The B1G Debate

Submitted by MGoLesher on March 2nd, 2014 at 2:11 PM

Right here, right now: Is the B1G a deep conference that has a lot of parody from top to bottom, or is it a weak conference with maybe one or two actually good teams? I know we have gone back and forth with the debate, but after seeing Nebraska/UI go to MSU and win, Penn State Sweep (!) Ohio, and Penn State come up just short against Wisconsin today, where does everybody stand? As for me, I think there are great coaches up and down this conference, and this conference is in the top three nationally. Obviously, the true test is to see how the B1G schools do in March.  

 

Comments

gwkrlghl

March 2nd, 2014 at 3:20 PM ^

As long as the SEC keeps up their nonsense about how deep their football league is, I'm going to keep saying "MSU only lost 5 conference games because EVERYONE BE SO GUD YA'LL"

allintime23

March 2nd, 2014 at 3:31 PM ^

This will ultimately be decided in the tournament. I say it's the second strongest conference and I'll be shocked if the big ten doesn't have at least one team in the final four.

turd ferguson

March 2nd, 2014 at 3:53 PM ^

If you had to guess which conference the 2013-2014 national champion will come from, which conference would you guess?

I'd go with the ACC (mainly because of Duke, Syracuse, and Virginia), but the Big Ten is right up there for me.  I just don't see a huge drop-off between the top-ranked teams and the place where a bunch of top Big Ten teams sit.

A Michigan, Wisconsin, or MSU could easily make a run this year, in my opinion, and Iowa or OSU are firmly in the "it's possible" camp.

Steves_Wolverines

March 2nd, 2014 at 3:56 PM ^

I'd agree with this. My prediction would be for the ACC to win it all, but the Big-10 isn't far behind. 

I just think the way Duke, UNC, and UVA are playing right now, and Syracuse is a very tough team to beat. 

The Big-10 may have the same number of teams with a shot at the Chip, but I'd say their strength is stronger than ours. I'd take a trio of Duke, UVA, and Cuse over Michigan, Wisconsin, and ________ (up in the air between MSU and Iowa I guess...)

readyourguard

March 2nd, 2014 at 4:10 PM ^

I fear the Big 10 will come off as weak in the upcoming tourney.
Michigan could certainly make a run, but we've seen what an effective big man can do.
Wisconsin may be the hottest team in the league but Bo Ryan could do them in against a fast paced/good shooting team.
OSU will crumble if forced to play offense.
MSU just might pack it in due to a terrible team attitude.
Minnesota is average.
Nebraska could lose in the first round.

I don't think the B1G will do well this March.

Zok

March 2nd, 2014 at 4:36 PM ^

B1G is behind the ACC and probably on par with the B12 this season.

The B1G has a lot of depth top to bottom but that is overrated IMO. Nobody cares how good your 6-8th best teams are. In football or bball. Sure its great in BBall do to RPI, SOS, and all the metrics used for seeding. But at the end of the year when judging conferences nobody looks at your 6-8th best teams.

Its all about how good your top tier is and for that reason I give the nod to the ACC bc their top tier is better than the B1G this season. Last year with MSU, IU, OSU, and UM all legit final four contenders that was not the case. 

This season only UM really has a chance for a final four run but we can also get bounced by a hot team in the sweet 16 due to our lack of interior O (we had McGary last tourney) nad ok D. I think last year we could whether a cold shooting night better bc Burke could just take over and McGary could bang down low. This year we don't have that.

So overall, I think a league is judged by its top tier, top 4 if you will. Hopefully the B1G can get 4 sweet 16 teams and have 1 make the final four (UM). Hard to be the best conference if you don't have a final four team. IMO, its much more likely for the B1G to miss out on the final four than the ACC.

