Someone needs to take the Captain Morgan away from Huggins. He is on the sauce again.

(08-10-2012 08:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This topic got me curious, so I went through the 2013 roster of each major BB conference, and I ranked teams (off the top of my head, w/o research) as Excellent, Good, Fair and Bad BB programs, based on overall performance, over a fairly long period of time. I'm not going to debate any of this, b/c everybody has their own impressions, but here are mine:

Big East

Excellent: Louisville, UConn, Memphis, Georgetown
Good: Marquette, Temple, Cincy, Villanova, Notre Dame
Fair: St. John's, USF, UCF, Houston, Rutgers
Poor: DePaul, Providence, Seton Hall, SMU

Big 12

Excellent: Kansas
Good: West Virginia, Texas, Baylor, Kansas State
Fair: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State
Poor: Texas Tech, TCU

ACC

Excellent: UNC, Duke, Syracuse
Good: Florida State, Pitt, Clemson, NC State, Maryland
Fair: Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, BC, Miami
Poor: None

SEC

Excellent: Kentucky
Good: Florida, Missouri, Tennessee, Vandy, Mississippi State
Fair: Arkansas, Alabama, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Texas A&M, Georgia
Poor: Auburn, LSU

Big Ten

Excellent: Ohio Sate, Indiana, Michigan State
Good: Wisconsin, Michigan, Purdue, Illinois, Minnesota
Fair: Iowa, Northwestern
Poor: Penn State, Nebraska

PAC 12

Excellent: UCLA, Arizona
Good: Stanford, Washington, Arizona State, Cal
Fair: Oregon, USC, Washington State, Oregon State
Poor: Colorado, Utah

My conclusions:

The BE still has the highest number of excellent teams.

The BE is deeper than any other conference (9 excellent or good teams, vs. 8 for the ACC and Big Ten). The other 3 conferences only have 5 or 6.

Top to bottom, I assigned a 4, 3, 2, 1 scale, corresponding to Excellent, Good, Fair and Poor. Results:

Total Points:
BE = 45
ACC = 39
Big Ten = 33
SEC = 33
PAC 12 = 30
B12 = 24

Average Score per Team:
ACC = 2.8
Big Ten = 2.75
BE = 2.5
PAC 12 = 2.5
B12 = 2.4
SEC = 2.4

So, top to bottom, taking averages, the ACC and the Big Ten are arguably more balanced. The B12 certainly has no argument for being the best, top to bottom, even being the smallest conference. In fact, they are closer to the worst in the top 6, rather than the best.

If you take everything in total, I'd say it's an argument between the BE and ACC for best BB conference, with the Big Ten third. The other three are essentially a tossup in any given year.

Lol at Memphis being excellent.

For what it's worth, the last two years (our lowest point since like 1982):
the Friars OOC are 22-4.
including wins vs:
SEC division champ, "fair" Alabama by 12.
at SEC "fair" South Carolina by 9.
ACC "fair" Boston College by 7.

our 4 losses were:
Iowa State and Northern Iowa, in South Padre.
at BC by 1.
LaSalle, in Cancun.

PC's 8 BE wins include by 30 over ranked Louisville, by 15 over ranked Villanova, and tourney-bound Connecticut.

We've also graduated an NBA first round pick who challenged for ROY.

in contrast:
Boston College (ACC "fair"???) last year lost to:
Holy Cross by 22.
UMass by 36.
St Louis by 11.
New Mexico by 18.
Penn State by 8.
Boston University by 14.
PC by 7.
Harvard by 19.
Rhode Island by 6.

BC won 5 ooc games last year:
New Hampshire by 3 at home.
UC Riverside by 4 in Anaheim.
Stony Brook.
Bryant.
Sacred Heart by 10.
but they then won 4 ACC games!
Clemson, Va Tech, Florida State, and Georgia Tech.
Think of where Holy Cross could've finished this past year in the ACC.

If Seton Hall and Providence are "poor" then:
Excellent: UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Pitt.
Good: Florida State, NC State.
Fair: Maryland, Clemson, Virginia, Miami.
Poor: BC, Wake Forest, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech.

"Poor" Seton Hall beat "fair" Wake Forest last year by 14.
Wake had just beaten "High Point" by 4...!
The bottom 6 of the ACC is a trainwreck.

