Was it match-ups or was the middle of the ACC inflated like the BigTen?

We bashed the crappy middle teams of the BigTen for weeks now, but the first round of the NCAA tournament raises another question. Was the middle of the ACC inflated or did the teams simply lose because of unfavorable matchups and teams playing better than usual?

The Florida State vs Wisconsin promised to be a slugfest from the beginning, but USC came out of left field to surprise everyone with their crisp performance and versatile size.

So either one of those ACC losses are a matter of opinion.

But what about Wake Forest? Was it the "first year jitters"? New coach, inexperienced NCAA-wise players going up against a grizzled coach and team? Or was Wake Forest in free-fall after their rise to the top earlier in the ACC season?

And what does this say about coaches coaching at the bottom of the Big East or ACC or other BCS conferences? Do they not have a better chance at regular NCAA appearances by moving to one of the power mid-major conferences and taking one of the good jobs there instead of hoping and praying that they can rebuild toasted programs like Rutgers, StJohn's, et al?