|
Replies: 11
| visibility 2116
|
Dynasty Maker [3189]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Bracketology and the SEC ...
6
6
Feb 25, 2025, 3:41 PM
|
|
So I realize the SEC has been a good basketball conference, and has some really good teams in the top third of its league this year. I also realize the early-season ACC challenge was very lopsided. After our football national championships, I have become tone-deaf to the media bias towards the SEC as well (meaning just show up and win your games and nothing is left to be said).
But I need some T-NET help trying to figure out what makes sense about the following in the latest ESPN Bracketology:
TEXAS LONGHORNS - 16-11, (5-9 in conference). Beat both Syracuse and NC State by 4 pts. Currently listed as one of the last 4 byes.
ARKANSAS RAZORBACKS - 16-11, (5-9 in conference). Beat Miami by 3 pts. Currently listed as a last 4 in.
OKLAHOMA SOONERS - 17-10, (4-10 in conference). Currently listed as a last 4 in.
UGA BULLDOGS - 16-11, (4-10 in conference). Currently on the bubble in the second group of last 4 out.
No matter how good the conference, it just seems odd looking at a team with a 4-10 league record with any seriousness. Just a thought.
GO TIGERS
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Phenom [14550]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23627
Joined: 2004
|
Rankings of those teams:
2
Feb 25, 2025, 3:58 PM
|
|
Texas - 40 KenPom, 38 NET
Arkansas - 36 KenPom, 39 NET
Georgia - 45 KenPom, 40 NET
Oklahoma - 49 KenPom, 51 NET
And also some ACC bubble teams:
UNC - 39 KenPom, 44 NET
SMU - 41 KenPom, 41 NET
Wake - 68 KenPom, 64 NET
As you can see, the 11-14th teams in the SEC are essentially the same tier as the 4th-6th teams in the ACC. If anyone here is an outlier, it's actually Wake Forest. The SEC is having an historically great year for a basketball conference, and it's not just the teams at the top of the league - it's the entire league. Go look at how many Quad 1 games the SEC teams have played. Auburn and Kentucky are at 16 each. Tennessee and Bama have played 14 each. Those SEC bubble teams have all played 12 or 13. SMU has played 5, UNC 11 (but has lost 10 of those), and Wake 8.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3189]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
So to me, Quads are either what you get from heavy squats and leg presses,
5
5
Feb 25, 2025, 4:21 PM
|
|
or a place you hang out in college.
I'm not arguing Auburn, UK, UT, and Bama are not really good teams. What I am arguing is that if eventually your overall record in your conference no matter how "good" that conference appears is 4-10 (28%), then I struggle with the idea that you have qualified for the dance.
What is propping up the bottom of the SEC teams that make them "Quad 1" wins for the upper tier teams?
And vice versa when considering "Quad 1" losses almost better than an actual win.
I do agree that the conference as a whole this season is terrific. To be fair we lost to the worst team in the league (though we did beat UK).
GO TIGERS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29316]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 12670
Joined: 1998
|
Re: So to me, Quads are either what you get from heavy squats and leg presses,
2
Feb 25, 2025, 5:09 PM
|
|
There is way too much credit given for losing Quad 1 games. When you are sub .500 in those quad 1 games; it just means you lost way more than you won. LOL If you were any good, you'd win those games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14550]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23627
Joined: 2004
|
Just curious
Feb 25, 2025, 5:21 PM
|
|
If we played 10 games against Auburn, how many do you think we would win? If we went, say 2-8 or 3-7 in those games (realistic), would that mean we were no good?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8312]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Re: Just curious
2
Feb 25, 2025, 5:26 PM
|
|
No. But if we played one game each against Auburn, TX A&M, Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas, Ole Miss, Miss St, Missouri, Vanderbilt, and Arkansas and went 3-7, then I'd say we were no good and don't even deserve NIT.
But, if a team with an SEC patch on their chest does that, they are on the NCAAT bubble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29316]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 12670
Joined: 1998
|
Re: Just curious
1
Feb 25, 2025, 5:59 PM
[ in reply to Just curious ] |
|
HUH? No esecpn team has played Aubie 10 times this year. LOL
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8312]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Re: Rankings of those teams:
2
Feb 25, 2025, 4:23 PM
[ in reply to Rankings of those teams: ] |
|
That’s because the entire conference was over ranked to begin with. When all the teams are at the top, all games are Quad 1 and nobody falls down the rankings.
That’s how the Coots lost like 12 straight but stayed ranked 90 the whole time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14550]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23627
Joined: 2004
|
I'm not sure how you can say that when they
1
Feb 25, 2025, 5:15 PM
|
|
obliterated everyone OOC, including the ACC. The SEC won the SEC/ACC challenge 14-2.
I guess it's still TBD on how they will perform in the NCAAT, but so far I think they've earned all of the accolades.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8312]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Re: I'm not sure how you can say that when they
3
Feb 25, 2025, 5:24 PM
|
|
Any rating scenario that lets a team lose 12 straight games and not drop in the rankings is flawed immensely. Just because you are playing other teams that are perceived to be ranked high does not mean you are good for losing to them.
That's the problem with conference rankings.
And just because the ACC lost to the SEC doesn't mean the ACC is categorically weaker than the Big10. Playing the best and losing doesn't mean you are also worse than all the other conferences.
The flaw in the ratings is that there is a starting point that is pre-determined by some unknown criteria, likely tied to conference or prior year results. Nobody will explain that, or admit it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8187]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
Posts: 16060
Joined: 2001
|
Do you not see what those teams OOC records are?
1
Feb 25, 2025, 7:28 PM
|
|
11-2,11-2,13-0,12-1 - the only reason they have the conference records they do is because their entire conference is good this year. We’re a great team this year but we lost 3 non-conference games. That’s over half what those 4 bubble teams lost combined. There have been times in recent years where the SEC and B1G got more than they deserved and the ACC and Big East got screwed over. The ACC and Big East have proven that the past few years in the tourney. This year based on non-conference results SEC deserves a ton of teams. I’m not a big believer in the quad/NET as I believe it’s flawed. I also think the ACC in the past got a lot better as the season went on - a lot of that used to do with roster turnover due to early pro departures. Not really the case now. All that said - just look at the non conference results and the SEC was just flat substantially better and way deeper than the ACC in the regular season. I personably think we should have 128 or at least 96 in the tourney. Regardless of the above, Duke is a favorite to win it all and Clemson and UL are both capable of an elite 8 and possibly a FF with a little luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6953]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
Posts: 13902
Joined: 2000
|
I'd say odds are only 1 of those teams makes it in
Feb 26, 2025, 4:56 PM
|
|
and that is being generous
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 11
| visibility 2116
|
|
|
50