Like I said, this is all opinion. All of you who took it in that vein, congrats.

All of you who want to throw darts, bite me.

And, as I said, MY CRITERIA WAS FROM 1985 TO THE PRESENT. That makes Georgetown and Memphis both excellent, as confirmed by the ESPN analysis in 2007. If you want to use a different time period, create your own list.

If I had gone back to 1960, Cincy might have been excellent, lol.

If I had gone back to the 1950s, San Francisco would have been excellent for a little while, at least.

If I had gone back 10 years, totally different list.

Even 5 years, different list.

Plus, if I did it again tonight, I might even have a different list than I did this morning. No research, remember? Completely off the top of my head.

So, as I said, those who want to criticize the list, well...

I also dare anybody to analytically prove any team is more than one position off, either direction, from what I posted, using my criteria of 1985 to present.

No problem Triple A... my post wasn't meant to sound angry except to show that Acc is overrated... heck St John's beat Duke by 25 two yrs ago...!

(08-10-2012 12:10 PM)billyjack Wrote:  No problem Triple A... my post wasn't meant to sound angry except to show that Acc is overrated... heck St John's beat Duke by 25 two yrs ago...!

That's cool. I'm having fun with this. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother. I'm too old to get upset by stuff on message boards, lol. I consider this to be great fun.

Which reminds me. Hey, Bearcat Bounce, let's take a nationwide vote as to who is more excellent (from 1985 to present), Memphis or Cincinnati?

(08-10-2012 08:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Big East

Excellent: Louisville, UConn, Memphis, Georgetown
Good: Marquette, Temple, Cincy, Villanova, Notre Dame
Fair: St. John's, USF, UCF, Houston, Rutgers
Poor: DePaul, Providence, Seton Hall, SMU

If you're going to label BC and Miami as "fair", you've got to put Seton Hall and PC in that category as well. PC or the Hall is a better program than BC at this point.

(08-10-2012 08:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Big 12

Excellent: Kansas
Good: West Virginia, Texas, Baylor, Kansas State
Fair: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State
Poor: Texas Tech, TCU

Ok-State is a good program. TCU isn't much better than SMU.

(08-10-2012 08:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  ACC

Excellent: UNC, Duke, Syracuse
Good: Florida State, Pitt, Clemson, NC State, Maryland
Fair: Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, BC, Miami
Poor: None

In four years, Syracuse moves to good, Pitt to fair, Maryland and NC State move up. Hard to see Duke staying on the top line after Krzyzewski retires.

(08-10-2012 08:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Big Ten

Excellent: Ohio Sate, Indiana, Michigan State
Good: Wisconsin, Michigan, Purdue, Illinois, Minnesota
Fair: Iowa, Northwestern
Poor: Penn State, Nebraska

Northwestern has never earned an NCAA tournament bid. That's not "fair"...

^ So, make your own list. I like mine fine. Remember, I did this off the top of my head. There are no guarantees, specific criteria, etc. It is my opinion as of today. If I took the time to do research, my list might change one position up or down for a lot of teams, but I ain't doing that.

P.S. The WHOLE POINT of my list was to prove that Huggins was full of crap. Remember the OP? It was not meant to be scientifically exact, or to please 100% of message board posters, or even to be a consensus.

(08-10-2012 11:08 AM)MemTGRS Wrote:  My thing with WVU hoops is ... how will recruiting go for them being so isolated from the rest of the league? To be pre-emptive. indeed the Big East is more spread out, but for every Houston, there is an SMU not too far away. Same with UCF and USF. And the Big East is known to be a tough league with parity and depth. Listening to the ESPN Radio folks, Big 12 hoops is often viewed as Kansas & Nine Others.

The Big East was infinitely a better geographic fit. Though I doubt it will hurt their football talent, but I can see their isolation as a problem in attracting top hoops talent. But maybe I'm wrong?

Good points! +1

(08-10-2012 12:20 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-10-2012 12:10 PM)billyjack Wrote:  No problem Triple A... my post wasn't meant to sound angry except to show that Acc is overrated... heck St John's beat Duke by 25 two yrs ago...!

