(04-03-2020 04:45 AM)XLance Wrote:  I just love a good hate.

When that series resumes it going to kick off a great weekend of football.
Texas v. A&M
Florida State v. Florida
Georgia Tech v. Georgia
Clemson v. South Carolina
Louisville v. Kentucky

1) It’s not going to resume for at least another decade (as a regularly scheduled game (Post season match up may happen sooner)

2) when and if it does resume it’s not going to be on rivalry weekend. It’ll be a start of the season game like Iowa vs Iowa State

(04-02-2020 08:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Can’t help notice how you keep changing the timeline to fit your terrible narrative. Stop dodging and answer the question:

What has UT done in the past 10 years?

How many 1st place and or record setting collegiate revenue years has UT had in the past 10 years?

You look absolutely ridiculous denying a basic truth the entire college world knows:

Nobody has done less with more over the past decade than UT

Well if you wanna go technical with dates, Texas in the past 10 years played for a MNC and won a NY6 game. Aggy has won zero NY6 games..haven't played in any at all, actually. Best season aggy had was JFF Heisman season that ended up in the cotton bowl..which isn't a NY6 bowl game.. All this with three coaching turnovers..Mack to Chuck to Tom. From seeing the #WRTS t-shirts to seeing a class full of oos kids.. Texas>aggy

(04-03-2020 05:50 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(04-02-2020 09:47 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  If “the rest of the BXII sucks”, then 340 of 355 schools suck.

Obviously you didn't read the link and if you were hinting the Big 12 is the best conference in men's basketball, 355 - 10 isn't 340 and neither is 355 - 9.

Last decade:

ACC: 130 wins, 36 Sweet 16's, 9 Final 4's, 5 Championships

Big Ten: 101 wins, 29 Sweet 16's, 8 Final 4's

SEC: 79 wins, 21 Sweet 16's, 7 Final 4's, 1 Championship

Big 12: 78 wins, 22 Sweet 16's, 5 Final 4's

Big East: 58 wins, 12 Sweet 16's, 4 Final 4's, 2 Championships

Pac-12: 46 wins, 15 Sweet 16's, 1 Final 4

AAC: 37 wins, 6 Sweet 16's, 3 Final 4's, 2 Championships

Of the 78 Big 12 wins, 24 are Kansas including 2 FF's. Take them out and they're below the Big East. Take Duke (26) out of the ACC and they're still #1. Take Duke (26) and North Carolina (24) out of the ACC and they're still ahead of both the Big 12 with Kansas and the SEC with Kentucky. Take Michigan State (21) out of the Big Ten and the Big 10's still ahead of both the SEC and Big 12 at full strength.

The ACC is #1, the Big Ten's #2, the SEC and Big 12 are fighting for #3. The data since 2000 is pretty similar. There's a reason the ACC and Big Ten are matched up in their challenge. The ACC won half of the championships in the last decade (four if Louisville's counts as a Big East title). Just because no one in the Big Ten is Kansas or Kentucky doesn't mean the SEC or Big 12 is better than the Big Ten.

Big 12 is the toughest bball conference from top to bottom. Good coaches go there and struggle..leave then become good again. It's a meat grinder. Look at the ACC the bottom is bigger than in the Big 12..reason why Sargin has the Big 12 consistently in the top 2 for the past decade... all with just one blueblood in Kansas. The ACC will always look the best because of Carolina and Duke..they are rightfully the top 2 basketball programs in the country no matter what year. Kansas is 3rd imo.

Back to the Big 12/Pac realignment. Is the answer, to pay every potential school the same amount across the board like the SEC and the Rust Belt?

Seeing tosu/michigan.. getting the same amount from TV deals as Purdue and Indiana is crazy. Same for Bama/FL getting the same as Vanderbilt and Mississippi state.

For schools like SC, Oregon.. I bet they look at the way the current Big 12 is set up and be that it's 3rd tier rights would be really nice bags themselves.

