UcMiami
How it is
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 14,196
- Reaction Score
- 47,310
AndyCT really good post and tomcat nice follow on.
And just as a reminder, people forget that the 'strong conferences' aren't all that strong really, and I include the old big east in that. At their best, conferences get one team ranked in the top four, another team that maybe flirts with the top 5 and is solidly in the top ten, and then one or two 'also ranked' teams in the teens/twenties and then where they distinguish themselves in in the 'other top 50' teams in their conference with the numbers anywhere from zero to 4 or 5. And those 'other top 50' teams are not that good - they distinguish themselves from the also-rans with the quality of coaching, the seriousness of the players and maybe one or two moderately ranked HS recruits.
The old big east that we all remember had UConn and variously either ND or Rutgers most years in the top 10, and a rotation of Louisville, St. Johns, WV, Villanova, DePaul vying for top 25, and then a bunch of teams rotating into and out of the top 50 - but UConn and either ND or Rutgers made mincemeat of the rest of the league in not dissimilar fashion to the way they slice through the AAC, and we never took any of the games too seriously, just as we made mincemeat of OOC teams outside the top 10.
Well, the ACC has had three team in the rankings on and off this year, including the #1 team, and they have what I consider quality coaching pretty much throughout the league, and they have serious committed players. What they are lacking at the moment is depth in recruiting HS talent. I think it is getting better and I think USF, Temple, and UConn all help with that. Generally the games are pretty easy on the eye and not slug fests of bad basketball and bad coaching so that has to look relatively appealing to prospects.
And just as a reminder, people forget that the 'strong conferences' aren't all that strong really, and I include the old big east in that. At their best, conferences get one team ranked in the top four, another team that maybe flirts with the top 5 and is solidly in the top ten, and then one or two 'also ranked' teams in the teens/twenties and then where they distinguish themselves in in the 'other top 50' teams in their conference with the numbers anywhere from zero to 4 or 5. And those 'other top 50' teams are not that good - they distinguish themselves from the also-rans with the quality of coaching, the seriousness of the players and maybe one or two moderately ranked HS recruits.
The old big east that we all remember had UConn and variously either ND or Rutgers most years in the top 10, and a rotation of Louisville, St. Johns, WV, Villanova, DePaul vying for top 25, and then a bunch of teams rotating into and out of the top 50 - but UConn and either ND or Rutgers made mincemeat of the rest of the league in not dissimilar fashion to the way they slice through the AAC, and we never took any of the games too seriously, just as we made mincemeat of OOC teams outside the top 10.
Well, the ACC has had three team in the rankings on and off this year, including the #1 team, and they have what I consider quality coaching pretty much throughout the league, and they have serious committed players. What they are lacking at the moment is depth in recruiting HS talent. I think it is getting better and I think USF, Temple, and UConn all help with that. Generally the games are pretty easy on the eye and not slug fests of bad basketball and bad coaching so that has to look relatively appealing to prospects.