The amount of butthurt from countless people about

[Clonefan32]

You forgot the 6th game of the year, with 2 new starters and new 6th man as well. Chemistry was not exactly established to say the least.

This captures why I hate the focus on the non-conference. Those games were 3 months ago. Who the hell cares the result of a game 3 months ago?

 

[AllInForISU]

lol. The SEC and Big 10 ruling CFB is essentially the same thing, except it’s even worse because they exclusively use the “eye test”.

 

[trevn]

This captures why I hate the focus on the non-conference. Those games were 3 months ago. Who the hell cares the result of a game 3 months ago?

Clemson's coach.

 

[alarson]

This captures why I hate the focus on the non-conference. Those games were 3 months ago. Who the hell cares the result of a game 3 months ago?

We put a lot of focus on those games because it's really all some of the mid majors have to sell their resumes, but it really ends up being a poor metric when comparing power conference teams. Teams playing in February and March when they have fully gelled are more impressive competition.

 

[CascadeClone]

I think the thing a lot of people don't get though is that if our strength of schedule was stronger we would be solidly on the two seed line

Yeah if you trade Lindenwood (359), Eastern Illinois(319) and Depaul (308) for say,
South Dakota State (162), Ohio (150), and Illinois St (171)...
the NCSOS would be 100 points higher probably, with next to zero change to the KenPom/BT metrics and certainly no change to the record.

Also on KenPom-
ISU overall SOS is 73, NCSOS is 352
UConn overall SOS 64, NCSOS is 291.

Is UConn gaming the system??

 

[FerShizzle]

lol. The SEC and Big 10 ruling CFB is essentially the same thing, except it’s even worse because they exclusively use the “eye test”.

*the 'eye test' of a committee on which they have over representation

 

[Gunnerclone]

That being said, it would stand to reason that if this information is out there teams in that sweet spot of like 150 to 200 would seem like they could drive up their asking price for buy games if they can sell themselves on being a buy team that does more for NCSOS ratings

Another good point. There’s a lot more nuance to scheduling than ISU just saying “be here on this date at this time” to whatever team we want.

 

[CyPunch]

This is absolutely spot on. I know that I would love to play some bigger names, I would love to get some home and homes but I think there a lot of teams that are just scared to come to Hilton.

Big East teams we haven't yet played in the Big 12/Big East Battle:

UConn, Villanova, Butler, Xavier, Georgetown, Marquette, Providence

Marquette would make a lot of sense as a pairing with two programs coming off comparably good seasons. I doubt we get UConn unless we make a deep tournament run.

Butler, Xavier, Providence and Marquette seem like sensible future pairings based on recent and historically successful basketball programs. If UConn remains a "modern blue blood" they're going to be reserved for Kansas or Arizona just about every year.

 

[Clonefan32]

lol. The SEC and Big 10 ruling CFB is essentially the same thing, except it’s even worse because they exclusively use the “eye test”.

No kidding. Michigan doesn’t play a team with a pulse until mid-November and it doesn’t get questioned in football.

 

[Die4Cy]

It pisses me off that this is a conversation the talking heads are more than happy to discuss ad nauseum but for some reason SEC football scheduling or the fact that more than half of the B1G is sub .500 in football goes unnoticed by them year after year when discussing championship profiles.

It's all such a lame ass joke at this point.

 

[1UNI2ISU]

Two simple thoughts on this:

1) Our metrics are strong across the board. If NET were some outlier, then I’d get it. But it isn’t.

2) The data they use is publicly available. If we are so successfully cheating the NET system, then everyone else can feel free to do the same.

3) Could there be a reason it’s only the Big 12 that appears to do this beyond gaming NET? Sure. Because it’s the only league you know you’ll have 8+ Q1 opportunities. We don’t need those in the non-con.

But that's just it. You game the NET in the non-con so that you have the 8+ Q1 opportunities. The cake is already baked.

It's not just the Big 12 doing it, it's the entirety of the power leagues, the Big 12 is just on the extreme end of it.

Again, that's the system and within the rules so take every advantage of it you can.

 

[fcclone]

H

I am sure you can find all kinds of tweets from Auburn Blazer complaining about the SEC football scheduling.

 

[MartyFine]

These balloon heads also do not understand that nobody, and I mean nobody, wants to play in Hilton.

 

[HFCS]

The Big 12 ‘gaming’ the NET is bonkers to me. Is anyone else seeing all the chatter online? Even Scott VanPelt talked about it on Sportscenter last night. I don’t get it.

Is the Final Four rigged for the Big 12 too?

2023: none
2022: Kansas (Champion)
2021: Houston, Baylor (Champion)
2019: Texas Tech
2018: Kansas
2017: non
2016: Oklahoma

6 in 7 tournaments, 3 finalists, two champions (this is just 10 teams and Houston)

Now let's do the media's favorite conference Big Ten.

2023: none
2022: none
2021: none
2019: MSU
2018: Michigan
2017: none
2016: none

2 in 7 tournaments, zero champions, one finalist...this is with 14 teams to pull from these years

Sorry but the other conferences they love are DOG $HIT compared to Big 12 basketball. They need to be called out on it. The SEC is no better than what I just did for Big Ten.

The Big East and ACC can be discussed, the Big Ten and SEC need to be laughed out of the room with this nonsense.

 

[Dirt Boy 2]

Two simple thoughts on this:

1) Our metrics are strong across the board. If NET were some outlier, then I’d get it. But it isn’t.

2) The data they use is publicly available. If we are so successfully cheating the NET system, then everyone else can feel free to do the same.

3) Could there be a reason it’s only the Big 12 that appears to do this beyond gaming NET? Sure. Because it’s the only league you know you’ll have 8+ Q1 opportunities. We don’t need those in the non-con.

Last year didn’t we have the Q1 games or was it Q1 wins? And then the committee chose to reward Q1/2 winning percentage instead because some other conferences just had a terrible number of Q1 games? It really hurt the Big 12 over previous years. It seems like this same narrative is popping up to get other conferences more seeds.

 

[HFCS]

Clemson's coach.

He's a moron.

He's basically saying Big 12 teams all need to have the toughest non conference and the toughest conference schedule.

All that matters is your total SOS, total strength of record etc...

It's not like Big 12 teams have an easy path to 20 wins, they have the hardest path to 20 wins.

 

[cytor]

The B1G brings nothing but suckage to the table. They should be whining about paying all that tv money for a conference to showcase an inferior product.

 

[HFCS]

It's objectively true but them's the rules so you might as well use them to your advantage.

The league has done a fantastic job with it.

It's not really true though. A schedule is an entire schedule. It makes just as much sense to say every other conference is cheating because their conference schedule is super easy compared to B12.

All that matters is total SOS, total strength of record, etc...

 

[coolerifyoudid]

Two simple thoughts on this:

1) Our metrics are strong across the board. If NET were some outlier, then I’d get it. But it isn’t.

2) The data they use is publicly available. If we are so successfully cheating the NET system, then everyone else can feel free to do the same.

3) Could there be a reason it’s only the Big 12 that appears to do this beyond gaming NET? Sure. Because it’s the only league you know you’ll have 8+ Q1 opportunities. We don’t need those in the non-con.

Which two are simple?

 

[NWICY]

Meh with the amount of possible turnover every yr, scheduling winnable games isn't a negative IMO. Next yr we have the Hawaii tournament plenty of competition there.