The tier 1 and 2 packages will always be the meat of the overall deal which would be huge pairing CA and Texas together and brands like ou with oregon.. But the independent 3rd packages could be what pushes this thing over.

(04-03-2020 07:53 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(04-02-2020 08:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Can’t help notice how you keep changing the timeline to fit your terrible narrative. Stop dodging and answer the question:

What has UT done in the past 10 years?

How many 1st place and or record setting collegiate revenue years has UT had in the past 10 years?

You look absolutely ridiculous denying a basic truth the entire college world knows:

Nobody has done less with more over the past decade than UT

Well if you wanna go technical with dates, Texas in the past 10 years played for a MNC and won a NY6 game. Aggy has won zero NY6 games..haven't played in any at all, actually. Best season aggy had was JFF Heisman season that ended up in the cotton bowl..which isn't a NY6 bowl game.. All this with three coaching turnovers..Mack to Chuck to Tom. From seeing the #WRTS t-shirts to seeing a class full of oos kids.. Texas>aggy

I get you keep moving the goal posts because you keep getting owned by your own dumb attacks

You are the one that said more money should equal more championships

(03-31-2020 02:48 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  One day they may be able to parlay that money into a championship..in something, anything.

Those were your exact words. All I ask is you not be a typical UT hypocrite about it and apply that to yourself

If money should lead to championships as you said then where are all UTs championships over the past 10 years which have seen first place and record setting revenues pretty much every year?

You haven’t even won the new B12-2 yet

I know you won’t answer because you’re a lazy horn hypocrite who won’t apply the same standard to himself

(04-03-2020 08:35 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(04-03-2020 07:53 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(04-02-2020 08:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Can’t help notice how you keep changing the timeline to fit your terrible narrative. Stop dodging and answer the question:

What has UT done in the past 10 years?

How many 1st place and or record setting collegiate revenue years has UT had in the past 10 years?

You look absolutely ridiculous denying a basic truth the entire college world knows:

Nobody has done less with more over the past decade than UT

Well if you wanna go technical with dates, Texas in the past 10 years played for a MNC and won a NY6 game. Aggy has won zero NY6 games..haven't played in any at all, actually. Best season aggy had was JFF Heisman season that ended up in the cotton bowl..which isn't a NY6 bowl game.. All this with three coaching turnovers..Mack to Chuck to Tom. From seeing the #WRTS t-shirts to seeing a class full of oos kids.. Texas>aggy

I get you keep moving the goal posts because you keep getting owned by your own dumb attacks

You are the one that said more money should equal more championships

(03-31-2020 02:48 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  One day they may be able to parlay that money into a championship..in something, anything.

Those were your exact words. All I ask is you not be a typical UT hypocrite about it and apply that to yourself

If money should lead to championships as you said then where are all UTs championships over the past 10 years which have seen first place and record setting revenues pretty much every year?

You haven’t even won the new B12-2 yet

I know you won’t answer because you’re a lazy horn hypocrite who won’t apply the same standard to himself

All I said was one day.. The money UT has made it has parlayed into a Tennis, swimming title.. even a golf title.. But enough of elitist talk, would u welcome us back in the SEC or would you want us to align with the west?

Wow cool

In the past 10 years We’ve won a NC in Women’s basketball and 7 team NCs in Men and Women’s Track and Field We won a golf one too but I’m not counting it here since it was 2009.

As for where you end up? Don’t really care. My prediction: you go nowhere at all.

(04-02-2020 08:31 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-02-2020 07:23 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  As for your implication that Big 12 football is better than Pac-12 football, there is no real prove of that. I do know that the Pac-12 consistently puts more talent in the NFL and more talent in the NBA. As for baseball, the Pac-12 has won more championships than any other conference, the last one in 2018 by Oregon State. For all three sports, both conferences produce good teams in all three sports. So I am not saying that the Pac-12 is better in these three sports, they just don't take a back seat to the Big 12 in any of them.

