# Best Conference in the Nation?



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Lets hear the reasoning. Vote as to which conference you think is the best and give a reason why.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

I voted for the Pac-10...

They have three of the top 12 teams, four in the Top 25, three others receiving votes, rated as the #1 RPI conference, and has the best winning percentage in the nation.

Feel free to correct my statements or add to them.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

I'll go with the ACC. 5 teams ranked and 2 others receiving votes...not to mention, Florida St. didn't receive any votes and four of their five losses are on the road, and all of their losses are to top 25 teams (except for Georgia Tech who isn't far out of the top 25).

The only teams in their conference that have no chance of making the tourney (Miami and Wake Forest) are both .500 and not nearly as bad as some other conferences garbage teams (Northwestern and Minnesota in the Big 10, and Arizona St. and Oregon St. in the Pac 10).


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

I'm starting to sway back to the ACC, but I think the Pac 10 has stronger teams at the top, so I gave them the edge. Top to bottom, ACC may have them edged. I don't know. I'll have to see what others have to say about it.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

I think it's between the ACC and SEC. No offense to the Pac 10, they are very good this year too.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

i voted for the big 12, because i felt like it


----------



## Ron Mexico (Feb 14, 2004)

Pac 10 because I think the quality of their best teams are better than other conferences


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

Pimped Out said:


> i voted for the big 12, because i felt like it


or because you're in love with Rick Barnes and his boys :biggrin:


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

I think the SEC is much stronger at the top than people realize. But then again covering it as much as I do I see some things that scare me off. Hard to say really cause the PAC-10 really does have some good ball this year.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

TM said:


> or because you're in love with Rick Barnes and his boys :biggrin:


thats _why_ i felt like it


----------



## MoscowHeel (Dec 25, 2006)

whatever conference durant is in


----------



## apelman42 (Apr 8, 2005)

It's the Pac 10 folks. I go based on whom I think has the teams capable of going furthest in the tournament. You can all pencil UCLA into the final four. There players and experience are too good not to make it back. You also have teams with the likes of Oregon and Arizona, who could also very well make the final four. There middle of the road teams are dangerous too, Wazzou, U Dub, SC, and Stanford. No top 7 matches up against the Pac 10 in this country.

Cal ain't that bad either...especially when they get Hardin back. (Winners of the Great Alaska Shootout with him)


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

I think UCLA is OVER-RATED!!!


----------



## DaBruins (Jul 30, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> I think UCLA is OVER-RATED!!!


So why rank us at #2 above Wisconsin?


----------



## apelman42 (Apr 8, 2005)

Nim, yet you've backed Kansas...You've got to explain that one to me. A home loss to Oral Roberts and than a loss at Depaul. Those 2 losses were pretty comfortable losses too.

UCLA and Florida I think are head and shoulders above the rest...based on their defense and coaches.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Ok let me correct myself. I think UCLA's talent is overrated. Their coaching is good and they play really well as a team. However I would not put them head and shoulders above the field right now like I would with Florida. As Kansas and UNC gain experience they will be better teams as well.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

apelman42 said:


> It's the Pac 10 folks. I go based on whom I think has the teams capable of going furthest in the tournament. You can all pencil UCLA into the final four. There players and experience are too good not to make it back. You also have teams with the likes of Oregon and Arizona, who could also very well make the final four. There middle of the road teams are dangerous too, Wazzou, U Dub, SC, and Stanford. No top 7 matches up against the Pac 10 in this country.
> 
> Cal ain't that bad either...especially when they get Hardin back. (Winners of the Great Alaska Shootout with him)


It's the ACC, folks. I go based on whom I think has the teams capable of going furthest in the tournament. You can pencil in UNC into the final four. Their players and experience are too good not to make it. You also have teams with the likes of Duke and Clemson, who could also very well make the final four. Their middle of the road teams are dangerous, too: Maryland, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, and Boston College. No top 7 matches up against the ACC in this county.

Forida St. ain't that bad either...their one of only two teams to have beaten the #1 ranked team in the country (Florida).


C'mon man, you could say this about the SEC, too. That post didn't tell us anything.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Nimreitz said:


> Ok let me correct myself. I think UCLA's talent is overrated. Their coaching is good and they play really well as a team. However I would not put them head and shoulders above the field right now like I would with Florida. As Kansas and UNC gain experience they will be better teams as well.


Yeah, Florida's the best team in the country right now. It's pretty much a three way tie between UCLA, UNC, and Wisconsin after them.


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

To most people here my vote is surpsing differnet, I did not voted for the Big 12. Yes they have 4 top 25 teams, one of the most talent teams in the nation(KU), the best frosh and perhaps the best player (durant), and very competitive, I voted for the Pac 10 as they have two potential National Champions in UCLA and Arizona while Big 12 has really one. Pac 10 also has 3 potential sweet16teams in Washington State, Washington, and Oregon. ACC is a good choice too.

