ACC Most Overrated

[depthcharge623]

If they can admit this, I'd like to see something admitting they were wrong about the B1G...

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...ment-struggles-prove-conference-was-overrated

 

[Boiler Wolf]

Still condescending to the BIG: "A down year in the Big Ten has produced three with Purdue, Wisconsin and Michigan."

Again because MSU, IU and O$U aren't there so it must be a down year? Geesh.

 

[Dryfly88]

Still condescending to the BIG: "A down year in the Big Ten has produced three with Purdue, Wisconsin and Michigan."

Again because MSU, IU and O$U aren't there so it must be a down year? Geesh.

Bingo. If those other 3 were in the sweet 16 there would be zero talk of the conference being down.

 

[BoilerAndy]

Still condescending to the BIG: "A down year in the Big Ten has produced three with Purdue, Wisconsin and Michigan."

Again because MSU, IU and O$U aren't there so it must be a down year? Geesh.

Would love to have seen NW win.

 

[rgarlitz]

Some really frank comments from ACC assistants. I think this one is spot on:

"It was overrated," another ACC coach added. "I'll admit it. We won games in November and December, but most of our teams weren't that much better than teams in the other leagues. But we had a ton of résumé wins on the board because of Duke, North Carolina, Louisville and even Virginia -- and that allows the other teams to become overrated."

Again, that's a function of the RPI. Strength of schedule is pretty much set by the end of December, and, since there are no meaningful non-conference games between January 1 and March 1, the RPI has no real mechanism for judging in-season improvement (or stagnation). Teams that were good in Nov. and Dec. (or even teams that just picked up a big win or two) become a "quality opponent" for the rest of the season regardless of what happens in January and February.

IMO, that's one strong reason for deemphasizing the RPI in favor of metrics like Pomeroy that pay more attention to how well teams played than just who teams played.

 

[Boilermaker]

Some really frank comments from ACC assistants. I think this one is spot on:

"It was overrated," another ACC coach added. "I'll admit it. We won games in November and December, but most of our teams weren't that much better than teams in the other leagues. But we had a ton of résumé wins on the board because of Duke, North Carolina, Louisville and even Virginia -- and that allows the other teams to become overrated."

Again, that's a function of the RPI. Strength of schedule is pretty much set by the end of December, and, since there are no meaningful non-conference games between January 1 and March 1, the RPI has no real mechanism for judging in-season improvement (or stagnation). Teams that were good in Nov. and Dec. (or even teams that just picked up a big win or two) become a "quality opponent" for the rest of the season regardless of what happens in January and February.

IMO, that's one strong reason for deemphasizing the RPI in favor of metrics like Pomeroy that pay more attention to how well teams played than just who teams played.

If there ever was a nail in the coffin for continued use of RPI for anything, this is it, plain and simple. It should become an extinct metric, starting this fall.

 

[Heller]

Everyone needs to hear what Nigel Hayes had to say about using the computer metrics. I don't remember the whole quote but he listed the important things that computers can't measure. Twice now, and I forget the other year, computer metrics were relied upon heavily and in both years the results were pretty poor. This year it is because one conference was heavily over valued.

Congrats to Virginia for their record setting performance.

 

[rgarlitz]

It's strange, though, why didn't the same thing work for Indiana?

The Hoosiers had 2 top-5 RPI wins in November but plummeted into the high 90s --- about 20 spots worse than Syracuse --- a team with a comparable record, comparable key wins, and comparable road woes. At least one of Indiana's big wins came on a neutral court.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

It's strange, though, why didn't the same thing work for Indiana?

The Hoosiers had 2 top-5 RPI wins in November but plummeted into the high 90s --- about 20 spots worse than Syracuse --- a team with a comparable record, comparable key wins, and comparable road woes. At least one of Indiana's big wins came on a neutral court.

From my understanding, Indiana had the same issue that Purdue had (to a lesser extent) on the scheduling with too many sub-150/200 teams. On top of that, Indiana had some "bad" losses. Those wins over Kansas and North Carolina, however, were keeping them in the NCAA conversation despite a plummeting RPI.

 

[punaj]

The talking heads like to say that the tourney is all about luck and the draw... well, only when it's convenient for them. And right now with the B1G winning in the tourney, it's awfully convenient.

