PDA

View Full Version : Boo Big 12



DukeWarhead
02-10-2014, 11:19 PM
In recent years past, the Big East would just eat itself up during the regular season, but still had consistently good performances from much of the conference. With each passing week, this years Big 12 looks worse and worse, top to bottom. KU will win the regular season once again (I suppose) but I don't think that will say much. Things looked much different just two weeks ago.

Des Esseintes
02-10-2014, 11:22 PM
In recent years past, the Big East would just eat itself up during the regular season, but still had consistently good performances from much of the conference. With each passing week, this years Big 12 looks worse and worse, top to bottom. KU will win the regular season once again (I suppose) but I don't think that will say much. Things looked much different just two weeks ago.

Really? The conference has seven teams in kenpom's top 50. That seems pretty good. It's just different teams rising up than were necessarily strongest in the noncon. K-State, for instance, has put together a very nice season after a shaky start. They beat KU in Bramladge tonight, where the Hawks have more or less owned them in perpetuity.

TexHawk
02-10-2014, 11:47 PM
In recent years past, the Big East would just eat itself up during the regular season, but still had consistently good performances from much of the conference. With each passing week, this years Big 12 looks worse and worse, top to bottom. KU will win the regular season once again (I suppose) but I don't think that will say much. Things looked much different just two weeks ago.

I came here tonight to relax because KU boards are going insane over an overtime loss to a hated rival that we are now 47-3 against over the last 50 games, but I have to admit, this is not the commentary I expected. In fact, I was kinda expecting the opposite. Outside of TCU, there is not a single relaxing road game on the entire Big12 slate. TTech blew that thought up in the Marcus Smart-athon on Saturday. ISU played a really bad game tonight, it happens. KU lost to a tournament team on the road in overtime.

Sorry, backing up... Can you explain the "consistently good performances from much of the BigEast conference" bit? I assume you noticed last year when Syracuse lost on the road to Temple, Nova, Pitt, and UCONN (when all of those teams were unranked), right?

tommy
02-11-2014, 12:05 AM
I only saw the last 10 minutes or so of the game tonight, plus the overtime, but Kansas really was beaten pretty badly on the interior by Kansas State. K-State just seemed much more aggressive. The strange thing about it was, Joel Embiid, who had only one foul, didn't play the last approx 5 or 6 minutes, and didn't play at all in the overtime. KU went with Tariq Black, of all people, for most of the time. TexHawk, any ideas as to why Embiid didn't see the floor for the stretch run or the OT? It's not like they did any better against K-State's inside attack and drive/dish game with Black or any other big guy in there.

DukeWarhead
02-11-2014, 12:12 AM
I came here tonight to relax because KU boards are going insane over an overtime loss to a hated rival that we are now 47-3 against over the last 50 games, but I have to admit, this is not the commentary I expected. In fact, I was kinda expecting the opposite. Outside of TCU, there is not a single relaxing road game on the entire Big12 slate. TTech blew that thought up in the Marcus Smart-athon on Saturday. ISU played a really bad game tonight, it happens. KU lost to a tournament team on the road in overtime.

Sorry, backing up... Can you explain the "consistently good performances from much of the BigEast conference" bit? I assume you noticed last year when Syracuse lost on the road to Temple, Nova, Pitt, and UCONN (when all of those teams were unranked), right?

Without dissecting schedules from every Big East team over the past few seasons, I think I'm on pretty safe ground by saying that, top to bottom, they were stronger than where the Big 12 stands right now. That's not going out on a limb.
A few weeks ago, there was a lot of commentary about the Big 12 being the best conference in college bball. You're not hearing that now. (No, I do not have sports radio commentary statistics on hand at the moment.) I think the combination of Baylor, Oklahoma State, and even ISU - losing five of its past nine games - have really taken the early shine off the conference.
I realize that none of this really makes a difference once NCAAT time begins.
I also realize that no self-respecting KU fan is going to admit to Big 12 mediocrity, and that's fair.

TexHawk
02-11-2014, 12:16 AM
I only saw the last 10 minutes or so of the game tonight, plus the overtime, but Kansas really was beaten pretty badly on the interior by Kansas State. K-State just seemed much more aggressive. The strange thing about it was, Joel Embiid, who had only one foul, didn't play the last approx 5 or 6 minutes, and didn't play at all in the overtime. KU went with Tariq Black, of all people, for most of the time. TexHawk, any ideas as to why Embiid didn't see the floor for the stretch run or the OT? It's not like they did any better against K-State's inside attack and drive/dish game with Black or any other big guy in there.

Embiid hyperextended his knee against TCU a few weeks ago, then strained his back going up for a rebound against WVU in the final 30 seconds on Saturday. That + the normal freshman wall stuff. He doesn't have the bounce he did a month ago, he just needs to figure out how to deal with double teams and the little chippiness by opposing players. He's picked up a few technicals for jawing or throwing elbows, so it's part of the gameplan for other teams these days. It happens, he will be fine. The Morris bros, Cole Aldrich, Thomas Robinson, Darnell Jackson, Darrel Arthur all went through similar spells when they were young.

