Since joining the ACC we have the 4th best record in the conference

[cuseattle]

And Go Orange!

 

[Cuseball]

Not sure why the OP left others out, but ND had two E8 appearances during this time frame, the Cards made the E8 their first year in the conference, and FSU joined the party just last year.

Cheers,
Neil

Wasn’t relevant to the regular season record and too lazy. Since you ask. Miami is 2-4 in NCAA, FSU 4-2, ND 7-3 with two Elite Eights. Ville’s 2015 Elite Eight is erased from the record books. So my point still stands. Cuse has the 4th best regular season ACC record and the 3rd best NCAA record and one of only three teams with a Final Four.

Cuse!

 

[omniorange]

You are defending the Top Eight claim by coming up with a set of variables --- TV ratings, Attendance and NCAA success -- that support it. But as you pointed out, if you choose a different set of variables, you get a different answer. The set of variables you chose seem like a way to choose "Most Famous Programs" but not necessarily "The Best".

I'm not going to get into what the right set of variables are and how to weight them, not because its not interesting, but because its an exercise in arbitrariness and futility. It's like the Medieval arguement over how many angels can fit on a head of a pin.

I go at this differently. I don't think you can get to who is #8 or #10 or #16.

I think there are a few teams at the top level (Duke, Kentucky, UNC and maybe Kansas.)

Then there's a whole bunch of teams that are at the second level and I mean a lot of them. And that''s where SU is in that group. Michigan State, Michigan, Gonzaga, Villanova, Virginia, etc., etc., etc.

And trying to rank these teams in any precise order is an exercise in statistical games.

The "Top Eight" claim was really about the relative attractiveness of the coaching job after Boeheim. Perpective coachs are going to use a whole different set of variables when they assess the job opportunity. (What are the expectations? What should the expectations be really? Can I do better than JB?, etc. etc.)

I'd agree SU is a Top 20 job. There's a ton of jobs out there that are just as good.

I have no issue with this last bolded stance. I think my issue in your previous post was this statement by you, "I was surprised to read SU was one of the top 8 jobs in all of college basketball". In re-reading that previous post by you and now in this post I see it had mostly to do with the hiring of JB's successor which is impacted by many factors not the least of which just naming off the Top 15-20 coaches in the land at that time doesn't mean that coaches like Wright at Nova, Bennett at Virginia, or Few at Gonzaga will leave those places for SU even if JB were to win 2 more NCs making a clear separation between us and those three programs even more evident in terms of actual quantifiable information.

I do, however, find it amusing that in terms of the blue bolded statement above you have in the past done some of that but more often than not it does seem to me that you do tend to try and stand above it all, ridiculing things others put forth from this stance but unwilling to establish what you think the criteria should be. It's a stance that likely ensures you don't lose an argument but also tends to mean you don't win many either.

So your final concluding statement means nothing to me, especially without defining "a ton", without knowing what the "market" will be, or even who the Top 10-15 coaches will be at that time JB finally does decide to retire since all other criteria has been eliminated by you as an exercise in arbitrariness and futility.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[omniorange]

Wasn’t relevant to the regular season record and too lazy. Since you ask. Miami is 2-4 in NCAA, FSU 4-2, ND 7-3 with two Elite Eights. Ville’s 2015 Elite Eight is erased from the record books. So my point still stands. Cuse has the 4th best regular season ACC record and the 3rd best NCAA record and one of only three teams with a Final Four.

Cuse!

I believe I was one of the first to like your post, so I had no problem with how you did it, I was just attempting to try and explain why the "guessed" reason of you only including ACC members who had reached at least the Elite 8 wasn't factually correct for that particular column. If as you now say it was meant to be a chart simply dealing with regular season records than the inclusion of the partial NCAA records is odd to me, especially since in now reviewing the chart more closely it appears you left off ACC tourney results altogether.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Cuseball]

I believe I was one of the first to like your post, so I had no problem with how you did it, I was just attempting to try and explain why the "guessed" reason of you only including ACC members who had reached at least the Elite 8 wasn't factually correct for that particular column. If as you now say it was meant to be a chart simply dealing with regular season records than the inclusion of the partial NCAA records is odd to me, especially since in now reviewing the chart more closely it appears you left off ACC tourney results altogether.

Cheers,
Neil

got it and apologies of this came off with attitude. Most of my reason was I too lazy to look at the NCAA records of the teams below and assumed in my head that they were not that successful in the NCAA's. I had forgotten about one of ND's Final Eight runs. They have done quite well in the tournament.

Cuse!