 

[TMA62]

Every year, it is the same for ESPN and the rest of the 'big sports media':

1. During Basketball season, hype the ACC and Big East
2. During Football season, hype the SEC, Big 12 and Notre Dame
3. Wash, Rinse, Repeat

Do you notice who is always missing?

 

[JohnnyDoeBoiler]

From my understanding, Indiana had the same issue that Purdue had (to a lesser extent) on the scheduling with too many sub-150/200 teams. On top of that, Indiana had some "bad" losses. Those wins over Kansas and North Carolina, however, were keeping them in the NCAA conversation despite a plummeting RPI.

IU started out 10-2 and then finished the season 8-13. That isn't going to get any type of conversation in the bubble, no matter your wins in the non-conference.

 

[JohnnyDoeBoiler]

Every year, it is the same for ESPN and the rest of the 'big sports media':

1. During Basketball season, hype the ACC and Big East
2. During Football season, hype the SEC, Big 12 and Notre Dame
3. Wash, Rinse, Repeat

Do you notice who is always missing?

Probably because of those conferences, the B1G has its own network that is highly successful and is drawing money away from ESPN.....

 

[punaj]

I go back to the Big Ten Network eating in to their profits. In the 80s and 90s ESPN was all about the B1G.

 

[Boilermaker]

Probably because of those conferences, the B1G has its own network that is highly successful and is drawing money away from ESPN.....

It might be more a function of buttering up the remaining audience (less B1G fans now) vs. punishing the BTN. Sort of like cable news channels pandering to their audience leanings.

 

[BoilerNGold013]

Even though there wasn't an apology for the Big10 I still love the last line : "Maybe we were right about the league after all. Maybe it was in a class of its own, the most overrated in America."

 

[rgarlitz]

From my understanding, Indiana had the same issue that Purdue had (to a lesser extent) on the scheduling with too many sub-150/200 teams. On top of that, Indiana had some "bad" losses. Those wins over Kansas and North Carolina, however, were keeping them in the NCAA conversation despite a plummeting RPI.

I do agree with that, Tex. The one thing I like about the RPI is that scheduling an overabundance of low-majors will eventually catch up to teams.

 

[Heller]

I do agree with that, Tex. The one thing I like about the RPI is that scheduling an overabundance of low-majors will eventually catch up to teams.

Like someone on the Committee or even some average guy off the street can't look at a schedule and see who loaded up on bunnies in the pre season? I don't need a computer metric to tell me that.

 

[BoilerFan#35]

I do agree with that, Tex. The one thing I like about the RPI is that scheduling an overabundance of low-majors will eventually catch up to teams.

You like that it kept Purdue out of the top 10? Purdue played some of the lowest of mid majors if they would of scheduled some more top 50 games and won that would of made them have an elite RPI. The RPI is garbage and it hurts Purdue almost every year

 

[threeeputtt]

If they can admit this, I'd like to see something admitting they were wrong about the B1G...

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...ment-struggles-prove-conference-was-overrated

ESPN has a conflict per their last contract with the SEC (more $$$) and the eastern bias. It is, what it is.

 

[PaBoiler78]

Everyone needs to hear what Nigel Hayes had to say about using the computer metrics. I don't remember the whole quote but he listed the important things that computers can't measure. Twice now, and I forget the other year, computer metrics were relied upon heavily and in both years the results were pretty poor. This year it is because one conference was heavily over valued.

Congrats to Virginia for their record setting performance.

w/ Kyle Guy.

 

[Heller]

w/ Kyle Guy.

Yes, I shed no tears for him. I can imagine coming home and being teased by McIntosh, PJ and the others for setting that record of futility. One thing it did to Pa was quell all the talk about what a genius Bennett is. I don't hear any IU fans begging for him.

 

[BoilerAndy]

The talking heads like to say that the tourney is all about luck and the draw... well, only when it's convenient for them. And right now with the B1G winning in the tourney, it's awfully convenient.

I'll add that it's also about the whims of the referees. They read the same stories about who should and shouldn't win, and some of them call the game accordingly.

 

[BoilerAndy]

I go back to the Big Ten Network eating in to their profits. In the 80s and 90s ESPN was all about the B1G.

Probably because of those conferences, the B1G has its own network that is highly successful and is drawing money away from ESPN.....

There is probably truth to this, which continues the story that news networks aren't about news. They choose side for their own biased reasons.