Is the B1G really worse this year?

[IU? I'm Fine]

Subjectively, it sure seems that the teams in the B1G are, in the top tier, not quite as strong as they have been in past years. More non-conferences loses, fewer top NBA first-round picks, more apparent parity, do these really indicate an off year for the B1G? Even a few NCAA Tourney bracketology predictions have the B1G getting only 5 invites and other major conferences with 7 or 6 invites.

But, wait. Didn't the B1G beat the ACC in the challenge? Oh, yeah, it's all about the matchups.

Uh, the B1G has 2 teams ranked in the top 12 or 14 teams and 3 in the top 25 in the nation indicating that the B1G hasn't slipped. Oh, yeah, rankings don't mean much..let the season play out. And didn't the B1G have more in the top 25 in years past?

Wisconsin traditionally does well in the B1G but can't sustain that in the NCAA Tourney. Well, this year is different, right?

Is parity such that each conference is stronger top to bottom and that dilution of talent at the top makes each major conference just about equal to others year-to-year? Are there fewer and fewer quality and/or 3- and 4- year players to go around each year and that also has a dampening or evening affect on excellence?

Is every conference seeing this trend? Is it a trend?

I think that the hype meter is broken. Dick Vitale and other Phi-Slamma-Jamma speaking media vocalists are tempering their bombast.

College ball is past it's prime. But, you say attendance figures are up. Heh. Maybe I'm just getting older.

 

[bsmitty08]

I would say as a conference the BIG is down.

Wisky when healthy will be a top 5 team. Maryland looks like a legit threat to win BIG

OSU/MSU...are down from a talent stand point and record standpoint to this date

Mich is way down..

Iowa, IU, Il, PU will all be bubble teams. Best team in conf play will make tourney.

Nebraska Regressed from last years NCAA appearance (Not a tourney team this year)

PSU, NW, RUT, Minny....all will struggle rest of year.

So in saying that I see 2 top 5 seeds in NCAA in Wisky and Maryland (potential to be a 2 or 3 seed)

Rest is a crap shoot on who gets in..

 

[Zizkov]

Yes the BT is down and every statistical measurement shows....

that up to now.

Wisky and Maryland are good and the rest are average to bad.

Currently 4th in Sagarin............

Link

 

[Tony20]

Because stats always tell the whole story...smh...

see Big 10 football as I mentioned below. Every stat said we sucked 45 days ago.

 

[S.Walker]

I have even watching basketball critically since the mid 60s

This is the worst overall level of play I can recall for the B10. Wisconsin has a nice team when everyone is healthy - maybe top 10 in a college basketball "up" year. Maryland is a true top 25 team from what I have seen. After that I see nothing worth writing home about. There are some nice individual players, but the level of play among those teams is on par with what should be the lower third of the B10 in a decent year. Some teams will have a nice game here and there, but most of the games I have seen so far have been painful to watch.

I think that this is a problem that goes far beyond the B10, although it is very apparent in our conference. All the major conferences seem to me to be down, and I have not seen any teams this year so far that look like an historically high-level team. UK plays some good defense and has some very nice players, but they have some issues also. UVA looks also like a very nice team. After that, not much out there.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[IU Meathead]

What is the best B1G nonconference win?

No one had a top 5 win, did anyone beat a top 10 team? Top 15?

 

[Zizkov]

If you have a better system for rating teams, please fill me in.....

I can only offer KenPom, Sagarin and the RPI.

If you have something to refute that, then feel free to post it.

OSU was one of the top 5 teams in all the computer polls, so I guess they were pretty good.

They are right far more often then wrong, unless you are aware of some other system of rating I'm not aware of. I would love to see them if so.

 

[Zizkov]

I can't remember a worse year for the BT in my 30+ years....

of watching.

I agree college BB as a whole is not very good right now. However, if you compare the last 2-3 years of the BT to this year, it is clearly down.

 

[SRIV94]

IOWA at UNC or IND vs BUT would probably be the two best at this

point. (IND over SMU is also in the ballpark, although SMU was without some key personnel.)

 

[bsmitty08]

Re: IOWA at UNC or IND vs BUT would probably be the two best at this


Our best wins are vs teams outside the current top 25? Bes twins would be Iowa over UNC in Chapel Hill, possibly PU over NC state.

Also when is the last time the BIG only had two teams ranked?

 

[SRIV94]

Butler will probably be ranked next week after winning at

Seton Hall (although they do have a game at Georgetown Saturday, which will be tough). And they were ranked when we played them, as was SMU.

SMU and Butler are 14 and 15 in the current RPI. (NC State is 43, still a nice win for Purdue, but I think our win over Butler is better--it wasn't at home.)

As for teams ranked, IU, OSU and MSU are all on the periphery--not in the top 25, but got votes (OSU is still 25 in one poll, but 26 in the other).

