ADVERTISEMENT

****Official B1G Off Season Thread****

Old B1G threads get deleted, do we keep everything as is?


  • Total voters
    32
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did Michigan (178), Iowa (285), Baylor (258), Texas Tech (283), Arkansas (272), … etc sneak into the tourney with poorer NC SOS?
Ole Miss went 16-11 and 10-8 in the SEC and one of the reasons they were left out was their 273rd ranked Non-conference SOS. They went 3-5 in Q1 and 4-5 in Q2, which was plenty good but they were left out.

Not every team is relevant to the discussion because not every team is on the bubble. But it can matter.
 
Ole Miss went 16-11 and 10-8 in the SEC and one of the reasons they were left out was their 273rd ranked Non-conference SOS. They went 3-5 in Q1 and 4-5 in Q2, which was plenty good but they were left out.

Not every team is relevant to the discussion because not every team is on the bubble. But it can matter.
Had nothing to do with their overall SOS being 78? Again, every Big Ten team will have a top 40ish overall SOS every year now that it is a 20 game schedule.
 
Ole Miss went 16-11 and 10-8 in the SEC and one of the reasons they were left out was their 273rd ranked Non-conference SOS. They went 3-5 in Q1 and 4-5 in Q2, which was plenty good but they were left out.

Not every team is relevant to the discussion because not every team is on the bubble. But it can matter.

That’s not even close to the example he gave. 10-1 and 10-10 on the Big Ten is way different than 5-3 and 10-8 in a much worse SEC.

Non conference SOS gets less relevant the stronger a conference is and the more games you play in said conference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NC_Trojan10
I don’t think you can really state that without knowing what your team looks like in a given year.
Are you really trying to argue with him about his pretend preferred scheduling strategy for his pretend team? Sheesh. Rough crowd.
 
RAC can be a difficult place to play when our 8,000 seat band box is filled. And that looks to be the case this season.

 
Looks like IU will be picking up their first 2023 commit on Friday.


Huge gap between his ranking on rivals versus 247. Strangely, he’s ranked significantly higher on rivals (43) versus 247 (117). Colvin is the opposite where he’s 140 on rivals and 75 on 247.
 
Huge gap between his ranking on rivals versus 247. Strangely, he’s ranked significantly higher on rivals (43) versus 247 (117). Colvin is the opposite where he’s 140 on rivals and 75 on 247.
He shot well when Rivals evaluated him. He didn’t shoot well when 247 did. I would guess he lands somewhere in between. Probably around 80ish.
 
It's a fine strategy if the goal is to squeak into the tourney.

If the goal is to be challenged, improve, and build a resume, it's certainly not the path I'd take my team on.

But the point is the Big Ten offers that in spades. It’s a different story if you’re talking about an SEC team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RutgHoops
Izzo said Christie and Gabe Brown are the only 2 secured starters right now.

It’s between Hoggard/Walker at the 1, Hall/Hauser at the 4, and Bingham/Marble.

Im going to say I think Walker, Hall, and Bingham are the starters by the end of the year.
 
That’s not even close to the example he gave. 10-1 and 10-10 on the Big Ten is way different than 5-3 and 10-8 in a much worse SEC.

Non conference SOS gets less relevant the stronger a conference is and the more games you play in said conference.
Never argued otherwise. I just argued against the term "Non conference SOS doesn’t really matter anymore" that is a verbatim quote that I responded to.
 
But the point is the Big Ten offers that in spades. It’s a different story if you’re talking about an SEC team.
I don’t think the 2 added games mean you should dumb down the non con schedule. Playing tough teams and neutral site games early is great experience imo, in addition to the resume benefits.
 
Izzo said Christie and Gabe Brown are the only 2 secured starters right now.

It’s between Hoggard/Walker at the 1, Hall/Hauser at the 4, and Bingham/Marble.

Im going to say I think Walker, Hall, and Bingham are the starters by the end of the year.
Brown at the 3 right?

It looks to me that Christie is going to be relied upon too heavily for my liking for a frosh, despite the fact that I love his game.
 
I don’t think the 2 added games mean you should dumb down the non con schedule. Playing tough teams and neutral site games early is great experience imo, in addition to the resume benefits.
I think it has to be a case by case basis, based on what a teams outlook is, but it usually behooves the most elite teams to play an elite level non con.

Also, the committee has shown a penchant for punishing (either a lower seed or leaving out entirely) teams with bad non conference schedules.

But like I’m fine with IU having a bad non con this year, I think it’s far more important for them to build momentum in November with the new system than to worry about non con ranking in March. I know that doesn’t say great things about where they’re at, but that’s where they’re at.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HoosierstuckinIowa
I don’t think the 2 added games mean you should dumb down the non con schedule. Playing tough teams and neutral site games early is great experience imo, in addition to the resume benefits.

