What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

I love Championship Week (1 Viewer)

TheIronSheik

SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
Honestly, I'm starting to like it more than the Big Dance.  Slightly.  Still love the Dance.  But for these two weeks of Champ Week, I have printouts of all the brackets and I meticulously fill each one out and have each game alert set up on my phone.  Up until this year, with ESPN3, you could switch between games and watch just the last 2 minutes of every game.  I was in heaven.  But they ruined it with ESPN+.  I'm not giving ESPN any money.  Especially to watch Copin State play Morgan State in the first round match to get into the quarterfinals.  

Anyway, I digress.  I'm a stat nerd.  Always have been.  It's what got me into the line of work I'm in now.  And yes, I mean calling Jim back.  

Don't get me wrong, I love watching the big conference teams play and battle it out.  But I also enjoy watching quarterfinal games from the Patriot League.  Or the America East semifinals in their gyms that hold 100 people, standing room only.  

Anyone else this way?  I'd say not many considering how hard it is to compile all of my information leading up to CW.  Not to mention how few games are televised anymore.  

 
Agree. For those kids, this is sometimes their one shot at the NCAA tournament. I watch as many of those finals as I can. 
Exactly.  I know the level of the game isn't as good as Duke v. North Carolina.  But it's not horrendous.  There's a reason these teams sometimes knock of the big guys in the dance.

But like you said, each game they play is their championship game.  There's no safety net of an at large bid.  And I love the big conference tournaments, too.  This is my favorite time of the year.  The start of CW until the last game of round 2.  There is so much excitement in that time frame.

 
Not to go off on a rant, but Gonzaga is a sham.  They are in a conference that has no one else even close.  Then their championship is set up so they just need to win 2 games.  Once against a crappy team.  Than one against a possibly decent team.   They field a team that is fairly good, so they can play some OOC games and win or come close.  But they end up with a 28-3 record every year, which puts them in a spot to get either a 1 or 2 seed, making their path easy.

Imagine if any team from a big conference switched with them.  It would be the same result for them.  But if Gonzaga played in a real conference, they'd have records similar to decent teams.  But not top of the conference every year.  And because of that, they wouldn't get a 1 or 2 seed.  And I'm sure it's easy to recruit above average players to a school that will hardly ever lose, win their conference championship almost every year.  And even if they don't, still get a high seed in the Big Dance.  

Ugh.  Gonzaga pisses me off.

 
Not to go off on a rant, but Gonzaga is a sham.  They are in a conference that has no one else even close.  Then their championship is set up so they just need to win 2 games.  Once against a crappy team.  Than one against a possibly decent team.   They field a team that is fairly good, so they can play some OOC games and win or come close.  But they end up with a 28-3 record every year, which puts them in a spot to get either a 1 or 2 seed, making their path easy.

Imagine if any team from a big conference switched with them.  It would be the same result for them.  But if Gonzaga played in a real conference, they'd have records similar to decent teams.  But not top of the conference every year.  And because of that, they wouldn't get a 1 or 2 seed.  And I'm sure it's easy to recruit above average players to a school that will hardly ever lose, win their conference championship almost every year.  And even if they don't, still get a high seed in the Big Dance.  

Ugh.  Gonzaga pisses me off.
Saw a tweet that kind of backs what I'm saying:

Blind Resumes:

Team A: 4-3 against Quad1, 26-0 otherwise.

Team B: 2-6 against Quad1, 24-0 otherwise.

Both lost in conference tournament final. Team A is Gonzaga who may get a No. 1 seed and Team B is UNC Greensboro who may get left out.

 
Saw a tweet that kind of backs what I'm saying:

Blind Resumes:

Team A: 4-3 against Quad1, 26-0 otherwise.

Team B: 2-6 against Quad1, 24-0 otherwise.

Both lost in conference tournament final. Team A is Gonzaga who may get a No. 1 seed and Team B is UNC Greensboro who may get left out.
Blindly comparing Quad1 games and omitting RPI is pretty disingenuous. 

