Conference winners and losers: Grading the so-called p5

[nwhoopfan]

The timing of the post was a little premature if you ask me.

Ya got me.

 

[mhshuskies]

Biggest conference winners (so far):

1. Big Ten

Put some respect. The oft-maligned conference, sometimes derided in recent years as "Maryland and the 13 dwarves", either met or exceeded expectations with all but one of its 7 entrants: Maryland (2) ran absolutely roughshod over Alabama. Iowa (5) and Michigan (6) dominated higher-seeded opponents. Indiana (4) made easy work of a Wright State team that had taken down Arkansas. Even in ultimately losing, Northwestern (7) had a huge early lead over Louisville (2) and wasn't overtaken until the 4th quarter. Michigan State (10) lost an extremely close game to Iowa State. The lone negative was Rutgers (6), which squandered a late lead and lost a heartbreaker to a likely under-seeded BYU. Overall score: A–

2. Big 12

Another conference that has looked less than stellar in recent years but has, on the whole, met or exceeded expectations in this tournament. On the positive side, Baylor (2) demolished Virginia Tech and appears to be peaking; Texas (6) surprised many folks by dominating UCLA; and Oklahoma State (8) crushed Wake Forest and then kept things reasonably interesting against Stanford. Iowa State (7), after surviving a nail-biter against Michigan State, lost a heartbreaker in overtime to Texas A&M. The one truly bad showing was West Virginia (4), who went AWOL against Georgia Tech. Overall score: B+

3. Pac-12

I hesitate to even put it in the winner category, but ultimately it's a win to put a fourth of the conference in the Sweet 16. But the performances were, to say the least, mixed: Oregon (6), which hadn't looked impressive for months, took down a Georgia team that many people were high on. Oregon State (8) dominated Florida State but then failed to mount a much-anticipated challenge to South Carolina. Stanford (1) looked good but not great in getting past Oklahoma State; and Arizona (3) labored past BYU to uphold its seed. Washington State (9) lost a very close game to South Florida. However, UCLA (3) couldn't overcome a disastrous first half against Texas and suffered its earliest exit in its current run of 5 consecutive NCAAT appearances. Overall score: B–



Biggest conference losers (so far):

1. SEC

This just in: The SEC has been renamed the Southeastern Clowns. All the prideful boasting about being such a "tough" conference and getting 6 teams into the top 16 quickly turned to embarrassment, as Arkansas (4) crashed against Wright State, Kentucky (4) got creamed by Iowa, Georgia (3) looked anything but peachy against Oregon, and Tennessee (3) turned sour in a lopsided loss to Michigan. Even in advancing, Texas A&M (2) benefited from highly questionable officiating in crunch time in both rounds. Alabama can hardly be faulted for not beating Maryland, but the Terps made them look like a bad JV team. The lone positive was South Carolina's (1) dominant win over Oregon State. Overall score: D

2. ACC

The newly renamed Atlantic Chumps Conference continues to live on the fumes of a waning reputation, with little substance behind it. First of all, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Notre Dame, the ACC's one-time flagship program, missed the tournament entirely. As for the teams that did make the tournament, heavily favored Louisville (2) trailed Northwestern big in the first half before rallying. NC State (1) never looked comfortable in getting past South Florida. UNC (10), Wake Forest (9), and Florida State (9) were completely uncompetitive and made folks wonder why they were given bids in the first place. Virginia Tech (7) did get past Marquette to uphold its seed but then looked like a cellar-dweller against Baylor. On a neutral-to-slightly positive note, Syracuse (8) cruised against an injury-affected South Dakota State and looked competitive in the early going against UConn before the rout was on, and Georgia Tech (5) slithered past SFA in overtime before benefiting from a West Virginia no-show to overshoot its seeding. Overall score: C–

I think the committee totally blew it by over-hyping the ACC, obviously all over-rated!

 

[TC22]

Well I don’t know maybe because UConn and Baylor are both better than the SEC teams that have already lost ? Just a wild guess

And maybe they thought the SEC was so good because of how closely they all played UConn. There weren't a whole lot of other barometers. I'm being serious. Arkansas beat Baylor and UConn. SC lost to NC State early in the year but beat Arkansas by 20 and lost to UConn in OT. TAMU didn't play ANYBODY out of conference. The Pac 12 didn't play ANY OOC games. I think it was just a crapshoot to seed these teams this year and you really can't just do it by the eye test. In the end it doesn't really matter where you are seeded - you just have to beat the team that shows up on your bracket line.

On a different note, what an absolute travesty it will be if the tournament in The Bahamas next year isn't picked up by a network. The field of teams in that tournament is sick and would be so much fun to watch. Surely we won't get stuck with FloSports.....

 

[Lorcan]

If you had to regrade at this point, does the PAC-12 get an A for putting two teams into the Final Four? The Big 10 had some fine moments, but again falls short of the Final Four. The SEC and ACC really were slightly disappointing, IMO

Pretty incredible—despite Oregon and UCLA falling early. Oregon needed Pao-Pao to take on a team like Louisville among other shortcomings. UCLA was always going to be in trouble in the tournament the second Osbourne had an off game due to the lack of bench and the injuries they’ve had.