There's lots of proof for football, out of conference records, poll rankings, computer rankings.
Now you can argue there's not much of a difference or argue with other criteria, but to say there is no real "proof" is simply not true.

As for basketball, the Big 12 has been FAR superior since the last realignment. To argue otherwise just indicates you haven't followed college basketball very well. There's a good argument the Big 12 has been the absolute best conference since the realignment.

When I look at the talent from the Big 12 to the NBA and NFL, it is clear that the Pac-12 has better talent. Oklahoma has been great in football, with five consecutive conference championships. In the past five seasons, the Pac-12 has had four different schools win a Pac-12 football championship: Stanford, USC, Oregon and Washington (twice). There is no dominate school in football at this time, which has not helped in the playoffs. Kansas has won 15 of the last 16 regular season titles in the Big 12. They have dominated the Big 12, although Texas Tech had a great season in 2019 and Baylor was having a great season in 2020 until the last few games. Kansas State wins the regular season title in 2019, then falls to UC Irvine in the NCAA Tournament.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men...ay-rosters
CONFERENCE
ACC- 82
Pac-12 - 69
SEC - 63
Big 12 - 41
Big Ten - 39

https://www.ncaa.com/news/football/artic...fl-rosters
CONFERENCE
SEC - 339
Big Ten - 253
ACC - 215
Pac-12 - 189
Big 12 - 131

The opening day rosters for 2019 NFL and NBA teams illustrates the difference in talent from the Pac-12 and Big 12. The talent in football is coming from primarily Oklahoma and the basketball talent is primarily coming from Kansas, although UT has produced some good basketball talent. It is more balanced in the Pac-12. That is why the last place team in the Pac-12 basketball standings (UW) could beat Baylor this season.

(04-02-2020 08:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Can’t help notice how you keep changing the timeline to fit your terrible narrative. Stop dodging and answer the question:

What has UT done in the past 10 years?

How many 1st place and or record setting collegiate revenue years has UT had in the past 10 years?

You look absolutely ridiculous denying a basic truth the entire college world knows:

Nobody has done less with more over the past decade than UT

There's only one timeline where your argument makes any sense at all. I'm showing what it looks like over various timelines. You are the one cherry picking. And there are a lot of schools who have done significantly less with a lot of resources even over that time frame (UCLA, Illinois, Tennessee to name a few). And you've presented absolutely no data to back up your opinion. Texas does have a winning conference record, 47-42, and a winning overall record, 71-57, during the worst period for Texas football since the 1930s. And they have a top 10 finish.

Programs have up and down periods. Alabama was 67-53 over the 10 year period prior to Nick Saban (97-06), also 14 games over .500. Officially they were even worse as 16 of those wins were vacated, so they were 51-53.

Notre Dame was only 70-52 in the 10 years before Brian Kelly, very similar.

As for A&M, I went back to 1968 and they had only 7 top 10 finishes in 52 years with the best a #6 and the most recent 2013 with Johnny Manziel. Texas had 7 top 10 finishes just from 2000 to 2009, a #1, #2, #4, #5 (2), #6, #10. And, of course, Texas had a #9 finish in 2018. Michigan also only has one top 10 finish in the last 10 years. Notre Dame and USC only have two. Nebraska and Miami have none.

(04-03-2020 12:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-02-2020 08:45 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Can’t help notice how you keep changing the timeline to fit your terrible narrative. Stop dodging and answer the question:

What has UT done in the past 10 years?

How many 1st place and or record setting collegiate revenue years has UT had in the past 10 years?

You look absolutely ridiculous denying a basic truth the entire college world knows:

Nobody has done less with more over the past decade than UT

There's only one timeline where your argument makes any sense at all. I'm showing what it looks like over various timelines. You are the one cherry picking. And there are a lot of schools who have done significantly less with a lot of resources even over that time frame (UCLA, Illinois, Tennessee to name a few). And you've presented absolutely no data to back up your opinion. Texas does have a winning conference record, 47-42, and a winning overall record, 71-57, during the worst period for Texas football since the 1930s. And they have a top 10 finish.