I’m not just saying 2 games. Im saying the Big Ten is the #1 or #2 conference in the country so strength of schedule will already be really good and teams get plenty of tests in conference.
 
Never argued otherwise. I just argued against the term "Non conference SOS doesn’t really matter anymore" that is a verbatim quote that I responded to.

As long as conference strength of schedule makes up for it, it doesn’t. Overall strength of schedule is what matters. Aside from wanting to see Michigan play good games from a fan perspective, I don’t really care what Michigan’s non conference SOS is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NC_Trojan10
I think it has to be a case by case basis, based on what a teams outlook is, but it usually behooves the most elite teams to play an elite level non con.

Also, the committee has shown a penchant for punishing (either a lower seed or leaving out entirely) teams with bad non conference schedules.

But like I’m fine with IU having a bad non con this year, I think it’s far more important for them to build momentum in November with the new system than to worry about non con ranking in March. I know that doesn’t say great things about where they’re at, but that’s where they’re at.

Teams in shitty conferences with shitty non conference schedules should get punished because we don’t know how they actually stack up against good competition. A Big Ten team playing 20 games in the best conference in the country and probably 10+ games against ranked teams is going to be just fine in terms of SOS and committee approval.
 
Teams in shitty conferences with shitty non conference schedules should get punished because we don’t know how they actually stack up against good competition. A Big Ten team playing 20 games in the best conference in the country and probably 10+ games against ranked teams is going to be just fine in terms of SOS and committee approval.
Yeah their metrics are going to look largely fine, but there’s still a line there somewhere. A team that wins 8 or 9 games in the big ten probably has to worry about their non con schedule at least a bit. You could definitely say a team that wins that few games in conference doesn’t deserve to make the tourney anyways, but with the strength and depth of the conference, you’re going to have teams that fit that criteria as fringe tourney teams
 
Teams in shitty conferences with shitty non conference schedules should get punished because we don’t know how they actually stack up against good competition. A Big Ten team playing 20 games in the best conference in the country and probably 10+ games against ranked teams is going to be just fine in terms of SOS and committee approval.
But yeah shitty conference teams that want a non-auto bid have to schedule some upper quad non conference games.
 
I think it has to be a case by case basis, based on what a teams outlook is, but it usually behooves the most elite teams to play an elite level non con.

Also, the committee has shown a penchant for punishing (either a lower seed or leaving out entirely) teams with bad non conference schedules.

But like I’m fine with IU having a bad non con this year, I think it’s far more important for them to build momentum in November with the new system than to worry about non con ranking in March. I know that doesn’t say great things about where they’re at, but that’s where they’re at.
If I was IU, I'd still want a marquee opponent especially in Assembly if possible. You guys have always had the ability to beat just about anyone [not named Purdue] in Bloomington.

For Purdue's sake, I'm happy with tough non-cons for the reasons I've mentioned. Absolutely love the top end teams we get this year.
 
You can only watch so many buy games in the non con. 1 or 2 is fine but it gets boring as **** after that. No matter how good your team is, and I'm saying that as a fan of a very young team this year. Just happy we won't have to hear we're older than the bulls every game this year. Now it'll be grandpa Bruce and his grandsons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: otte21
Teams in shitty conferences with shitty non conference schedules should get punished because we don’t know how they actually stack up against good competition. A Big Ten team playing 20 games in the best conference in the country and probably 10+ games against ranked teams is going to be just fine in terms of SOS and committee approval.
It’s true but I agree with @Toast. ’s main point in that it’s beneficial to the actual team in playing a tough non-con. The teams in the big ten know each other. Not only is it helpful to the resume to play tougher teams but also just see different players/coaches/style of play that you will in the tournament.

Also big ten could lay a dud as a whole one year in the non con and go from being a guaranteed top 2 conference in the nation to 5th or something for all we know. Then you really are susceptible to your non-con schedule. Pros far outweigh the cons IMO. Sometimes losses are a good thing, beating up on cupcakes hardly ever means anything.
 
If I was IU, I'd still want a marquee opponent especially in Assembly if possible. You guys have always had the ability to beat just about anyone [not named Purdue] in Bloomington.

For Purdue's sake, I'm happy with tough non-cons for the reasons I've mentioned. Absolutely love the top end teams we get this year.
It makes sense for Purdue to play a tough schedule this year. It doesn’t make sense for them to play a tough schedule in a down year.
 