FreddieMercuryHayes

March 2nd, 2014 at 4:51 PM ^

You may be correct in that's how many view it, but is that the way it should be? No contend that the perception of the top tier depends on how good the middle tier is. If the middle tier is good, then the top tier is less likely to waltz through conference play week to week. While Cuse, Kansas, Zona may be elite teams, should UVA get credit for not only their weak schedule through the poor middle tier of the ACC? Conversely, Wisc beat the Sec champion (and 1 seed), the ACC champion, and another top-15ish type team in St. Louis. But they can't get trough the B1G without at least 5 losses. Yeah, teams change throughout the season, but that's gotta mean something for the conference as a whole.

Zok

March 2nd, 2014 at 5:48 PM ^

You use Wisc to sort of debunk that but you must admit that is a very rare scenario where a team beats two conf champs out of conference then finds a way to lose 5 conference games itself....just a weird scenario.

I mean I don't care how you spin it IU, northwestern, and Minnesota are not very good teams and they all beat Wisc. You'd never say those three are on par with UVA or Florida would you? Even if Wisc beat UVA and Florida.

Plus I think the big issue is its very hard to compare "middle tier" teams which by definition are going to have a decent amount of losses.  How do you compare 9-11 loss teams across conferences objectively? How good can you really be with that many losses. If we we are saying the B1G 9-12 loss teams (middle tier) are "good" then by definition we are now saying the Big Ten has 9-10 "good teams". I just don't by it that a conf can have that many "good teams" and still think it has any elite teams. Elite teams would not have lost that many times to allow a conf to have 10 "good" teams.

I think being good top to bottom is great for a conference and actually helps B1G teams in the tourney as they are more battle tested. I just think it doesn't mean much in terms of perception of the conference as a whole. 

In football I feel the same way. The SEC #6-7 teams are almost always better than the B1G or any other conference but who cares if they win some bowl game before Jan 1st. I roll my eyes at SEC fans bragging about their 6th best team just like I do B1G fans talking about their 6th best bball team that will probably lose opening wknd of the tourney and be forgotten. Nobody cares.

In football, its all about new years day bowls and the BCS. Win those (esp BCS) and your conference perception goes through the roof. I feel like making elite 8 is like winning a BCS bowl (mainly due to the random nature of 1 and done NCAA tourney..ie matchups). Pretty much every program would consider an elite 8 trip or BCS win a great season. Outside of a couple heavily favored teams each season (Bama in football, loaded Kentucky or Duke team in Bball).

Michigan Arrogance

March 2nd, 2014 at 5:20 PM ^

I think it's pretty clear that the supposed bottom 5 teams (Neb, PSU, NW, Ill, Pur) are AS A WHOLE, better than last year. I addition, the top 5 (OSU, MSU, M, Wisc, Iowa) are a bit worse (again, as a whole).

Now, are the bottom 4-5 teams having better records this year due to their own improvement or the downturn of the top teams? Probably both, and what that means is that the conf is probably a bit worse than last year and certainly perceived to be a lot worse.

 

Zok

March 2nd, 2014 at 5:52 PM ^

Just look at who was drafted to the NBA from the top B1G teams last year (and who stayed ie G Harris, McGary, GRIII). Much more talent at the top at a player level for the B1G last year then this year. IU lost a ton, UM lost a lot, OSU lost its best stuff.

Thats why the bottom of the B1G looks better this year. The top is just weaker. Remember UM was never outside the top ten all season last year in the polls...

 

docwhoblocked

March 2nd, 2014 at 6:36 PM ^

Here is a ...chart.
I took the total number of games played against top 50 RPI by each conference and calculated the winning percentage.
The ACC played 115 games against RPI top 50 and had a .287 winning percentage.  For SOS this comes to playing 7.66 games per team against the top 50
The Big 12 (which is actually the big 10) played 141 games against top 50 and won .418 of them.  SOS 14.1 games per team against top 50
BIg East played 79 games v. the top 50 and won .266  SOS is 7.9 games per team against top 50
Big 10 (which is actually the big 12) played 119 games agaisnt top 50 and won .370. SOS 9.91 games per team against the top 50.
For those with more ambition than I have, feel free to calculate the winning percentage against the other grouping and compare but this data is enough for me to conclude that the Big 12 (10) is the best conference so far this year.  As others have pointed out, the conference playoffs and national tournament will give us a better view of the accuracy of this conclusion.  