 

[outanames]

College basketball has been the victim of NBA rules, ie. shot-clock, 3-pt. lines, however the biggest problem is the reliance on freshmen, especially with the so-called top schools, most kids who are not fundamentally sound coming in.
These kids come in fresh off AAU ball where run and gun is the rule. In order to recruit them, coaches have to promise and show where they fit in, not in the long run, but rather that first year on campus. Does anyone think Calipari likes to play platoon basketball, or is he doing what he has to do to keep, at least in part, recruiting promises made?

It's those schools who end up with veteran teams that play the most organized ball when it comes to the basics, however they seldom win NCAA championships. That usually stays with the schools recruiting the best of the best each year praying that most will stay at least two years, but knowing otherwise. Some schools lose kids to the draft who are not the best of the best which makes predicting future needs even tougher.

One thing for sure, if a kid sees where he stands well in mock drafts, and money that's guaranteed for two years on first-round picks, it's hard to argue their not jumping for it.

Basketball has become a big money sport for the top colleges and most strategies are directed towards keeping it that way. Ticket sales used to be their lifeline, but TV contracts, gifts, and sales of soft goods have become king. The advent of Hi-Def TV's and the increase in ticket prices, and the monies paid out to get the best tickets have had an impact on attendance figures.

The popularity of the internet and hi-tech have proportionately taken a large part of people's leisure time plans. Basketball, even in Indiana, is not what it once was in regards to live audiences. Let's face it, kids in particular, don't attend sporting events as they once did, especially at the high school level.

If you look at who the top schools were last year in the Big-10, you only need to look at those who lost the most to entry to the NBA as those who couldn't immediately replace the losses. They're not going to be as strong. Works that way most years.

 

[T.M.P.]

No they can't predict the future, but they can show

what happened fairly accurately. To use stats you need to understand what they are reflecting and how to interpret them. And apparently, you don't. That doesn't mean they're wrong, it just means you don't know how to use them or what they are used for. To you, like many others here, an accurate stat, or even accurate "opinion", is one you agree with.












This post was edited on 1/15 12:27 PM by T.M.P.

 

[IndianaHoops]

Only 2 B10 teams top 25 right now (AP)

Let't compare to last year... ( http://collegepollarchive.com/mbasketball/ap/seasons.cfm?appollid=1079#.VLf6hivF81I )

The B10 had 2 teams in the top 5 (Wisky #3, MSU #4), and 2 others (OSU #11, Iowa #14) in the top 15.


Let's go back 2 years ago... ( http://collegepollarchive.com/mbasketball/ap/seasons.cfm?appollid=1059#.VLf7VSvF81I )

The B10 had 3 teams in the top 10 (Indiana #2, Michigan #5, and Minny #9). And 3 more in the top 25 (OSU #11, MSU #18, and UI #23).


Yes... the B10 is down compared to last year and way down compared to 2 years ago.


And the ACC has a better record vs B10 teams overall....fyi....








This post was edited on 1/15 12:48 PM by IndianaHoops

 

[T.M.P.]

It doesn't matter which measure you use ..

Polls, Power Rankings, Kenpom, Sagarin, BPI, RPI ... they all say we're down from previous years. But of course those with cognitive dissonance will find a way to ignore 6 different sources because, well, math and educated opinions obviously all hate Tom Crean and are just trying to make him look bad. Now if you can find a random blog or one clueless sportswriter to disagree, they'll all jump on that "accurate" bandwagon like it's gospel

The B1G is down this year, and, it's obvious.






This post was edited on 1/15 3:01 PM by T.M.P.

 

[T.M.P.]

The Purdue 3 peat years ..

were bad. And there was one last decade, but, in recent memory.. nope. This is as low as we've been in awhile.

But what do I know.. there's a guys on here that only watches IU and an occasional top 25 game and they can accurately access how good every conference is just from that small sample.

Freakin Geniuses...












This post was edited on 1/15 3:14 PM by T.M.P.

 

[S.Walker]

Are you talking about the Jim Rowinski teams? The B10 was

certainly down then.

 

[T.M.P.]

We used to call it the Purdue Line. If PU wins the B1G

outright it means the conference is down. lol

Rowinski was before the 3 peat. It would have been the C, Martin, Big Dog years.

 

[IU Scott]

If you are talking about me


I watch a lot of games every day and probably will watch well over 200 games in a year so if that comment was about me then you are totally wrong. I will even watch the smaller conferences on ESPN especially during championship week and have been doing this for years. I watch a lot of teams and conferences and I would rather base things on what I see rather than reporters or whoever votes because they don't watch as much as I do.

In the other conversation I was not talking about ranking being bad but I was talking about people using a lot of stats when determining who is good and who is not and I rather people use the eye test and base their thoughts on what they have observed.

 

[bsmitty08]

Agree outanames...and in this day in age of basketball athleticism and talent trumps experience.

