Jump to content

Competitiveness in a conference?


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

To a degree it matters; if we are talking about being Kansas and dominating an above average conference or Virginia and doing really well, but not dominating, in a loaded conference, give me Kansas. 

I think Kansas's domination quite honestly just looks pathetic on the B12. No team in any conference should dominate that way. Hell Bama football doesn't have anything like KU does in-conference domination wise. Looks awful on the other B12 teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, btownqb said:

I think Kansas's domination quite honestly just looks pathetic on the B12. No team in any conference should dominate that way. Hell Bama football doesn't have anything like KU does in-conference domination wise. Looks awful on the other B12 teams. 

Yeah, I'm not worried about perception though. If we keep getting high seeds we will win more titles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's tough to point correlation between winning national title and strength of conference. No doubt better competition gets you prepared. I think we all can agree on that. With that said....the path to the title game is such a crap shoot. I mean Michigan played Montana, Houston, A&M, Florida St and Loyola for their chance at title. 

Not discounting Michigan playing for a title but we do have to weigh it properly as it relates to impact a tough conference has on increasing chances of playing for title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archie talked about this a little at the Huber winery event.  Said that we have to schedule and win tough non-conference games because looking at last year, the conference as a whole didn’t get it done in non-con games and it hurt the Big Ten at tournament time.  He said it wasn’t good that a team that won 13 conference games (Nebraska) and a team that won the NIT (Penn State) couldn’t get into the tourney.

For whatever reason, it does seem that the selection committee has been down on the Big Ten recently.  With the Big Ten being perceived as a weaker conference, it hurts our teams’ seeding come tournament time (see IU as a 5 seed in 2016 after winning the Big Ten).  I think that’s a pretty big problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, btownqb said:

I think Kansas's domination quite honestly just looks pathetic on the B12. No team in any conference should dominate that way. Hell Bama football doesn't have anything like KU does in-conference domination wise. Looks awful on the other B12 teams. 

Big 12 was pretty good last year......even with Kansas' "domination".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Archie talked about this a little at the Huber winery event.  Said that we have to schedule and win tough non-conference games because looking at last year, the conference as a whole didn’t get it done in non-con games and it hurt the Big Ten at tournament time.  He said it wasn’t good that a team that won 13 conference games (Nebraska) and a team that won the NIT (Penn State) couldn’t get into the tourney.

For whatever reason, it does seem that the selection committee has been down on the Big Ten recently.  With the Big Ten being perceived as a weaker conference, it hurts our teams’ seeding come tournament time (see IU as a 5 seed in 2016 after winning the Big Ten).  I think that’s a pretty big problem.

Very fair assessment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, btownqb said:

I think Kansas's domination quite honestly just looks pathetic on the B12. No team in any conference should dominate that way. Hell Bama football doesn't have anything like KU does in-conference domination wise. Looks awful on the other B12 teams. 

This is what I don’t really understand, and it might just be because I’m a biased Big Ten fan.  I totally agree with you that it’s pathetic that the rest of the Big 12 has allowed Kansas to dominate for so long.  I don’t think Kansas would have that streak in the Big Ten.

But for whatever reason, the Big 12 is consistently ranked as a better conference than the Big Ten, whether that’s RPI and SOS rankings, tournament seeding, conventional wisdom from national analysts, etc.  I’m not really sure why, but obviously there is something we’re missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, rico said:

I saw things were being talked about in the Carton thread so I thought I would start one that discussed it.  Does it really matter how tough the competition is in your conference?  

Yes it does because it will help you come tournament time.  Also the better the conference the better the seed you will receive if you win the conference. take our 16 team where we won the conference and still received a 5 seed.  Also as a fan it brings  a lot more enjoyment to watch the conference if it is very competitive and has great teams.  I loved watching the conference around 87-94 because the conference had plenty of great players and great teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Yes it does because it will help you come tournament time.  Also the better the conference the better the seed you will receive if you win the conference. take our 16 team where we won the conference and still received a 5 seed.  Also as a fan it brings  a lot more enjoyment to watch the conference if it is very competitive and has great teams.  I loved watching the conference around 87-94 because the conference had plenty of great players and great teams.

And Gonzaga says hello.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, rico said:

And Gonzaga says hello.

I would bet that their fans get bored watching them dominate a smaller conference every year as well.  Also Gonzaga usually play a great out of conference schedule so that helps when it comes to seeding.  I would think most fans would be more entertained when the big ten is good because you will see better matchups instead of watching a lot of mediocrity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I would bet that their fans get bored watching them dominate a smaller conference every year as well.  Also Gonzaga usually play a great out of conference schedule so that helps when it comes to seeding.  I would think most fans would be more entertained when the big ten is good because you will see better matchups instead of watching a lot of mediocrity.

I doubt it.  Just sayin'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Yes it does because it will help you come tournament time.  Also the better the conference the better the seed you will receive if you win the conference. take our 16 team where we won the conference and still received a 5 seed.  Also as a fan it brings  a lot more enjoyment to watch the conference if it is very competitive and has great teams.  I loved watching the conference around 87-94 because the conference had plenty of great players and great teams.

Sure has helped the B1G in the last 20 years. 