My rankings

Pac 10
ACC
Big 12
as the top 3

the rest can really be put in any order as the next three
Big East
SEC
Big 10


----------



## apelman42 (Apr 8, 2005)

coolpohle said:


> It's the ACC, folks. I go based on whom I think has the teams capable of going furthest in the tournament. You can pencil in UNC into the final four. Their players and experience are too good not to make it. You also have teams with the likes of Duke and Clemson, who could also very well make the final four. Their middle of the road teams are dangerous, too: Maryland, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, and Boston College. No top 7 matches up against the ACC in this county.
> 
> Forida St. ain't that bad either...their one of only two teams to have beaten the #1 ranked team in the country (Florida).
> 
> ...


Hmm, UNC has the same experience in the tournament as UCLA? That's beyond me...If I remember correctly UNC lost to little old George Mason in the 2nd round and UCLA advanced to the National Championship game just last year. I believe along with Wisconsin, that North Carolina is a bit overrated. Did they not get pounded to Gonzaga in the preseason NIT? A west coast team that is struggling right now, that has lost by 10 to Washington State? There best win outside of Ohio State is against Tennesee, an unranked team. Not to mention they beat Ohio State without Oden. Duke and Clemson in the final four...hmmm...ask any Duke fan right now if they think there team has a chance to make the Final Four. Start with TM...he'll tell you flat out that there is no way that team is making the final four. I love Duke every year, but this year they're just too young and not talented enough to make it past the sweet sixteen. There guy's need one more year to develop. Clemson's a good team but we found out what happens when they play ranked opponents...0-2, one at home and one away. There best win was against Georgia Tech, a team that was blasted by UCLA in the Maui. They play these preseason tournaments for a reason dude, to see who has the best conference going into conference play. The numbers don't lie...the Pac-10 is the best rated conference according to the RPI and they've deserved it.

C'mon man, yer post was absolutely idiotic and didn't tell us anything.


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

He did said Duke COULD make it. Any team COULD make it. ask George Mason


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

^Not Duke. Not this year.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

If Clemson and Duke are Final Four caliber teams, then Oregon is as well. Personally, I dont think Oregon has a chance to make the Final Four, same with Duke and Clemson.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

UNC is overrated? Gosh...that 22 point domination at Clemson last night sure looked like one of the best teams in the NCAA to me.

Any team that plays outstanding defense has a decent chance at making the final four. Duke plays outstanding defense. In fact, they are similar in a lot of ways to the LSU team of last year.

So the Pac 10 is the best conference beacuse of the RPI, eh? I guess UNLV is the 11th best team in the country right now, too.


btw apelman...learn how to use the word 'there' correctly. For example, it's not "There best win was at Georgia Tech", it's Their best win was at Georgia Tech.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

True any team that plays outstanding defense can make the final four, however teams who score a lot of points make the final four more often then defensive teams.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

The first ESPN bubble watch is out...

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bubblewatch?id=38

Locks from each conference:

*ACC*

Carolina
Duke
Clemson


*Big East* 

Pitt
Notre Dame
Marquette


*Big Ten*

Wisconsin
Ohio St.


*Big 12*

Kansas
Oklahoma St.
Texas A&M


*Pac-10*

UCLA
Oregon
Arizona
Washington St.


*SEC*

Florida
Alabama
Kentucky 
Tennessee


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

The only two I would disagree with is Washington St. and Tennessee. I'm sure they'll both get in but I wouldn't consider either of them locks, especially Tennesse who's got a brutal conference schedule which has already led them to a 1-2 start.


----------



## DaBruins (Jul 30, 2003)

Not sure how Wazzu isn't a lock. They're at 15-3 and 4-2 in the conference with a tough conference schedule so far since they had to travel to LA, travel to Nor Cal, and play Arizona. They got 3 easy wins left against OSU and ASU for a guaranteed 18 wins, so they only need to win twice in the other 10 games just to hit 20 wins before the Pac 10 tournament.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Yeah, I'd be surprised if they didn't make it a couple months from now, but their OOC SOS was a joke (a big pet peeve of mine lol) and if they lose home games to Oregon and USC...you never know.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Duke held Wake Forest to 40 points tonight. They may not look sexy but this team is unbelievable on the defensive end of the ball. This is why they'll go deep in March.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

but they can't score... FINALLY, Gerald Henderson playing well. If that guy gets going, it could change some things. Anyone have a picture of that dunk he got. Wow!


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

We've got a good one in Eugene...