Not sure I understand the dig on Black, because he's been one of the more reliable players on the team (outside of Wiggins and Tharpe) over the last 2-3 weeks. He missed a couple of games to an ankle injury, but after his foulfest pre-New Year's, he's adjusted quite well. His defense is still terrible, but to be honest, there are no good defenders on KU these days outside of Wiggins.

DukeWarhead
02-11-2014, 12:21 AM
I assume you noticed last year when Syracuse lost on the road to Temple, Nova, Pitt, and UCONN (when all of those teams were unranked), right?

Well, if being unranked is such a bad thing, then what does it mean that only KU and ISU (both losers tonight) are the only ranked Big 12 teams? KU just lost to an unranked team (and sorry, last years Temple was just as good if not better than this year's K-State; they gave KU all they could handle). So, what exactly is your point about last years' Syracuse team losing to unranked teams on the road???

FerryFor50
02-11-2014, 12:28 AM
I dunno. No conference in the country possesses more teams that I'd hate to see Duke get in the tourny than the Big 12. Matchup nightmares all over.

Plus, the best part of the Big 12 is that they have teams that actually score points. And refs actually call fouls!

TexHawk
02-11-2014, 12:29 AM
Without dissecting schedules from every Big East team over the past few seasons, I think I'm on pretty safe ground by saying that, top to bottom, they were stronger than where the Big 12 stands right now. That's not going out on a limb.
A few weeks ago, there was a lot of commentary about the Big 12 being the best conference in college bball. You're not hearing that now. (No, I do not have sports radio commentary statistics on hand at the moment.) I think the combination of Baylor, Oklahoma State, and even ISU - losing five of its past nine games - have really taken the early shine off the conference.
I realize that none of this really makes a difference once NCAAT time begins.
I also realize that no self-respecting KU fan is going to admit to Big 12 mediocrity, and that's fair.

I would like to test the strength of that limb there. I have no idea how we could definitively settle that, so as a guess I looked at the teamrankings power conference ratings (http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/ranking/overall-power-ranking-by-conf), and over the last 5 seasons, I see the Big12 at 1st-3rd-2nd-5th-1st, while the Big East rolls in with 3rd-1st-3rd-2nd-3rd. Average that out, and it's exactly the same.

Baylor's faults can be left at the feet of Scott Drew, so I won't go there, but ISU/OSU were top 10 teams before conference play. Then they started losing. I suppose it's a "glass half-full" thing, because I see that as an indicator of the strength of the conference, you see that as them just not being good. It's probably a bit of both, tbh. But, yea, our friends from ESPN and other places have been pretty clear that they think that the Big12 is right there with the Big10 in terms of strongest CBB conference this year, and no, they have not stopped saying that.

TexHawk
02-11-2014, 12:32 AM
Well, if being unranked is such a bad thing, then what does it mean that only KU and ISU (both losers tonight) are the only ranked Big 12 teams? KU just lost to an unranked team (and sorry, last years Temple was just as good if not better than this year's K-State; they gave KU all they could handle). So, what exactly is your point about last years' Syracuse team losing to unranked teams on the road???

I assumed you started this thread because the two best teams in the Big12 lost on the road to conference foes tonight. You made a statement about "the BigEast eating each other up over the last few seasons" as proof that the BigEast is/was super strong, when IMO this is exactly what you are seeing with the Big12 right now.

DukeWarhead
02-11-2014, 12:35 AM
Really? The conference has seven teams in kenpom's top 50. That seems pretty good.

With one...count 'em....one in the kenpom top 20. Only three in the top 30. Compared to the ACC, Big 10, PAC 12, and even SEC, that's not pretty good.

I'm sure if we had looked at kenpom three weeks ago, it would have been much different. And that's my point - it just seems that the Big 12 has had a steeper drop off in that time than any of the other major conferences. That's all.

As I said in a previous post, such observations mean very little when the ball gets tipped in March. But right now, why not....

TexHawk
02-11-2014, 12:38 AM
Well, if being unranked is such a bad thing, then what does it mean that only KU and ISU (both losers tonight) are the only ranked Big 12 teams? KU just lost to an unranked team (and sorry, last years Temple was just as good if not better than this year's K-State; they gave KU all they could handle). So, what exactly is your point about last years' Syracuse team losing to unranked teams on the road???

Last year's Temple team was a #8 seed in the NCAA tournament. Today, KSU is slotted for the exact same spot (according to Joey Brackets). I have no idea what you are trying to say there, though I admit I probably shouldn't have drank 1+ bottles of wine watching my team play an overtime game tonight, apologies.

DukeWarhead
02-11-2014, 12:58 AM
Last year's Temple team was a #8 seed in the NCAA tournament. Today, KSU is slotted for the exact same spot (according to Joey Brackets). I have no idea what you are trying to say there, though I admit I probably shouldn't have drank 1+ bottles of wine watching my team play an overtime game tonight, apologies.

No apologies needed, sometimes 1+bottles are justified.
BTW, the ESPN.com cover story written by Myron Metcalf seems to go against my argument that the Big12 is slipping. He sees it as the opposite. Can't say as I buy it, but I don't get paid to write about sports, so....