That's cool. I'm having fun with this. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother. I'm too old to get upset by stuff on message boards, lol. I consider this to be great fun.

Which reminds me. Hey, Bearcat Bounce, let's take a nationwide vote as to who is more excellent (from 1985 to present), Memphis or Cincinnati?

Oh right, I forgot, if you criticize a homer they come back at your own school. Where did I say Cincinnati was better? In order to be "excellent" you should at least won a title or make a non vacated Final 4.

(08-10-2012 08:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This topic got me curious, so I went through the 2013 roster of each major BB conference, and I ranked teams (off the top of my head, w/o research) as Excellent, Good, Fair and Bad BB programs, based on overall performance, over a fairly long period of time. I'm not going to debate any of this, b/c everybody has their own impressions, but here are mine:

Big East

Excellent: Louisville, UConn, Memphis, Georgetown
Good: Marquette, Temple, Cincy, Villanova, Notre Dame
Fair: St. John's, USF, UCF, Houston, Rutgers
Poor: DePaul, Providence, Seton Hall, SMU

Based on the long-term view (not the short-term view since I'm sure UCF fans will complain as soon as I say this), I'd move St. John's up one notch to "Good", move Providence up to "Fair", and then put Rutgers, USF and UCF down one notch to "Poor". I know that you're a Memphis guy, but I'd have to move them down to the "Good" category. Every other school that you have in the "Excellent" category has had at least multiple Final Four appearances in the post-1985 era (if not multiple national championships) and the Memphis appearances in 1985 and 2008 aren't officially on the books. (I'm not trying to troll on that point - Derrick Rose, in all seriousness, is my favorite currently active athlete in the entire world.)

Quote:Big 12

Excellent: Kansas
Good: West Virginia, Texas, Baylor, Kansas State
Fair: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State
Poor: Texas Tech, TCU

I do think that you've underrated a lot of the Big 12 schools, so Bob Huggins might have a point. Texas could arguably be in the "Excellent" category (they have underachieved in the NCAA Tournament, but they consistently had national championship contending talent for the past decade and turned into a top national TV draw). Oklahoma and Oklahoma State should definitely be moved up to the "Good" category, especially when I look at who else you have listed as "Fair" - those are solid programs with great history. Texas Tech also should be moved up to "Fair" when compared to who else you have listed as "Poor". TCU is the only real dog that I see in the Big 12.

Quote:ACC

Excellent: UNC, Duke, Syracuse
Good: Florida State, Pitt, Clemson, NC State, Maryland
Fair: Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, BC, Miami
Poor: None

GT and Wake seem to be "Good" programs when looking at the long-term. I'd move Miami down to "Poor".

Quote:SEC

Excellent: Kentucky
Good: Florida, Missouri, Tennessee, Vandy, Mississippi State
Fair: Arkansas, Alabama, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Texas A&M, Georgia
Poor: Auburn, LSU

The most obvious change that I'd make out of all of these conferences would be to put Florida into the "Excellent" category. That's a no-brainer to me - if you're giving historical credit to Georgetown and Memphis as being elite programs, then Florida unequivocally needs to be at the highest level. (In the past 20 years, Florida has 2 national championships, a national runner-up and 5 total Final Fours, and have just added in 2 more Elite Eight appearances in the past 2 years. That's an incredible record during that period of time.) Arkansas and Texas A&M also seem more like "Good" programs to me as opposed to "Fair". I'd actually move LSU up 2 notches to "Good" - I'm not sure what warranted the "Poor" ranking considering their history (both relatively recent over the past decade and long-term).

Quote:Big Ten

Excellent: Ohio Sate, Indiana, Michigan State
Good: Wisconsin, Michigan, Purdue, Illinois, Minnesota
Fair: Iowa, Northwestern
Poor: Penn State, Nebraska

Wisconsin deserves to be in the "Excellent" category even though that team bores the sh*t out of me (and I'm the Big Ten homer here) - the consistency coming out of that program is incredible and they quietly have the best combo of huge sold-out attendance figures with a top tier arena next to Louisville. Northwestern, on the other hand, needs to get knocked down to "Poor" for sure - that's arguably the worst basketball program in any of the power conferences when taking into account its entire history. Even the "Poor" programs in the Big East such as DePaul, Providence and Seton Hall have all had periods of playing at elite levels since the 1980s, which is something that has *never* happened at Northwestern.