 
Not to go off on a rant, but Gonzaga is a sham.  They are in a conference that has no one else even close.  Then their championship is set up so they just need to win 2 games.  Once against a crappy team.  Than one against a possibly decent team.   They field a team that is fairly good, so they can play some OOC games and win or come close.  But they end up with a 28-3 record every year, which puts them in a spot to get either a 1 or 2 seed, making their path easy.

Imagine if any team from a big conference switched with them.  It would be the same result for them.  But if Gonzaga played in a real conference, they'd have records similar to decent teams.  But not top of the conference every year.  And because of that, they wouldn't get a 1 or 2 seed.  And I'm sure it's easy to recruit above average players to a school that will hardly ever lose, win their conference championship almost every year.  And even if they don't, still get a high seed in the Big Dance.  

Ugh.  Gonzaga pisses me off.
They are in a conference that has no one else even close.

Incorrect.  St. Mary's is 33rd, USF not much further back.  Sure it's no ACC, but people exaggerate how ####ty the conference is, especially the top 3-4 teams.  

When you look at the metrics that measure performance against seed expectations, Gonzaga has been near the top.  There is a myth perpetuated that Gonzaga under-performs in the tournament and it is completely wrong.  They have been performing up to the standards of the seeds they've been given and have surpassed on many occasions.  This year, they are the only team to beat a healthy Duke, and for most of that game they dominated.  They pass the eye test.  

 
And if you think it’s easy to recruit kids to that podunk town called Spokane, Washington, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

 
Saw a tweet that kind of backs what I'm saying:

Blind Resumes:

Team A: 4-3 against Quad1, 26-0 otherwise.

Team B: 2-6 against Quad1, 24-0 otherwise.

Both lost in conference tournament final. Team A is Gonzaga who may get a No. 1 seed and Team B is UNC Greensboro who may get left out.
Team A is ranked 2nd in kenpom. Team B is ranked 82nd. 

 
Scoresman said:
They are in a conference that has no one else even close.

Incorrect.  St. Mary's is 33rd, USF not much further back.  Sure it's no ACC, but people exaggerate how ####ty the conference is, especially the top 3-4 teams.  

When you look at the metrics that measure performance against seed expectations, Gonzaga has been near the top.  There is a myth perpetuated that Gonzaga under-performs in the tournament and it is completely wrong.  They have been performing up to the standards of the seeds they've been given and have surpassed on many occasions.  This year, they are the only team to beat a healthy Duke, and for most of that game they dominated.  They pass the eye test.  
Not to mention, they were ranked highly before conference play started, ie they made their bones against legit teams, as opposed to a team like Wofford who was ranked in the high 30s after completing their non-conference schedule and has risen to 13 on the strength of beating up on the cupcakes in their league.

 
Saw a tweet that kind of backs what I'm saying:

Blind Resumes:

Team A: 4-3 against Quad1, 26-0 otherwise.

Team B: 2-6 against Quad1, 24-0 otherwise.

Both lost in conference tournament final. Team A is Gonzaga who may get a No. 1 seed and Team B is UNC Greensboro who may get left out.
Says more about Greensboro than Gonzaga.  It's not right how angry I get every March that teams like them get left out for sub 500 major conference teams, but - I do.

 
First off, I didn't say Gonzaga wasn't good.  I think they're on par with a team like Louisville.  But if Louisville played in the WCC, they'd have a 1 or 2 seed every season and win their tourney.

And the RPI and Kenpom numbers aren't great measures.  Gonzaga is always in the top 10 of these rankings but have only been to 1 Final Four, if I remember correctly.  Again, not saying Gonzaga is bad.  But they are set up to put themselves in the best position of any college basketball team.  

And stop with trying to say anyone else in that conference is good.  One other team can sometimes be ok, but that's about it.

 
First off, I didn't say Gonzaga wasn't good.  I think they're on par with a team like Louisville.  But if Louisville played in the WCC, they'd have a 1 or 2 seed every season and win their tourney.