Wander
02-11-2014, 06:44 AM
The second-to-last team in the Big 12 standings has a better non-conference resume than like 12 of 15 ACC teams. The only thing holding them back from being the obvious best conference in the country is how god-awful TCU is: probably the worst BCS team and an example of non-football sports suffering as a result of all the conference realignment stupidity. But I'd still argue they're the best conference anyway.

flyingdutchdevil
02-11-2014, 07:05 AM
The second-to-last team in the Big 12 standings has a better non-conference resume than like 12 of 15 ACC teams. The only thing holding them back from being the obvious best conference in the country is how god-awful TCU is: probably the worst BCS team and an example of non-football sports suffering as a result of all the conference realignment stupidity. But I'd still argue they're the best conference anyway.

I agree. But I'm also a firm believer that, in these packed top-to-bottom conferences, they beat the crap out of each other every night. At least we have BC, WF, and VT as cupcakes. Come tournament, these teams are prepared, but they can sometimes get beaten more easily. Take the Big East 2-3 years ago where they were by far the best conference and didn't perform that well in the tourney. It would easily happen to the Big 12 this year.

FerryFor50
02-11-2014, 07:49 AM
With one...count 'em....one in the kenpom top 20. Only three in the top 30. Compared to the ACC, Big 10, PAC 12, and even SEC, that's not pretty good.

I'm sure if we had looked at kenpom three weeks ago, it would have been much different. And that's my point - it just seems that the Big 12 has had a steeper drop off in that time than any of the other major conferences. That's all.

As I said in a previous post, such observations mean very little when the ball gets tipped in March. But right now, why not....

Kenpom uses wins heavily in their formula. Hard to win consistently when you play quality teams *every* game. Big 12 is the best conference this year, by far.

Troublemaker
02-11-2014, 07:55 AM
Kenpom uses wins heavily in their formula. Hard to win consistently when you play quality teams *every* game. Big 12 is the best conference this year, by far.

I don't think this is right. Only efficiency margins matter. A team could play Arizona 30 times, go 0-30 with each loss being by 1-3 points, and that 0-30 team would be ranked in the top 5 of KenPom (assuming none of these 30 games replace any of the games Arizona has already played).

El_Diablo
02-11-2014, 07:56 AM
No apologies needed, sometimes 1+bottles are justified.
BTW, the ESPN.com cover story written by Myron Metcalf seems to go against my argument that the Big12 is slipping. He sees it as the opposite. Can't say as I buy it, but I don't get paid to write about sports, so....

Since conference games are zero-sum games, it does not make much sense to say that one B12 team losing to another B12 team shows the conference as a whole is somehow better or worse than it would be if the other team won. Which is why it's hard to take the Metcalf story seriously when he uses West Virginia to show that the B12 is "stacked." Um, really? West Virginia's best nonconference win was against Virginia Tech...oh, wait, no...they lost to Virginia Tech. Just let that sink in for a minute. Now look at their actual best nonconference win: #160 William & Mary.

West Virginia now has one signature win. Great--they're basically Clemson.

Steven43
02-11-2014, 08:46 AM
I would like to test the strength of that limb there. I have no idea how we could definitively settle that, so as a guess I looked at the teamrankings power conference ratings (http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/ranking/overall-power-ranking-by-conf), and over the last 5 seasons, I see the Big12 at 1st-3rd-2nd-5th-1st, while the Big East rolls in with 3rd-1st-3rd-2nd-3rd. Average that out, and it's exactly the same.

Baylor's faults can be left at the feet of Scott Drew, so I won't go there, but ISU/OSU were top 10 teams before conference play. Then they started losing. I suppose it's a "glass half-full" thing, because I see that as an indicator of the strength of the conference, you see that as them just not being good. It's probably a bit of both, tbh. But, yea, our friends from ESPN and other places have been pretty clear that they think that the Big12 is right there with the Big10 in terms of strongest CBB conference this year, and no, they have not stopped saying that.

You almost always have thoughtful, insightful, well-supported posts presented in a rational and calm manner, and your comments on this particular thread are no different. However, I would like to know why conference bragging rights really matters at the end of the day. And that goes for DukeWarhead as well. Who really cares? There is no way to prove any of this anyway. Just because we have polls and Kenpom and other rankings systems doesn't mean much to me.

To determine whether one conference is definitively better than another you would have to at least start by having each conference team play the other conference's teams home and away, then tabulate the results. Even then you've only just begun to truly assess which conference is better. At the end of the day it doesn't matter for much other than superficial bragging rights.

Indoor66
02-11-2014, 09:42 AM
You almost always have thoughtful, insightful, well-supported posts presented in a rational and calm manner, and your comments on this particular thread are no different. However, I would like to know why conference bragging rights really matters at the end of the day. And that goes for DukeWarhead as well. Who really cares? There is no way to prove any of this anyway. Just because we have polls and Kenpom and other rankings systems doesn't mean much to me.

To determine whether one conference is definitively better than another you would have to at least start by having each conference team play the other conference's teams home and away, then tabulate the results. Even then you've only just begun to truly assess which conference is better. At the end of the day it doesn't matter for much other than superficial bragging rights.

Why are you attempting to bring rationality to an irrational discussion?