Quote:PAC 12

Excellent: UCLA, Arizona
Good: Stanford, Washington, Arizona State, Cal
Fair: Oregon, USC, Washington State, Oregon State
Poor: Colorado, Utah

I'd change Oregon, which is more of a "Good" program to me when looking at its long-term history and prospects. Also, I'd move Utah up to "Good" and Washington State down to "Poor".

USF went 12-4 in the BE last year, made the 3rd round of NCAAT, and is expected to be good again this year and Frank thinks they are "poor".

(08-10-2012 04:26 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  USF went 12-4 in the BE last year, made the 3rd round of NCAAT, and is expected to be good again this year and Frank thinks they are "poor".

Well, this is from a USF fan as opposed to a UCF fan, but as I emphasized in my very first sentence since I could almost predict the heartburn from people, I'm looking at it from a LONG-TERM perspective. Making it to the NCAA Tournament for the first time in 20 years after a long low quality period doesn't change status any more than missing the NCAA Tournament last year suddenly drops UCLA from blue blood status.

(08-10-2012 07:33 AM)TripleA Wrote:  "...that top sometimes stretched as far as 10 or 12 teams in the 16-team league...

Uh, let's see, our top sometimes stretches 10-12 teams, and the B12 has TEN teams total, including TCU, Texas Tech and Iowa State.

Except in the BIG 12 you play each team twice and not once like the Big East.

(08-10-2012 02:09 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  

(08-10-2012 12:20 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-10-2012 12:10 PM)billyjack Wrote:  No problem Triple A... my post wasn't meant to sound angry except to show that Acc is overrated... heck St John's beat Duke by 25 two yrs ago...!

That's cool. I'm having fun with this. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother. I'm too old to get upset by stuff on message boards, lol. I consider this to be great fun.

Which reminds me. Hey, Bearcat Bounce, let's take a nationwide vote as to who is more excellent (from 1985 to present), Memphis or Cincinnati?

Oh right, I forgot, if you criticize a homer they come back at your own school. Where did I say Cincinnati was better? In order to be "excellent" you should at least won a title or make a non vacated Final 4.

Come on dude, can't you take a joke? Did you miss the laughing icon at the end of the post?

(08-10-2012 04:02 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-10-2012 08:55 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This topic got me curious, so I went through the 2013 roster of each major BB conference, and I ranked teams (off the top of my head, w/o research) as Excellent, Good, Fair and Bad BB programs, based on overall performance, over a fairly long period of time. I'm not going to debate any of this, b/c everybody has their own impressions, but here are mine:

Big East

Excellent: Louisville, UConn, Memphis, Georgetown
Good: Marquette, Temple, Cincy, Villanova, Notre Dame
Fair: St. John's, USF, UCF, Houston, Rutgers
Poor: DePaul, Providence, Seton Hall, SMU

Based on the long-term view (not the short-term view since I'm sure UCF fans will complain as soon as I say this), I'd move St. John's up one notch to "Good", move Providence up to "Fair", and then put Rutgers, USF and UCF down one notch to "Poor". I know that you're a Memphis guy, but I'd have to move them down to the "Good" category. Every other school that you have in the "Excellent" category has had at least multiple Final Four appearances in the post-1985 era (if not multiple national championships) and the Memphis appearances in 1985 and 2008 aren't officially on the books. (I'm not trying to troll on that point - Derrick Rose, in all seriousness, is my favorite currently active athlete in the entire world.)

Quote:Big 12

Excellent: Kansas
Good: West Virginia, Texas, Baylor, Kansas State
Fair: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State
Poor: Texas Tech, TCU

I do think that you've underrated a lot of the Big 12 schools, so Bob Huggins might have a point. Texas could arguably be in the "Excellent" category (they have underachieved in the NCAA Tournament, but they consistently had national championship contending talent for the past decade and turned into a top national TV draw). Oklahoma and Oklahoma State should definitely be moved up to the "Good" category, especially when I look at who else you have listed as "Fair" - those are solid programs with great history. Texas Tech also should be moved up to "Fair" when compared to who else you have listed as "Poor". TCU is the only real dog that I see in the Big 12.

