College Bball Thread

[OliviaPope40]

2 hours ago, reconmkd said:

LOL, ESPN (the most impartial name in Sports) has decided to take game day down to the UNC/Duke match up on the same day IU/PU. Chose a rivalry game between 2 unranked teams over the #1/21 rivalry! Makes sense, I guess.

This one to me doesn't make sense why wouldn't a game with two ranked teams one being ranked number one.

[TheWatShot]

1 hour ago, str8baller said:

 

The least impressive B1G champion in recent memory is almost definitely us (unfortunately) in 2016. That is true by ranking, kenpom ranking, and tourney seeding.   Maybe Purdue will stumble down the stretch and take that distinction from us.  
 

If you're using Kenpom rankings, then it would almost have to be Wisconsin last year. Our 2016 team was #11 in Kenpom and finished with the 6th ranked offense. Wisconsin was #37 overall and had the 62nd ranked offense, not to mention they shared the title. 

 

Anyone who thinks our last Big Ten title team wasn't impressive must not have watched them or is massively misremembering. 

[RaceToTheTop]

2 hours ago, AKHoosier said:

MSU was without Malik Hall, OSU was without Key and McNeil missed a decent amount of time, Maryland came within 3 at the end.

They'll be the least impressive B1G champion in recent memory IMO.

Wisconsin and Illinois won the Big Ten last year.  They ended the year ranked 14th and 19th and Illinois lost 10 games on the season.  I would say that's pretty recent memory.

[RaceToTheTop]

BTownBanners Top 25 poll (LCS/WAR/Joe combined poll):

• 1.  Purdue (2)  21-1 (72 points)
• 2.  Alabama  18-3 (68 points)
• 3T. Tennessee (1)  18-3  (67 points)
• 3T. Houston 20-2 (67 points)
• 5.  Arizona 19-3 (59 points)
• 6.  Kansas 17-4 (58 points)
• 7T. Kansas St 18-3 (55 points)
• 7T. UCLA 17-4 (55 points)
• 9.  Texas 17-4 (50 points)
• 10. Gonzaga 17-4 (46 points)
• 11. Virginia 16-3 (44 points)
• 12. Marquette 17-5 (42 points)
• 13. Baylor 16-5 (40 points)
• 14. Xavier 17-5 (34 points)
• 15. Iowa St 15-5 (33 points)
• 16. Florida Atlantic 18-1 (29 points)
• 17. St. Mary's 17-5 (27 points)
• 18. TCU 16-5 (24 points)
• 19. San Diiego St 16-4 (23 points)
• 20. Connecticutt 16-6 (18 points)
• 21. Providence 17-5 (17 points)
• 22. Clemson 18-4 (8 points)
• 23. Indiana 15-6 (6 points)
• 24T.Missouri 16-5 (5 points)
• 24T.New Mexico 18-3 (5 points)

Also receiving votes:  North Carolina 14-6 (4 points), Boise St 16-5 (4 points), Memphis 17-5 (3 points). North Caroilna St 17-5 (3 points), Duke 15-6 (3 points), Auburn 16-5 (2 points), Utah State 16-5 (2 points), USC 15-6 (1 point), Illinois 15-6 (1 point).

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

Colgate up 18 right now. Win stretches win streak to 11. Only Florida Atlantic would have a longer streak. Saint Mary's also has a 10 game winning streak going. 

[Rico]

6 minutes ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

Colgate up 18 right now. Win stretches win streak to 11. Only Florida Atlantic would have a longer streak. Saint Mary's also has a 10 game winning streak going. 

[str8baller]

2 hours ago, TheWatShot said:

If you're using Kenpom rankings

I wasn’t solely, quite obviously and for good reason.  That Wisconsin team was ranked higher than IU at each of their peaks and got a higher seed from the committee. That Wisconsin team was weak for a champion but quite comparable to our 2016 team where we were the best of a down B1G.
 

I wasn't counting shared champs though, because it seems unlikely that will happen to Purdue. I don’t count them as the same thing, honestly, as an outright champ.  But I didn’t state that in my post so that confusion is on me.

 

In any event, *if* Purdue’s last ten games are anything close to their first twenty, they’ll be so far and above those examples they’ll have no claim to the worst Big Ten champ. 

[TheWatShot]

8 minutes ago, str8baller said:

I wasn’t solely, quite obviously and for good reason.  That Wisconsin team was ranked higher than IU at each of their peaks and got a higher seed from the committee. That Wisconsin team was weak for a champion but quite comparable to our 2016 team where we were the best of a down B1G.
 

I still think you're letting recency bias get in the way. That team was 15-3, didn't lose at home, had four wins by 25 or more points and scored 28 straight points in another game. They got screwed without lube by the selection committee, who wanted an IU-UK second round matchup so badly they shafted both teams with their seeding, and still beat the SEC champs in the second round. And they still had the #6 adjusted offense in spite of losing a big scorer midseason. 

