Inter-conference records among the majors | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Inter-conference records among the majors

Status
Not open for further replies.
PRHusky said:
Anyone else find it funny that the numbers posted in this thread to try to prove that the Big East is not doing as badly as many are saying actually show that the Big East is clearly the worst major conference this season?
Expand ...
There is no debate or question from anyone in this board on whether the Big East this year is the weakest of the major conferences. It is obvious in the stats and also on the floor that we are in 5th place. With that said:

(1) the difference between the major conference and the Big East isn't as great as it made seem to be by the media and some here
(2) the difference between the Big East (5th out of 31) and the ACC/BIG/SEC is less than the difference between the Big East and the MWC (6th) and West Coast Conference (7th)
 
PRHusky said:
Anyone else find it funny that the numbers posted in this thread to try to prove that the Big East is not doing as badly as many are saying actually show that the Big East is clearly the worst major conference this season?
Expand ...

Anyone else find it funny that you are saying other posters are saying the exact opposite of what they actually said?
 
Very detailed and thorough analysis and debate. Had Tarris and Braylon been good to go AZ loses and the picture tilts.
 
pepband99 said:
Err ok.

So I took it originally that it was everyone that was projected to go under 500 was eliminated.

And it’s actually for 500 against a round robin.

So the big east is the least skewed. The bigger conferences more so. But it’s still very very close.
Expand ...

It's only the strength of schedule rating, not the team rating, that uses the WIN50 formula.

The WIN50 approach also takes away the impact of the best teams on your schedule. Your schedule strength is based on the strength at the middle of your schedule. Both strong and weak opponents are ignored in calculating SOS.
 
pj said:
It's only the strength of schedule rating, not the team rating, that uses the WIN50 formula.

The WIN50 approach also takes away the impact of the best teams on your schedule. Your schedule strength is based on the strength at the middle of your schedule. Both strong and weak opponents are ignored in calculating SOS.
Expand ...
Ignored is going too far. Your expected chance of beating the best or worst teams are still factored in equivalently as every other game. You may be thinking of Sagarin's central mean.
 
ecasadoSBU said:
Thanks for this analysis @nelsonmuntz

It's always good to hit the Big East haters and "Big East is mid-major" with the cold hard facts.

The Big East is a solid major/power league. Yes, its currently the 5th best league. But 5th is still pretty solid and should get 4-5 bids

P.S: Really pissed with the Johnnies dropping yesterday's game against UK. The Johnnies have been a big disappointment so far. Seton Hall ITOH has been a pleasant surprise
Expand ...
"They" will never get over what UConn did Charles Barkley's attempted public assault on the Big East and then Villanova Cementing it with 2 NCs in 3 years over true powerhouse teams.
 
.-.
pj said:
It's only the strength of schedule rating, not the team rating, that uses the WIN50 formula.

The WIN50 approach also takes away the impact of the best teams on your schedule. Your schedule strength is based on the strength at the middle of your schedule. Both strong and weak opponents are ignored in calculating SOS.
Expand ...
Err - no it isn't.

The header on the conference ranking is quite clear:

"Ranking of conferences by NetRtg of team expected to go .500 in conference play"

NetRtg is overall efficiency - aka the KenPom ranking.
 
The SEC tunes up a bunch of directional low majors last night, and its KenPom rating actually improves to one of the all time high conference ratings. Just playing the dreck it played last night should hurt the league given how high its rating currently is.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
The SEC tunes up a bunch of directional low majors last night, and its KenPom rating actually improves to one of the all time high conference ratings. Just playing the dreck it played last night should hurt the league given how high its rating currently is.
Expand ...
I'm too cheap to pay for KenPom. Do you have the conference ratings for the top 6 leagues.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
The SEC tunes up a bunch of directional low majors last night, and its KenPom rating actually improves to one of the all time high conference ratings. Just playing the dreck it played last night should hurt the league given how high its rating currently is.
Expand ...
If there is gamesmanship in the system regarding metrics, we should simply follow suit. Some of these teams have figured it out as well - Zags, StM.
 
South Carolina beat Albany and Tennessee beat a South Carolina State team that is 0-14 against D1 opponents, and their KenPom ratings went up, along with the SEC overall, despite the SEC have a historically high KenPom rating going into tonight. How can two games against two putrid opponents like this improve the conferences rating when it is already sky high?

Seton Hall beat a Top 200 Marquette team on the road and its rating went down.

I am starting to question whether KenPom has a "house effect" bias for certain conferences. The model is a black box, so there is no reason to trust it.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
South Carolina beat Albany and Tennessee beat a South Carolina State team that is 0-14 against D1 opponents, and their KenPom ratings went up, along with the SEC overall, despite the SEC have a historically high KenPom rating going into tonight. How can two games against two putrid opponents like this improve the conferences rating when it is already sky high?