And the RPI and Kenpom numbers aren't great measures.  Gonzaga is always in the top 10 of these rankings but have only been to 1 Final Four, if I remember correctly.  Again, not saying Gonzaga is bad.  But they are set up to put themselves in the best position of any college basketball team.  

And stop with trying to say anyone else in that conference is good.  One other team can sometimes be ok, but that's about it.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/dear-haters-youre-dead-wrong-about-gonzaga-whether-you-realize-it-or-not/

That article puts it better than I can.  It was written about the 2017 team that made the finals , but this year's team is better than that one was.   

A lot of what you are saying is simply not true.  Louisville would be very successful in the WCC, but so would a lot of teams.  That doesn't prove anything about how good or overrated Gonzaga is.  I don't know how you can look at this year's non-con, as well as their tournament success over the last few years and not think they absolutely belong somewhere in the mix with the top power conference schools.  You say you're a stat nerd, but the data doesn't support your opinion here.  

And I disagree about kenpom.  It's a great measure.  Along with Vegas lines, efficiency data has proven to be the best predictor we have.  

Sheik, you're a great poster who I respect, but you're wrong here.  

 
Says more about Greensboro than Gonzaga.  It's not right how angry I get every March that teams like them get left out for sub 500 major conference teams, but - I do.
I get some of the hate but UNCG's best win of the season came a couple days ago against Furman (Kenpom 54) on a neutral court.  By 4.  Before that their signature win was at ETSU.

 
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/dear-haters-youre-dead-wrong-about-gonzaga-whether-you-realize-it-or-not/

That article puts it better than I can.  It was written about the 2017 team that made the finals , but this year's team is better than that one was.   

A lot of what you are saying is simply not true.  Louisville would be very successful in the WCC, but so would a lot of teams.  That doesn't prove anything about how good or overrated Gonzaga is.  I don't know how you can look at this year's non-con, as well as their tournament success over the last few years and not think they absolutely belong somewhere in the mix with the top power conference schools.  You say you're a stat nerd, but the data doesn't support your opinion here.  

And I disagree about kenpom.  It's a great measure.  Along with Vegas lines, efficiency data has proven to be the best predictor we have.  

Sheik, you're a great poster who I respect, but you're wrong here.  
You know I love you, GB, so no offense taken.  But we can definitely disagree here.  

Again, I think you're mischaracterizing what I'm saying.  I'm not saying that they're not a good team.  I'm not even really saying they're overrated, per se.  What I'm saying is that by staying in the WCC which doesn't have anyone close to their caliber in it, then on top of that structuring the tourney so they only have to win 2 games, they can guarantee themselves a 1,2 or 3 seed depending on how well they play that year.  

Put them in the ACC, and all of a sudden that good Gonzaga team starts to have a season record with maybe 8 to 10 losses.  Same team.  But not going to get a high seed in the tourney.  Therefore making it harder to advance each game.  

And I am a HUGE stat nerd.  HUUUUUGE.  But that's why I realize that things like RPI and Kenpom can only be used so much.  If they were flawless, we wouldn't need to play the games.  Those stats give a nice baseline.  But they are not gospel.

 
You know I love you, GB, so no offense taken.  But we can definitely disagree here.  

Again, I think you're mischaracterizing what I'm saying.  I'm not saying that they're not a good team.  I'm not even really saying they're overrated, per se.  What I'm saying is that by staying in the WCC which doesn't have anyone close to their caliber in it, then on top of that structuring the tourney so they only have to win 2 games, they can guarantee themselves a 1,2 or 3 seed depending on how well they play that year.  

Put them in the ACC, and all of a sudden that good Gonzaga team starts to have a season record with maybe 8 to 10 losses.  Same team.  But not going to get a high seed in the tourney.  Therefore making it harder to advance each game.  

And I am a HUGE stat nerd.  HUUUUUGE.  But that's why I realize that things like RPI and Kenpom can only be used so much.  If they were flawless, we wouldn't need to play the games.  Those stats give a nice baseline.  But they are not gospel.
The bolded is definitely where we disagree.  I think no more than 5-6 losses for this year's team and still in the mix for a high seed with other elite teams.   Keep in mind if they played in the ACC there would be no need for them to schedule as tough a non-con as they do.  

