Give me your new AP top 10 tomorrow...
- Thread starter ABVolsFan92
- Start date
Why would UT be a solid favorite over UNC? I think they would maybe be a 2-3 point favorite at most based on the metrics. When one says a solid favorite, one assumes a spread of 6-7 points at least.
Bama might be a 6-7 point favorite over Clemson but all the sharps would be on Clemson because Bama has not been the same team away from Tuscaloosa. They're 6-6 on the road and on neutral courts vs Power 5 competition.
Clemson has road wins over Alabama, UNC, TCU and Pitt. They don't seem to benefit as much from their home court like Alabama and this seems to be the theme across SEC schools.
SEC schools seem to overperform the predictive metrics at home to improve their efficiency ratings but them underperform on the road in the SEC. A team like Alabama has been fortunate to play a pretty weak road SEC schedule as they've been able to beat LSU, UGA, MSSU and Vandy. They've been wrecked on the road at Tennessee and Auburn and those games haven't been particularly close.
Alabama is 2-6 in Quad 1 games and Auburn is 2-5 in Quad 1 games.
Auburn is only 5-4 in road and neutral games and also has a road loss to Appalachian State. This is another team that wins big at home and is living on the back of massive wins vs an Arkansas team that has quit on the season, a Cocks team that sucks on the road and SEC weaklings.
The performance of ACC schools don't vary this much from home vs on the road like the Big 10 and SEC. I'm not sure if this has to do more with the home crowds, the reffing or maybe its just the particular rosters in these conferences this year.
I suppose there are analytics that tell what kinda favorite UT would be, same with bama. But we can agree both would be favorites.
Do ACC teams not enjoy homecourt advantages too or is that exclusively an SEC phenom?
I think bama has played a tougher schedule than UNC, both in and out of conference. Regarding quad 1, bama's avg quad 1 comp would be rated 13th in the country. UNC's rating of comp would be rated at 30th in the country. Not all quad 1 comp is the same.
The ACC doesn't blow though. They have more H2H wins vs the SEC this year.
Duke's performance doesn't really differ on the road that much compared to home. They're the 182nd rank Home Team according to EvanMiya. UNC's not bad either ranked at 75th though not great. Clemson is #248 which indicates almost no HFA.
Alabama is #3, Tennessee is #27, Florida is #44, etc.
EvanMiya CBB Analytics
Advanced college basketball analytics, home of the Bayesian Performance Rating
evanmiya.com
Kentucky is #300 by the way since its struggled at Rupp which probably is a good thing for UK when it comes to how they might perform in the NCAAT.
Why would Duke and UNC have 3-5 more losses in the SEC? They're not losing to teams like Mizzou, Vandy, UGA, Mississippi St, Ole Miss, etc.
Most of their losses would be to Alabama, Auburn, UK and UT on the road plus a few other random losses just like if they were in any other conference.
Duke lost to GT, and Pitt at home...they also lost to Ark, the only SEC team Duke has played this year. You cannot say Duke wouldn't lose to UGA, Miss St, or Ole Miss. Completely illogical based upon whom they have already lost to.The ACC doesn't blow though. They have more H2H wins vs the SEC this year.
Duke's performance doesn't really differ on the road that much compared to home. They're the 182nd rank Home Team according to EvanMiya. UNC's not bad either ranked at 75th though not great. Clemson is #248 which indicates almost no HFA.
Alabama is #3, Tennessee is #27, Florida is #44, etc.
EvanMiya CBB Analytics
Advanced college basketball analytics, home of the Bayesian Performance Rating
Kentucky is #300 by the way since its struggled at Rupp which probably is a good thing for UK when it comes to how they might perform in the NCAAT.
Why would Duke and UNC have 3-5 more losses in the SEC? They're not losing to teams like Mizzou, Vandy, UGA, Mississippi St, Ole Miss, etc.
Most of their losses would be to Alabama, Auburn, UK and UT on the road plus a few other random losses just like if they were in any other conference.
While Duke only has to worry about playing UNC twice, imagine having to play UT twice, UK twice, Bama twice, maybe Auburn twice, playing at TAMU, or at Florida, or at Miss St, or at SCar...Duke and UNC's ACC schedule pales in comparison to this. Its a joke, honestly. To say they wouldn't have at least 3 more losses is nonsense.
Freak losses happen. No matter what conference Duke is in, we'd likely have a few questionable losses since we're a young team and not some experienced roster coming off deep tournament runs with established chemistry.