I’d say the PAC-12 has shown some toughness, largely on the strength of Arizona and Stanford, and Texas beating UCLA and Maryland makes that loss slightly less embarrassing.

 

[mhshuskies]

The ACC had to be the most over-rated conference. The only team to do anything was L’ville making it interesting for a half before sinking to its true level.

 

[UcMiami]

The SEC had the most overrated conference - they were supposed to get 5 teams to the S16, they got 2 and the second of those teams was an embarrassment for the whole tournament. While the ACC and the B10 may have gotten a lot of teams in, they mostly played to seed and disappeared when they should have.

I actually think the committee is pretty well vindicated by the results = 3 #1 seeds and a #3 is an above 'average' total of 6 seed points - perfect is a 4 and the average in the last 10 tournaments is a 7.0. The outlier is a #3 that had the most disappointing #2 seed and an injured #1 seed. That is not that egregious a seeding mistake.

We can talk about 'eye test' all we want, but because of covid and the best wins, best losses formula that has been around for ever, it is hard per-tournament results to discount the resumes of the one seeds vs. the two seeds, or to really argue with the seeding within those two lines. And the results of the S16 make that 'eye test' that people say makes Baylor and MD seeding unfair look pretty poor with regards to MD losing to 'pretty poor' TX team and Baylor going to overtime against an equally 'poor' Michigan team.

Baylor/Uconn was a war and it is easy to say it should have been a FF game, but the reality is Baylor got to the E8 game on the strength of a single FT in regulation against Michigan.

 

[ConwayGmck]

Since this is a thread concerning the grading of conferences, how would you grade ALL applicable conferences in regards to the 2021 NCAAT?? Or, how would you rank them, is another way of putting it....

 

[Lorcan]

West Coast: B. Gonzaga really should have done more, but BYU upsetting Rutgers somewhat balances it out.

OVC: A+: Belmoooont upsetting Gonzaaaaga!

MVC: Missouri State reaching the sweet 16 is a good representation, but Bradley struck out against Texas for a team that shouldn’t have been in. A.

 

[willtalk]

Barring a teams total superiority over all the other teams, winning a National Championship requires a degree of luck in respect to match ups and timing. Its single elimination and due to the nature of the game it is possible for any team that is any where close in ability to catch a team on a bad night and beat them. Logically we have been giving entirely too much validity to the Tournament in respect to decide which team is the best. Its basically a promotional fan fest.

Now that there is more parity in WCBB, the afore mentioned factors will play a much greater role each season. This season, with its virus factors certainly added to the uncertainty. The seedings were based mostly on guess work.

There is a reason why professional leagues do not have single elimination playoffs.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

It's not hard to beat a sec team. None of them cept Arkansas could shoot. Arkansas lack of rebounding and defense makes them lose.

That's how they beat on each other. Only SC can handle playing top tier teams in other conferences.

(SOME OF...) The top sec teams lost to mid-level out of conference teams. Still give them a F-

 

[Plebe]

The top sec teams lost to mid-level out of conference teams. Still give them a F-

 

[nwhoopfan]

I think the Pac 12 gets an A+ now.

 

[Dwilliams02]

SEC to the Pac 12: "My grand mama gave me that chain"

 

[Lorcan]

I think the Pac 12 gets an A+ now.

Is there a grade above A+? The only team that didn’t perform to their seed? UCLA.

 

[triaddukefan]

Pac 12.... The Conference of Champions (about time)

 

[nwhoopfan]

Is there a grade above A+? The only team that didn’t perform to their seed? UCLA.

We know the Pac 12 has been really good for a number of years, and their collective performance in the Tourney has reflected that. But that refrain "they never win the Championship" certainly grates on the nerves. Well that's finally gonna be put to rest.

 

[Floridaduck]

Pac-12, baby!

 

[jonson]

We know the Pac 12 has been really good for a number of years, and their collective performance in the Tourney has reflected that. But that refrain "they never win the Championship" certainly grates on the nerves. Well that's finally gonna be put to rest.

As it would have been in my unbiased opinion last year, if only there had been a tourney.

 

[nwhoopfan]

As it would have been in my unbiased opinion last year, if only there had been a tourney.

I sure wish we could've seen it. I also thought they had a very good chance of getting it done.

 

[domerduck]

Pac 12.... The Conference of Champions (about time)

There are a lot of sports that PAC has earned this title over the years and the total # of NCAA championships bears it out as the PAC12 has over 530 championships, over 200 more than the closest conference, the Big 10. Still the PAC's early roots in women's basketball were part of making it true. From 1972 to 1981, the national championship for WCBB was the AIAW and UCLA in 1978 was the only champion from a major conference. Even Pat Summit's Tennessee teams, despite being in 3 straight AIAW final 4's couldn't win that NC over the likes of Old Dominion and La Tech. Then when the NCAA tourney started the 1st school to win 2 championships was from the PAC, Southern Cal (1983 & 1984), again before Tennessee did it. Then the 1st conference to have a second school champion was also the PAC when Stanford won in 1990 and again in 92.

It's been a drought since then, but I am glad we got it this year. Oregon would have surely won it last year so it'a nice this year is guaranteed even before it's played.