Should be a good test.
BTW, IA is 4 of 6 in the last 6 B1G/ACC Challenge games
BTW, IA is 4 of 6 in the last 6 B1G/ACC Challenge games
IA playing at Syracuse for Big 10/ACC Challenge
- Thread starter BBHawk
- Start date
Iowa wasnt going to get Duke or UNC, but Syracuse is a very good one!
By name alone, much more to look forward to than Pitt.
By name alone, much more to look forward to than Pitt.
Really good matchup. And this may pay off during NCAA Tournament selection time, if Iowa can win this one. When committee looks at the head to head result, and if the teams are otherwise equal. When they slot Syracuse a few seeds higher - we will have plenty to scratch our head about.
Anyone else been to Syracuse? Great college town in a beautiful area of upstate NY. Very vibrant and diverse downtown.
Hawk fans who make the trek up there for the game will enjoy themselves.
Hawk fans who make the trek up there for the game will enjoy themselves.
The last time we played there:
Back in 1980, on our way to the final four, we beat Syracuse in the east regional. Jim B was their coach then and still is now. Got it be some kind a record.
Their zone is anything but boring. If we could play zone that boring it'd be awesome!
I like it, better than Flordia State, Notre Dame, Virginia Tech or Clemson. At least something new.
Was hoping to play them last year in MSG. But no complaints with what the Hawks did there.
Was hoping to play them last year in MSG. But no complaints with what the Hawks did there.
Matchups:
Iowa @ Syracuse
Clemson @ Minnesota
Michigan @ Louisville
Rutgers @ Pitt
Duke @ Michigan State
Florida State @ Indiana
Northwestern @ Boston College
Virginia @ Purdue
Notre Dame @ Maryland
Nebraska @ Georgia Tech
Ohio State @ North Carolina
Wisconsin @ NC State
Wake Forest @ Penn State
Rutgers @ Pitt
Florida State @ Indiana
Miami @ Illinois
Favor ACC as usual.
Iowa @ Syracuse
Clemson @ Minnesota
Michigan @ Louisville
Rutgers @ Pitt
Duke @ Michigan State
Florida State @ Indiana
Northwestern @ Boston College
Virginia @ Purdue
Notre Dame @ Maryland
Nebraska @ Georgia Tech
Ohio State @ North Carolina
Wisconsin @ NC State
Wake Forest @ Penn State
Rutgers @ Pitt
Florida State @ Indiana
Miami @ Illinois
Favor ACC as usual.
Last edited:
BirdistheWord
HB Legend
Since the beginning (1999): ACC leads 12–5–3 in the series and 127–98 in games.
At least a Duke is playing MSU in East Lansing.
No idea about that-just a lot of diverse clubs/bars/restaurants in the downtown district that were a lot of fun.
Sure, but the last decade the Big Ten has more than held its own. Why should we care about before that?
Because when considering whether matchups have historically favored one side, including the entire series history rather than just a segment that you hand selected to try to make a point provides the most fair and accurate picture.
I’m glad they moved away from “neutral” site games. When Iowa played them in fall 2001 as the host it was in Chicago instead of Iowa City. Of course we got the shaft.
Looks like Duke played the first four games at neutral sites. But since then has only played in college arenas. 7 true road games and 8 home games.
Last edited:
I’d say combes’ numbers that he showed from the past 10 seasons more accurately represent the college basketball landscape of today, as opposed to including the previous 10 seasons. There is such a thing as going back too far to the point that the numbers become less meaningful, professor. Otherwise we may as well say UCLA still dominates college basketball.
The point was whether matchups (including venue) have unfairly favored one conference in the series.
Combes’ selected segment may support the contention that the matchups have been more fair since 2009. I don’t think they necessarily do but if that is the point he was attempting to make, those records are certainly relevant.
However, I don’t see how his chosen data subset could possibly “accurately represent the college basketball landscape of today” as you contend. They’re the partial results of a conference challenge that happens over a few days at the beginning of every season. That's it.
Since the beginning of the challenge in 1999, the ACC has had four different teams win a total of eight national championships. The BigTen has had one.
Since 2009 (Combes Era), the ACC has had three different teams win a total of five national championships. During Combes Era, no Big Ten team has won a national championship. Do Combes Era challenge records really provided a more accurate representation of “the college basketball landscape of today”? I won’t presume to speak for him, but I would suspect that even he wouldn’t make such a claim. He has more sense than that.
Last edited:
Oh, whatever. The Big Ten is clearly more on par with the ACC from top to bottom the past 10 years (and today) compared to the previous 10 years. The tournament results represent that, and it has nothing to do with specific matchups or venues. No one is going to argue the ACC hasn’t dominated he NCAA tournament for a long time, but even you should have the sense to see that the Big Ten is more competitive with them lately as a whole. If you want to argue the top 4 teams of the ACC are consistently better than the top four teams the big 10, that would be hard to refute.
Again... the original discussion was about whether the matchups in the challenge unfairly favored one conference.
The challenge is a clever marketing scheme. Not much more. I don’t think the series results or any subset thereof say much at all about the “landscape of college basketball.”
NCAA tournament results tell the tale. Period. You want to argue about whether the big ten has more round of 32 appearances in the last ten years? Be my guest. Maybe they have? I don’t know. No one cares.
The Big Ten has had more final four appearances than the ACC in both the periods discussed (1999-2009; and 2009-2019). Again... few care. And again, the challenge results don’t correlate.
People care who wins it all and the Big Ten hasn’t had a team do that in 20 years.
Similar threads
