GT Hoops General Topics

[stinger78]

The SEC went 59-19 against the other Power Conferences last season in OOC games. That is what drove their very high NET rankings and caused the feedback loop. They earned the NET rankings based on the games played in Nov-Dec.

Here are the Power Conference records against Top 25 teams thru December 2024:
SEC: 15-10
ACC: 5-31
Big East: 5-18
Big Ten: 11-26
Big 12: 9-22

I do not agree. They ballooned in the SOS *after* they began to play each other post-NYD. Classic positive feedback loop.

 

[Root4GT]

The SEC went 59-19 against the other Power Conferences last season in OOC games. That is what drove their very high NET rankings and caused the feedback loop. They earned the NET rankings based on the games played in Nov-Dec.

Here are the Power Conference records against Top 25 teams thru December 2024:
SEC: 15-10
ACC: 5-31
Big East: 5-18
Big Ten: 11-26
Big 12: 9-22

I do not agree. They ballooned in the SOS *after* they began to play each other post-NYD. Classic positive feedback loop.

That only happened because their teams had very high NET Rankings at the end of OOC play.

In my view the systembis flayed but everyone knows the system. The results I posted clearly demonstrate the SEC was far superior to the other conferences in OOC games.

The ACC in particular was bad as a Conference!

 

[Northeast Stinger]

That only happened because their teams had very high NET Rankings at the end of OOC play.

In my view the systembis flayed but everyone knows the system. The results I posted clearly demonstrate the SEC was far superior to the other conferences in OOC games.

The ACC in particular was bad as a Conference!

I don’t think the question is about the ACC being bad so much as whether the ACC being good would have made any difference in the degree to which the SEC gets over hyped. History tells us that regardless of other team’s performances there is an SEC bias.

 

[Root4GT]

I don’t think the question is about the ACC being bad so much as whether the ACC being good would have made any difference in the degree to which the SEC gets over hyped. History tells us that regardless of other team’s performances there is an SEC bias.

Wow, you really have bought hard into the conspiracy theory on this one.

The numbers made the case in OOC play.

You can say the system is screwed up, and I agree. But based on the known system the NET Rankings played out appropriately.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Wow, you really have bought hard into the conspiracy theory on this one.

The numbers made the case in OOC play.

You can say the system is screwed up, and I agree. But based on the known system the NET Rankings played out appropriately.

Not conspiracy, observation.

I was playing devil’s advocate with you a little bit because I have mostly agreed with you in this argument. But it’s hard to deny that the SEC tends to get more of a bump in ratings out of their wins and losses than any other conference. We have seen this in 3 sports. So when you throw out that the ACC was bad last year it was irrelevant to your argument and weakened it.

 

[MtnWasp]

Systems can be played optimally. The SEC have done a good job of that.

The NET system is biased because of dependence on non-objective initial conditions (initial power rankings).

The self defeating nature of the system is that the spoils go to the victors and the victors use the spoils to gain competitive advantage to horde future spoils. This may work (to an extent) in the broader economic world, it does not work in competitive sport where the viability of the industry depends on, to some degree, competitive integrity and parity.

I guess a central question is how many competitive programs and leagues does college ball actually need to sustain the industry. If pro sports is any model, then around thirty is the number. So, the SEC and BIG programs might actually be enough and everybody else is pretty much "non-essential."

 

[57jacket]

Damon Stoudamire looking for Georgia Tech basketball to continue momentum

For the second consecutive season, the Yellow Jackets had too many bad losses.

www.ajc.com

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Systems can be played optimally. The SEC have done a good job of that.

The NET system is biased because of dependence on non-objective initial conditions (initial power rankings).

The self defeating nature of the system is that the spoils go to the victors and the victors use the spoils to gain competitive advantage to horde future spoils. This may work (to an extent) in the broader economic world, it does not work in competitive sport where the viability of the industry depends on, to some degree, competitive integrity and parity.

I guess a central question is how many competitive programs and leagues does college ball actually need to sustain the industry. If pro sports is any model, then around thirty is the number. So, the SEC and BIG programs might actually be enough and everybody else is pretty much "non-essential."

I fear you might be right.

It’s a question we’ve tossed around many times. Do the SEC and B1G programs need a bunch of “also-rans” to plump up their won/loss numbers and give their athletes time to heal and give their backups playing experience? And, do “also-rans” have to see viable opportunities to fairly compete lest alumni support craters and economics shuts down programs? Who needs who more and what is the extent of that need?

Lots of parameters but no certainty about where they converge.

 

[Root4GT]

Not conspiracy, observation.

I was playing devil’s advocate with you a little bit because I have mostly agreed with you in this argument. But it’s hard to deny that the SEC tends to get more of a bump in ratings out of their wins and losses than any other conference. We have seen this in 3 sports. So when you throw out that the ACC was bad last year it was irrelevant to your argument and weakened it.