Wander
02-11-2014, 10:04 AM
You almost always have thoughtful, insightful, well-supported posts presented in a rational and calm manner, and your comments on this particular thread are no different. However, I would like to know why conference bragging rights really matters at the end of the day. And that goes for DukeWarhead as well. Who really cares? There is no way to prove any of this anyway. Just because we have polls and Kenpom and other rankings systems doesn't mean much to me.

To determine whether one conference is definitively better than another you would have to at least start by having each conference team play the other conference's teams home and away, then tabulate the results. Even then you've only just begun to truly assess which conference is better. At the end of the day it doesn't matter for much other than superficial bragging rights.

I agree that conference pride is overrated, but it does matter for selection and seeding purposes.



West Virginia now has one signature win. Great--they're basically Clemson.


Agreed with your preceding paragraph and even this, but if Clemson and West Virginia are about equal, that's a point in the Big 12's favor, since there are 3 teams worse than WVU in the Big 12 (TT, TCU, Baylor) and like 8 worse than Clemson in the ACC.

El_Diablo
02-11-2014, 10:53 AM
Agreed with your preceding paragraph and even this, but if Clemson and West Virginia are about equal, that's a point in the Big 12's favor, since there are 3 teams worse than WVU in the Big 12 (TT, TCU, Baylor) and like 8 worse than Clemson in the ACC.

True, but it's more like West Virginia is Clemson with a few extra losses thrown in for good measure, so it's not a perfect analog. But my point is that I do not think Clemson is ever touted as demonstrating the ACC's strength. Rather, it's "oh, Duke lost to CLEMSON...it must be a down year for the conference." And for the record, I am not necessarily saying the ACC is the "best" conference...just saying that pointing to West Virginia to say that the B12 is "stacked" is pretty dubious.

I too think the "best conference" argument is pretty pointless overall, and I get pretty tired of listening to every talking head on ESPN opine about what conference is best, as if that label has some sort of meaning or as if I am supposed to care whether that person believes the B12 is better than the B10 or vice versa.

Indoor66
02-11-2014, 11:35 AM
True, but it's more like West Virginia is Clemson with a few extra losses thrown in for good measure, so it's not a perfect analog. But my point is that I do not think Clemson is ever touted as demonstrating the ACC's strength. Rather, it's "oh, Duke lost to CLEMSON...it must be a down year for the conference." And for the record, I am not necessarily saying the ACC is the "best" conference...just saying that pointing to West Virginia to say that the B12 is "stacked" is pretty dubious.

I too think the "best conference" argument is pretty pointless overall, and I get pretty tired of listening to every talking head on ESPN opine about what conference is best, as if that label has some sort of meaning or as if I am supposed to care whether that person believes the B12 is better than the B10 or vice versa.

But can't that level of caring apply to most threads and discussions on sports boards? Kinda like an Angels and Pinheads type of thing.

TexHawk
02-11-2014, 11:42 AM
Since conference games are zero-sum games, it does not make much sense to say that one B12 team losing to another B12 team shows the conference as a whole is somehow better or worse than it would be if the other team won. Which is why it's hard to take the Metcalf story seriously when he uses West Virginia to show that the B12 is "stacked." Um, really? West Virginia's best nonconference win was against Virginia Tech...oh, wait, no...they lost to Virginia Tech. Just let that sink in for a minute. Now look at their actual best nonconference win: #160 William & Mary.

West Virginia now has one signature win. Great--they're basically Clemson.

WVU also has wins over KSU and Oklahoma, and will get another shot at ISU in Ames, and KU at home in the final game of the regular season. Trust me, I would love it if the team that lost to VTech would show up for that one.

DukeWarhead
03-23-2014, 03:23 PM
Remind me again just how great the Big 12 is/was. Sure, ISU and Baylor are still in it.... But quite a few conferences still have two (or more) teams representing. Of course, the ACC is barely hanging on, but nobody claimed the ACC was the best this year.

It's the eye test. Watching an Oklahoma-Baylor or KSU-Texas game during the season would have showed that the teams didn't seem particularly better than others.

FerryFor50
03-23-2014, 03:50 PM
Remind me again just how great the Big 12 is/was. Sure, ISU and Baylor are still in it.... But quite a few conferences still have two (or more) teams representing. Of course, the ACC is barely hanging on, but nobody claimed the ACC was the best this year.

It's the eye test. Watching an Oklahoma-Baylor or KSU-Texas game during the season would have showed that the teams didn't seem particularly better than others.

Right. I'm sure KU losing their 7foot nba lottery prospect to injury didn't have any impact on KU losing today...

Big 12 was by far the strongest conference. The one and done NCAA tourny really proves little in that regard.

DukeWarhead
03-23-2014, 09:07 PM
Big 12 was by far the strongest conference.

Right. Keep telling yourself that. The PAC-12 and Big 10 ain't buying it. And they shouldn't.

FerryFor50
03-23-2014, 09:18 PM
Right. Keep telling yourself that. The PAC-12 and Big 10 ain't buying it. And they shouldn't.

Teams remaining, by conference...

