What has happened to the ACC teams?

Heard all year, just how powerful their conference is.

North Carolina is the lone remaining team, if not for some questionable calls down the stretch, they might have also been eliminated by a woeful SEC team.

The ACC has certainly proven to be over hyped, but like the SEC in football, it's still the elite conference year in and year out IMO.

Was the ACC good because it was so deep? Honestly, besides Duke and FSU, the other ACC losses really aren't huge upsets, including UL losing to Michigan. Upsets yes but no one is shocked by them.

The ACC is a couple referee calls and offensive brain cramp by Arkansas from being out of this tournament.

The real question is why do so many people care about conference affiliation? Why does it matter? If UNC wins this year does it redeem the ACC teams that lost early and validate their dominance? Or do you view it how it should be, that UNC was just really good and they played and beat a lot of really good teams on the way to the title?

If UNC wins this year does it redeem the ACC teams that lost early and validate their dominance?

Yes. It absolutely does.

Call it The Alabama Rule.

I don't think they were overrated at all. They just like all of college basketball this year, didn't have a dominate team. So every team is very capable of losing to anyone. Its wide open.

Yes. It absolutely does.

 

Call it The Alabama Rule.

Brilliant.

I don't think they were overrated at all. They just like all of college basketball this year, didn't have a dominate team. So every team is very capable of losing to anyone. Its wide open.

That's just the nature of the sport of basketball. The best team doesn't win every game. I saw some comparisons between national titles in football and basketball on here earlier and about lost it.

College basketball tournament is the hardest to win in sports period. One bad game or one team getting hott and playing great and your season is over. That's why for me I don't understand how people can say Coach Cal had underachieved by having only 1 title, even though they made the final four 4 times in a 6 year span and hopefully 5 times in a 7 year span after this year. It's so hard to even get to the sweet 16. Thats a pretty darn good accomplishment what he has done, even though its only been 1 title so far.

I think that the ACC was the best conference top to bottom, but a lot of times the tournament is about matchups and South Carolina was not a good match up for Duke. I think not having a true point guard and I think playing 4 tough games in 4 days with a thin bench might have hurt them today. I never was real impressed with any teams in the ACC besides N.C., Duke, Louisville, and maybe Notre Dame personally.

College basketball tournament is the hardest to win in sports period. One bad game or one team getting hott and playing great and your season is over. That's why for me I don't understand how people can say Coach Cal had underachieved by having only 1 title, even though they made the final four 4 times in a 6 year span and hopefully 5 times in a 7 year span after this year. It's so hard to even get to the sweet 16. Thats a pretty darn good accomplishment what he has done, even though its only been 1 title so far.

Exactly. Cal got 2 teams to the Final 4 that had no business being there based on how they played during the regular season, but then failed to win the title with 2 of the greatest college basketball teams ever assembled IMO. It's just so hard to win 6 straight games against great teams.

Agreed! You just never know.

Agreed! You just never know.

But if this was football for instance UK wins in '09-'10, '11-'12, and '14-'15 in all likelihood.

Very true.