Kansas and Kentucky completely destroy your theory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FW_Hoosier said:

This is what I don’t really understand, and it might just be because I’m a biased Big Ten fan.  I totally agree with you that it’s pathetic that the rest of the Big 12 has allowed Kansas to dominate for so long.  I don’t think Kansas would have that streak in the Big Ten.

But for whatever reason, the Big 12 is consistently ranked as a better conference than the Big Ten, whether that’s RPI and SOS rankings, tournament seeding, conventional wisdom from national analysts, etc.  I’m not really sure why, but obviously there is something we’re missing.

Its a joke man. I love when UK fans run their mouth about how they have dominated their conference (outside of last year because quite honestly the sec was damn good last year). Winning @Iowa or minny or MSU or Mich or ILL or Pu or IU or OSU is CRAZY hard to do. Now... you win a baseball series at OK or Texas or Baylor you've accomplished something... those road wins in basketball. Yawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, btownqb said:

Its a joke man. I love when UK fans run their mouth about how they have dominated their conference (outside of last year because quite honestly the sec was damn good last year). Winning @Iowa or minny or MSU or Mich or ILL or Pu or IU or OSU is CRAZY hard to do. Now... you win a baseball series at OK or Texas or Baylor you've accomplished something... those road wins in basketball. Yawn

Go Vols.......just had to get that in!!!!!  LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with having a very strong conference overall is that you get alot of parity which results in road losses for team and alot of home wins.  So you end up with 1 or 2 dominiate teams and alot with the similar records.  To me, it doesn't matter how good your conference team are.  Its how good your non-cons are and how well you perform against them.  Kansas and Kentucky might dominate their weaker conferences but if you look mostly year to year, those 2 teams are playing a tough Non-Con and are in major tourney's.  Yes you can find examples of where their non-cons are horrible but mostly they play good competition and win.  Then they dominate their conference and stay in the top 10-15 of the country all year, get great seeds and easier paths to final 4's

I would rather have a very hard and successful non-con with average conference competition.  Win big early and maintain late.  That will get you a decent seeding.

just my opinion.  Which is usually wrong :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The officiating in the Big Ten hurts seeding.  The home team gets about a 10 point cushion in the Big with the way the game is called.  That is cut in half in most other conferences.  It hurts seeding and it hurts Big Ten teams in the tournament as they have to adapt to how differently the game is called.

Home court advantage in the Big Tennis vastly inflated because our officials, by and large, suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

The officiating in the Big Ten hurts seeding.  The home team gets about a 10 point cushion in the Big with the way the game is called.  That is cut in half in most other conferences.  It hurts seeding and it hurts Big Ten teams in the tournament as they have to adapt to how differently the game is called.

Home court advantage in the Big Tennis vastly inflated because our officials, by and large, suck.

Interesting point, you may be right.  Along those lines, I’m sure it also helps Duke, Kansas, and UK that they get a 10 point cushion in any stadium in their respective conferences, home or away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Interesting point, you may be right.  Along those lines, I’m sure it also helps Duke, Kansas, and UK that they get a 10 point cushion in any stadium in their respective conferences, home or away.

There is no such thing as a Big 10 official anymore....back in the day they were conference affiliated, but not now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rico said:

There is no such thing as a Big 10 official anymore....back in the day they were conference affiliated, but not now.

You are mostly correct.  The refs can have contracts with multiple conferences but that doesn't mean they all do.  We see a lot of the same refs.

But i would say, although i am not anywhere near an expert on college basketball but i do watch alot of other teams from other conferences play and i can say with a mostly unbiased opinion, the B1G officials seem to to let the home environment affect them more than other places and not just when the momentum is swinging.  But from start to finish, certain places are just harder to play due to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

You are mostly correct.  The refs can have contracts with multiple conferences but that doesn't mean they all do.  We see a lot of the same refs.

But i would say, although i am not anywhere near an expert on college basketball but i do watch alot of other teams from other conferences play and i can say with a mostly unbiased opinion, the B1G officials seem to to let the home environment affect them more than other places and not just when the momentum is swinging.  But from start to finish, certain places are just harder to play due to this.

Wisconsin and Purdue.  But Wisconsin especially when Bo Ryan was there.  Playing in Madison meant playing 5 on 8 every night.  It helped to inflate a record of an undeserving team to the detriment of better teams.  Losing 2 or 3 away games because of an overwhelmingly unfair advantage to the home team means the difference between a 1 seed and a 3 or a 3 and 6.  Duke, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas are generally the better teams in their conference and that bears out whether they are home or away.  In the Big Ten you deal with Mackey, Kohl, and yes Assembly Hall some years.  Some of that is attributable to the crowds but quite a bit is because the refs play to that as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

You are mostly correct.  The refs can have contracts with multiple conferences but that doesn't mean they all do.  We see a lot of the same refs.

But i would say, although i am not anywhere near an expert on college basketball but i do watch alot of other teams from other conferences play and i can say with a mostly unbiased opinion, the B1G officials seem to to let the home environment affect them more than other places and not just when the momentum is swinging.  But from start to finish, certain places are just harder to play due to this.

I think ACC, SEC, Big12, Pac 12 fans would say the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...