College Basketball Discussion '09-10

<p>

</p>

<p>Performance is a huge component of the ranking process. You can have the best team in the world, but if there is no team chemistry and you can’t beat anyone, you probably aren’t going to be ranked too high. </p>

<p>What are voters supposed to consider if performance is taken out of the picture? Average height of the players on the roster? Potential is useful for preseason rankings, but performance is what drives rankings throughout the season (and things like tournament bids, seeding, and the like).</p>

<p>^I completely agree with you on that, performance and team chemistry is an important part of being a good team. That reminds me of the [2005</a> Illinois team](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004–05_Illinois_Fighting_Illini_men’s_basketball_team]2005”>2004–05 Illinois Fighting Illini men's basketball team - Wikipedia), they didn’t have any particularly strong players but they played very well together and they ended up having a record of 33-2. That being said, the strength of conference and strength of schedule is another component that drives rankings and other things such as seeding. [The</a> RPI](<a href=“http://www.realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html]The”>http://www.realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html) had UConn as having the strongest schedule out of any other team, I’m sure that helps them in their rankings, and the fact that they play in a very tough conference, the Big East, is another reason they’re ranked slightly higher than UNC. In the ESPN/USA Today poll, Northern Iowa is ranked as No.22, right in-between UNC and UConn. Their record is 16-1, but they’re near the bottom of the poll. Why? Because they’ve played against relatively weak opponents. Performance is a huge component in the ranking process, but so is conference strength and schedule strength. A win in the Missouri Valley Conference doesn’t equal a win in the Big East.</p>

<p>^^</p>

<p>Agreed, but you can’t honestly compare the ACC with a Missouri Valley Conference. The Big East is a beast of a conference, but the ACC is pretty competitive as well. Big East had 5 times ranked in the latest poll (Nova, Syracuse, Pitt, WVa, Georgetown) while the ACC had 4 (Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech, UNC). Both conferences are pretty competitive this year, as always.</p>

<p>The ACC isn’t as impressive as it has been in the past. The two powerhouse teams (Duke & UNC) are just declining. UNC probably isn’t going to be ranked anytime soon and I don’t see Duke going far with losses to teams like NC State. The No.1 team in the ACC is Virginia? Last year’s national champion is in second to last place? </p>

<p>It’s still early, but from what’s happened so far, I wouldn’t put the ACC on the same level as the Big East. I would say that the Big 12 has been impressive this year, and not just because of Kansas and Texas.</p>

<p>Perhaps relevant, Jeff Sagarin also does conference ratings for basketball:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>These ratings are weighted towards the center of the conference (meaning the best/worst teams contribute less than the teams in the middle), but the unweighted ratings are not much different (ACC and Big 12 swap for #1/#2)</p>

<p>Of course, this is just another metric. I don’t know that personally I’d say the ACC is the best (both the Big 12 and the Big East have a strong case)</p>

<p>How is MSU ranked higher than Texas?!</p>

<p>MSU: 17-3
Texas: 17-2</p>

<p>Texas beat MSU.</p>

<p>I don’t get it also… Maybe cause MSU is getting their act together or something? :-/</p>

<p>Because the polls in college basketball are a joke. If you look at Pomeroy’s system you’ll get some surprising rankings too, but at least they have rationality behind them and you can see an actual breakdown of each team. The AP and coaches polls are like a dart board.</p>

<p>I’d argue that the polls are useful for determining the top 10. Once you get past that, its a crapshoot.</p>

<p>My theory why MSU is ranked higher than Texas, is because Texas seems to be losing ground and has had 2 very recent losses, while MSU has won 8? straight and seems to be on-the-rise as a team. Also, while Texas did win against MSU the game was in Texas, which is a significant advantage in itself. Arguably, if Texas played MSU again at the Breslin I have a strong feeling that MSU would come out the victor. Plus, the rankings are rather biased based upon a schools past performance (and since MSU was the number 2 team last year, that definitely colors people’s perceptions of the team).</p>

<p>Hope Kentucky enjoyed being #1 for all of a day and a half. Well done to the '*****.</p>

<p>My heels stopped their losing skid last night with a win over demi-rival NC State. Great night of college basketball.</p>

<p>Kentucky was overrated. Their quality wins came from UNC & UConn were they barely won.</p>

<p>^^definitely. I jumped for joy when I saw the “Gamecocks” win over Kentucky. The Michigan/Michigan State game was a heart-pounder as well but MSU won out in the last second. Any guesses as to who will be the new #1 in upcoming weeks? My vote’s on Kansas.</p>

<p>I’m guessing Kansas will probably be No.1 again if they can pull out a win against Kansas State, otherwise Villanova. K-State did take down Texas so they could do the same to Kansas. It’ll be one of the first games where Kansas will be challenged. They’ve only played two ranked teams up till now and they lost to one of them, so It’ll definitely be a tough game.</p>

<p>Last night was definitely a great night of college basketball. I had a slight feeling that Kentucky would lose to SC, especially after watching Downey play against Florida the other day. Michigan State barely won against Michigan. It’s nice how they can play badly and still pull out a W.</p>

<p>SEC needs to stop being such tightasses. $25k fine for storming the court? Come on.</p>

<p>How does everyone think Syracuse is doing? They are my second favorite team in the NCAA.</p>

<p>Oh and Kansas will definitely be first again.</p>

<p>extremely close games today, with Kansas barely beating Kansas St in overtime and Syracuse barely beating DePaul (and a huge upset with Baylor over Texas…they’ve lost 3 out of the last 4 games).<br>
My guess is Kansas #1, Syracuse #2, Kentucky #3, Villanova #4, MSU #5, Georgetown #6, West Virginia #7 etc.</p>

<p>^ I don’t think WVU deserves that #7. Kansas has the easiest schedule compared to everyone else in the Top 5 imho. I can see 'Cuse being #1 instead of Kansas.</p>

<p>

Kentucky has the easiest schedule IMO. They play in the SEC, which is a lot easier than the Big East, or Big 12 for that matter. That being said, I can see 'Cuse being #1. Despite being the most underrated team this season, they’ve consistently played well, going 5-0 against ranked opponents.</p>

<p>

I agree with that but Villanova should swap with Kentucky. Kentucky doesn’t deserve #3 after losing to an unranked South Carolina that was without 2 of its 3 best players.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Both of the main computer ratings think they have the most difficult schedule. The RPI says they have the second most difficult. (of the top 5 teams) All three have Kansas as #1 overall.</p>