Big 12
Iowa State
Baylor

Pac 12
Stanford
UCLA
Arizona (perhaps, pending results)

Big 10
Wisconsin
MSU
Michigan

SEC
Kentucky
Florida
Tennessee

ACC
UVA

AAC
UConn
Louisville

A-10
Dayton

MWC
San Diego St

So by your logic, the best conferences are the ones with the most teams left. That means the SEC, Pac12 and Big 10 are by far the best.

I disagree with that sentiment wholeheartedly. My point was that Kansas losing their NBA lottery 7 footer was why the Big 12 didn't have three teams as opposed to the Pac12.

Honestly, the NCAA tournament is a TERRIBLE way to judge conference strength because of how many upsets take place, how the matchups occur, etc.

DukeWarhead
03-24-2014, 01:22 AM
Honestly, the NCAA tournament is a TERRIBLE way to judge conference strength because of how many upsets take place, how the matchups occur, etc.

So what's your metric? RPI averages? kenpom? They don't amount to much when teams meet head to head on a neutral court, do they? (ask Duke) You can't claim that that NCAAT doesn't mean anything - I mean, the winner of the darn thing is given the title of College Basketball Champion. Obviously, it's a determiner of who is better than whom.

The argument that the Big 12 was "the far stronger conference" didn't survive past this weekend. Baylor is hot. But so is Tennessee. ISU is hanging in there. So is UCLA and several others. There is nothing, absolutely nothing substantial to verify the claim that the Big 12, that went 2 for 7 this weekend, is or was ever "far stronger" than the likes of the Pac-12 or Big-10. The only way to prove such things to play head to head.

Just like Duke, we found out that KSU, Oklahoma, OSU, and Texas just weren't that great, and without Embiid, KU couldn't beat a bubble team from the Pac-12. All those wonderful, back and forth in-conference Big 12 games didn't show depth - just a lot of parity within the conference.

If ISU or Baylor ends up winning the whole thing, good for them. They will be named the best, but not because of their conference.

You can't just say a conference, as a whole, was "far stronger" than any other. The teams actually have to prove it when they step on the court with teams from other conferences. One loss can be a fluke. Five out of seven is a trend.

Des Esseintes
03-24-2014, 02:38 AM
So what's your metric? RPI averages? kenpom? They don't amount to much when teams meet head to head on a neutral court, do they? (ask Duke) You can't claim that that NCAAT doesn't mean anything - I mean, the winner of the darn thing is given the title of College Basketball Champion. Obviously, it's a determiner of who is better than whom.

The argument that the Big 12 was "the far stronger conference" didn't survive past this weekend. Baylor is hot. But so is Tennessee. ISU is hanging in there. So is UCLA and several others. There is nothing, absolutely nothing substantial to verify the claim that the Big 12, that went 2 for 7 this weekend, is or was ever "far stronger" than the likes of the Pac-12 or Big-10. The only way to prove such things to play head to head.

Just like Duke, we found out that KSU, Oklahoma, OSU, and Texas just weren't that great, and without Embiid, KU couldn't beat a bubble team from the Pac-12. All those wonderful, back and forth in-conference Big 12 games didn't show depth - just a lot of parity within the conference.

If ISU or Baylor ends up winning the whole thing, good for them. They will be named the best, but not because of their conference.

You can't just say a conference, as a whole, was "far stronger" than any other. The teams actually have to prove it when they step on the court with teams from other conferences. One loss can be a fluke. Five out of seven is a trend.
I love this. Tournament performance determines conference strength. Unless Baylor or Iowa State win the title. Then it doesn't.

That weird sound you hear is Logic tearing himself in half, Rumplestilskin-style.

YmoBeThere
03-24-2014, 05:47 AM
I love this. Tournament performance determines conference strength. Unless Baylor or Iowa State win the title. Then it doesn't.

That weird sound you hear is Logic tearing himself in half, Rumplestilskin-style.

Who said Logic is male?

FerryFor50
03-24-2014, 09:37 AM
Who said Logic is male?

What if Logic was one of us?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_PawcvFrMQ‎

DukeWarhead
03-24-2014, 11:14 AM
I love this. Tournament performance determines conference strength. Unless Baylor or Iowa State win the title. Then it doesn't.

It's almost as loveable as your faithful foot-stomping about the "far stronger conference" in absence of any real form of proof.

FerryFor50
03-24-2014, 11:40 AM
It's almost as loveable as your faithful foot-stomping about the "far stronger conference" in absence of any real form of proof.

Here's some proof...