Stanford leads Oregon 26-25 at half.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

TM said:


> but they can't score... FINALLY, Gerald Henderson playing well. If that guy gets going, it could change some things. Anyone have a picture of that dunk he got. Wow!


I'd rather have a very good defensive team and an average offensive team than a very good offensive team and an average defensive team. Paulus has cut down on his turnovers since that Va Tech game, and has been shooting the ball well this year. Not to mention, they've got arguably the best coach in the country, as well as a solid big guy in McRoberts and good shooters in Scheyer and Nelson. I don't understand why everyone is so down on this team. Did they lose at home to Va. Tech, a game they probably should've won by double digits? Yes. But how many teams go through an entire season winning every game they are supposed to? You're usually gonna lose a couple games that on paper you shouldn't, no matter how good you are. Their other losses are to Marquette and at Georgia Tech, games that they probably weren't supposed to win anyway. And they've beaten Gonzaga, Georgetown, Indiana, and Air Force. What do people expect from this team. Perfection? It just baffles me. Okay...that's my Duke rant for the day...


----------



## apelman42 (Apr 8, 2005)

coolpohle said:


> UNC is overrated? Gosh...that 22 point domination at Clemson last night sure looked like one of the best teams in the NCAA to me.
> 
> btw apelman...learn how to use the word 'there' correctly. For example, it's not "There best win was at Georgia Tech", it's Their best win was at Georgia Tech.


This is a basketball discussion forum. If I would've known that I had to prepare a research paper for you, I would've used the correct spelling.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

apelman42 said:


> Did I not point out that Clemson got beat by a middle of the pack team in the Pac 10 in Wazzou...by ten?


Sorry. I think I missed something. When was that?


----------



## apelman42 (Apr 8, 2005)

Hey coopohle, why are you trying to convince TM that they're an offensive team? He watches them every freaking night! If a hardcore Duke fan tells you that his team has 0 chance of making the Final Four...why don't you believe him?


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Sorry, but it has always been a pet peeve of mine. I just can't understand how many people don't use the words there or your correctly. 

Clemson lost to Washington this year?


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

apelman42 said:


> Hey coopohle, why are you trying to convince TM that they're an offensive team? He watches them every freaking night! If a hardcore Duke fan tells you that his team has 0 chance of making the Final Four...why don't you believe him?


Fans are often biased of their own team, and not necessarily always in a good way.


----------



## apelman42 (Apr 8, 2005)

Let's look at the polls. Looks like darn near 70% of this message board agrees with me, you can't ignore the numbers.


----------



## apelman42 (Apr 8, 2005)

coolpohle said:


> Sorry, but it has always been a pet peeve of mine. I just can't understand how many people don't use the words there or your correctly.
> 
> Clemson lost to Washington this year?


Wazzou is Washington State buddy.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

my bad...Clemson lost to Washington St. this year?


----------



## apelman42 (Apr 8, 2005)

Coopohle I just noticed that you've got Drew Neitzel on your All-American team. You honestly think that Neitzel is better than Tucker? Your entitled to your own opinion, but I guess I'm just not seeing Neitzel carrying his team like Tucker is.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

ya, i they've lost 2 games. WSU wasn't one of them.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Very true, the majority of people agree with you that the Pac 10 is the best. However, it's kinda frustrating when a lot of the responses were something to the extent of, "Pac 10 because I think the quality of their best teams are better than other conferences." Nevertheless, I think a lot of people are just going off RPI rankings which, is stupid imo, but what can ya do.

If Alando Tucker was a point guard, he'd be on my All-American team. However, he's more of a small forward and I think Boggan is better.


----------



## apelman42 (Apr 8, 2005)

**


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

Gotcha, apel 

I don't like All-American teams that do it by positions. Leaves off worthy guys.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

apelman42 said:


> Nah I f'd up, I meant to say that Clemson's best win was against Ga. Tech, a team that Wazzou beat by 10.


Washington St. beat Georgia Tech this year?


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

TM said:


> Gotcha, apel
> 
> I don't like All-American teams that do it by positions. Leaves off worthy guys.


Neitzel's really the only one that's not worthy. You can replace him with Aaron Gray if you'd like.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Solid game for Stanford tonight. Lots of offensive boards and solid D from what I saw. However, like I've been saying, the schedule's just awfully tough the rest of the way and I think that's gonna leave them without a lot of these similar 5 point losses from here on out.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

coolpohle said:


> Very true, the majority of people agree with you that the Pac 10 is the best. However, it's kinda frustrating when a lot of the responses were something to the extent of, "Pac 10 because I think the quality of their best teams are better than other conferences." Nevertheless, I think a lot of people are just going off RPI rankings which, is stupid imo, but what can ya do


How can you say conference RPI is irrelevant? The season is more then half way over. In your opinion, when is it suitable to use the conference RPI rankings? What other way is there to measure how good a conference is?