Quote:ACC

Excellent: UNC, Duke, Syracuse
Good: Florida State, Pitt, Clemson, NC State, Maryland
Fair: Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, BC, Miami
Poor: None

GT and Wake seem to be "Good" programs when looking at the long-term. I'd move Miami down to "Poor".

Quote:SEC

Excellent: Kentucky
Good: Florida, Missouri, Tennessee, Vandy, Mississippi State
Fair: Arkansas, Alabama, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Texas A&M, Georgia
Poor: Auburn, LSU

The most obvious change that I'd make out of all of these conferences would be to put Florida into the "Excellent" category. That's a no-brainer to me - if you're giving historical credit to Georgetown and Memphis as being elite programs, then Florida unequivocally needs to be at the highest level. (In the past 20 years, Florida has 2 national championships, a national runner-up and 5 total Final Fours, and have just added in 2 more Elite Eight appearances in the past 2 years. That's an incredible record during that period of time.) Arkansas and Texas A&M also seem more like "Good" programs to me as opposed to "Fair". I'd actually move LSU up 2 notches to "Good" - I'm not sure what warranted the "Poor" ranking considering their history (both relatively recent over the past decade and long-term).

Quote:Big Ten

Excellent: Ohio Sate, Indiana, Michigan State
Good: Wisconsin, Michigan, Purdue, Illinois, Minnesota
Fair: Iowa, Northwestern
Poor: Penn State, Nebraska

Wisconsin deserves to be in the "Excellent" category even though that team bores the sh*t out of me (and I'm the Big Ten homer here) - the consistency coming out of that program is incredible and they quietly have the best combo of huge sold-out attendance figures with a top tier arena next to Louisville. Northwestern, on the other hand, needs to get knocked down to "Poor" for sure - that's arguably the worst basketball program in any of the power conferences when taking into account its entire history. Even the "Poor" programs in the Big East such as DePaul, Providence and Seton Hall have all had periods of playing at elite levels since the 1980s, which is something that has *never* happened at Northwestern.

Quote:PAC 12

Excellent: UCLA, Arizona
Good: Stanford, Washington, Arizona State, Cal
Fair: Oregon, USC, Washington State, Oregon State
Poor: Colorado, Utah

I'd change Oregon, which is more of a "Good" program to me when looking at its long-term history and prospects. Also, I'd move Utah up to "Good" and Washington State down to "Poor".

Geez, that's too much to follow all the quotes, especially while watching the PGA on TV, so I'll answer in one big reply.

On Memphis, I would argue that those two vacated F4 appearances counted, b/c ESPN counted them in their analysis and rankings, and I distinctly remember seeing them when they happened, lol. That puts them in that category.

Plus, remember that I really have no argument with moving almost any school up or down one spot. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I did this with no crib sheet, as fast as I could type it, just to prove Huggins wrong, lol.

I disagree on Texas, b/c results count, not talent, and I went back roughly to 1985 as my criteria, not just the past decade. My choice, lol. Again, other than Texas, I won't quibble with the other B12 moves. Doesn't move the numbers enough to make Huggins point valid, though.

ACC, no quibbles.

I agree on Florida. I forgot about the other stuff beyond the 2 NCs. I was on the fence there, anyway.

LSU, yeah, they were great with Pistol Pete and with Shaq,at least, although Pete was way before my criteria. I probably focused too much on their recent performance. I would move them up; to fair, but not good.

Like I said,I really have no issue with moving any of them one spot up or down. Just two opinions meeting for good convo, lol. No research required. Just memories. Oh, and, in case you missed it, ESPN agrees with me about Memphis.

(08-10-2012 07:58 AM)Borncoog74 Wrote:  "Grey Goose is better top to bottom than Belvedere."
-Bob Huggins

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I wouldn't say Memphis is excellent from 1985 to now...good yes, Excellent...no

(08-10-2012 05:30 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  I wouldn't say Memphis is excellent from 1985 to now...good yes, Excellent...no

ESPN and I both disagree with you. Memphis was ranked #14 in the era from 1985, and I (coincidentally) listed 14 teams as excellent.

But back to the OP. Do you agree with Huggins? That was the whole point of my rankings, NOT to pick nits with other BE fans.