Sagarin rankings: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaab/sagarin/2014/conference/



CONFERENCE CENTRAL MEAN SIMPLE AVERAGE TEAMS WIN50%
1 BIG 12 = 84.26 83.57 ( 2) 10 84.09 ( 1)
2 BIG TEN = 83.66 83.81 ( 1) 12 83.73 ( 2)
3 ATLANTIC COAST = 81.79 81.75 ( 3) 15 81.76 ( 3)
4 PAC-12 = 81.61 81.74 ( 4) 12 81.63 ( 4)
5 BIG EAST = 80.90 80.90 ( 6) 10 80.89 ( 5)
6 SOUTHEASTERN = 80.40 81.02 ( 5) 14 80.60 ( 6)
7 AMERICAN ATHLETIC = 79.27 79.73 ( 7) 10 79.39 ( 7)
8 ATLANTIC 10 = 78.81 78.60 ( 8) 13 78.71 ( 8)
9 WEST COAST = 76.72 77.25 ( 9) 10 76.97 ( 9)
10 MOUNTAIN WEST = 76.24 76.20 ( 10) 11 76.29 ( 10)


Also, RPI rank:

http://statsheet.com/mcb/conferences/



Conference RPI Rank Avg RPI SOS Rank Avg SOS Wins Losses Pct Avg RPI Median RPI Hi RPI Low RPI
Big 12 1 0.5798 1 0.5782 115 40 74.1 61 43 3 207
Big Ten 2 0.5751 2 0.5721 142 46 75.5 62 55 4 139
Pac-12 3 0.5684 3 0.5661 135 48 73.7 74 55 2 209
Big East 4 0.5629 5 0.5610 108 44 71.0 76 69 7 148
ACC 5 0.5594 4 0.5614 160 71 69.2 85 67 8 239
A-10 6 0.5573 7 0.5528 145 70 67.4 86 69 18 213
SEC 7 0.5539 6 0.5564 148 66 69.1 92 80 1 242
American Athletic 8 0.5478 8 0.5447 107 45 70.3 108 101 14 223
West Coast 9 0.5352 9 0.5323 98 52 65.3 115 132 19 199
Mountain West 10 0.5286 10 0.5315 104 58 64.1 128 117 12 275
Missouri Valley 11 0.5128 11 0.5150 86 60 58.9 153 156 5 291
MAC 12 0.5105 12 0.5115 100 75 57.1 153 129 42 306
Conference USA 13 0.4990 13 0.5029 150 117 56.1 174 175 31 302
Horizon 14 0.4931 14 0.4967 80 73 52.2 182 181 70 313
CAA 15 0.4921 15 0.4965 69 79 46.6 184 212 73 278


In non-conference games, the Big 10 was slightly better:

http://statsheet.com/mcb/conferences/stats/record

But the close wins/close losses and blowouts favored the Big 12:

http://statsheet.com/mcb/conferences/stats/non_conf_games?season=2013-2014

So the evidence points, overall, to the Big 12 being the stronger conference. But if you want to look at the NCAA tournament as the only indicator for how good a conference is, then why bother playing any games at all? Just start the season with a tournament!

flyingdutchdevil
03-24-2014, 11:45 AM
So the evidence points, overall, to the Big 12 being the stronger conference. But if you want to look at the NCAA tournament as the only indicator for how good a conference is, then why bother playing any games at all? Just start the season with a tournament!

It's hard to disagree that the Big 12 was the best conference. TexHawk made really valid and convincing arguments about that a few weeks ago. But, like the Big East and the Big 10 before it, the Big 12 may have exhausted its energy beating the crap of each other twice a week. And I wouldn't be surprised that, by tourney time, they really have nothing left.

Frankly speaking, I like the ACC: 4-6 elite teams, 4-6 mediocre teams, and 4-6 cupcakes. It gives teams experience while also giving them rest once in a while.

FerryFor50
03-24-2014, 11:48 AM
It's hard to disagree that the Big 12 was the best conference. TexHawk made really valid and convincing arguments about that a few weeks ago. But, like the Big East and the Big 10 before it, the Big 12 may have exhausted its energy beating the crap of each other twice a week. And I wouldn't be surprised that, by tourney time, they really have nothing left.

Frankly speaking, I like the ACC: 4-6 elite teams, 4-6 mediocre teams, and 4-6 cupcakes. It gives teams experience while also giving them rest once in a while.

Yea, it's good to have conferences with breaks. In the Big 12, everyone had to wait for their turn to play TCU. :p

CDu
03-24-2014, 12:01 PM
It's hard to disagree that the Big 12 was the best conference. TexHawk made really valid and convincing arguments about that a few weeks ago. But, like the Big East and the Big 10 before it, the Big 12 may have exhausted its energy beating the crap of each other twice a week. And I wouldn't be surprised that, by tourney time, they really have nothing left.

Frankly speaking, I like the ACC: 4-6 elite teams, 4-6 mediocre teams, and 4-6 cupcakes. It gives teams experience while also giving them rest once in a while.

To be fair, injuries have played a big part in the Big-12's tourney struggles this year. I don't think Kansas loses with Embiid in the lineup. And if you take away that loss, only Oklahoma really failed to acquit itself (Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and Texas all lost to higher-seeded teams).

With a healthy Embiid and a healthy Niang, I think the Big-12 would have had a realistic shot at 3 teams in the Elite-8. As it stands, they may still get 2 teams there. That's pretty good.

DukeWarhead
03-24-2014, 12:46 PM
But if you want to look at the NCAA tournament as the only indicator for how good a conference is, then why bother playing any games at all? Just start the season with a tournament!

Better yet, cancel the tournament all together and just give the trophy to the team with the best RPI or Sagarin or whatever ratings at the end of the regular season! Boy, that would really prove who's the best, wouldn't it?

I suppose some folks will always place faith in stats and computer numbers. I mean, they worked so well for the BCS system.