 
Atlantic Coast
  CONFERENCE OVERALL
  W L PCT W L PCT STREAK RPI vs 1-50 51-100 101-150 150+
Virginia 16 1 .941 25 5 .833 Won 13 10   4-4 6-1 6-0 9-0
Syracuse 13 3 .813 26 3 .897 Lost 1 7   8-2 6-0 4-0 8-1
Duke 12 4 .750 23 6 .793 Won 2 9   5-4 5-1 4-1 9-0
North Carolina 12 4 .750 22 7 .759 Won 11 19   5-3 6-1 4-3 7-0
Pittsburgh 10 6 .625 22 7 .759 Won 2 44   1-6 4-1 6-0 11-0
Clemson 8 7 .533 17 10 .630 Lost 1 76   1-5 2-2 2-2 12-1
Florida State 7 8 .467 16 11 .593 Won 1 57   3-7 2-3 3-1 8-0
Maryland 7 8 .467 15 13 .536 Lost 1 67   0-9 3-3 5-1 6-0
North Carolina State 7 9 .438 17 12 .586 Lost 2 73   1-7 2-2 7-3 7-0
Miami (FL) 6 10 .375 15 14 .517 Won 1 108   2-6 3-4 1-0 9-4
Notre Dame 6 11 .353 15 15 .500 Lost 1 118   1-8 4-4 0-2 10-1
Wake Forest 5 11 .313 15 14 .517 Lost 1 115   1-8 3-4 2-0 9-2
Georgia Tech 4 11 .267 13 15 .464 Lost 3 170   0-6 2-7 2-2 9-0
Boston College 4 12 .250 8 21 .276 Won 1 173   1-9 1-4 1-4 4-4
Virginia Tech 2 14 .125 9 19 .321 Lost 4 222   0-8 1-4 2-3 6-4
Big 12
  CONFERENCE OVERALL
  W L PCT W L PCT STREAK RPI vs 1-50 51-100 101-150 150+
Kansas 13 3 .813 22 7 .759 Lost 1 2   12-7 4-0 3-0 0-0
Iowa State 10 6 .625 22 6 .786 Lost 1 11   8-5 2-1 5-0 7-0
Oklahoma 10 6 .625 21 8 .724 Won 1 21   8-5 2-2 5-1 6-0
Texas 10 6 .625 21 8 .724 Lost 1 25   7-8 5-0 2-0 7-0
Kansas State 10 6 .625 20 9 .690 Won 2 36   7-5 2-2 4-0 7-2
West Virginia 8 8 .500 16 13 .552 Won 1 87   4-10 0-1 3-1 9-1
Oklahoma State 7 9 .438 19 10 .655 Won 3 45   4-9 3-0 5-1 7-0
Baylor 7 9 .438 19 10 .655 Won 1 46   6-8 1-1 2-1 8-0
Texas Tech 5 11 .313 13 16 .448 Lost 5 119   3-12 0-3 2-1 0-0
TCU 0 16 .000 9 19 .321 Lost 16 204   0-13 2-3 0-2 5-1
Big East
  CONFERENCE OVERALL
  W L PCT W L PCT STREAK RPI vs 1-50 51-100 101-150 150+
Villanova 13 2 .867 25 3 .893 Won 3 4   4-3 9-0 6-0 6-0
Creighton 13 3 .813 23 5 .821 Lost 1 8   6-3 6-2 7-0 0-0
Xavier 10 6 .625 20 9 .690 Won 2 38   3-4 5-3 6-1 5-1
Marquette 9 6 .600 17 11 .607 Won 2 70   2-9 3-1 5-1 7-0
Providence 9 7 .563 19 10 .655 Won 2 56   2-5 5-4 7-1 5-0
St. John's 8 8 .500 18 11 .621 Lost 2 60   1-7 4-2 5-2 8-0
Georgetown 7 9 .438 16 12 .571 Lost 1 61   4-5 2-4 4-2 6-1
Seton Hall 5 11 .313 14 15 .483 Lost 3 146   1-5 3-6 1-2 9-2
DePaul 3 13 .188 11 18 .379 Won 1 141   0-10 1-6 4-2 6-0