Programs have up and down periods. Alabama was 67-53 over the 10 year period prior to Nick Saban (97-06), also 14 games over .500. Officially they were even worse as 16 of those wins were vacated, so they were 51-53.

Notre Dame was only 70-52 in the 10 years before Brian Kelly, very similar.

As for A&M, I went back to 1968 and they had only 7 top 10 finishes in 52 years with the best a #6 and the most recent 2013 with Johnny Manziel. Texas had 7 top 10 finishes just from 2000 to 2009, a #1, #2, #4, #5 (2), #6, #10. And, of course, Texas had a #9 finish in 2018. Michigan also only has one top 10 finish in the last 10 years. Notre Dame and USC only have two. Nebraska and Miami have none.

let it go Bullet, it's dead.

(04-03-2020 08:07 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  Back to the Big 12/Pac realignment. Is the answer, to pay every potential school the same amount across the board like the SEC and the Rust Belt?

Seeing tosu/michigan.. getting the same amount from TV deals as Purdue and Indiana is crazy. Same for Bama/FL getting the same as Vanderbilt and Mississippi state.

For schools like SC, Oregon.. I bet they look at the way the current Big 12 is set up and be that it's 3rd tier rights would be really nice bags themselves.

The tier 1 and 2 packages will always be the meat of the overall deal which would be huge pairing CA and Texas together and brands like ou with oregon.. But the independent 3rd packages could be what pushes this thing over.

One answer would be a joint venture. The two conferences would control the entire west. They could do a Thursday or Friday game each week without burdening the schools too much since it would be spread over 22 to 24 schools. Their contracts expire within a year of each other.

Fire Scott and get rid of most of that San Francisco office space. Have one conference office in Dallas, Denver or Phoenix with meeting space in California and Dallas. Work with ESPN for Tier III, either with a conference network or ESPN+

(03-04-2020 10:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  But if they did what would the outcome be? Maybe the Big 10 goes for Oregon, Stanford, Cal, and UW and adds Colorado and Utah as bridges. All are AAU and that would put the PAC out of its misery.
Can we say Big 20? or Big 10x2, or will it be B2G?

The Big Tens

(04-03-2020 05:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  Fire Scott and get rid of most of that San Francisco office space. Have one conference office in Dallas, Denver or Phoenix with meeting space in California and Dallas. Work with ESPN for Tier III, either with a conference network or ESPN+

This is the only way to get ESPN's approval for a property they covet among all others, Texas. The rest of your plan is spot on. Scott needed to go 3 years ago, what an entitled putz!

(04-03-2020 05:51 PM)bullet Wrote:  Fire Scott and get rid of most of that San Francisco office space. Have one conference office in Dallas, Denver or Phoenix with meeting space in California and Dallas. Work with ESPN for Tier III, either with a conference network or ESPN+

I don’t think there is any question Scott would be gone.

(04-03-2020 05:50 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-03-2020 08:07 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  Back to the Big 12/Pac realignment. Is the answer, to pay every potential school the same amount across the board like the SEC and the Rust Belt?

Seeing tosu/michigan.. getting the same amount from TV deals as Purdue and Indiana is crazy. Same for Bama/FL getting the same as Vanderbilt and Mississippi state.

For schools like SC, Oregon.. I bet they look at the way the current Big 12 is set up and be that it's 3rd tier rights would be really nice bags themselves.

The tier 1 and 2 packages will always be the meat of the overall deal which would be huge pairing CA and Texas together and brands like ou with oregon.. But the independent 3rd packages could be what pushes this thing over.

One answer would be a joint venture. The two conferences would control the entire west. They could do a Thursday or Friday game each week without burdening the schools too much since it would be spread over 22 to 24 schools. Their contracts expire within a year of each other.

having a 22 or even 20 team conference.. I don't like the pod system but that would have to be in play..or there would never be cross divisional games until the CCG. 16 schools with two divisions of 8 makes the most sense since you can play cross divisional schools every 2 years (same school).

