No, this isn't really a post about another loss by a top 3 ACC team to a bottom feeder in their league - sh!t happens.

But I could have sworn I heard the announcer for the game say "these knuckleheads (meaning the YellowJackets) shouldn't even be in this game".

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the depth of that league not to mention what it says about the Demon Deacons, at least in terms of this game.

Cheers,
Neil

I'm sure the ACC spin will be this proves how deep and talented blah blah blah. If winless Depaul or even mid league teams like cincy and Providence beat UConn or Pitt the spin would be how overrated the BE is. Its been said before on here but i cnat let it go. ha ha

Another ACC classic. First BCU beats UNC and loses to Harvard. Harvard, btw, is 9-8 or something with one really good player.

(01-31-2009 02:30 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  I'm sure the ACC spin will be this proves how deep and talented blah blah blah. If winless Depaul or even mid league teams like cincy and Providence beat UConn or Pitt the spin would be how overrated the BE is. Its been said before on here but i cnat let it go. ha ha

I'd put the Wake loss to VT and the UNC loss to BC as the equivalents of a Pitt loss to Cincinnati or a UConn loss to Providence. Something within the margin of error, but something that shouldn't happen in the same season.

But Wake losing to GT this year is like Pitt or UConn losing to Rutgers or USF this year. It just shouldn't happen. Close games at Rutgers or USF? perhaps - losses? no way.

Cheers,
Neil

It will be interesting to compare Pitt's lost to Villanova and Wake's lost to Ga. Tech in terms of how far each team drops in the rankings. No way can pitt dip further than Wake but we'll see what happens with the ACC bias in sports.
Pitt had two good losses (Louisville and Villanova) and Wake had two bad losses (Virginia tech and Georgia tech). They better stop playing teams with "tech" in their name.

However, Wake had a "big" win over Duke. So we'll see how the ranking go. But the rankings are really, really, meaningless. I think there are going to be a lot of "upsets" (lower seed beating higher seed) in this year's tournement.

(01-31-2009 02:46 PM)frogman Wrote:  It will be interesting to compare Pitt's lost to Villanova and Wake's lost to Ga. Tech in terms of how far each team drops in the rankings. No way can pitt dip further than Wake but we'll see what happens with the ACC bias in sports.
Pitt had two good losses (Louisville and Villanova) and Wake had two bad losses (Virginia tech and Georgia tech). They better stop playing teams with "tech" in their name.

However, Wake had a "big" win over Duke. So we'll see how the ranking go. But the rankings are really, really, meaningless. I think there are going to be a lot of "upsets" (lower seed beating higher seed) in this year's tournement.

I think the Wake win over Duke will impress the voters enough not to drop them too much in the polls, even with the loss to GT. But I would still expect Pitt to be ahead of them in the polls since pollsters tend to remember the last game played more - meaning the win over ND will trump the loss at GT.

Cheers,
Neil

In fairness to the media, they're actually cutting us a little slack, now labeling Cincinnati and Providence as "up-and-coming" teams. That being said, I've been keeping an eye on Georgia Tech for some reason, and they're one of those teams that just floats around and bites you in the @ss if you fall asleep at the wheel, similar to last year's Cincinnati.

(01-31-2009 02:54 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  In fairness to the media, they're actually cutting us a little slack, now labeling Cincinnati and Providence as "up-and-coming" teams. That being said, I've been keeping an eye on Georgia Tech for some reason, and they're one of those teams that just floats around and bites you in the @ss if you fall asleep at the wheel, similar to last year's Cincinnati.

I actually agree with you on GT. Somewhat like Rutgers and USF. Don't sleep on them because they can make it tough on you, particularly at their place - but moreso with the next 'level down' teams in the league not the true upper echelon - which is my point.

I have pretty much agreed with most of the pundits that the ACC is better at the top but the Big East is the deeper conference. But with this loss now added to the other two, I'm beginning to think that the Big East at the top is better than the ACC at the top as well.

Cheers,
Neil

If UConn wins today against the Friars we should have #1 visiting #5 in two days for Big Monday in Freedom Hall. The Huskies will be #1 with a win today and UofL should rise from 7th by passing Pitt and Wake. The Dukies lost as well, but will remain ahead of us.