I just cant stand when people say RPI doesnt mean anything "now". If it doesnt matter now then the only time it matters on selection sunday. Its not like this is week 3 of the season and we are looking at a conference's RPI.

Also, I gave you several reasons as to why I thought the Pac-10 was the best conference. I could go through and list all the quality wins the Pac-10 has as well, but I already did that in one thread.


----------



## apelman42 (Apr 8, 2005)

Unreal, I must've just been thinking about UCLA beatin Ga. Tech. I'm all mixed up, and it's time to go out. I think the Pac-10 is better just based on what I've seen from its teams play in live basketball games. Nice discussion man, you win, I'm coming up with all these false games.

Peace.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

coolpohle said:


> Solid game for Stanford tonight. Lots of offensive boards and solid D from what I saw. However, like I've been saying, the schedule's just awfully tough the rest of the way and I think that's gonna leave them without a lot of these similar 5 point losses from here on out.


Foul trouble did them in. Hill, Johnson, and Brook Lopez were in foul trouble early and that killed Stanford. Stanford got Oregon to play out of their style. This is was Stanford's size will do to teams, especially ones with no post presence. Oregon is going to end up shooting 30% in this game and won it at the foul line.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Yeah, and I think I heard the announcers say at one point Oregon wasn't shooting well at the line. You were definitely right though, Stanford matched up well with the Ducks.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

coolpohle said:


> Yeah, and I think I heard the announcers say at one point Oregon wasn't shooting well at the line. You were definitely right though, Stanford matched up well with the Ducks.


Yeah, Oregon shot 28%, yikes. However, Oregon did the right thing and used their speed to create fouls. It paid dividends, because that is the reason why Oregon won. If the Hill and or the Lopez twins get in foul trouble like that, they wont be winning games against UA, UCLA, and Oregon.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

TucsonClip said:


> How can you say conference RPI is irrelevant? The season is more then half way over. In your opinion, when is it suitable to use the conference RPI rankings? What other way is there to measure how good a conference is?
> 
> I just cant stand when people say RPI doesnt mean anything "now". If it doesnt matter now then the only time it matters on selection sunday. Its not like this is week 3 of the season and we are looking at a conference's RPI.
> 
> Also, I gave you several reasons as to why I thought the Pac-10 was the best conference. I could go through and list all the quality wins the Pac-10 has as well, but I already did that in one thread.


I think it's safe to use conference RPI rankings as of now since almost all of the non conference games have already been played. However, I don't think it's the best way to judge which conferences are the best. For example, even the worst teams in the Pac 10 (Arizona St. and Oregon St.) are going to have very good non-conference records, but that doesn't necessarily make them the best conference. Even though the bottom teams in the ACC like Wake Forest and Miami are clearly better teams, that doesn't show in the RPI rankings because they all post similar non conference records. This is why the Pac 10 has the best RPI ranking. People just judge the conferences based on the top tier or the top half and neglect how much worse the Pac 10 is at the very bottom or even the 2nd tier. 

I mean, how many people really believe the Missouri Valley is the 4th best conference? Even the Mid-Continental Conference is ranked 22nd in RPI, and they are definitely more like the 16th-17th best conference. No question that they are better than the Ivy or Patriot conferences, yet they have the better RPI ranking.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Here's Pomeroy's take on the conferences thanks to my email . Kudos to him for taking some time to discuss the conferences. Check out his blog if you have time. www.kenpom.com/blog

You know, I’ve never really been interested in which conference is the best. Mainly because you can develop any criteria you want to prove which one of three or four conferences is king. My system orders conferences by the average rating of the teams, so in that sense I feel that it’s accurate. I also recognize that nobody’s going to defend their conference by saying “our average team is better than yours!”

That said, I am befuddled by the anointing of the Pac-10 as the nation’s best. I can explain the ACC’s lack of respect this way - Duke is actually underrated, even by Vitale! And the rest of good teams are non-traditional winners. NC State and Wake are at the bottom of the conference, and it’s up to the Techs and Clemson and Florida State to carry the conference honor. You can’t expect people to adjust to that.

But all in all, there isn’t much difference between the best and seventh-best conference. Where there is a difference is between the 15th and 16th best conferences. Seriously, it’s light years between the CAA and Mid-Con. One of the stories at the conference level is not the parity, but that we seem to be developing a 1-A and 1-AA system in the sport.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Hahahahaha, you went crying to Ken Pomeroy. I saw his blog first since I had long given up caring about this debate and the first thing I see is "I'm from basketballforum.com and the Pac 10 sucks right?"


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

No tears coming from my eyes buddy. I just wanted an experts opinion and he's the only one that replied to me.


----------

