PDA

View Full Version : Does the WCC do a better job prepping teams for the tourney than ACC?



NEC26
03-19-2017, 08:19 PM
ACC has a grand total of 1 team in the sweet sixteen (very close to being zero) after getting 9 teams in and many getting very favorable seeds as well. I bring it up only to show that this argument is silly.
I hear this line of thinking constantly and many here use it as an excuse as well but the reality is I don't think it hurts the Zags to play in the WCC but I would say they don't get the respect they deserve for beating the likes of SMC and BYU.

rennis
03-19-2017, 08:41 PM
Agreed. You're either good or you're not. Calipari didn't deal with the same nonsense from the media with Memphis, for example. Or Tarkanian.

Again, all of it goes away with a final four.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

gonzagafan62
03-19-2017, 08:57 PM
Yes. WCC prepares better. ACC was not prepared playing against weak defenses all year

Zagricultural
03-19-2017, 09:23 PM
Once again the ACC is overrated. Wish Bilas and Williams would admit they were total homers.

Ezag
03-19-2017, 10:36 PM
No, we just happen to have overall better talent than anybody in the WCC

CDC84
03-19-2017, 11:25 PM
The ACC was brutal this year. Maybe they beat themselves up so much that there was nothing left in the tank for the NCAA tournament. Not saying I agree, but some might respond that way.

TexasZagFan
03-20-2017, 04:24 AM
The ACC was brutal this year. Maybe they beat themselves up so much that there was nothing left in the tank for the NCAA tournament. Not saying I agree, but some might respond that way.

That's the only arrow left in the quiver, CDC. Wouldn't surprise me if the ACC's results next year are similar to the Pac 12 this year. That's why they call it March Madness.

75Zag
03-20-2017, 04:50 AM
The Pac 12 is one questionable call (goaltending against USC) from having 4 teams in the Sweet 16. A great year for basketball for people who live West of the Rockies.

See you in San Jose - Go Bulldogs!

Zigzag92
03-20-2017, 05:53 AM
judging conferences on the randomness of single elimination games is just stupid

Zagsker
03-20-2017, 06:38 AM
After years of GU playing to their potential in most of the NCAA...the idea of a conference "preparing" a team more than another has little to no significance to me. The only benefit of playing in a more highly regarded conference is the increased likelihood of securing an at-large

ACC being example 1of that

TexasZag
03-20-2017, 07:09 AM
judging conferences on the randomness of single elimination games is just stupid

I totally agree. Not only that, one weekend in one tournament is simply too small a sample size to have any real validity. What this year's tournament demonstrates to me is that anyone can lose on any given day. Stats, etc. are great for analyzing teams' strengths and weaknesses, but they aren't the only factors that contribute to the results. There are just too many intangibles that can influence events on the floor (as we all saw this past weekend).

bartruff1
03-20-2017, 07:10 AM
No

SWZag
03-20-2017, 07:26 AM
No

I think this is an interesting thread meant to poke fun at those who think the big name leagues better prepare teams for the tourney (or say WCC doesn't prepare us). I would like to hear why you think it doesn't. If you think it doesn't, do you possibly think that more teams get into the tourney from "power conferences" than they should? Is that maybe the reason for a "power conferences" lack of success in the tourney?

bartruff1
03-20-2017, 07:43 AM
I think this is an interesting thread meant to poke fun at those who think the big name leagues better prepare teams for the tourney (or say WCC doesn't prepare us). I would like to hear why you think it doesn't. If you think it doesn't, do you possibly think that more teams get into the tourney from "power conferences" than they should? Is that maybe the reason for a "power conferences" lack of success in the tourney?

no

SWZag
03-20-2017, 07:44 AM
no

Great! Thanks for enlightening us all and bringing value to the board.

bartruff1
03-20-2017, 07:47 AM
Great! Thanks for enlightening us all and bringing value to the board.

Your welcome, Nietzsche explained all this centuries ago...

zaguarxj
03-20-2017, 08:03 AM
In the WCC, the Zags have to deal with physically overmatched teams that resort to grabbing, hacking and shooting 3's to try to level the playing field. In the 1st couple of rounds of the tourney, top seeds have to deal with physically overmatched teams that resort to grabbing, hacking and shooting 3's to try to level the playing field. So you might say that the WCC prepares the Zags well for getting to the Sweet Sixteen.

willandi
03-20-2017, 08:32 AM
Once again the ACC is overrated. Wish Bilas and Williams would admit they were total homers.

And hosers, eh?

bartruff1
03-20-2017, 08:48 AM
This doesn't prove anything...you could play the same 32 games over and get a completely different result....

It is intuitively obvious that intense competition will have a tendency of making a team better (Nietzsche), but to prove that with any certitude would be very expensive and time consuming ....

A quick and dirty analysis of the past 30 years (or whenever the tourney went to 64 teams) would probably show that the ACC has won a higher % of games than the WCC and has advanced a higher number of teams or % of teams to the Elite Eight or whatever level you define as success..

That doesn't mean that a Butler or a Wichita State that had little competition cannot reach the FF or the NC game...