Seton Hall beat a Top 200 Marquette team on the road and its rating went down.

I am starting to question whether KenPom has a "house effect" bias for certain conferences. The model is a black box, so there is no reason to trust it.
Expand ...
I don't really know either. I know Kenpom's formula moves teams around based on performance vs. expectations, but I'm not sure what his algorithm's expectations were for these games

I think you need to pay to see them, but looking at the spreads on ESPN as a proxy:
  • SC was favored by 19.5 and won by 29 (+9.5)
  • Tennessee was favored by 44.5 and won by 51 (+6.5)
  • Seton Hall were underdogs by 1.5 and won by 6 (+7.5)
Not sure why all 3 teams wouldn't move up
 
.-.
In RPI, which doesn't reward power conferences for running up the score on terrible teams, the conferences are ranked:

1) Big 10
2) Big 12
3) Big East
4) ACC
5) SEC

Conference RPI - 2026 Men's College Basketball | WarrenNolan.com

2026 Men's College Basketball Conference RPI (Rating Percentage Index): A Ranking of Every Conference Based on the Average RPI of the Teams in Each Conference
www.warrennolan.com www.warrennolan.com
 
nelsonmuntz said:
In RPI, which doesn't reward power conferences for running up the score on terrible teams, the conferences are ranked:

1) Big 10
2) Big 12
3) Big East
4) ACC
5) SEC

Conference RPI - 2026 Men's College Basketball | WarrenNolan.com

2026 Men's College Basketball Conference RPI (Rating Percentage Index): A Ranking of Every Conference Based on the Average RPI of the Teams in Each Conference
www.warrennolan.com www.warrennolan.com
Expand ...
Do you really think the BE is better than the SEC? Florida, Arkansas, Kentucky (already beat our second best team), Vandy, Bama.

I don’t get it. Are we comparing each conferences worst teams? Do we care South Carolina is worse than DePaul?
 
RuffRuff said:
Do you really think the BE is better than the SEC? Florida, Arkansas, Kentucky (already beat our second best team), Vandy, Bama.

I don’t get it. Are we comparing each conferences worst teams? Do we care South Carolina is worse than DePaul?
Expand ...
he's making a nice cherry pie for New Years Eve
 
RuffRuff said:
Do you really think the BE is better than the SEC? Florida, Arkansas, Kentucky (already beat our second best team), Vandy, Bama.

I don’t get it. Are we comparing each conferences worst teams? Do we care South Carolina is worse than DePaul?
Expand ...
In Nelson's world everything is roses. He even thinks his farts smell like roses.
 
RuffRuff said:
Do you really think the BE is better than the SEC? Florida, Arkansas, Kentucky (already beat our second best team), Vandy, Bama.

I don’t get it. Are we comparing each conferences worst teams? Do we care South Carolina is worse than DePaul?
Expand ...

You and @HooperScooper , among many others, have repeatedly compared the Big East to mid majors. You are wrong.

I have addressed your need to constantly make this comparison elsewhere, but happy to revisit if you want.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
You and @HooperScooper , among many others, have repeatedly compared the Big East to mid majors. You are wrong.

I have addressed your need to constantly make this comparison elsewhere, but happy to revisit if you want.
Expand ...
I’ve never said that. Not even once. As a matter of fact all I’ve basically done is post articles. I’m not on here saying how bad the Big East is this year. Go complain to Mike Anthony, Dave Borges, the ESPN writers, the CBS Sports writers, etc. I’m sure they’ll listen to your drivel.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I am starting to question whether KenPom has a "house effect" bias for certain conferences. The model is a black box, so there is no reason to trust it.
Expand ...
I have never fully trusted any of these models as even if there is no true bias towards or against any specific schools or conferences, there will be some inherent bias in how certain things are weighed. Whoever created any of these models logically would have placed more or less value on pace of play, defensive efficiency, overall scoring, etc based on personal preferences.

The final straw for me was late last season when one of these (I believe Kenpom) had Duke's 24-25 squad rated higher than our 23-24 team. I believe they also rated the Virginia and Baylor title teams higher than our 23-24 team. We'd win at least 90% of the head to head matchups against any of them.
 
HooperScooper said:
I’ve never said that. Not even once. As a matter of fact all I’ve basically done is post articles. I’m not on here saying how bad the Big East is this year. Go complain to Mike Anthony, Dave Borges, the ESPN writers, the CBS Sports writers, etc. I’m sure they’ll listen to your drivel.
Expand ...

You are trashing the Big East several posts above when I am simply pointing out a math problem with the current ratings models. Rather than discussing the issue, you take another recycled lazy cheap shot at the conference.
 