 

[outanames]

I knew there was something we could agree on. VBG nt


*

 

[Paterfamilias]

I had thought before the season that the bottom half of ...

the conference would be a little stronger even though the top half would be down. Now I think only the bottom third is tougher, with the rest a couple of notches below Big Ten par. I still think that OSU will be very tough when March rolls around and I did predict that both Maryland and IU would be surprising. IU though is only surprising from the standpoint of ridiculous preseason projections.



This post was edited on 1/15 5:21 PM by Paterfamilias

 

[outanames]

Re: I can't remember a worse year for the BT in my 30+ years....


In-conference play has as much parity as it's ever had. No longer can a team go on the road knowing they will win at any of the venues. There is also more parity in the quality of coaches, especially at schools who were once conference doormats more often than not.

Most schools are much younger, on average, than in the past. In many of the 30+ years you speak of, the conference had teams who were hugely better than others in the conference, in terms of player quality and coaching quality. That has leveled out, and, with the fact that there is reliance on incoming freshmen more so than veteran lettermen, the quality of play has suffered as well.

I think it important to remember that, in the past, no IU team ever won an NCAA championship relying on even one talented freshman. That's not the nature of the foundation on which the college game is structured today.

No one need forget the past, however there are no answers for those comparing anything from the past to today in looking at the state of the college game.

 

[outanames]

Re: I have even watching basketball critically since the mid 60s

Go over the names of those players who have left school early since the early entry rules of the NBA changed. Pretend those players finished their college years and then ask yourself if you think the quality of Big-10 play would have been better under the old rules. I know it would have been at IU in recent years.

Go down through the years looking at All-American players who graduated from IU, and ask yourself how many would have left early had they been able to. The same can/could be said for other conference schools as well.

 

[T.M.P.]

Lot of injuries to key people ..**

IU

 

[Tony20]

To you and your buddy....

P/E ratios must have been gospel in the late 90's....because as well all know stats/analytics mean everything, right? I mean P/E ratios North of 80 made sense.

I can't help you guys if numbers is everything. Here's a sure bet though. $39.99 at Motel 6 for you and the other one.

 

[T.M.P.]

lol ...

make more sense than that post. Gibberish, followed by false assumption and accusation, and finally, a lame and feeble attempt at insult.. lol You okay? Need a hug?

lol .....

 

[ORG]

Are these the same experts who in October told us B1G Football was down?


Just wondering . . . my cognitive dissonance is acting up again . . .

 

[Zizkov]

So you aren't going to offer me a better measure of success?....

I'm not saying I'm right, but you have offered nothing. If you have a blog I can follow, I will.

So far you have said that KenPom, Sagarin and the RPI should not be believed and offered no alternative.

I guess you and IUScott just have the eye.

I used to make that kind of argument, but realized that I don't have the eye, despite my many years of watching and working with coaches.

 

[T.M.P.]

No they weren't....

Kenpom, BPI, RPI, Sagarin, all deal with college basketball, not football, with each using a different method.

Well sagarin does football too.

Seems ugh uncanny that all four, while using differing analytics or formulas say the same thing, huh?

they must all hate Tom Crean, right?













This post was edited on 1/16 2:13 PM by T.M.P.

 

[T.M.P.]

Hey buddy, lol ..

it amazes me that they ignore four different services using different measurements, analytics and programs (and two people polls using, hopefully, educated opinion) All saying that the conference is down.

Not saying any of the above is absolute in accuracy and isn't without flaws. Just that when four different proven methods have the same outcome. You better have a damn good argument to dismiss them. But no, instead they point to their own biased expert opinion with nothing more than "because". While using a very minimal sample size by watching a few games, reading articles they agree with and watching ESPN. And, then dismiss all four methods, on a whim. Like math is a subjective opinion or something?

I could get arguing one, but all four methods are wrong? At the same time? What's the odds of that ever happening? One measures schedule by using winning percentages. One measures wins and losses weighted partially by scoring margin, The next uses the same winning percentages as the first but adds in scoring margin and other detail factors, and the last uses possession percentage success rates on offense and defense. Only two are closely related.

Do all four methods hate Tom Crean? Does Kenpom have an agenda? Then here's the odd thing, or odder, or dumber. If you tell them that Michigan, MSU, and OSU are down from previous years and that no one has taken their place from our conference on the national scene, they'll agree. Logic must be a rare superpower on this board.






This post was edited on 1/16 1:12 PM by T.M.P.

 

[T.M.P.]

Also, since you don't know ..

advanced sports analytics don't work with football. They work best with baseball and have done fairly well with basketball but they're not used in football. So, just showing you that your comparative is basically crap.

 

[Shimmy24]

Not trying to be a homer here but....

Are you really mentioning wins over NC State and Butler instead of MD beating Iowa State in Kansas City (a neutral, but more or less away, site)?

 

[SRIV94]

That's a good one too. I forgot about that game.

Whoopsies.