I agree with you in football as there are no real comparable metrics and ESPN, which owns the TV rights to the SEC and the CFP, has a vested interest in hyping the SEC.

In Basketball there are enough OOC games between the Power Conferences to establish solid metrics on who is better. The SEC was 30-4 vs the ACC in regular season basketball games last year. That is a large enough sample size to say unquestionably the SEC was a much better overall basketball conference than the ACC was last year.

Additionally, ESPN has no role in the NCAAT, CBS, Turner and True TV (whoever the heck they are) broadcast all NCAAT games. No ESPN hype there.

It's simple, win more OOC games against Powe Conferences!

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I agree with you in football as there are no real comparable metrics and ESPN, which owns the TV rights to the SEC and the CFP, has a vested interest in hyping the SEC.

In Basketball there are enough OOC games between the Power Conferences to establish solid metrics on who is better. The SEC was 30-4 vs the ACC in regular season basketball games last year. That is a large enough sample size to say unquestionably the SEC was a much better overall basketball conference than the ACC was last year.

Additionally, ESPN has no role in the NCAAT, CBS, Turner and True TV (whoever the heck they are) broadcast all NCAAT games. No ESPN hype there.

It's simple, win more OOC games against Powe Conferences!

Mainly, yanking your chain, a little. I don’t care what everybody else thinks of you, I like you

Again, it was a tough year for the ACC. I am still not sure whether or not the early results of SEC vs ACC didn’t have an oversized impact on perception over and above the reality of one conference being better than the other. It’s a nuanced thing for. But, no doubt, the ACC cannot afford another collapse out of the gate like last year.

 

[57jacket]

Mainly, yanking your chain, a little. I don’t care what everybody else thinks of you, I like you

Again, it was a tough year for the ACC. I am still not sure whether or not the early results of SEC vs ACC didn’t have an oversized impact on perception over and above the reality of one conference being better than the other. It’s a nuanced thing for. But, no doubt, the ACC cannot afford another collapse out of the gate like last year.

Root is our fact checker. And optimist critic. LOL. Calls himself a realist.

 

[Root4GT]

Root is our fact checker. And optimist critic. LOL. Calls himself a realist.

Do you dispute the facts on how the SEC vs ACC preformed in head to head BB last regular season?

It sucked and I hate what has become of ACC BB. The Conference was once great and by far the best basketball conference. The ACC went 10-0 vs the Big Ten in the first ten years of that competition. Last year the SEC beat the ACC like we were the Sun Belt Conference. Makes me sick.

Sadly, now the ACC IS just a bunch of random schools with little in common.

Lord I miss ACC BB from the 1980s and 1990s.

 

[ESPNjacket]

Systems can be played optimally. The SEC have done a good job of that.

The NET system is biased because of dependence on non-objective initial conditions (initial power rankings).

The self defeating nature of the system is that the spoils go to the victors and the victors use the spoils to gain competitive advantage to horde future spoils. This may work (to an extent) in the broader economic world, it does not work in competitive sport where the viability of the industry depends on, to some degree, competitive integrity and parity.

I guess a central question is how many competitive programs and leagues does college ball actually need to sustain the industry. If pro sports is any model, then around thirty is the number. So, the SEC and BIG programs might actually be enough and everybody else is pretty much "non-essential."

If you have any evidence of the NET being driven by initial rankings I would like to see it.

While the NET is fairly opaque, it uses mostly the same criteria as a typical basketball predictive model. It has a couple of political tweaks (caps on margin of victory, for example) that make it less accurate than one without political tweaks (like kenpom), but they are small factors in the results.

 

[57jacket]

Do you dispute the facts on how the SEC vs ACC preformed in head to head BB last regular season?

It sucked and I hate what has become of ACC BB. The Conference was once great and by far the best basketball conference. The ACC went 10-0 vs the Big Ten in the first ten years of that competition. Last year the SEC beat the ACC like we were the Sun Belt Conference. Makes me sick.

Sadly, now the ACC IS just a bunch of random schools with little in common.

Lord I miss ACC BB from the 1980s and 1990s.

No no. I didn't say you were wrong. You are just a very cautious optimist. LOL. My attempt at humerous truth.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Root is our fact checker. And optimist critic. LOL. Calls himself a realist.

Every group needs one. It’s called “being Rooted in reality.”

 

[Root4GT]

ThumbNo no. I didn't say you were wrong. You are just a very cautious optimist. LOL. My attempt at humerous truth.

Good by me!

 

[augustabuzz]

Another great Ga. Tech. alumnus.

 

[iopjacket]

Another great Ga. Tech. alumnus.

You would do it for Randolph Scott

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Another great Ga. Tech. alumnus.

It is reported that he excelled at football but I don’t think he played for Tech, did he?

 

[stinger78]

It is reported that he excelled at football but I don’t think he played for Tech, did he?

Wiki says after his WWI service he enrolled at GT wanting to play football. He suffered a back injury and could not play, so he transferred to UNC. Ha!