Staples piece hit it on the head about Larry Scott and him headquartering the Pac 12 offices in San Francisco. Bullet is correct, he has to go and that office needs to be shut down. Dallas would probably be the best place to continue having the Conference HQ at in this merger or expansion. The conference tournaments would really benefit from a rotation of sites. Football CCG could be in Dallas, PHX, Vegas, even LA. Basketball could rotate between St. Louis, Vegas.

I think Thursday games could work even though it will be going head to head vs the NFL. I say no to Friday nights, that's for High School Football.

(04-03-2020 07:21 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(04-03-2020 04:45 AM)XLance Wrote:  I just love a good hate.

When that series resumes it going to kick off a great weekend of football.
Texas v. A&M
Florida State v. Florida
Georgia Tech v. Georgia
Clemson v. South Carolina
Louisville v. Kentucky

1) It’s not going to resume for at least another decade (as a regularly scheduled game (Post season match up may happen sooner)

2) when and if it does resume it’s not going to be on rivalry weekend. It’ll be a start of the season game like Iowa vs Iowa State

Just like the Louisville-Kentucky game.....oh wait.

(04-03-2020 07:59 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(04-03-2020 05:50 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(04-02-2020 09:47 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  If “the rest of the BXII sucks”, then 340 of 355 schools suck.

Obviously you didn't read the link and if you were hinting the Big 12 is the best conference in men's basketball, 355 - 10 isn't 340 and neither is 355 - 9.

Last decade:

ACC: 130 wins, 36 Sweet 16's, 9 Final 4's, 5 Championships

Big Ten: 101 wins, 29 Sweet 16's, 8 Final 4's

SEC: 79 wins, 21 Sweet 16's, 7 Final 4's, 1 Championship

Big 12: 78 wins, 22 Sweet 16's, 5 Final 4's

Big East: 58 wins, 12 Sweet 16's, 4 Final 4's, 2 Championships

Pac-12: 46 wins, 15 Sweet 16's, 1 Final 4

AAC: 37 wins, 6 Sweet 16's, 3 Final 4's, 2 Championships

Of the 78 Big 12 wins, 24 are Kansas including 2 FF's. Take them out and they're below the Big East. Take Duke (26) out of the ACC and they're still #1. Take Duke (26) and North Carolina (24) out of the ACC and they're still ahead of both the Big 12 with Kansas and the SEC with Kentucky. Take Michigan State (21) out of the Big Ten and the Big 10's still ahead of both the SEC and Big 12 at full strength.

The ACC is #1, the Big Ten's #2, the SEC and Big 12 are fighting for #3. The data since 2000 is pretty similar. There's a reason the ACC and Big Ten are matched up in their challenge. The ACC won half of the championships in the last decade (four if Louisville's counts as a Big East title). Just because no one in the Big Ten is Kansas or Kentucky doesn't mean the SEC or Big 12 is better than the Big Ten.

Big 12 is the toughest bball conference from top to bottom. Good coaches go there and struggle..leave then become good again. It's a meat grinder. Look at the ACC the bottom is bigger than in the Big 12..reason why Sargin has the Big 12 consistently in the top 2 for the past decade... all with just one blueblood in Kansas. The ACC will always look the best because of Carolina and Duke..they are rightfully the top 2 basketball programs in the country no matter what year. Kansas is 3rd imo.

True, UNC and Duke is the best combo of any other conference. Bu theres also Louisville and Syracuse which are both top 10 all time. Then there is Notre Dame, which is top 15, and now there is Virginia. Sure the B12 is rated #1 or #2 many years, but so is the ACC. Folks who have nothing else to crow about like to talk about computer ratings. But, I dont just put confidence in computers. The ACC can also crow about results on the court, things like Final Fours, and NC's. And Kansas is not 3rd. Thats a tossup between UNC and Kentucky and Duke. But Kansas is not near those 3. They are a distant 4th, if you consider NC, Final Fours etc...