Butler 2 14 .125 12 16 .429 Lost 7 142   0-7 2-8 3-1 6-0
Big Ten
  CONFERENCE OVERALL
  W L PCT W L PCT STREAK RPI vs 1-50 51-100 101-150 150+
Michigan 13 3 .813 21 7 .750 Won 3 12   8-5 3-1 6-0 4-1
Michigan State 11 5 .688 22 7 .759 Lost 2 24   6-4 3-3 6-0 7-0
Wisconsin 10 5 .667 23 5 .821 Won 6 5   8-3 7-1 3-1 5-0
Ohio State 9 7 .563 22 7 .759 Lost 1 23   4-4 7-1 6-2 5-0
Nebraska 9 7 .563 17 11 .607 Won 1 54   3-7 3-1 6-3 5-0
Iowa 8 7 .533 19 9 .679 Lost 3 40   4-8 2-1 5-0 7-0
Minnesota 7 10 .412 18 12 .600 Lost 1 47   3-7 3-3 4-2 7-0
Indiana 6 9 .400 16 12 .571 Won 1 88   3-6 2-2 2-4 9-0
Illinois 6 10 .375 17 12 .586 Won 3 71   2-7 3-2 4-2 8-1
Purdue 5 10 .333 15 13 .536 Lost 3 122   1-8 5-1 1-3 8-1
Penn State 5 10 .333 14 14 .500 Won 1 109   2-6 4-5 1-2 7-1
Northwestern 5 11 .313 12 17 .414 Lost 6 129   2-10 3-5 1-2 0-0
Southeastern
  CONFERENCE OVERALL
  W L PCT W L PCT STREAK RPI vs 1-50 51-100 101-150 150+
Florida 16 0 1.000 27 2 .931 Won 21 3   5-2 9-0 4-0 9-0
Kentucky 11 5 .688 21 8 .724 Lost 2 18   2-4 11-3 2-0 6-1
Georgia 10 6 .625 16 12 .571 Lost 1 83   0-5 5-3 2-1 9-3
Arkansas 9 7 .563 20 9 .690 Won 5 58   4-4 4-4 2-1 10-0
Tennessee 9 7 .563 18 11 .621 Won 2 48   2-5 5-3 2-3 8-0
Missouri 8 8 .500 20 9 .690 Won 1 52   2-2 6-6 3-1 9-0
LSU 8 8 .500 17 11 .607 Lost 1 64   2-5 3-3 4-3 8-0
Ole Miss 8 8 .500 17 12 .586 Lost 1 91   0-7 4-2 3-2 10-1
Texas A&M 8 8 .500 17 12 .586 Won 1 112   2-4 4-5 3-0 8-3
Vanderbilt 7 9 .438 15 13 .536 Lost 2 96   1-5 3-5 2-2 9-1
Alabama 6 10 .375 12 17 .414 Won 1 119   0-8 5-4 2-2 4-3
Auburn 5 11 .313 13 14 .481 Lost 1 165   0-5 2-6 2-1 9-2
South Carolina 4 12 .250 11 18 .379 Won 1 178   1-4 2-10 4-1 4-3
Mississippi State 3 13 .188 13 16 .448 Lost 11 226   0-4 1-6 2-4 10-2

 

bronxblue

March 2nd, 2014 at 7:11 PM ^

Honestly, the conference is strong but teams like OSU and MSU just aren't that good right now, and while MSU kinda, sorta has the injury excuse, OSU always stunk but just played a horrible early schedule to get to 15-0.  It's a well-coached conference lacking in star power, and so it feels like a step below last year.  At least with SEC football, the teams at the top are great; UM and Wiscy are probably the best teams right now, and I don't think anyone would say they'd be surprised if neither made it past the Sweet 16.