First off, Duke is no worse than 5 if they win out. There is a couple things to remember, when determining tie breakers, among three or more tied teams, you compare winning percentage of records against each other (see above). Remember 0-1 is equal to 0-2 and 2-0 is equal to 1-0 and 1-1 is equal to 2-2. Cuse and Wake have not played, but Cuse has a combined record of 0-1 vs Cheats and Wake while Wake Is 1-1. Wake split with the cheats while they have not played Cuse. In this case it doesn’t matter much, just what color Jersey and what bench in the first game of day 2 of ACC tournament.
So, while I would still put Duke’s chance as more than 50% they won’t get a double bye, they still have a decent shot. We lose the tiebreaker heads up with Clemson, it becomes interesting if we tie Clemson with another team.
Add all to that, if Pitt wins out, they are the number one seed and tie breakers do not even factor. So remember, if Duke ties alone with, let’s say Miami with Pitt as the top seed (so they win at Miami) Duke wins the tiebreaker over Miami (Two teams tied who split the regular season, you compare the winning percentage for the tied teams against fellow conference members starting with the top of the standings. Duke would have a better winning percentage against Pitt). Now in the Miami scenario, I wouldn’t hold my breath as Miami plays FSU and Pitt at home, but rivalry games create absolute shockers.
As far as speculation on sweet 16 or for whatever for the tournament, it can be fun to talk about, but in all actuality it is stupid before the brackets are released. Look at Syracuse 2003. Virtually no one had them slated as a F4 team until the brackets were released. When they were, everyone had them as a final four team.
Look how many 12 seeds are hot debates whether they should even be in the tournament but then in the next breath, the pundits say “but this team is going to the S16.” Didn’t that exact scenario happen to Zona a few years ago? Yes, when you have a long term trend like the Big 10-11-12-14 whatever there conference has not won a nati since 2000, you can make a statement about that conference. But people who judge a conference strength just based on tournament results, it is a huge fallacy. Look at the Cheats last year. Everyone had them in before they beat Duke (and you actually looked at the resume without the name, they shoulda been out had they lost to Duke). But beat Duke in the most pressure filled regular season game on the history of NCAA basketball, have one of the most fortuitous roads to the FF with injuries and upsets, a FF game that was the most pressure filled game for one team in the history of NCAA basketball, and the Cheats have one of the most head scratching preseason number one ranking in sports history. Add to that, the two times the second the Cheats felt pressure and n the NCAAs last year, they folded like a cheap suit. Just all of that went away against Baylor in OT as everyone and their brother thought there was no way they beat Baylor.
