I think he was giving Iowa St a compliment. His point was that Va Tech isn't a terrible team. "I mean, they beat Iowa State. They can't be that bad" We did the same thing with WVU and UCF. "Hey, they're not terrible, I mean, WVU did beat Kansas."
The amount of butthurt from countless people about
- Thread starter dahliaclone
- Start date
I think he was giving Iowa St a compliment. His point was that Va Tech isn't a terrible team. "I mean, they beat Iowa State. They can't be that bad" We did the same thing with WVU and UCF. "Hey, they're not terrible, I mean, WVU did beat Kansas."
When you lose at home to Georgia Tech and NC State you better deflect anyway you can.
LOL. Looks like Clemson screwed up gaming the system.
In reality would not getting wins against good teams who are missing a key player be an actual way to "game the system".
I mean you can't purposefully schedule that, but certain teams definitely take advantage of it. BYU is going to get full credit for beating KU at Phog last night without their star player.
When we won at TCU without Lipsey it wasn't like we got some bonus points for that.
I'm not saying the system needs to change, just that injuries seem like a far greater source of inaccuracy than non conference scheduling.
It is one of those weird tribalism things that has happened over the past 20 years. It’s a bizarre phenomenon because prior to 2000ish most fans thought like you. Who cares about your conference mates? They were all viewed as rivals and we wanted them to lose every game.
- Jan 26, 2019
- 1,109
- 1,646
- 113
- 33
I'm struggling with the fact that Seth Davis is in our corner, very strange times indeed
Well, these other conferences just need to have consistence good showings in March. Problem solved.
I think that at the end of the season, the metrics are pretty indisputable. There is enough data there to be as accurate as possible.
You could argue that scheduling cupcakes in November results in the metrics being off a bit in the early season, but they were going to be off anyways because they lack the complete data that the end of season metrics have.
And over the course of the season, injuries, luck, streaks even out and what’s left, the body of work, should be pretty accurate.
I feel like what these butt hurts are saying is the big 12 inflated their metrics during the non con, knowing that once conference play started that it would be hard to lose much in terms of metrics. They would just trade high ranking wins earned from inflated metrics. A kind of a tide raising all ships plan.
Last edited:
Shut up clemson. You made the college football playoff several times by winning the ACC. Just stop it.
Do we have decent chance to play Clemson in the tournament?
Maybe they will drop down to a 6 or 7 and we get to show them how we play?
Maybe they will drop down to a 6 or 7 and we get to show them how we play?
As a 68 YO, I can assure you this is not the case. As long as I can remember people in IA were all Big 10 or Big 8. ESPN started out with Big East and those teams promoted the crap out of each other. ACC were all "We're the best basketball conference!"
It's been around way before 2000ish.
Start listening at 33:05. These three are some of the most informed CBB minds in the space. Really good stuff. They talk about (and defend) ISU directly and the B12, backing up with stats and factual information.
Highly suggest giving this a listen.
I don't see how it's a bizarre phenomenon. Being in a strong conference gives you an objectively stronger case for making the tournament and/or getting a better seed. Other conferences' fans try to make a case for your conference being weaker to prop up their conference and, therefore, their team. If every other big 12 team lost every non-con game, we'd be in a 1-bid league, and nobody would want to play for us.
I would love nothing more than the Big 12 knocking out every ACC team in the tourney.
Hard disagree back to you. Maybe in your circles. But I grew up before the 2000s and this was most definitely not the case. Sure there were some teams you didn’t mind, but most we wanted to see lose.
The whole ACC thing for basketball was only talked about mostly at the high level because it was a good league. But those teams didn’t like each other and Duke, North Carolina, NC State, etc most certainly did NOT cheer for each other in the tournament.
Not disagreeing with any of that because that is exactly why conference strength matters. But the chest pounding we see these days was never a thing en masse prior to 2000.
Or fans (who never see a dime of it) pounding their chests about how much tv money their schools get. Never made sense to me.
I hope Big12 strength gets proven out in tourney. Recent final fours and ISU making sweet16s with not great Teams would suggest the conference is as good as advertised.
Vs Purdue last year representing the Big10. Flukes happen, but overall that conf hasn't been dominate.
Vs Purdue last year representing the Big10. Flukes happen, but overall that conf hasn't been dominate.
It’s serious bulletin board for any of the 9-10 big 12 teams that could beat them. Odds are any team that plays 2-3 games is gonna hit a big 12 team.