 

[Townie72]

I have no issue with this last bolded stance. I think my issue in your previous post was this statement by you, "I was surprised to read SU was one of the top 8 jobs in all of college basketball". In re-reading that previous post by you and now in this post I see it had mostly to do with the hiring of JB's successor which is impacted by many factors not the least of which just naming off the Top 15-20 coaches in the land at that time doesn't mean that coaches like Wright at Nova, Bennett at Virginia, or Few at Gonzaga will leave those places for SU even if JB were to win 2 more NCs making a clear separation between us and those three programs even more evident in terms of actual quantifiable information.

I do, however, find it amusing that in terms of the blue bolded statement above you have in the past done some of that but more often than not it does seem to me that you do tend to try and stand above it all, ridiculing things others put forth from this stance but unwilling to establish what you think the criteria should be. It's a stance that likely ensures you don't lose an argument but also tends to mean you don't win many either.

So your final concluding statement means nothing to me, especially without defining "a ton", without knowing what the "market" will be, or even who the Top 10-15 coaches will be at that time JB finally does decide to retire since all other criteria has been eliminated by you as an exercise in arbitrariness and futility.

Cheers,
Neil

I don't think I have ever tried to build a case for anything on here depending on statistical analysis because I know how sensitive these things are to what criteria are used, and what time periods considered. As I said, the criteria you used to me seemed more suited for “Most Popular” or “Most Seen” and not “Best”. And I’ll admit, I don’t know what “Best” looks like although it has something to do with wins against “quality” opponents, conference championships, NCAA performance and NC’s over the past, 5, 10 or 20 years.

I can make an argument, that if SU was to go on a tear and win two more NC’s it might make the job less attractive. The candidates aren’t going to ask “What has JB done?”, they are going to ask “What are my chances of success there as a follow-on act?”.

A characteristic of this forum is the huge mood swings that occur between euphoric highs and angry lows. The board after the GT loss is a prime example. Toning down of expectations and of a sense of entitlement are probably good ideas, especially if you have a problem dealing with the frustration associated with unmet expectations.

Just recently we have seen people on here argue about our ACC record, many of them cherry-picking the time frame to make their case that the program is in disarray, JB is failing, he’s senile, out of touch, lazy, etc.

If I were to list the 15 or so programs I think SU is in the second tier with that discussion would quickly disintegrate into finding the one or two programs people disagreed with. I can’t tell the difference between the 8th best program and the 12th or the 14th because that ranking depends on what criteria and what time frame are used and all of that is anyone’s guess.

 

[Forza Azzurri]

A characteristic of this forum is the huge mood swings that occur between euphoric highs and angry lows. The board after the GT loss is a prime example. Toning down of expectations and of a sense of entitlement are probably good ideas, especially if you have a problem dealing with the frustration associated with unmet expectations.

This may be the most accurate post ever regarding the behavior of this board.

 

[721Comstock]

I think you both meant 180 degrees.

I think we're up to about a 900 degree turnaround by now.

 

[Sherman20]

On what basis are we not Top 8 program? Perhaps if we were to value conference season titles, conference tourney titles, regular season wins, ease in which we get into the NCAAs and recruiting rankings higher than TV ratings, actual NCAA results, and attendance?

Over the past 7 seasons (11-12 through 17-18) my data mining SMW has found only 10 programs have played in 30 or more regular season/conference tourney games that exceeded 1 million viewers or more. The Top 5 have done it 45 or more times - Kentucky (89, yes 89), Duke (69), North Carolina (61), Michigan State (51) and Kansas (46). If one wonders why I am using the last 7 years it is because the SMW archives are not very good beyond that time frame and obviously this year is not complete.

So there is clearly an expected separation of the Top 5, versus the next five which are Michigan (40), Louisville (37), Syracuse (32), Ohio State (31), and Indiana (30). And yes, the Kansas 46 vs the Michigan 40 is a chasm when you take into consideration the Jayhawks are carrying an entire conference on their backs while the Wolverines are getting support from MSU above them and OSU and Indiana in the same grouping as them, and Wisconsin (not on the Top 10 list but on the next level down which has the Badgers, Cavaliers, and Irish separate from the next level down from them). And yes, Kentucky is truly a cut above everyone else because they are doing what KU is doing but at a much higher level.

In terms of average ratings of those games SU ranks in actuality 7th, but realistically 8th since KU behind them is hindered by their conference affiliation.

In terms of NCAA results over the same 7 year period - SU ties for fifth with Florida just behind Michigan State. And in terms of attendance over that period SU only trails Kentucky. So taking all of that into consideration I personally don't see how we are not a Top 8 program in the country. But that is my view. You may have a perfectly valid different point of view, just wondering what you are basing yours on?

Cheers,
Neil

Thanks for sharing, Neil. This is great info. I was aware that SU was a top 10 TV draw for CBB but didn’t know the numbers. What’s SMW?