I really don't understand how parity in college basketball has made the sport "at times, unwatchable." As Pete Thamel put it.
I loved watching Utah State beat LSU on a neutral court and watching Dayton beat Georgia and Va. Tech on a neutral court plus take Kansas to OT before losing by 6. And who, outside of people in Durham, NC didn't absolutely LOVE IT that Stephen F. Austin was able to go there and end Duke's home non-conference winning streak?
Unwatchable? GTFOHWTBS
It really irks me that whenever North Carolina or Duke isn't flat out dominant the narrative becomes "it's a down year for the ACC." As if the conference is only good if those two programs are having great seasons.
:uzi: that.
They said that in the 1994-95 season, when Coach K had back troubles and only coached 12 games, despite the conference having four out of nine programs ranked in the top-13 in the Nation. Then again in the 2001-2002 season because North Carolina finished last. Yet, four ACC teams went to the NCAA Tournament. Two of them were No. 1 seeds and one of them won the national championship. But since none of them was the media's precious North Carolina "it's a down year for the ACC."
They're saying it this year because I guess it isn't sexy to talk about the terrific seasons Louisville and Florida State are having. However, both of those teams have the same 19-3 record as Duke. Louisville, who won at Duke, is 10-1 in the ACC and FSU, who won at Louisville, is 9-2 (Lord please have FSU go into Cameron Indoor Stadium on Monday and beat Duke. That would be a great day in America.)
Maybe, just maybe, the ACC commissioner's office should push harder on the conference as a whole instead of getting in their Ford F-150s (great truck btw), driving to their pre-season meeting at their favorite Waffle House in Greensboro and discussing how they can promote Duke and North Carolina all season.