HooperScooper said:
I’ve never said that. Not even once. As a matter of fact all I’ve basically done is post articles. I’m not on here saying how bad the Big East is this year. Go complain to Mike Anthony, Dave Borges, the ESPN writers, the CBS Sports writers, etc. I’m sure they’ll listen to your drivel.
Expand ...
Know that you are a messenger who has just been shot.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
You are trashing the Big East several posts above when I am simply pointing out a math problem with the current ratings models. Rather than discussing the issue, you take another recycled lazy cheap shot at the conference.
Expand ...
You do realize the entire country is on top of the quality of the BE? It’s not like we are making it up for fun. You can twist numbers all you want but the wide and accurate view is that the BE is way down.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
You are trashing the Big East several posts above when I am simply pointing out a math problem with the current ratings models. Rather than discussing the issue, you take another recycled lazy cheap shot at the conference.
Expand ...
Please show me where I trashed the Big East several posts above. I want to see this.

Are you talking about the post that I linked below? I'll let you in on a secret on the way I've been posting on here since I joined. The italicized part of my posts are taken directly from an article that I link below the excerpt that is italicized. That was Mike Anthony "trashing" the Big East and not me. I offered no opinion on the Big East in that post. Do you understand the difference?

HooperScooper

Post in thread 'Big East December '25 Thread'

Another article on the subject of the Big East not helping UConn this year. From Mike Anthony. I think we're all fully aware at this point.

But, beyond that, will the conference help prepare UConn for the March pursuit of another national championship? If so, to what extent? Will the Big East round robin bolster the Huskies’ resume? Not really.

The conference is down, way down. UConn is currently the Big East’s only ranked team. The Huskies, despite key injuries, plowed through their nonconference gauntlet, losing only to No. 1 Arizona (without starters Tarris Reed Jr. and...
  • Like
 
.-.
RuffRuff said:
You do realize the entire country is on top of the quality of the BE? It’s not like we are making it up for fun. You can twist numbers all you want but the wide and accurate view is that the BE is way down.
Expand ...

We got it. You and your friend make the same point in almost every single freaking thread. Since presumably everyone else on this board can read and follows basketball and they have access to at least some of the various published ratings, they can all draw their own conclusions without you bleating at us from your soapbox.

The other problem with your posts on this topic is that you are wrong. The Big East is not WAY down. It is the #3 conference in RPI and #5 in most of the efficiency ratings, a little behind the ACC in those efficiency ratings, and way ahead of the MWC at 6. For you to be right, the Big East would have to be at least below the MWC. You have never provided any evidence that the Big East is closer to the mid majors than it is to the other majors, yet you keep making the same assertion.

I am trying to have a discussion about the math issue with the efficiency ratings. Do you have something to add on that topic?
 
Last edited:
nelsonmuntz said:
We got it. You and your friend make the same point in almost every single freaking thread. Since presumably everyone else on this board can read and follows basketball and they have access to at least some of the various published ratings, they can all draw their own conclusions without you bleating at us from your soapbox.

The other problem with your posts on this topic is that you are wrong. The Big East is not WAY down. It is the #3 conference in RPI and #5 in most of the efficiency ratings, a little behind the ACC in those efficiency ratings, and way ahead of the MWC at 6. For you to be right, the Big East would have to be at least below the MWC. You have never provided any evidence that the Big East is closer to the mid majors than it is to the other majors, yet you keep making the same assertion.

I am trying to have a discussion about the math issue with the efficiency ratings. Do you have something to add on that topic?
Expand ...
IMG_3853.jpeg
 
HooperScooper said:
Please show me where I trashed the Big East several posts above. I want to see this.
Expand ...
@nelsonmuntz, are you going to answer this? Of course you're not, because you don't have anything to show. You shouldn't accuse someone of something if you don't have evidence to back it up. If you want articles that only you deem as sufficiently positive for your liking then move to China or Russia and take over for Xi Jinping or Vladimir Putin.
 
HooperScooper said:
@nelsonmuntz, are you going to answer this? Of course you're not, because you don't have anything to show. You shouldn't accuse someone of something if you don't have evidence to back it up. If you want articles that only you deem as sufficiently positive for your liking then move to China or Russia and take over for Xi Jinping or Vladimir Putin.
Expand ...

This bit you are doing is pathetic even by internet message board standards. You stalk me around the board, making cracks about the Big East (see post 47 in this thread) and agreeing with any poster that makes a dig at the Big East, or takes a dig at me for that matter (which you have done in the last hour in the Big East NET thread), then pretend to be indignant when I call you on it and imply I should do a complete audit of your posting history to prove something that I don't care about. This is the laziest gaslighting I have ever seen on this board, and that is saying something.

I have spelled out my position clearly in the 1st and 8th post of this thread, yet you continually misrepresent and exaggerate what I post, and you do it continually, and now are trolling and making a transparent attempt to hijack and derail this thread.

Give it a rest.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,160
Messages
4,555,246
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom