The College Basketball Post

[woody2626]

It’s almost as if Big 12 non-conference is going to look bad when they play other power 5 teams that turn out mid, but those other teams get the boost of playing an actually good team…

Why don’t we post the strength of schedule for in-conference games? Especially when those account for 60% of the total season?

You manipulate the NET by beating up on 300+ ranked teams in the non-con to boost your rankings/metrics. If the majority of the conference does it, like the big 12, then they carry that into conference play with a large amount of all Q1 games. If the games remain close consistently and there’s plenty of variation then they won’t drop much at all in the NET. The big 12’s status is elevated because of that which is why I don’t take seriously what they do in conference and history backs that up with results in March more often than not

 

[spacedoodoo]

You can factor in early season games, absolutely, but to rely on those more heavily than the most recent games is silly. The CFP does it (Florida State!) so idk the selection committee here is so weird about it.

Even if ISU doesn’t get the 1 seed, putting them as the 8th overall seed is ludicrous. The ISU team that lost to VT and A&M in November is obviously a very different team than the one that just beat the brakes off of Houston on Saturday.

I hear you. I’ve never really given much thought about the seeding from the ranking perspective. It’s all gonna be chaos come Thursday anyway

 

[sneaksoy]

What does ‘historically’ mean lol? Kansas and Baylor won two of the last three national championships. Texas Tech was in the championship game in 2019.

Last year, Big 12 went 9-7 in the tourney. ACC went 7-5. In 2022, Big 12 was 13-5. In 2021, 11-6.

It’s not like the Big 12 has ‘historically’ scheduled poor non-conference games writ large.

And the Big 10 looks to schedule decent non-conference games on paper yet has faceplanted in the last couple of tournaments.

I don’t think there’s any real correlation to your theory.

 

[spacedoodoo]

Big 12 has came on strong the last couple of years in the tournament but if you look at the conference as a whole, outside of Kansas there hasn’t been much success. At least what I think woody is referring to

Big Ten is nasty hoop

 

[woody2626]

Big 12 has came on strong the last couple of years in the tournament but if you look at the conference as a whole, outside of Kansas there hasn’t been much success. At least what I think woody is referring to

Big Ten is nasty hoop

Yea, you have your outliers like Kansas, now it’ll be Houston. But the big 12 gets in 8-9 teams annually, however, by the 2nd weekend they’re left with 2-3 and it’s the usual suspects. The ACC, for example, gets in 5-6 and is carrying 4 into the 2nd weekend and then you see a new team from the conference end up in the final four as it has produced for the last decade. I’m not specifically using the ACC as an example here, they just fit, but sorry if I don’t think teams who beat up on the likes of Idaho State and Lindenwood should be rewarded or those results sway anything to the positive side. You’re untested and when it comes to seedings, the committee agrees.

 

[sneaksoy]

You’re untested and when it comes to seedings, the committee agrees.

Sure, if you’re playing Idaho States all year but to say that playing 12+ games against ranked teams leaves a team “untested” is stupid.

The committee agrees that playing Idaho State is irrelevant and that’s why Eastern Washington isn’t getting an at large bid. But this whole “early season means more than the basketball team you are entering the tournament” is silliness, even if that’s the tomfoolery that the committee is employing.

 

[Arthur Shelby]

 

[woody2626]

Sure, if you’re playing Idaho States all year but to say that playing 12+ games against ranked teams leaves a team “untested” is stupid.

The committee agrees that playing Idaho State is irrelevant and that’s why Eastern Washington isn’t getting an at large bid. But this whole “early season means more than the basketball team you are entering the tournament” is silliness, even if that’s the tomfoolery that the committee is employing.

The point is that the metrics are skewed and that conference specifically as a whole opts to play lower level competition instead of scheduling meaningful/helpful games to boost the résumé’s by playing the same competition they do in March.

Is the Big 12 the best conference in America or do they just beat up on no names and then receive elevated rankings which makes their conference schedule appear much more difficult than it is? The results in March, with how quickly the majority of the conference is bounced in the opening weekend, supports that notion. That’s the point trying to be made

 

[rolaholic]

 

[isu 42]

Yea, you have your outliers like Kansas, now it’ll be Houston. But the big 12 gets in 8-9 teams annually, however, by the 2nd weekend they’re left with 2-3 and it’s the usual suspects.

The Big 12 has had 10 teams in the conference until this year. We haven't been getting 8-9 teams in the tournament annually. The number has been 6-7 with 4 different schools going to the Final Four the last 10 years.

 

[sneaksoy]

The point is that the metrics are skewed and that conference specifically as a whole opts to play lower level competition instead of scheduling meaningful/helpful games to boost the résumé’s by playing the same competition they do in March.

Is the Big 12 the best conference in America or do they just beat up on no names and then receive elevated rankings which makes their conference schedule appear much more difficult than it is? The results in March, with how quickly the majority of the conference is bounced in the opening weekend, supports that notion. That’s the point trying to be made

SDSU, FAU, Gonzaga all in the Elite 8 last year out of mid conferences. K State and Texas in from the Big 12.

