Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="jncuse, post: 4618787, member: 1969"] [B]POST #3[/B] This is the data that I accumulated and posted around Selection week. Only tweaked the formatting a bid, and added the overall OOC Win%. It tracks the overall performance of conferences in OOC play, and it clearly shows that the ACC was dominated by the elite power conferences this year. [ATTACH type="full"]226377[/ATTACH] You will also see there is zero mention of NET. I'm not a "huge lover of NET". I'm a huge lover of understanding and tracking the W's and L's and how they impact things. Big difference there. For you to insult my lack of knowledge by saying its all NET based shows you were not tracking things like I do. Because it was obvious the ACC was behind NET only comes into play when determining if an OOC win is Q1-Q4. As this is all OOC stuff, its going to cause a random small disturbance that could be equally good or bad but both to a minor degree. It would not change things very much. But since as you say "its simply math" I assume you understand this basic statistical principle. Or I could give you the list of teams in each group, and since you watch the games it would pass your eye test as well. [B]Overall Win % (OOC)[/B] Note the ACC did not have a significantly higher OOC than the other power conferences. It actually may have been lower - I just eyeballed the NC SOS on KP and did not calculate the average. But I can if you want. Big 12 - .830 Big 10 .757 SEC - .731 Big East - 683 ACC .675 P12 .634 Not good for the ACC. The leaders in this metric are the B12, BIG, and the SEC - those who dominated in terms of # of lines and seeds. To give you context if we wanted to look at a 162 game baseball season the Big10 wins 122 games... the ACC wins 109 games. Its a sizable difference [B]Q1 Wins (OOC)[/B] BIG 16 Big12 15 SEC 14 P12 9 BE 9 ACC 7 ACC is clearly behind in this. Once again the leaders in this metric are the BIG, B12, and the SEC. In terms of elite (top half Q1 wins) its even worse for the ACC. They get 2 while the other 5 top conferences averaged 7.2 [B]Q1+Q2 Wins (OOC)[/B] SEC 31 B12 30 (with 10 teams!!) Big10 24 ACC 21 P12 18 Big East 16 On a per team basis the ACC is last at 1.4. Its well behind the SEC, B12, and the BIG who dominated the bracket. [B]Q3+Q4 Losses (Bad Losses) OOC[/B] ACC 18 P12 17 SEC 11 Big East 8 B10 - 6 B12 - 2 Hey finally something the ACC dominated in (along with the P12). Unfortunately its the wrong category to dominate in. Per team it does better than the P12, who nobody considers good And you will note the B10 and the B12 do very good in this metric And its not just Florida St and Louisville The rest of the league loses 11 bad games - 6 teams in the ACC in fact lost two bad games. [B]Ratio of Good Wins vs Bad Losses[/B] Big 12 - 30 vs 2 B10 - 24 vs 6 SEC - 31 vs 11 Big East - 16 vs 8 ACC - 21 vs 18 P12 - 18 vs 17 This clearly shows the dominance of the B12, B10, SEC over the ACC and the P12. Based on the above I'm not sure why the ACC is questioning why they are getting far less seeds than those 3 conferences, ITS NOT THE NET - ITS THE WINS AND LOSSES. To claim my statements are only based on NET and not observing results is absurd. There is a reason the ACC started where it did in January -- and it wan't the NET throwing out jibberish, The NET was reflecting what happened on the floor. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?