm going to give you 2 choices and am curious to see which one you'd prefer. Assume BC is a #2 or #3 seed:

1) Conference title but embarrassing 1st weekend exit

2) No conference title but make it to the Elite Eight

Since we haven't made the Elite 8 since before Al started coaching, I forgot what it was like. But I think it was pretty cool.

I hear, though, that Al is one of the HUGE backers of the 96 Team tournament possibility, since it may give him the chance to actually win two games in the tournament .

[bignick33]

FF

[EaglesTalon]

as many have said in the other posts that oj contradicts himself, the "elite 8" is kind of hinky. its the same weekend as the sweet sixteen, doesn't result in additional travel and (most importantly) doesn't generate an additional week of hype. the final four and the conference champion DOES garner the additional hype.

therefore, i would trade nothing short of a final 4 appearance for the conference championship in this hyperbole hypothetical

I'm going to give you 2 choices and am curious to see which one you'd prefer. Assume BC is a #2 or #3 seed:

1) Conference title but embarrassing 1st weekend exit

2) No conference title but make it to the Elite Eight

If #2 definitely means BC loses in the Elite Eight, then I'd honestly have to flip a coin, depending upon what you mean by embarrassing. 3 seeds seem to get knocked out of the first round every couple of years. 2 seeds losing is pretty rare, but unprecedented. If you call it an embarrassing first weekend exit just because a #2 or #3 seed isn't supposed to lose, then it's still a coin flip. If it's the type of loss that will go down in infamy (ie, #2 BC blows a 30 point lead in the last five minutes of the game to a #15 seed that had its starting five all foul out and it was the benchwarmers that were on the court for the comeback), then I'd like to avoid that.

[branchinator]

as many have said in the other posts that oj contradicts himself, the "elite 8" is kind of hinky. its the same weekend as the sweet sixteen, doesn't result in additional travel and (most importantly) doesn't generate an additional week of hype. the final four and the conference champion DOES garner the additional hype.

therefore, i would trade nothing short of a final 4 appearance for the conference championship in this hyperbole hypothetical

I'm going to give you 2 choices and am curious to see which one you'd prefer. Assume BC is a #2 or #3 seed:

1) Conference title but embarrassing 1st weekend exit

2) No conference title but make it to the Elite Eight

If #2 definitely means BC loses in the Elite Eight, then I'd honestly have to flip a coin, depending upon what you mean by embarrassing. 3 seeds seem to get knocked out of the first round every couple of years. 2 seeds losing is pretty rare, but unprecedented. If you call it an embarrassing first weekend exit just because a #2 or #3 seed isn't supposed to lose, then it's still a coin flip. If it's the type of loss that will go down in infamy (ie, #2 BC blows a 30 point lead in the last five minutes of the game to a #15 seed that had its starting five all foul out and it was the benchwarmers that were on the court for the comeback), then I'd like to avoid that.

Let's say BC loses in the 2nd round 80-72 to some mid-major team but it isn't in any embarrassing fashion. We just get beat. Even then, I still choose Option #2. In my mind, you get better exposure for an Elite Eight run than you do with a conference title. I think more eyeballs are watching an Elite 8 matchup, when I believe there's only 1 other game that day, than a conference championship game, even the ACC.

[branchinator]

Option #1 includes a BJ from a fat chick that buconvict typically settles for and Option #2 includes a BJ from a one of the Tennessee recruiting whores. Now, choose.

[BCEagle74]

FUCKING IDIOTS!!

Haven't you learned anything from the foot of the Master 74?

An ACC Championship is only a ticket for entrance to the Big Dance!!!

...and you can also get there for finishing 7th or 8th in the ACC!!!

WOW....how dumb!

ARE YOU ALL THIS FUCKING STUPID!!!?????????????????????



You have to win 6 NCAA GAMES.

We have so many fucking morons here.

TITLES!!!

Be a Champion, not a one and done!!

[BCEagles25]

74,

You seem to undermine the importance of conference championships... One of the things it helps is something you've been complaining about...

Uh, hello? Recruiting?

You can make an awfully sweet pitch to a big-time recruit after winning the best conference in the country.

[twballgame9]

Given the conference BC plays in, and who they would have to beat to get a title, I would not sacrifice an ACCCG win for anything short of a Final Four appearance. The Elite Eight is a garbage propaganda advertising gimmick which means "lost in the regional finals."