It makes sense for Purdue to play a tough schedule this year. It doesn’t make sense for them to play a tough schedule in a down year.
Disagree. Just play a tough non-con every year. If you suck, you suck & don’t deserve to make the tournament. But even that path probably gives you best chance, it puts you higher up on computer models, etc.
 
It makes sense for Purdue to play a tough schedule this year. It doesn’t make sense for them to play a tough schedule in a down year.
It makes sense every year. Feasting on cream puffs does nothing for teams. I’ve seen IU do it for the past 4 years and crumble when they actually play a tough Big Ten schedule. Coaches would tell you the same. Iron sharpens iron.
 
It makes sense every year. Feasting on cream puffs does nothing for teams. I’ve seen IU do it for the past 4 years and crumble when they actually play a tough Big Ten schedule. Coaches would tell you the same. Iron sharpens iron.
The thing is, mocking teams for weak non-con schedules has been a constant in this thread for as long as I can remember. Now...It's Actually Good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: B-Westy and otte21
Disagree. Just play a tough non-con every year. If you suck, you suck & don’t deserve to make the tournament. But even that path probably gives you best chance, it puts you higher up on computer models, etc.
It really doesn’t. Your overall SOS is high regardless. The only thing it could possibly help with is a human making a decision.

Two years ago when you guys were down, would you have felt better about Purdue’s chances of making the tournament if you replaced the Texas loss with a win against some cupcake?
 
It makes sense every year. Feasting on cream puffs does nothing for teams. I’ve seen IU do it for the past 4 years and crumble when they actually play a tough Big Ten schedule. Coaches would tell you the same. Iron sharpens iron.
Our non con SOS was better than yours last year.
 
It really doesn’t. Your overall SOS is high regardless. The only thing it could possibly help with is a human making a decision.

Two years ago when you guys were down, would you have felt better about Purdue’s chances of making the tournament if you replaced the Texas loss with a win against some cupcake?
No & that’s a bad example because the year before Purdue lost @ Texas and wasn’t really looking like a tournament team and went to the elite 8.
 
The thing is, mocking teams for weak non-con schedules has been a constant in this thread for as long as I can remember. Now...It's Actually Good.

I didn’t say it was good. Just that it doesn’t matter to me and that the Big Ten is so strong that it more than makes up for a weak NCSOS at selection time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NC_Trojan10
No & that’s a bad example because the year before Purdue lost @ Texas and wasn’t really looking like a tournament team and went to the elite 8.
How is that a bad example? Purdue won the Big Ten, so their Texas loss didn’t matter. Wins > Quality in the non con.
 
Yeah their metrics are going to look largely fine, but there’s still a line there somewhere. A team that wins 8 or 9 games in the big ten probably has to worry about their non con schedule at least a bit. You could definitely say a team that wins that few games in conference doesn’t deserve to make the tourney anyways, but with the strength and depth of the conference, you’re going to have teams that fit that criteria as fringe tourney teams

Going 10-1 against the 150th NCSOS vs going 8-3 vs the 50th NCSOS is negligible when you get 20 Big Ten games and will have a top 14 in the country CSOS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NC_Trojan10
The thing is, mocking teams for weak non-con schedules has been a constant in this thread for as long as I can remember. Now...It's Actually Good.
To be clear, I’m not saying to schedule 300+ kenpom teams. I don’t think any serious power 6 program should do that. I just don’t know if you should also schedule road games against top 25 teams if you’re concerned about how good your team is to start the year.
 
How is that a bad example? Purdue won the Big Ten, so their Texas loss didn’t matter. Wins > Quality in the non con.
Because I’m glad Purdue had that experience of playing a tougher team in Texas than some cupcake. If your team is solely relying on pure W/L record to make the tournament, chances are they aren’t going to do shit in the tournament anyway.
 
Going 10-1 against the 150th NCSOS vs going 8-3 vs the 50th NCSOS is negligible when you get 20 Big Ten games and will have a top 14 in the country CSOS.
Yep. You can actually make your NCSOS look pretty good without playing any top 25 teams. Just stay away from the 250+ teams.
 
Because I’m glad Purdue had that experience of playing a tougher team in Texas than some cupcake. If your team is solely relying on pure W/L record to make the tournament, chances are they aren’t going to do shit in the tournament anyway.
Cool. It was still a good example. That win would have gotten you closer to making the tournament 2 years ago than the loss.
 
Michigan has played for a national title twice this decade.

2012/13
NCSOS 257
Overall SOS 3

2017/18
NCSOS 301
Overall SOS 18


We’ve been to the Elite 8 two other years this decade

2013/14
NCSOS 142
Overall SOS 2

2020/21
NCSOS 178
Overall SOS 18


The Big Ten being loaded corrects a weak SOS so much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT