Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Bone Dog, post: 4499284, member: 12088"]
I agree. It might be more revealing (at least in a rough and ready way) in the early part of the season to look at the ratio

Q1 + Q2 : Q3+ Q4

without even factoring in wins and losses. This would also be a way of measuring strength of conference by schedule.

Thus, as of today (thru 1/13), you get:
UConn       12:3

UNC           11:5
Creighton   11:5
UCLA         12:6
Duke          10:5
ND             10:5

NC St         11:6
Villanova    11:7
Indiana       10:6
Iowa St       9:5
Stanford     10:6
Indiana       10:6

FSU            11:8
Michigan    10:7
VPI             10:7
Iowa           8:7
Utah           8:7
Oklahoma  8:7
Colorado    9:8
Tennessee 10:9

tOSU          8:9
Maryland    8:9
Alabama    8:9
SCar          7:10

Arizona      3:11

and of course,
LSU           3:14

They can be grouped according to broader ratios. For example, UConn's group is 4:1, the next group (with UNC, Duke, ND, etc) is 2:1 or better, the next is 1.5:1 or better, then 1:1 or better, then less than 1:1, less than 1:3, and finally less than 1:4.

If you factor in W/L records, the list begins to reflect more what we come to expect, with SCar and Stanford closer to the top of the list.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

First name of men's bb coach

Reply to thread

Forum statistics