(04-04-2020 07:28 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-03-2020 07:59 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(04-03-2020 05:50 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(04-02-2020 09:47 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  If “the rest of the BXII sucks”, then 340 of 355 schools suck.

Obviously you didn't read the link and if you were hinting the Big 12 is the best conference in men's basketball, 355 - 10 isn't 340 and neither is 355 - 9.

Last decade:

ACC: 130 wins, 36 Sweet 16's, 9 Final 4's, 5 Championships

Big Ten: 101 wins, 29 Sweet 16's, 8 Final 4's

SEC: 79 wins, 21 Sweet 16's, 7 Final 4's, 1 Championship

Big 12: 78 wins, 22 Sweet 16's, 5 Final 4's

Big East: 58 wins, 12 Sweet 16's, 4 Final 4's, 2 Championships

Pac-12: 46 wins, 15 Sweet 16's, 1 Final 4

AAC: 37 wins, 6 Sweet 16's, 3 Final 4's, 2 Championships

Of the 78 Big 12 wins, 24 are Kansas including 2 FF's. Take them out and they're below the Big East. Take Duke (26) out of the ACC and they're still #1. Take Duke (26) and North Carolina (24) out of the ACC and they're still ahead of both the Big 12 with Kansas and the SEC with Kentucky. Take Michigan State (21) out of the Big Ten and the Big 10's still ahead of both the SEC and Big 12 at full strength.

The ACC is #1, the Big Ten's #2, the SEC and Big 12 are fighting for #3. The data since 2000 is pretty similar. There's a reason the ACC and Big Ten are matched up in their challenge. The ACC won half of the championships in the last decade (four if Louisville's counts as a Big East title). Just because no one in the Big Ten is Kansas or Kentucky doesn't mean the SEC or Big 12 is better than the Big Ten.

Big 12 is the toughest bball conference from top to bottom. Good coaches go there and struggle..leave then become good again. It's a meat grinder. Look at the ACC the bottom is bigger than in the Big 12..reason why Sargin has the Big 12 consistently in the top 2 for the past decade... all with just one blueblood in Kansas. The ACC will always look the best because of Carolina and Duke..they are rightfully the top 2 basketball programs in the country no matter what year. Kansas is 3rd imo.

True, UNC and Duke is the best combo of any other conference. Bu theres also Louisville and Syracuse which are both top 10 all time. Then there is Notre Dame, which is top 15, and now there is Virginia. Sure the B12 is rated #1 or #2 many years, but so is the ACC. Folks who have nothing else to crow about like to talk about computer ratings. But, I dont just put confidence in computers. The ACC can also crow about results on the court, things like Final Fours, and NC's. And Kansas is not 3rd. Thats a tossup between UNC and Kentucky and Duke. But Kansas is not near those 3. They are a distant 4th, if you consider NC, Final Fours etc...

The ACC clearly has the best collection of college basketball brands, albeit this isn't organic rather it happened via the raids on the Big East, which by 2012 had easily surpassed the ACC as a hoops conference.

The ACC is the only conference with two blue chip brands - UNC and Duke, the #3 and #4 all time programs - and their red chip wrung of brands - Syracuse, Louisville, NC State, Virginia - are very strong as well. No other conference comes close to that top 6. If we chose the top seven all-time programs between the ACC and Big 12, the ACC would have six of them and the Big 12 would have Kansas.

Nevertheless, big brands doesn't necessarily mean high performance in a given year. The Big 12 was better than the ACC this past year. Ratings like Conference RPI aren't perfect, but they basically tell the tale.

(04-04-2020 07:28 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-03-2020 07:59 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(04-03-2020 05:50 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(04-02-2020 09:47 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  If “the rest of the BXII sucks”, then 340 of 355 schools suck.

Obviously you didn't read the link and if you were hinting the Big 12 is the best conference in men's basketball, 355 - 10 isn't 340 and neither is 355 - 9.