 
I get some of the hate but UNCG's best win of the season came a couple days ago against Furman (Kenpom 54) on a neutral court.  By 4.  Before that their signature win was at ETSU.
They were competitive against the big boys non-conference.  It's a lot more difficult to win on the road in small conferences than anyone considers.  It's one of the reasons why big boys won't go there.  It's a no-win situation...and it's a tall task.

The mediocrity in the major conferences have show every year that they are not capable of going anywhere if they're one of the last ones in.  How many times have we seen the best from small conferences make deep runs into the tourney?  Loyola, Xavier, Dayton, VCU, Davidson, George Mason, Kent.  Those are the 11+ seeds that have made runs to the elite eight since 2002.  And Xavier's the only big boy.  All of those chances and they have one that made a run...vs six from the little guys.

Gimme Belmont, Greensboro, Furman, and Lipscomb.  To hell with Oklahoma, NC State, Florida, and Ohio.

 
If you average the RPI of the teams played for Gonzaga, Cincinnati and Louisville you get: 136.1, 132.4, and 103.3.

If you take the RPI of only the teams they beat, you get: 144.8, 148.2, and 138.3.

Zags schedule isn't that crazy as it's made out to be. In fact SOS goes like this: 60, 56, 3.

 
First off, I didn't say Gonzaga wasn't good.  I think they're on par with a team like Louisville.  But if Louisville played in the WCC, they'd have a 1 or 2 seed every season and win their tourney.

And the RPI and Kenpom numbers aren't great measures.  Gonzaga is always in the top 10 of these rankings but have only been to 1 Final Four, if I remember correctly.  Again, not saying Gonzaga is bad.  But they are set up to put themselves in the best position of any college basketball team.  

And stop with trying to say anyone else in that conference is good.  One other team can sometimes be ok, but that's about it.
This kind of ignores that gonzaga is often a lower seed, even when they win their conference. Last year they were 17-1 in conference and a 4 seed. 

 
If you average the RPI of the teams played for Gonzaga, Cincinnati and Louisville you get: 136.1, 132.4, and 103.3.

If you take the RPI of only the teams they beat, you get: 144.8, 148.2, and 138.3.

Zags schedule isn't that crazy as it's made out to be. In fact SOS goes like this: 60, 56, 3.
No denying that the WCC drags their SoS down.  The problem is trying to identify how good they really are in spite of this.  It comes down to how much trust you put in the metrics that adjust for SoS.  And they all say that the Zags are an elite team this year.  Kenpom, Sagarin, Torvik, Haslam, all of them.    Cincinnati hovers around 35 in all of these metrics.  Louisville 20th. That's the difference and its a huge difference.

Also, within conference play, they absolute demolished every team like they never have before including USF and BYU by 30.  Top 40 St. Mary's by 48.  If they were only as good as a Louisville, I would've expected more close games.  But those consistent margins of victory are an indication of an elite team IMO.  

 
They were competitive against the big boys non-conference.  It's a lot more difficult to win on the road in small conferences than anyone considers.  It's one of the reasons why big boys won't go there.  It's a no-win situation...and it's a tall task.

The mediocrity in the major conferences have show every year that they are not capable of going anywhere if they're one of the last ones in.  How many times have we seen the best from small conferences make deep runs into the tourney?  Loyola, Xavier, Dayton, VCU, Davidson, George Mason, Kent.  Those are the 11+ seeds that have made runs to the elite eight since 2002.  And Xavier's the only big boy.  All of those chances and they have one that made a run...vs six from the little guys.

Gimme Belmont, Greensboro, Furman, and Lipscomb.  To hell with Oklahoma, NC State, Florida, and Ohio.
Syracuse, while a 10 seed, was considered by many to be one of the last teams in the year they made the final four recently. But your point is still well taken.

 
They were competitive against the big boys non-conference.  It's a lot more difficult to win on the road in small conferences than anyone considers.  It's one of the reasons why big boys won't go there.  It's a no-win situation...and it's a tall task.

