If the ACC wants more March Madness bids, it needs to tell its story on the floor

On Nov. 28, 2023, the Pitt basketball squad trotted onto the floor at the Petersen Events Center for a home game in the ACC-SEC Challenge. The Panthers still didn’t know quite what they were at that point, but there were pro scouts in the building to see dynamic freshman guard Bub Carrington, and the team was coming off an impressive performance in the NCAA Tournament.

Their opponent: the Missouri Tigers. They didn’t know what they were yet, either, which was a good thing, or many of them might have pondered sitting out the year.

Final score: Missouri 71, Pitt 64.

Missouri went on to finish with an 0-18 SEC record, 8-24 overall.

One can spin that result any way one wishes, but that’s basic math.

And these sorts of numbers led to the ACC receiving only five March Madness bids last season, same as the two years before, despite a membership of 15 schools and a glorious history in the sport.

The methods of the NCAA selection process have been an open secret since February 2007, when the first “mock selection” exercise was conducted in Indianapolis and reporters and analysts were allowed to assemble an early field using the same tools and data as the committee would a month later. The ACC’s members and leaders want to believe the problem is something different, that it’s about narrative or coverage or image. Commissioner Jim Phillips acknowledged this as an issue Wednesday, at the annual ACC media days in Charlotte.

“We have to tell our story better. That’s on me. We just have to do that relative to the outlets that we have,” Phillips said.

“I know you don't get credit for past successes. I get it. I totally get it. But we just feel like the last three years with five invitations each of those years, is not reflective of the basketball that's being played in this league, the coaches that are in this league, the student-athletes and players that are in this league that are matriculating into the NBA – and all the rest of it from a players' standpoint.”

Phillips is a terrific administrator who has spent time on the NCAA selection committee. He understands how it works. He also recognizes the coaches in his league are more comfortable finding reasons for the paucity of March Madness bids outside their gymnasiums. And the media always are an inviting target.

During his address, however, Phillips did sprinkle in references to the actual issues with the ACC’s Selection Sunday shortages.

– Scheduling. Part of reaching the NCAA Tournament is scheduling strategically, which has been rare among the league’s members.

“Last spring we initiated an extensive statistical analysis with multiple experts regarding our scheduling,” Phillips said. “This was inclusive of both conference and non-conference games and how that impacts the NCAA NET rankings and selection process.

“Our league working groups are engaged in countless discussions with our head coaches and athletic directors. Scheduling remains an important piece, and collectively our teams have been aggressive.”

It’s also important to win those games, though. Last season, the league finished 31-37 against opponents from the other five highest-rated conferences plus national power Gonzaga. The Big 12 was 33-22 against that cohort. The Big Ten was 28-27.

MORE: Even with Gonzaga, new Pac-12 far from a power conference

The ACC won only 72 percent of games against non-conference competition overall, compared to 76 percent for the Big Ten and 81 percent for the Big 12.

That’s at the core of the Big 12’s placement of 8 teams (67 percent of membership) into the field.

– Dead weight. Phillips would not use such a label to describe the bottom teams in the ACC, but I can. Louisville’s historically poor performances in the past two seasons have been problematic for all members, and Notre Dame’s in-conference struggles in 2022-23 were problematic, as well.

“I would say one of the things that has occurred for us the last several years is we've had a drag at the bottom of the conference,” Phillips said. “We've had some teams that have had really difficult seasons that has really influenced and has helped influence some of those rankings, some of the metrics overall that they're looking at.”

The Cardinals’ combined 12-52 record over the past two seasons punished the other members of the league by dragging down their power ratings. The ACC took a risk by inviting Stanford, California and SMU, three programs that were a combined 77-120 over the past two seasons. Collectively, those three have performed reasonably so far in football and other fall sports.

MORE: Tom Izzo enters Year 30 as a changed man, sort of

– Metrics. With 15 teams, the ACC had only five teams place in the top 50 of the NCAA’s NET ranking. In the final KenPom.com rankings, even a run to the ACC Tournament championship and the Final Four only got NC State up to 45 ^th . There were just five league partners ahead of them.

Having a significant NET ranking is not going to get anyone into the field, as Pitt could tell you after finishing 40 ^th and missing the field. But the absence of prominently placed teams diminishes the opportunity to build strong tournament selection resumes.

The data drive the selection process for the committee, and for those who attempt to anticipate their work. If it were up to those who compile the online projections collected by the Bracket Matrix, there actually would have been only four ACC teams in the 2024 field. Virginia was not on the final bracket I composed for Fox Sports; it was the only team I missed. I had plenty of company. UVa was absent from 203 of the 226 online brackets, including Joe Lunardi’s at ESPN, Jerry Palm’s at CBS and Bill Bender’s for The Sporting News.

The ACC doesn’t have a narrative problem.

It’s about performance. Winning in March is commendable and rewarding, and the ACC has done extraordinarily well once there. But you’ve got to be in it to win it.