ACC 10 - Big Ten 0

There are a few major reasons why the Big Ten has never won this ACC/Big Ten challenge. The biggest reason is that the ACC over the past decade or so has been a slightly better conference than the Big Ten (sometimes they've been much better). But this year, except for the obvious standout of UNC, the matchups looked like the Big Ten could have pulled this one off. But, again, they didn't. Why not? Here are some other significant reasons why the Big Ten continues to be overmatched:

#1 - The ACC usually has one more top-tier team than the Big Ten, because they have UNC and Duke. This means that with the theoretical matchups (ACC v Big Ten) 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, ... 11v11, that the ACC is usually one step above the Big Ten, resulting in matchups that are more like 1a v1, 1b v2, 2v3, 3v4, ... 10v11. Basically, if NC or Duke were in the Big Ten instead of the ACC, the opposite result would likely occur and the Big Ten likely would win the "challenge" nearly every year.

#2 - The ACC usually leaves out one of their worst teams every year from the "challenge." This year it was NC State, who was 15-16 last year, and the worst ACC team! If the Big Ten eliminated their worst team every year and the ACC would leave out their best team or every a higher-tier team, this challenge would be a lot more even.

If the ACC / Big Ten challenge has seemed a bit unfair over the years, there may be evidence suggesting that, some years, it has indeed been unfair. Consider that from 1999 through 2004 there were 9 games played, and 11 thereafter. Here's who has been left out (2001 UVa v MSU cancelled due to weather):
1999: Big Ten: (2) OSU 23-7, (5) Indiana 20-9 (big ADV - ACC, final 5-4)
2000: Big Ten: (3) OSU 20-11, (4) Indiana 21-13 (big ADV - ACC, final 5-4)
2001: Big Ten: (5) MSU 19-12, (9) PU 13-18, (10) Mich 11-18; ACC: (5) Virg 17-12 (slight ADV - BT, final 5-3)
2002: Big Ten: (4) PU 19-11, (5) Mich 17-13 (ADV - ACC, final 5-4)
2003: Big Ten: (4) Iowa 16-13, (11) PSU 9-19 (slight ADV - BT, final 7-2)
2004: Big Ten: (7) Iowa 21-12, (11) PSU 7-23; ACC: (5) VTech 16-14, (8) Miami 16-13 (no clear ADV, final 7-2)
2005: ACC: (3) BC 28-8 (big ADV - BT, final 6-5)
2006: ACC: (11) WF 15-16 (big ADV - ACC, final 8-3)
2007: ACC: (5) Miami 23-7 (ADV - BT, final 8-3)
2008: ACC: (?) NC State ? (ADV - ACC, final 6-5)

Looking at these, the schedule has been very advantageous to the ACC 5 times, in which they won by only 1 game 4 of those times (1999, 2000, 2002, and 2008). The schedule was arguably advantageous to the BT 4 times, though only 1 of those times did the BT keep it within 1 (2005). Thus, the argument could be made that the Big Ten could have won the challenge up to FOUR times now had the matchups been fairer in those years.

#3 - Duke. They are 10-0 in the challenge. It's not easy to recover from this every year, especially when Duke takes out one of the better Big Ten teams every year. Why not just have Duke play NU or PSU - they get their win anyway and the other matchups are better (see #1 and #2 above).

#4 - Home games - with all other things considered, did the ACC really need to play 2 more home games than the Big Ten this year? This year that extra home game might have been the difference. Had the Big Ten won this year if they had the one extra home game? (e.g., would Iowa have beaten BC at Carver?)

If all of the games had been reversed in location, we'd expect the following results considering an average 6-point swing: PSU>GT at PSU (BT 1), Wisc>VT at Wisc (BT 2), Minn>Virg at Virg (BT 3), FSU > NU at FSU (ACC 1), Duke > PU at Duke (ACC 2), UNC > MSU at UNC (ACC 3), Iowa>BC at Iowa (BT 4), Mich > Maryland at Mich (BT 5), Clemson>Ill at Clemson (ACC 4), WF>Ind at Ind (ACC 5), OSU > Miami at OSU (BT 6!).

Moreover, I have to wonder if MSU could have shown better against UNC at Breslin at opposed to Ford Field, which wasn't quite a neutral site but was also far from home court advantage. As it turns out, UNC looks too good this year and likely would have won anyway; at least while Suton is out for MSU.


ACC 10 - Big Ten 0 so far. Next year, theoretically the Big Ten will have home court advantage. Also, with the upgrade in Big Ten coaching and in Big Ten recruiting, statistics say that the Big Ten will win one of these very soon.

Well done overview cncmin. You pointed out some things I didn't realize, such as the teams that had been left out in previous years and how some of those squads, particularly early in the Challenge, were very solid teams for the Big Ten (and begs the question, why didn't Northwestern ever see the sidelines? Why was the most apathetic Big Ten program always included?)