 

Just because we haven't finished above .500 in conference since then doesn't mean that team was a weak champion. 

[RaceToTheTop]

How about this one:  1995-6 Purdue won the Big Ten title but their official conference record was 6-12.  The NCAA forced them to officially forfeit games in which Luther Clay participated in -- he was an 8 minute per game player and played in 19 of Purdue's wins.  The Big Ten, though, did not ever officially remove Purdue as the Big Ten champion.

Clay was deemed ineligible due to an improper benefit -- Purdue assistant coach Frank Kendrick provided him with a $4,000 bank loan.

[RaceToTheTop]

FWIW, LCS had three teams in his top 25 that Joe and I did not;  Joe had three that he had in that LCS and I did not;  I had four teams in that LCS and Joe did not.

LCS had Clemson (18), North Carolina (22), and NC State (23), so obviously he values the ACC higher than Joe and I do.

Joe had New Mexico (21), Boise St (22) and Duke (23) in, so he values the MWC higher than LCS and I do.

I had Missouri (21), Memphis (23), Auburn (24), and USC (25) in, so I value the SEC higher than they do (or programs that traditionally cheat).

[lillurk]

26 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

I had Missouri (21), Memphis (23), Auburn (24), and USC (25) in, so I value the SEC higher than they do (or programs that traditionally cheat).

Listen, Missouri should be honored to be in the rarefied air of such NCAA infraction artists

[IUHoosierJoe]

45 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

FWIW, LCS had three teams in his top 25 that Joe and I did not;  Joe had three that he had in that LCS and I did not;  I had four teams in that LCS and Joe did not.

LCS had Clemson (18), North Carolina (22), and NC State (23), so obviously he values the ACC higher than Joe and I do.

Joe had New Mexico (21), Boise St (22) and Duke (23) in, so he values the MWC higher than LCS and I do.

I had Missouri (21), Memphis (23), Auburn (24), and USC (25) in, so I value the SEC higher than they do (or programs that traditionally cheat).

My system actually ranks the Mountain West higher than the Pac 12 and ACC.  In looking over their out of conference schedules, they have had some pretty good results.  I’ll be interested to see how the tournament committee treats them.

[RaceToTheTop]

6 minutes ago, IUHoosierJoe said:

My system actually ranks the Mountain West higher than the Pac 12 and ACC.  In looking over their out of conference schedules, they have had some pretty good results.  I’ll be interested to see how the tournament committee treats them.

I don''t rate the conferences individually, but teams that could at least sniff at large bids (positive WAR values) in those three conferences IMO are:

MWC:

• San Diego St (16), New Mexico (26), Utah St (32), Boise St (36) and Nevada (37).

ACC:

• Virginia (14), NC State (27), Miami (F) (31), Clemson (34), North Carolina (35), Duke (38), Pittsburgh (56)

Pac 12:

• Arizona (4), UCLA (9), USC (25), Arizona St (48).

 

[RaceToTheTop]

Iowa State trying to hold off a late Texas Tech charge.

[RaceToTheTop]

Tech was down over 20, now within 3 with just over a minute left.

[RaceToTheTop]

Missed opportunity for Texas Tech...stole the ball with about fifty seconds left and then immediately turned it back over.

[IUHoosierJoe]

4 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

I don''t rate the conferences individually, but teams that could at least sniff at large bids (positive WAR values) in those three conferences IMO are:

MWC:

• San Diego St (16), New Mexico (26), Utah St (32), Boise St (36) and Nevada (37).

ACC:

• Virginia (14), NC State (27), Miami (F) (31), Clemson (34), North Carolina (35), Duke (38), Pittsburgh (56)

Pac 12:

• Arizona (4), UCLA (9), USC (25), Arizona St (48).

 

Your system is quite interesting to me.  Seems to be a unique way of looking at it, and hard to argue with the results.

Pittsburgh is a team I’m keeping my eye on.  Their resume is reminding me a little of Rutgers last year.  I have them at 67 but they have 5 wins over my top 50.

[RaceToTheTop]

USPS usually says something about now....down 22 with 17 minutes left, a three pointer brings Texas Tech within 2.  25.4 seconds left, Iowa State ball.

[RaceToTheTop]

Wow....ball bounces off a Texas Tech player's face THEN an Iowa State player's arm.  Tech ball, 23.2 seconds left, down 2.

[RaceToTheTop]

3 minutes ago, IUHoosierJoe said:

Your system is quite interesting to me.  Seems to be a unique way of looking at it, and hard to argue with the results.

Pittsburgh is a team I’m keeping my eye on.  Their resume is reminding me a little of Rutgers last year.  I have them at 67 but they have 5 wins over my top 50.

If you want results, though, USPS is the main for picking tournament seedings.