Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="jncuse, post: 4959417, member: 1969"]
So as to the overriding questions

Is MwC legit in terms of getting 4-5 teams?  Probably.  I think so, I think the big difference vs the ACC is in part because they have avoid cannibalization within conference and avoided teams getting bad losses.   Because there is some really bad teams in MWC.

In terms of the Big 12 and SEC getting 9 teams in as of now   The SEC getting 9 teams seems much more deserved. Unlike last year the Big 12, is not dominating against other quality opponents OOC.     So there is another factor in play in the NET.    As a conference they did much better than the ACC against bad teams, but not enough for his seed variance.

So something is going on.

That being said is it NET gaming -- on average each B12 only plays 1.2 more Q4 game than ACC teams.  Is merely winning that additional game going to swing things - knowing enough of the NET I highly, highly doubt that.

[B]Also the NET is somewhat schedule independent.    My guess is that yes the B12 NET is driven by how the B12 did in Q3 and Q4 games, but not by merely winning them which some are erroneously speculating.     But its not a function of winning them, but more dominating in Q4 games more than others.   There is a way to calculate if that is the case... but do I feel like gathering data points on about 120 games.   Maybe, probably not.

But even if the NET is driven by the B12 dominating Q3 and Q4 opponents more margin wise than others, should that really be a basis for them doing so well in this[/B].

Last year was easily explainable, this year not so easy.

I'd love to find an online repository of such information to find details, but this is largely data I compiled this year.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?