Yesterday there was a long discussion about what the legitimate expectations ought to be for VT basketball. Many said something along the lines that VT should regularly expect to be in the top half of the ACC and making NCAA tourneys in most years. But that got me thinking. If we include Pitt and Syracuse we're looking at a 14 team ACC. So if it is a realistic expectation for VT to be in the top half of the conference year in and year out, who are the SEVEN teams that should regularly be expected to fall below VT to the bottom half of the ACC?
To try to answer that, ask yourself, what advantage does VT have over any of these teams?
1. Wake (nice arena, tobacco road school, multiple ACC titles in past, etc...)
2. NC State (modern arena, several national titles, long history of success, etc...)
3. Duke (no explanation needed)
4. UNC (no explanation needed)
5. GT (urban school, Atlanta recruiting base, has played in national title game, multiple final fours, totally re-doing arena, etc...)
6. UVA (does have hoops history, 2 final fours, 3 time national player of year, new arena, popular young coach, etc...)
7. Maryland (somewhat recent final fours, national title, newish arena, D.C/Balt recruiting base, etc...
8. Syracuse (no explanation needed)
9. Pitt (newish arena, strong Northeast recruiting base, consistant top 20 team in last 8-10 years, etc...)
I think you could make the argument that VT, based on basketball tradition, facilities, etc..., might be more similar to FSU, Clemson Miami, and BC. But even BC can claim a strong recruiting base in the Boston area, and you could argue the same for Miami, which also has a pretty new on campus arena.
So the question is, is it really reasonable to expect VT to to finish in the top half of the ACC on a consistant basis?