Last decade:

ACC: 130 wins, 36 Sweet 16's, 9 Final 4's, 5 Championships

Big Ten: 101 wins, 29 Sweet 16's, 8 Final 4's

SEC: 79 wins, 21 Sweet 16's, 7 Final 4's, 1 Championship

Big 12: 78 wins, 22 Sweet 16's, 5 Final 4's

Big East: 58 wins, 12 Sweet 16's, 4 Final 4's, 2 Championships

Pac-12: 46 wins, 15 Sweet 16's, 1 Final 4

AAC: 37 wins, 6 Sweet 16's, 3 Final 4's, 2 Championships

Of the 78 Big 12 wins, 24 are Kansas including 2 FF's. Take them out and they're below the Big East. Take Duke (26) out of the ACC and they're still #1. Take Duke (26) and North Carolina (24) out of the ACC and they're still ahead of both the Big 12 with Kansas and the SEC with Kentucky. Take Michigan State (21) out of the Big Ten and the Big 10's still ahead of both the SEC and Big 12 at full strength.

The ACC is #1, the Big Ten's #2, the SEC and Big 12 are fighting for #3. The data since 2000 is pretty similar. There's a reason the ACC and Big Ten are matched up in their challenge. The ACC won half of the championships in the last decade (four if Louisville's counts as a Big East title). Just because no one in the Big Ten is Kansas or Kentucky doesn't mean the SEC or Big 12 is better than the Big Ten.

Big 12 is the toughest bball conference from top to bottom. Good coaches go there and struggle..leave then become good again. It's a meat grinder. Look at the ACC the bottom is bigger than in the Big 12..reason why Sargin has the Big 12 consistently in the top 2 for the past decade... all with just one blueblood in Kansas. The ACC will always look the best because of Carolina and Duke..they are rightfully the top 2 basketball programs in the country no matter what year. Kansas is 3rd imo.

True, UNC and Duke is the best combo of any other conference. Bu theres also Louisville and Syracuse which are both top 10 all time. Then there is Notre Dame, which is top 15, and now there is Virginia. Sure the B12 is rated #1 or #2 many years, but so is the ACC. Folks who have nothing else to crow about like to talk about computer ratings. But, I dont just put confidence in computers. The ACC can also crow about results on the court, things like Final Fours, and NC's. And Kansas is not 3rd. Thats a tossup between UNC and Kentucky and Duke. But Kansas is not near those 3. They are a distant 4th, if you consider NC, Final Fours etc...

If you're trying to find the best teams, my link had them ranked.

2010-2019:
1. Kentucky (31 wins, 8 Sweet 16, 4 Final Fours, 1 Championship)
2. Duke (26, 7, 2, 2)
3. North Carolina (24, 6, 2, 1)
Tie. Kansas (24, 6, 2, 0) - But UNC won a championship and Kansas didn't
5. Michigan State (21, 6, 3, 0)
6. Gonzaga (20, 5, 1, 0)

Kentucky no doubt owned the 2010's

2000-2019:
1. North Carolina (50, 11, 6, 3)
Tie. Kansas (50, 13, 5, 1)
3. Duke (49, 15, 4, 3)
4. Michigan State (46, 12, 7, 1)
5. Kentucky (45, 12, 4, 1)

North Carolina and Kansas tied from 2000-2019 but UNC won 3 championships and Kansas won just one. Carolina also made one more Final Four. Interestingly Kentucky did not make the Final Four once in the 2000's decade (Elite Eight in 2003 and 2005).

I would say the top five are clearly the top five in men's college basketball and the ACC has two of them.

I think the most accurate stat might be performance since 1985 when they expanded to 64 teams. I don't like all time since UCLA gets credit for a ton of tournaments when the field was smaller (most of their championships they won winning just 4 games vs. 6 today and most were when only conference champions made the tournament). UCLA's not winning 7 titles in a row today. No one since 1985 has won 3 in a row and only Duke (1991, 1992) and Florida (2006, 2007) have won back to back.