The mediocrity in the major conferences have show every year that they are not capable of going anywhere if they're one of the last ones in.  How many times have we seen the best from small conferences make deep runs into the tourney?  Loyola, Xavier, Dayton, VCU, Davidson, George Mason, Kent.  Those are the 11+ seeds that have made runs to the elite eight since 2002.  And Xavier's the only big boy.  All of those chances and they have one that made a run...vs six from the little guys.

Gimme Belmont, Greensboro, Furman, and Lipscomb.  To hell with Oklahoma, NC State, Florida, and Ohio.
Like Syracuse?

 
I'm not a fan of people saying that X team would have a better chance of winning games than Y team as a reason to put someone in the Dance.  For me, it's not about who can do better in the tourney.  It's about who had a better year.  That's why I'm a big proponent of Mid Majors getting more bids over big schools who went 18-16, but had a high NET ranking.  I think it's ridiculous when 8 teams are getting in from a 10 team conference.  

 
As scoobus said above, they were more like a 12. But Mac's point is still valid IMO. More mid-majors have made deep runs from way back than "meh" high-majors recently.
How are you defining 'deep run' and 'from way back'?

Double digit at-large to the regional finals sound good?

 
How are you defining 'deep run' and 'from way back'?

Double digit at-large to the regional finals sound good?
I'm shooting from the hip and should have included "memorable" in front "deep", but show the math and shame me. I don't care. I'll remember VCU, George Mason, Loyola, and Butler for far longer than I will Syracuse's lucky run.

 
Saw a tweet that kind of backs what I'm saying:

Blind Resumes:

Team A: 4-3 against Quad1, 26-0 otherwise.

Team B: 2-6 against Quad1, 24-0 otherwise.

Both lost in conference tournament final. Team A is Gonzaga who may get a No. 1 seed and Team B is UNC Greensboro who may get left out.
I'm a math guy, you are a math guy, this guy is a math guy:

https://twitter.com/SethBurn/status/1106930862459965441

https://sethburn.wordpress.com/2019/03/04/parcells-defined-why-unc-greensboro-belongs-in-the-ncaa-tournament/

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Remove the games against D3 schools and below (yes they have a USACC team on their schedule) and their Pythag drops to.7801.  

Guy is using cupcakes to strengthen his argument.  I'll go ahead and call shenanigans on the rest of his wall of text.

 
Remove the games against D3 schools and below (yes they have a USACC team on their schedule) and their Pythag drops to.7801.  

Guy is using cupcakes to strengthen his argument.  I'll go ahead and call shenanigans on the rest of his wall of text.
1. Pretend to read links

2. "Call shenanigans" because the logic you use is flawed.

:ignore user:

 
1. Pretend to read links

2. "Call shenanigans" because the logic you use is flawed.

:ignore user:
Read it.  Looked up the schedule (105-57 and 111-33 look a little odd.)   Figured out which PWE he was using.  Adjusted his calculation for intellectual honesty's sake.  Pythagorean win expectation works on the assumption that all possessions are relatively equal.  When you are scheduling cupcakes, those possessions tend to be a little less competitive than playing even a bottom feeder in a P5 conference.  Sorry math guy if you can't comprehend the reasoning behind removing obvious outliers.

 
How does Gonzaga beat SM by 48 in the regular season and then lose to them by 13 in the conf. tourney?

And yes, I'm a bit salty that my team just spit the bit against UT.  I'll go back to my bourbon/hang up and listen.

 
So I've officially put away my notebook and binders, colored markers and Excel sheets.  Always a sad time.  Sure the tournament starts Thursday, but the real fun of the tourney is done by Friday night.  Over as quick as it starts.  

One final note before closing out of the Excel sheets for another year:  While it's fun to pull for the teams that have never been, we kind of lose sight of the ones that haven't been in forever.

50 schools haven't been this century.

15 schools saw their last bid prior to 1990.

8 prior to 1980.

5 prior to 1970.

And 1 prior to 1960.  What's up, Dartmouth?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top