Anyway, I think if you look beyond the two headliners, the Big Ten fared pretty well in this challenge. This year, as most years, UNC and Duke were pretty daunting and proved to be head and shoulders above the rest of the competition. While the Big Ten occasionally has had dominant teams during the years the Challenge has taken place (Michigan State in 2000, Illinois w/Deron Williams, Dee Brown,etc., Ohio State w/Conley, Lewis (Oden was injured for the Challenge that year)), we haven't had a consistent powerhouse team like the ACC has with Duke and again UNC.

So, this year you had the top two match ups where UNC and Duke were head and shoulders above Michigan State and Duke and you also had the Wake-Indiana game which was a total mismatch. I think the rest of the Big 10 acquitted themselves pretty well though.

The win by Minnesota over Virginia was expected, as was the road win of Wisconsin over Virginia Tech. Wins on the road by Ohio State (Miami) and Penn State (Ga Tech) were unexpected. Northwestern winning by double figures (Florida St.) was surprising.

Losses on the road by Iowa (BC) and Michigan (Maryland) by very close margins was surprising to me; before this season started, I thought both these programs were at least a year away from being competitive, but they've shown they will be tough teams to match up with.

Illinois' home loss to Clemson was disappointing, but this is an Illini team coming off their worst season in a long time and without Alex Legion eligible yet. I would expect Clemson to finish fourth in the ACC this year.

So, the Big Ten lost 6-5. That's with one traditional power in the toilet this season (Indiana) and with UNC gearing up for best team ever status, that put the Big Ten in an 0-2 hole. But as with you cncmin, I don't think it's long before the Big Ten will capture one of these challenges. We know that Michigan State and Wisconsin will remain towards the top of the conference as long as their head coaches are there. Minnesota, Michigan, Iowa are all programs in the second year with their head coaches who have shown marked improvement from one year to the next. Illinois, while currently going through a tough spell, will rebound soon with elite prep talent that's committed to the program and we know Bruce Weber can X and O. Indiana will bounce back soon. Ohio State, if it can get its best players to stick around more than one year (and by the looks of it, BJ Mullens and William Buford should return for their sophomore year) will be formidable. I don't know how long the window is for Penn State, but they have a nice trio in Talor Battle, Jamelle Cornley, and Stanley Pringle that they can build off of. And Northwestern, well, they're excited about the freshman recruits they've got and they just beat Florida State by 14 points.

The Big Ten is getting better and I think it could be as early as next year when they win the Challenge. Now that Roy Williams is at UNC, the ACC has two teams that never hit rough patches, or their rough patches mean they didn't make it past the Sweet 16. That's extremely rare in college basketball. The Big Ten might continue to struggle when matched up against those two, but I feel the depth of the conference will soon overcome the disparity at the top.

Very nice analysis, both of you. Here's hoping for more respect for the big ten this year and beyond!

IIRC, Bobby Knight didn't like the challenge and voluntarily kept Indiana out of it for the first two years.

Coolhand, back at you, very nice analysis.

The only thing that I don't like about the Big Ten becoming stronger in a real hurry is that the Gophers are going to have a rough time getting a conference championship. Other than that, it's good to see the Big Ten putting up a strong fight - it was even hard for me to cheer against Wisc and Iowa in this challenge, I was really pulling hard for all of the teams. The most disappointing one was Illinois - they had a lot of chances to win that game. The most surprising was Penn State's superior offensive performance against Georgia Tech. They will be a decent team this year, with results depending on how well their guards shoot (Battle, Pringle, Morrisey). I'll be at that Valentine's Day game in State College.

Very nice thread here with some thoughtful commentary that was a good read.

I agree that the Big Ten is closing the gap and should win its first challenge very soon.

I also think Minnesota will be matched up with much better teams the next few years. Wouldn't it be great to see UNC or Duke playing at Williams arena!!

Gold Rush said:

Very nice thread here with some thoughtful commentary that was a good read.

I agree that the Big Ten is closing the gap and should win its first challenge very soon.

I also think Minnesota will be matched up with much better teams the next few years. Wouldn't it be great to see UNC or Duke playing at Williams arena!!

Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be great to see UNC or Duke playing at Williams Arena? It sure would!! One little problem - with those two I highly doubt they'd allow a game to be played at Williams - my guess is they would force it to be at the Dome.

Which reminds me, when was the last time the Gophers played a game at the Dome? I remember one or two played there when I was an undergrad (a loss to Cal around about 1995, at least).

cncmin said:

Wouldn't it be great to see UNC or Duke playing at Williams Arena? It sure would!! One little problem - with those two I highly doubt they'd allow a game to be played at Williams - my guess is they would force it to be at the Dome.

Which reminds me, when was the last time the Gophers played a game at the Dome? I remember one or two played there when I was an undergrad (a loss to Cal around about 1995, at least).

Click to expand...

Or they would move it to the Target Center I would imagine, maybe even the X. I don't think they've played at the Target Center since West Virginia in 1997. Which probably isn't a bad thing...

Sure would be nice if top schools would get off their high horses and just play in a regular arena.