B1G - Best Football and Best Basketball Conference

[mikemarc1]

Originally posted by bac2therac:

who is putting a lot of stock in a game here or there. Obviously you must balance some of the regular season with the tournament results. If you get two schools to the Final 4 yeah that matters...and one of them was a 4th/5th place Big 10 school against one of the top ACC schools. Then the top Big 10 school took out ACc #3. So yes head to head in the tourney is factored in.

Lets face it Rutgers was atrocious this season yet still went out and won at Clemson. The Big 10 ten won the series overall 8-6 led by much of the second tier of the league. The ACC elite beat the Big 10 elite at the start of the year but look who is winning now...and of course still a couple of games to be played that could sway supremecy to one or another...I mean if its Wisky vs Michigan State in the finals are you see still going to hear arguments about the ACC being better than the Big 10

Rutgers beat Wisconsin...does that mean Rutgers is better than Wisconsin? Obviously not.

Again, people are putting too much stock in one game by each team (the challenge)..without looking at the overall picture. Still think Clemson overall was better than Rutgers.

 

[bac2therac]

sure they were but as a whole the bottom of the ACC is garbage....worse garbage than Minnesota or Northwestern who were not true bottom feeders...really that was Rutgers and Penn State and I would take Penn State over any of the bottom 6 ACC schools

 

[R1950]

I do agree, however, collectively, between football success, basketball success, and olympic sports success, Big Ten is #1 in nation. Can't we at least agree on that! Haha.

Agreed ! I think just about everyone is on the same page with this one.

 

[Ty Webb]

Originally posted by bac2therac:

sure they were but as a whole the bottom of the ACC is garbage....worse garbage than Minnesota or Northwestern who were not true bottom feeders...really that was Rutgers and Penn State and I would take Penn State over any of the bottom 6 ACC schools

How is Northwestern not a true bottom feeder? Nebraska is typically a bottom feeder in basketball too.

So to say the BIG had only two total dogs and the ACC had 6 is peculiar.

 

[Caliknight]

Originally posted by derleider:

Originally posted by Caliknight:
On their own, top to bottom, it's the best conference. Beat the acc head to head, as well as the SEC in football. 2 teals in the ff and NC in football. Dominance.

I dont think you know what top to bottom means.

Was waiting for you to chime in. Your contrarian game is slipping.

 

[c_husk]

You forgot best wrestling conference by looong margin.

 

[mikemarc1]

Originally posted by bac2therac:

sure they were but as a whole the bottom of the ACC is garbage....worse garbage than Minnesota or Northwestern who were not true bottom feeders...really that was Rutgers and Penn State and I would take Penn State over any of the bottom 6 ACC schoolsEhh. I disagree, but whatever.

I guess my initial post of "Lets not get carried away..." regarding B1G being best conference in hoops made it seem like I think B1G is far and away 2nd to ACC. Not the case, and sorry for making it seem that way.

Think ACC holds slight advantage based on overall season. Wisky and MSU win on Saturday? Might change my feelings.

 

[R1950]

You forgot best wrestling conference by looong margin

Yep, 5 out of the top 9 finishers were BIG schools. Pretty damn impressive.

 

[brista21]

Originally posted by Caliknight:
On their own, top to bottom, it's the best conference. Beat the acc head to head, as well as the SEC in football. 2 teals in the ff and NC in football. Dominance.

And another school winning a New Year's Six bowl (Cotton) in addition to Ohio State's NC. Said school is also in the Final Four.

 

[brista21]

Originally posted by PatrickRU92:

Originally posted by bac2therac:
It was the best basketball conference....the big 12 and big east fell flat on their faces in the tourney undoing any claim they had in the regular season

Big East?? They pretty much finished where they belong--with the rest of the good conferences that aren't part of major college sports. like the A10, AAC or the MVC.

They put 6 schools in the tourney, which was warranted and no fluke. In basketball, the Big East remains one of the power conferences until proven otherwise.

 

[RUfinal4]

IMO the conferences are pretty even:

ACC - 3 teams with at least 30 wins, 4 teams with at least 20 wins, 4 additional teams with winning records, 4 teams with losing records

Duke, UVA, ND, and Louisville are top 10 type teams

B10 - 1 team with at least 30 wins, 6 teams with at least 20 wins, 4 additional teams with .500 or better records, and 3 teams with losing records.

Wisconsin and Mich St are top 10 teams type teams

Top match-ups in each league:
Wisconsin (35-3) vs Duke (33-4)
Mich St (27-11) vs Louisville (27-9)
Maryland (28-7) vs Notre Dame (32-6)
Iowa (22-12) vs Virginia (30-4)
Ohio St (24-11) vs. UNC (26-12)

Middle match-ups:
empty vs. NC St (22-14)
Indiana (20-14) vs. Syracuse (20-13)
Illinois (19-14) vs. Pitt (19-15)
Michigan (16-16) vs. Clemson (16-15)
Minnesota (18-15) vs. Fla St (17-16)

Bottom match-ups:
Rutgers (10-22) vs. Va Tech (11-22)
Penn St (18-16) vs. Ga Tech (12-19)
Nebraska (13-18) vs. Boston College (13-19)
Northwestern (15-17) vs. Wake Forest (13-19)

This post was edited on 3/30 11:17 AM by RUfinal4

 

[bac2therac]

Northwestern was strong at the end of the year if you watched them play, beating the likes of Indiana and Iowa.