You're completely delusional if you think Duke would lose to teams like UGA, Miss St or Ole Miss regularly in January and February.
Duke would have a better record than Kentucky right now if we played your schedule. We wouldn't have lost to this Zags team at home, Florida at home or a mediocre A&M team on the road.
Looking at UK's schedule, Duke would have *likely* lost 2/4 to UNC, @UT, @Auburn, @Florida and then suffered a few other random losses.
The idea that if Duke somehow played UK's schedule they'd have 8-10 losses is absurd.
So you're basically giving Duke the toughest possible SEC schedule imaginable and saying "No way you guys couldn't survive that gauntlet without losing at least 8 games!!".
No shit Sherlock but we wouldn't have to play all 5 top SEC teams twice and neither does UK.
UK plays UT and Florida twice but they only play Bama and Auburn once.
Duke plays UNC twice, Wake twice, Clemson once and UVA once.
I'm not seeing a huge difference here. Our SOS isn't too different.
Duke played Arizona, Baylor and Michigan St NONCON while the Cats played UNC, Kansas and Gonzaga in NONCON.
The reason I believe duke would have more losses in the SEC, is duke struggles with physicality, have for quite some time. The SEC is incredibly physical.
Also, injuries and youth are another factor to consider. UK has 7 losses and some of that can be blamed on injuries, but the real issue is youth. You can't expect freshmen to step in SEC play and handle physical play right off the bat.
I'm still blown away at how they handled Auburn last Saturday. Hopefully it means they turned a corner.
Dude...you need to step off the ledge. Also, calm down and re-read what I posted. Never said Duke would play all those teams twice, but they would most definitely play some of those teams twice, and definitely all of them, with some only being on the road.
You can scream til you are blue in the face, but Duke and UNC play in a crappy conference. All the metrics point that out. So keep living in delusion. They would have close to double digit losses if they were in the SEC.
Funny you keel bringing up UK over and over...again, I will repeat that UK is 3-0 against the vaunted ACC, including beating UNC (didn't Duke lose to UNC?)...oh wait, Duke also lost to Ark (didn't UK beat them as well)?
You ACC guys are a joke. The conference blows. As a UK fan, I had no problem admitting the SEC was trash for a better part of the 2000s and 2010s, yet you guys can't bring yourselves to say the same about the ACC.
The only teams Duke has played in the ACC that are worth anything are UNC and Clemson. Duke got manhandled against UNC, and the refs bailed them out at home against Clemson. Yep, Duke sure would be rolling in the SEC...
Have fun with the rest of your cakewalk schedule. Maybe you can schedule ND, or GT, or Pitt, or Louisville, or WF a third time...oh wait, you still get to play in that joke of a tournament called the ACC tournament.
Look at the metrics my friend, look at the metrics. The ACC blows, just like the SEC did for so long. Not hard to admit.
Were there any SEC basketball fans around in the 2000s and 2010s to say otherwise? Hardly any programs even cared about basketball, can't imagine many trying to prop up the SEC in that timeframe.
If there were, then they are idiots.
I wasn’t aware there exists a crew that protects us?! Pretty sure UK fans would agree we’ve taken it up the shorts from the refs so SEC refs so much we’re gathering the pitchforks. I’d pay for impartiality.
Last edited:
Personally, I wouldn’t argue against Duke or for UK, or any combination of either. I don’t see either of them being able to string 6 wins together. Neither team is all that impressive.
Oh, no doubt!
And in no way, shape, or form was arguing that UK was better equipped to make a deeper run, or would have a better record if they were in the ACC then Duke currently does.
Was merely pointing out how weak the ACC is and how much that has benefited Duke and UNC.
Neither team has looked that great at all, to your point.
Yeah, but honestly, I trust Duke more right now. UK can jump up and bite a good team here and there, but then they'll lose the next game to a dud.
Duke has steadily gotten better and watching them against Miami, they looked really good at all facets if the game.
I know Miami is down, but it wasn't about the opponent.
I still think duke would lose several more games in the SEC. The road environments in the SEC are crazy and the league is really physical. Plus the officiating is trash.
The duke v Wake game coming up, should be a good one. That one will tell us more about how good duke is.
It kinda depends who the others are playing and the outcomes. However, winning solves a lot of problems.
Yeah, they definitely have developed into a strong contender.
Let's see how they handle Wake's guards. They’re very good.
You seem like a guy that knows an awful lot about “the D,” don’t ya, bitch?
Similar threads