Meanwhile Kansas beat Duke, Wisconsin, Indiana, NC State, etc during the non-conference last year but goes down in the second round. Were they just not good? Does that make the Big 12 bad?

Iowa State beat Villanova and UNC in the non-conference last year then gets bounced in the first round. Does that make them bad?

The majority of every conference is getting bounced in the first weekend, there’s only 16 teams left! Any conference getting 3-4 of those teams is solid.

I think y’all are leaning a little too hard on this whole “oh take away Kansas and the Big 12 doesn’t win in March” thing while also looking way too hard at this specific year’s non-conference schedule. I guess the results will play out on the court, but I really don’t find any correlation between non-conference schedule strength and tournament success, so I think it’s weird the selection committee leans so hard on it.

 

[Arthur Shelby]

 

[spacedoodoo]

SDSU, FAU, Gonzaga all in the Elite 8 last year out of mid conferences. K State and Texas in from the Big 12.

Meanwhile Kansas beat Duke, Wisconsin, Indiana, NC State, etc during the non-conference last year but goes down in the second round. Were they just not good? Does that make the Big 12 bad?

Iowa State beat Villanova and UNC in the non-conference last year then gets bounced in the first round. Does that make them bad?

The majority of every conference is getting bounced in the first weekend, there’s only 16 teams left! Any conference getting 3-4 of those teams is solid.

I think y’all are leaning a little too hard on this whole “oh take away Kansas and the Big 12 doesn’t win in March” thing while also looking way too hard at this specific year’s non-conference schedule. I guess the results will play out on the court, but I really don’t find any correlation between non-conference schedule strength and tournament success, so I think it’s weird the selection committee leans so hard on it.

Well, what we do know is that the majority of big 12 teams scheduled lightly in order to enter in conference play with minimal loses, which in turn helped their net ranking subsequently making every matchup a Q1 game. Iowa state was the main culprit and beneficiary of gaming the system by having a poor non-con schedule. Committee chairman mentioned on the selection show last night that Iowa state wasn’t being considered for a 1 seed because of it

Non-con games have always been of significant importance to the committee. It’s why you see teams like Gonzaga consistently schedule multiple pre season top 25 opponents every year with their being limited Q1 opportunities in WCC play

 

[Arthur Shelby]

 

[sneaksoy]

Well, what we do know is that the majority of big 12 teams scheduled lightly in order to enter in conference play with minimal loses, which in turn helped their net ranking subsequently making every matchup a Q1 game. Iowa state was the main culprit and beneficiary of gaming the system by having a poor non-con schedule. Committee chairman mentioned on the selection show last night that Iowa state wasn’t being considered for a 1 seed because of it

Non-con games have always been of significant importance to the committee. It’s why you see teams like Gonzaga consistently schedule multiple pre season top 25 opponents every year with their being limited Q1 opportunities in WCC play

Again, sure it’s fine ISU didn’t get a #1 over UNC but to then be the #8 overall? And why is the NCAA bothering with NET ratings if they’re not even going to use them? (See Indiana State - the highest net rating to not make the tournament. Probably would’ve been better off not to play Alabama and Michigan St?)

For the record, both ISU and UNC played 11 games against Quads 3 and 4. Same record off Quad 1 and 2 combined. So even with the “inflated” Quad 1, the resumes are basically the same.

I guess Big 12 teams are better off scheduling 3-4 good Quad 1 games in the non-conference and joining a mediocre conference like Gonzaga then. And you’re definitely better off with a couple of early season wins against teams that get good later in the year than winning a conference tournament when it counts.

 

[spacedoodoo]

Aye man I’ve been said that the metrics are flawed for various reasons. Few pages back I lobbied for the committee putting teams like Indiana state in over a power 6 school like Michigan state

 

[sneaksoy]

The irony there is I have Michigan State knocking out UNC

But fair enough. Looking forward to these debates being settled on the court this week!

 

[Bantz Lord T]

The irony there is I have Michigan State knocking out UNC

But fair enough. Looking forward to these debates being settled on the court this week!

So do I. I’m familiar with UNC’s game and I’m not impressed.

 

[heelsandeers]

UNC was 8-2 on the road with wins at Duke, Clemson, Virginia, Pitt, and NCST

Iowa St was 5-5 on the road beating Texas, TCU, Cincy, UCF, and DePaul

 

[spacedoodoo]

The irony there is I have Michigan State knocking out UNC

But fair enough. Looking forward to these debates being settled on the court this week!

I wouldn’t overlook Mississippi state

 

[Arthur Shelby]

 

[heelsandeers]

I wouldn’t overlook Mississippi state

Not sure either has enough offense but think I'd rather see Mich St

 

[JustBlaze.]

Paxson Wojcik's NIL agent must be elite because what the actual ****?

 

[rolaholic]

 

[langfor5]

The Caitlin Clark effect.

Who is the biggest name in the mens game?