Is cast of sweet sixteen proxy for conference strength?
- Thread starter RUBigFrank
- Start date
Wait until next year.
Top 30
MD...with or without Trimble
Pur....assuming Haas OR Swanigan stay
Mich..provided BOTH Wilson and wagner stay
Mich St...assuming Bridges leaves and frosh class has a few players
Minnesota..everyone back
Northwestern
Top 50
Iowa...they'll be fine without JOK , Bohannon is good
PSU...everyone back
Ohio State...all but center back
the rest
Wisconsin...Happ and ?
Indiana...what is left after Crean is gone...could move up to 1st tier
Illinois...lose seniors, what happens to great frosh class
basement
nebraska
Rutgers...who has everone back but CJ. i expect top 100
BAC has a preseason list somewhere that was inline with my thinking
Interesting question. It is hard to compare conferences in the regular season, since interconference play is essentially done by Christmas. So if a team is improving through the season, that doesn't get reflected in interconference comparisons.
That's an issue in comparing conferences just on the number of teams that make the NCAA tournament, as that count is based on regular season performance, and interconference competition stops in December.
Counting teams in the Sweet 16 at least allows you to have 2 rounds of Tournament play to compare conferences. But that comparison is also heavily dependent on seedings in the bracket. Some conferences, due to better seedings, may have easier paths to get more schools into the Sweet 16.
The other problem with counting teams in the Sweet 16, is it is a very small sample. With only 16 schools and 6 major conference (P5 + BE), you'd expect each major conference to have between 2.33 and 2.67 schools in the Sweet 16 (depending on whether you expect 0, 1, or 2 mid-major schools). So is there a real difference between the BE getting 2 and B1G getting 3, or is that just a rounding error or random chance.
I think of all the rounds in the NCAA tournament, the Sweet 16 is the best proxy for conference strength, because it provides the best balance of interconference play post-December and large sample size. But being the best proxy doesn't necessarily make it a good proxy.
say if everyone comes back everywhere
1. Purdue
2. Michigan State
3. Minnesota
4. Maryland
5. Michigan
6. Northwestern
7. Iowa
8. Indiana
9. Wisconsin
10. Penn State'
11. Illinois
12. Ohio State
13. Rutgers
14. Nebraska
No Walton, Robinson or Irvin. Michigan may be a tad high. My list provided no defections
1. purdue
2. maryland
3. indiana
4. michigan state
5. minnesota
6. northwestern
7. michigan
8. iowa
9. ohio state
10. penn state
11. wisconsin
12. illinois
13. ru
14. nebraska
1. purdue
2. maryland
3. indiana
4. michigan state
5. minnesota
6. northwestern
7. michigan
8. iowa
9. ohio state
10. penn state
11. wisconsin
12. illinois
13. ru
14. nebraska
If I told you before the year that Northwestern was going to go 10-8 in conference and Minnesota was going to go 11-7 (2-16 in '15-16) most would have told me I was nuts. Further if I said Indiana was going to go 7-11 in conference (15-3 in '15-16) most wouldn't have believed that either.
As Adolph Rupp famously said, "That's why we play the game...."
Northwestern was supposed to make a run this year so I would certainly believe 10-8 was possible....same for Minnesota, both schools came into the year with legit NCAA hopes. The real surprises were Indiana and Ohio State doing so poorly and Iowa actually finishing 10-8.
Wilson who will be one of the leagues best players, Wagner and Rakman are back. Thats a solid nucleus there. Enough for them to finish 11-7 in league play
I think you have Indiana too high...yes they have a lot returning but new coach and not sure everyone stays plus not sure if those kids are hard workers...I do not see them that high. Also Wisconsin way too low, Their style of play and system will keep the drop off from falling that low but yes I do expect a falloff. Should be NCAA bubble next year. I think Ohio State is garbage and a mess and Matta is toast after next year.
This is the assumption everyone stays. I HIGHLY doubt everyone stays here. If they do, with a new coach, the sky is the limit.
Your assessment of Ohio State is probably better than mine. Not sure why I should expect any better with the same group of talented underacheivers.
If I were advising Wilson I might tell him to take a rain check on his education. Moritz Wagner went from a guy who sat in crunch time the game before to a NBA caliber player in 2 days. He had the look yesterday of they guy who can succeed at the next level.
I am not convinced, in today's times, a player staying for year 3 is a good idea. Especially when you go from under the radar to the target in scouting reports AND there is no Walton.
I agree with upstream, may not be good but it's the best we have
that the ACC got 9 teams in, argued for 10 with Cuse, and was this close to be completely shut out (UNC helped in meaningful part by refs and some bad Arkansas plays) is striking...and should be humbling...for ESPN and ACC...they got seeded very generously, and got exposed in 2nd round...got crushed in several games...
for Big 10, what should be also told is that they got 3 teams in seeded very low...beating a 1 and 2...truly earned it...
that the ACC got 9 teams in, argued for 10 with Cuse, and was this close to be completely shut out (UNC helped in meaningful part by refs and some bad Arkansas plays) is striking...and should be humbling...for ESPN and ACC...they got seeded very generously, and got exposed in 2nd round...got crushed in several games...
for Big 10, what should be also told is that they got 3 teams in seeded very low...beating a 1 and 2...truly earned it...
That's the fun of predicting conference records.. it.. IS.. a Zero-Sum Game. The Big Ten wins for one conference mate have to come at the expense of another.
Perfect Parity would have everyone going 9-9 in conference.
If we had 2 tiers of parity it might be half at 12-6 and a bunch at 6-12.
Playing at who is going to be weakened and who is strengthened for next season is a very tough question.. so good luck. I'll watch the predictions like I do those weather threads.
But maybe (in bringing this back to the OP) .. maybe we are seeing that the Big Ten beating each-other up was not a sign of weakness.. but one of growth and strength. Unfortunately Michigan and Purdue are in eachother's way for the Final Four.. should they both win the next games. But should the Big Ten have 2 Elite teams emerge.. I think that's a win for the conference and should help get more bids next year.
Perfect Parity would have everyone going 9-9 in conference.
If we had 2 tiers of parity it might be half at 12-6 and a bunch at 6-12.
Playing at who is going to be weakened and who is strengthened for next season is a very tough question.. so good luck. I'll watch the predictions like I do those weather threads.
But maybe (in bringing this back to the OP) .. maybe we are seeing that the Big Ten beating each-other up was not a sign of weakness.. but one of growth and strength. Unfortunately Michigan and Purdue are in eachother's way for the Final Four.. should they both win the next games. But should the Big Ten have 2 Elite teams emerge.. I think that's a win for the conference and should help get more bids next year.