I tend to think that any group or conference that is claimed to be "the strongest" of them all should be able to step on the court and prove it against teams from other conferences. And yes, every conference beats itself up during the regular season.

As a whole, the Big 12 hasn't done much to prove that it was/is better than a number of others.

It's safe to say that a number of other conferences feel like, top to bottom, they match up just fine with the Big 12.

vick
03-24-2014, 01:27 PM
Better yet, cancel the tournament all together and just give the trophy to the team with the best RPI or Sagarin or whatever ratings at the end of the regular season! Boy, that would really prove who's the best, wouldn't it?

I suppose some folks will always place faith in stats and computer numbers. I mean, they worked so well for the BCS system.

I tend to think that any group or conference that is claimed to be "the strongest" of them all should be able to step on the court and prove it against teams from other conferences. And yes, every conference beats itself up during the regular season.

As a whole, the Big 12 hasn't done much to prove that it was/is better than a number of others.

It's safe to say that a number of other conferences feel like, top to bottom, they match up just fine with the Big 12.

I'm not sure there's even a plausible case to be made that the NCAA basketball tournament does a better job of selecting the best team than the BCS did.

CDu
03-24-2014, 01:35 PM
I'm not sure there's even a plausible case to be made that the NCAA basketball tournament does a better job of selecting the best team than the BCS did.

I would, in fact, say unequivocally that the BCS did a better job of it than the NCAA tournament does. Unless one really thinks that Villanova was the best team in 1985 or that NC State was the best team in 1983 (or countless examples of teams outside the top-25 making the Final Four).

A tournament is a fun and fairly fair way to crown a champion. But crowning a champion can be very different than determining which team was the best team. And a single-elimination, 68-team tournament ensures that the two are very very different things. Sometimes they end up having the same result. But very frequently they don't.

FerryFor50
03-24-2014, 01:52 PM
I would, in fact, say unequivocally that the BCS did a better job of it than the NCAA tournament does. Unless one really thinks that Villanova was the best team in 1985 or that NC State was the best team in 1983 (or countless examples of teams outside the top-25 making the Final Four).

A tournament is a fun and fairly fair way to crown a champion. But crowning a champion can be very different than determining which team was the best team. And a single-elimination, 68-team tournament ensures that the two are very very different things. Sometimes they end up having the same result. But very frequently they don't.

Unfortunately, the only real way and fair to crown a champ is a set of multi-game series, like the NBA. But college athletics will never be able to go to that model.

DukeWarhead
03-24-2014, 02:53 PM
"I would, in fact, say unequivocally that the BCS did a better job of it than the NCAA tournament does."

And yet, the BCS has given way to a one-and-done playoff system by popular demand. Sure, there won't be any cinderellas in the field of 8 (or even 16) but the premise of computers identifying the best team(s) as opposed to on the field match-ups won't ever win out.

Think more Clausewitz, and less Jomini. It's art, not science. Stats and numbers won't ever trump the end result on the field (or court).

And now that I've gone off in a ridiculous direction, I'll just circle back and say: "Hey Big 12, during the season folks said you were better than everybody else. I just don't see it."

Out.

Des Esseintes
03-24-2014, 05:56 PM
"I would, in fact, say unequivocally that the BCS did a better job of it than the NCAA tournament does."

And yet, the BCS has given way to a one-and-done playoff system by popular demand. Sure, there won't be any cinderellas in the field of 8 (or even 16) but the premise of computers identifying the best team(s) as opposed to on the field match-ups won't ever win out.

Think more Clausewitz, and less Jomini. It's art, not science. Stats and numbers won't ever trump the end result on the field (or court).

And now that I've gone off in a ridiculous direction, I'll just circle back and say: "Hey Big 12, during the season folks said you were better than everybody else. I just don't see it."

Out.

Agreed.

This has to be one of the weirdest, most quixotic threads (Non-greybeard Division) I have ever seen on this board.

Wander
03-24-2014, 09:58 PM
I would, in fact, say unequivocally that the BCS did a better job of it than the NCAA tournament does. Unless one really thinks that Villanova was the best team in 1985 or that NC State was the best team in 1983 (or countless examples of teams outside the top-25 making the Final Four).


Are you kidding? NC State and Villanova are the exceptions, not the rule. They're the two biggest upset champions, and they happened about three decades ago. Most of the time, like Louisville 2013, Kentucky 2012, Duke 2010, UNC 2009, Kansas 2008, Florida 2007, and so on, one of the best teams of the regular season wins the tournament. You can't be certain that they were THE best team, I guess, but the tournament isn't as super flukey as some here make it out to be, and it does a better job of determining the best team than the BCS did, because at least all the worthy teams get a shot. A playoff field that includes all the contending teams and some non-contending ones does a better job than one that doesn't include all the contending teams.

Was Alabama the best team in college football last year? Was Utah the best team in 2008? We don't know, and we never will (we wouldn't know for sure with a 16 team playoff either, but we'd be more confident).

DukeWarhead
03-28-2014, 11:32 PM
So the "strongest" conference fails to get a team past the sweet 16, while the Big 10 gets three into the final 8. Big Ten had a better nonconference record during the season, too.
I'm not a fan of the Big 10, mind you. Just never bought all the Big 12 love. Just sayin....