RU was garbage no question but the ACC had 3 schools in that category....BC, Wake and Va Tech. Minnesota and NW do not fall into that category IMO from watching the games

 

[Ty Webb]

Northwestern was garbage. Their "finish" included getting blown out by an average Illinois team and then getting destroyed by both Iowa and Indiana. Northwestern is a total bottom feeder just like BC, Wake, etc.




This post was edited on 3/30 12:05 PM by Ty Webb

 

[Shimmy24]

Originally posted by Ty Webb:
Northwestern was garbage.

Yeah they beat Iowa and Indiana in mid to late Feb then faced both teams again in March and got demolished in both games.

Winning 5 of 6 in from mid-February to early March is not "garbage." They were a (small) step above Nebraska, Penn State, and Rutgers this year.

 

[Ty Webb]

Originally posted by Shimmy24:

Originally posted by Ty Webb:
Northwestern was garbage.

Yeah they beat Iowa and Indiana in mid to late Feb then faced both teams again in March and got demolished in both games.

Winning 5 of 6 in from mid-February to early March is not "garbage." They were a (small) step above Nebraska, Penn State, and Rutgers this year.

Using that logic, then I guess BC wasn't a bottom feeder either. They won 4 of 5 down the stretch with their only loss to a Top 15 UNC team.

Fact is BC sucked. So did VT. So did Wake. So did RU. So did Northwestern. So did Nebraska.

Both conferences had four to five total garbage teams this year. Trying to argue which piece of shit was better or that the BIG only had two dogs while the ACC had 6 is some serious hair splitting. The ACC and BIG were likely the two best conferences last year and if one wants to believe the BIG was better because apparently their shit stank just a bit less than the ACC's shit, then have at it.

This post was edited on 3/30 12:23 PM by Ty Webb

 

[Scarlet_Scourge]

But seriously folks, how in the actual BLEEP did Rutgers beat Wisconsin in MBB again?

Greatest upset in Rutgers MBB history. I hope they win the whole thing, just to make it even more absurd.

 

[ScarletDave]

Rutgers went undefeated against the ACC in football and men's basketball, and took their top wbball team (#6 UNC) to 2 OT.

 

[Ty Webb]

Originally posted by ScarletDave:
Rutgers went undefeated against the ACC in football and men's basketball, and took their top wbball team (#6 UNC) to 2 OT.

ND is the ACC's top wbball team, not UNC.

 

[anvilofstars]

Originally posted by mikemarc1:

Originally posted by Caliknight:
How so?

Duke - 1 seed, final four
Notre Dame - 3 seed, elite eight (2 points from beating best team)
Virginia - 2 seed, best defensive team in country?
NC state - Only team to upset a #1
UNC - Sweet 16
Louisvile - Elite 8.

5 sweet 16 teams vs only 2 in Big Ten. Better tourney overall.
higher seeds in the tourny too..arguably better regular season.

Stopping at the Sweet 16 is very arbitrary. Why not stop at Elite 8 or Final 4 or national champs or even just number of teams chosen to the tourney? What is the reason for choosing Sweet 16?

 

[Eagle78]

No, it wasn't arbitrary at all to the point he was making. He wasn't saying that the ACC has the best teams in MBB, although it is a bit premature for one to be saying the BiG has the best teams prior to the results of the FF, IMO. At this point, though, it is perfectly reasonable to say the top 2 teams in the BiG are among the very best - the exact standing to be determined in the next week.

However, he wasn't making this point. All he said was that the ACC appeared to be the deeper conference based in the Tournament results so far. Pretty hard to argue that point. The BiG got 7 teams into the Tournament and only 2 survived the first weekend and moved to the Sweet 16. By contrast, the ACC got 6 teams in - and 5 survived the first weekend and moved into the Sweet 16.

 

[bac2therac]

Originally posted by anvilofstars:

Originally posted by mikemarc1:

Originally posted by Caliknight:
How so?

Duke - 1 seed, final four
Notre Dame - 3 seed, elite eight (2 points from beating best team)
Virginia - 2 seed, best defensive team in country?
NC state - Only team to upset a #1
UNC - Sweet 16
Louisvile - Elite 8.

5 sweet 16 teams vs only 2 in Big Ten. Better tourney overall.
higher seeds in the tourny too..arguably better regular season.

Stopping at the Sweet 16 is very arbitrary. Why not stop at Elite 8 or Final 4 or national champs or even just number of teams chosen to the tourney? What is the reason for choosing Sweet 16?

because it fit his argument

 

[RURM85]

This post was edited on 3/31 4:37 PM by RURM85