Guess the ACC has proven the experts to be wrong. What happened to the Big ” Least” and the Big ” Hen “. That will show those f…..ing experts which conference has always been and will always be the top conference in the nation.
why do you say the Big ten sucks? They’ve performed well in games where they were the favorite. They haven’t performed well as the underdog. I don’t think that qualifies as them sucking.
What’s really silly is the fact that 60 out of 68 teams receive “first round byes”. It’s moronic to have a “first round” of a 68-team tournament with only 4 games. They’re play-in games, no matter what the NCAA has decided to rename them.
Richard, that may be true but it is disrespectful to leave those teams out of these stats. Not just to the ones who won their games. UAB and Alabama State don’t need to be treated as if they weren’t even there. I see that Matt corrected this. Thanks, Matt.
One of the things that people are interested in is whether conferences are overrated or underrated. So I’d like to see whether conferences are underperforming or overperforming with respect to their seeds. How many times do they lose to a lower seed, or beat a higher seed?
I decided to answer my own question for two conferences. Here are games-outperformed/games-performed-as-seeded/games-underperformed, through the first round:
Big Ten: 1-6-0
Big East: 2-6-3
I’ve revised my metric. Now it’s unexpected wins-expected wins-expected losses-unexpected losses. I think it’s better to separate expected wins and losses, because it’s no accomplishment to lose, even to a higher-seeded team. Here are the two conferences, through Saturday:
So much for all of that Bravo Sierra East Coast Media hype about the Big East…………and the weakness of the Big Ten, SEC and ACC. As usual, once you have some consistent officiating and take away the overly physical (read that fouling the hell out of you all the time) brand of ball, they fall like a dead duck!
Only reason they got two was playing each other………….Marquette is a quick team that could give UNC trouble, but there were two or three of those in the ACC that didn’t get a chance to play St. Johns!
Thanks for the suggestion Fred. I updated the chart to have a Big East and a Big East 2 conference. The Big East 2 conference excludes games played against each other.
It’s actually a nice and useful piece of information. I am glad that you simply shared this useful info with us. Please keep us up to date like this. Thank you for sharing.
Mar 18, 2011 @ 14:05:33
clemson was 1-1.
Mar 18, 2011 @ 15:42:01
USC lost for the Pac-10
Mar 20, 2011 @ 21:55:09
Guess the ACC has proven the experts to be wrong. What happened to the Big ” Least” and the Big ” Hen “. That will show those f…..ing experts which conference has always been and will always be the top conference in the nation.
Mar 21, 2011 @ 00:11:06
The Big East & Big Ten suck!
Mar 21, 2011 @ 05:35:04
why do you say the Big ten sucks? They’ve performed well in games where they were the favorite. They haven’t performed well as the underdog. I don’t think that qualifies as them sucking.
Mar 18, 2011 @ 20:17:46
I think this guy is pretending that the Round 1 games weren’t really tournament games. Pretty silly, really.
Mar 18, 2011 @ 21:19:52
I can’t name one person who thinks the “Round 1″ games are tournament games. That includes the people who work for ESPN, CBS, TruTV, TNT and TBS
Mar 19, 2011 @ 21:15:44
What’s really silly is the fact that 60 out of 68 teams receive “first round byes”. It’s moronic to have a “first round” of a 68-team tournament with only 4 games. They’re play-in games, no matter what the NCAA has decided to rename them.
Mar 18, 2011 @ 22:09:38
Richard, that may be true but it is disrespectful to leave those teams out of these stats. Not just to the ones who won their games. UAB and Alabama State don’t need to be treated as if they weren’t even there. I see that Matt corrected this. Thanks, Matt.
Mar 20, 2011 @ 15:41:52
You can’t leave out victories in the first four but include losses – that doesn’t make any sense.
If Clemson wasn’t 1-1, then UAB was 0-0, right?
Mar 20, 2011 @ 19:05:49
Matt originally left the first four stats out – wins and losses – he has since added them in. I wasn’t suggesting what you think I was suggesting.
Tournament by Conference - HawkeyeNation Forum
Mar 19, 2011 @ 07:46:22
[...] Re: Tournament by Conference Not such a good year thus far for the AQ's…………. NCAA Tournament Conference Records | Backseat Fan [...]
Mar 19, 2011 @ 11:58:18
One of the things that people are interested in is whether conferences are overrated or underrated. So I’d like to see whether conferences are underperforming or overperforming with respect to their seeds. How many times do they lose to a lower seed, or beat a higher seed?
Mar 19, 2011 @ 12:33:47
I decided to answer my own question for two conferences. Here are games-outperformed/games-performed-as-seeded/games-underperformed, through the first round:
Big Ten: 1-6-0
Big East: 2-6-3
Mar 19, 2011 @ 23:00:12
I’ve revised my metric. Now it’s unexpected wins-expected wins-expected losses-unexpected losses. I think it’s better to separate expected wins and losses, because it’s no accomplishment to lose, even to a higher-seeded team. Here are the two conferences, through Saturday:
Big Ten: 1-5-2-0
Big East: 2-6-3-4
Mar 20, 2011 @ 05:50:53
The Big East is actually 1-7-3-4 the only win as an underdog they have is Marquette over Xavier. I updated the post with some more metrics
Mar 20, 2011 @ 23:06:45
Thanks for the correction and the updates.
Mar 21, 2011 @ 05:39:48
How does The acc and sec match up with the other power cconferences
Mar 21, 2011 @ 07:33:08
did you read the post? It’s all in the post.
Mar 19, 2011 @ 20:53:40
how bout record by cities? richmond va is 4-0 in the tourney! if you count vcu’s 1st four game. just sayin. go VA!
Mar 20, 2011 @ 04:58:54
So much for all of that Bravo Sierra East Coast Media hype about the Big East…………and the weakness of the Big Ten, SEC and ACC. As usual, once you have some consistent officiating and take away the overly physical (read that fouling the hell out of you all the time) brand of ball, they fall like a dead duck!
Mar 21, 2011 @ 03:58:06
Only reason they got two was playing each other………….Marquette is a quick team that could give UNC trouble, but there were two or three of those in the ACC that didn’t get a chance to play St. Johns!
Mar 20, 2011 @ 19:01:00
Charles Barkley is right about the BIG LEAST,
Mar 20, 2011 @ 20:22:14
you are absolutely right, Jeff. the guys on set bet Chuck that SIX teams would make it to the sweet 16. They got 2. embarassing.
Mar 25, 2011 @ 06:12:46
You should remove the wins and losses against teams from the same conference. (e.g. Marquette over Syracuse) should not be counted.
Mar 25, 2011 @ 10:32:47
Thanks for the suggestion Fred. I updated the chart to have a Big East and a Big East 2 conference. The Big East 2 conference excludes games played against each other.
Mar 27, 2011 @ 18:21:01
Rough time for the MWC, you know going 4-31 and everything.
Apart from that typo this was very interesting. Thanks for putting it together.
Mar 27, 2011 @ 18:25:23
Oops, thanks for the heads up. I fixed that
Jun 20, 2012 @ 02:54:46
It’s actually a nice and useful piece of information. I am glad that you simply shared this useful info with us. Please keep us up to date like this. Thank you for sharing.