CR9
03-28-2014, 11:35 PM
Slightly harsh on ISU, who I felt were the best team in the East before Niang got hurt. Same for Kansas in their region if Embiid had been healthy. But I digress. These things happen. Gotta say, I didn't expect much from UT or OU.

El_Diablo
03-29-2014, 12:38 AM
But...but...the Big 12 teams beat other Big 12 teams....

CDu
03-29-2014, 09:16 AM
As CR9 said, injuries played a BIG part in the early exits of the two teams with the best shot. Kansas and Iowa St both lost one of their best players.

Baylor and Texas lost games to much higher seeded teams.

Kansas St lost to a team that was playing better than their seed.

Oklahoma was the only team that embarrassed the Big 12 this year in the tourney.

I think the Big 12 and Big 10 were the two best conferences. The Big 10 has supported that argument in the tourney, while the Big 12 had the misfortune of having their two best teams greatly compromised heading into the tourney.

FerryFor50
03-29-2014, 10:51 AM
As CR9 said, injuries played a BIG part in the early exits of the two teams with the best shot. Kansas and Iowa St both lost one of their best players.

Baylor and Texas lost games to much higher seeded teams.

Kansas St lost to a team that was playing better than their seed.

Oklahoma was the only team that embarrassed the Big 12 this year in the tourney.

I think the Big 12 and Big 10 were the two best conferences. The Big 10 has supported that argument in the tourney, while the Big 12 had the misfortune of having their two best teams greatly compromised heading into the tourney.

Exactly. Pretty sad that someone completely discounts injuries when measuring the strength of an entire season of a conference.

The tourny is not a good way to determine which conference is best. Take a key player off any of the remaining teams right before the tourny... Are they still as strong?

gurufrisbee
03-29-2014, 07:47 PM
I would totally echo the comments about the significance of the injuries. No way Kansas loses to Stanford with a healthy Embiid. Best big man in the nation. I even feel pretty good about their chances against Dayton with him too. And no way Iowa State loses to UConn with Niang. Over half their offense ran through him and he was one of their three best players. UConn barely beats them without him - wouldn't have happened with him. Without those unfortunate injuries the big 12 has two in the Elite Eight, with decent shots two going to the final four. THat's impressive.

FerryFor50
03-29-2014, 07:50 PM
I would totally echo the comments about the significance of the injuries. No way Kansas loses to Stanford with a healthy Embiid. Best big man in the nation. I even feel pretty good about their chances against Dayton with him too. And no way Iowa State loses to UConn with Niang. Over half their offense ran through him and he was one of their three best players. UConn barely beats them without him - wouldn't have happened with him. Without those unfortunate injuries the big 12 has two in the Elite Eight, with decent shots two going to the final four. THat's impressive.

Losing Niang was huge. Not only could he score inside and out, he was an excellent ball distributor. He averaged 3.6 assists per game and was one of their better bigs.

And with a healthy Embiid, KU had a real good shot at the title.

ice-9
03-29-2014, 11:30 PM
Don't look now, but tomorrow the Big 10 has a great chance to get THREE of their teams into the Final Four. Wow, that's got to be a record?

Michigan should be favored over Kentucky as will be Michigan State over U-Conn. Wisconsin is already in with their OT win against Arizona.

ICP
03-29-2014, 11:46 PM
Don't look now, but tomorrow the Big 10 has a great chance to get THREE of their teams into the Final Four. Wow, that's got to be a record?

Michigan should be favored over Kentucky as will be Michigan State over U-Conn. Wisconsin is already in with their OT win against Arizona.

Kentucky is a 2 pt favorite tomorrow. The big east had three teams before the year Villanova beat Georgetown for the title in the mid 80s.

DukeWarhead
03-19-2015, 04:11 PM
Big XII underwhelming start again....
Deepest conference my a**!

subzero02
03-19-2015, 04:20 PM
Big XII underwhelming start again....
Deepest conference my a**!

They're definitely not as deep as Turner's game winning 3...

brevity
03-19-2015, 04:21 PM
Via Twitter (https://twitter.com/McMurphyESPN/status/578645035924717569):

Brett McMurphy
‏@McMurphyESPN

As soon as UAB reinstates football, Big 12 will add UAB & Georgia State so it can hold a Big 12 title game

12:51 PM - 19 Mar 2015

Tripping William
03-19-2015, 07:32 PM
Via Twitter (https://twitter.com/McMurphyESPN/status/578645035924717569):

Brett McMurphy
‏@McMurphyESPN

As soon as UAB reinstates football, Big 12 will add UAB & Georgia State so it can hold a Big 12 title game

12:51 PM - 19 Mar 2015

And, in order not to be surpassed by the B1G, they'll add Butler as the lucky13th.

DukeWarhead
03-22-2015, 06:53 PM
...and the BiG12's regular season champ gets manhandled by a (very good) mid-major. Bye bye Jayhawks. At least your RPI was good. I guess you'll always have that...

the "overall best" conference's tournament fate now rests in the hands of Oklahoma and Huggy Bear.