March 26, 201115 yr So if the Big 10 is the best conference, and the tournament is the ultimate measure of how good a league is, where would 0 teams remaining put them?????
March 26, 201115 yr Just Curious but were does 2 put the weak SEC. Seriously? They are the ONLY 2 good teams the SEC had.
March 26, 201115 yr Seriously? They are the ONLY 2 good teams the SEC had. Very true; UK and Florida is on a completely different level than the rest of the conference.
March 26, 201115 yr Very true; UK and Florida is on a completely different level than the rest of the conference. Maybe, but they lost 9 SEC games between the two of them.
March 26, 201115 yr Quite simply you don't understand my point. The odds makers are IMO the most qualified experts on ranking teams. They have a lot more at stake than a selection committee. If they think UConn should be favored by 2.5 against Arizona and Marquette should only get 4 points from UNC I tend to lean towards their judgement because of their risk.
March 27, 201115 yr @BrettmcmurphY: Since 2003 "overrated" Big East has 9 Final Four teams, ACC 6, Big 10 5, Big 12 4, Pac-10/SEC 3, Butler 2
March 27, 201115 yr @BrettmcmurphY: Since 2003 "overrated" Big East has 9 Final Four teams, ACC 6, Big 10 5, Big 12 4, Pac-10/SEC 3, Butler 2 Absolute numbers mean absolutely nothing in this context (9 vs 6 is misleading when you have 16 teams vs 12). Also, since when are we talking about "since 2003"?
March 27, 201115 yr 5 teams that are in the Big East now weren't even in the conference in 2003... 2005 would be a better year to start from. No idea how much that changes the number.
March 27, 201115 yr Quite simply you don't understand my point. The odds makers are IMO the most qualified experts on ranking teams. They have a lot more at stake than a selection committee. If they think UConn should be favored by 2.5 against Arizona and Marquette should only get 4 points from UNC I tend to lean towards their judgement because of their risk. First of all they don't rank the teams, they set the point spread. So they are more qualified at setting the line...that makes sense as any gambling is against NCAA rules. However, there are generally only three outcomes...win, lose or push...
March 27, 201115 yr 5 teams that are in the Big East now weren't even in the conference in 2003... 2005 would be a better year to start from. No idea how much that changes the number. 2 in 2003 and 1 in 2004 if you count Marquette's CUSA run in 2003. If that was counted would still leave them with 6 and equal to ACC total in that span...
March 27, 201115 yr Absolute numbers mean absolutely nothing in this context (9 vs 6 is misleading when you have 16 teams vs 12). Also, since when are we talking about "since 2003"? 16% of teams in tournament. 25% of Final 4. That better???
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.