SEC Strength

[Jason94]

As of this morning, the sec has 5(!) teams in kenpom's top 10 teams. In addition, while we have climbed our way into the top 60 (the highest we've been this late since 2017), we are 15th in the conference, with South Carolina not far behind at 68. To put this into perspective, 68th in kenpom would have been the 6th best team in the SEC during the 2013 season.

I think the assumption is that we could go 8-10 conference record and end up with a 21-11 record (assuming we don't stumble in our last three noncon games) going into the SEC-T and potentially get into the tournament. I don't think that this will work out this way, as our conference strength which is going to allow us a lot of opportunities for Quad 1 wins also provides a number of roadblocks to us making the tournament.

The major issue that I see is that while we have performed well in our non-conference schedule so far, we've played the 4th weakest schedule of the 16 SEC teams thus far. And of the teams that have played weaker overall schedules, all of them have at least 1 Quad win on their resume, which means that we probably have to separate ourselves a bit from the middle of the pack to make the tournament, either by grabbing a number of wins against the top 5 in the conference or getting above .500.

This is not to minimize what has been done to this point, which is just short of best case scenario. But it does highlight how difficult it will be to make the tournament without playing better than we have so far.

[bhoyal]

The major issue that I see is that while we have performed well in our non-conference schedule so far, we've played the 4th weakest schedule of the 16 SEC teams thus far.

Nothing personal against UMES... but they do blow. If we beat them by 200, playing that game would still hurt our SOS.

Citadel and New Orleans are not exactly the Magic/Kareem/Worthy era Lakers either.

[mathguy]

I think the assumption is that we could go 8-10 conference record and end up with a 21-11 record (assuming we don't stumble in our last three noncon games) going into the SEC-T and potentially get into the tournament. I don't think that this will work out this way, as our conference strength which is going to allow us a lot of opportunities for Quad 1 wins also provides a number of roadblocks to us making the tournament.

I mean, a stronger schedule to date would have us in better position, obviously.

But I think the logic still holds. As good as the SEC has been this year, 8-10 will make the Tourney. Looking at SEC standings from past years, that would be about 9th in a conference that right now is projected to get 10-12 teams into the tournament. And while we be a little lighter in the resume than some of our conference mates, we also aren't trying to overcome a loss to Grambling either.

I suppose that it depends a bit on *which* 8 games we win, but I feel like the way the SEC has beaten up on people to boost our overall SOS, plus the fact that going 8-10 would virtually guarantee multiple quad I wins ... yeah, I feel like 8-10 would leave up 80%+ likely to get in, and at 9-9 we'd be virtual lock.

[CommanderHoo]

The major issue that I see is that while we have performed well in our non-conference schedule so far, we've played the 4th weakest schedule of the 16 SEC teams thus far.

Nothing personal against UMES... but they do blow. If we beat them by 200, playing that game would still hurt our SOS.

Citadel and New Orleans are not exactly the Magic/Kareem/Worthy era Lakers either.

Why are we playing UMES a second time in 11 games? Austin Peay would give us a better game.

* Just pulling your leg - We know what you intended.

[OldDude]

I would be ecstatic if we go 8-10 in SEC . I just don't think it will happen ; hope I am wrong.

[buffy]

Let's just be happy we're seeing a competent staff that's smart enough to avoid scheduling heavy weights like Presbyterian and Grambling.

[bhoyal]

Let's just be happy we're seeing a competent staff that's smart enough to avoid scheduling heavy weights like Presbyterian and Grambling.

Or Bucknell and Kent State.

[Jason94]

I think the assumption is that we could go 8-10 conference record and end up with a 21-11 record (assuming we don't stumble in our last three noncon games) going into the SEC-T and potentially get into the tournament. I don't think that this will work out this way, as our conference strength which is going to allow us a lot of opportunities for Quad 1 wins also provides a number of roadblocks to us making the tournament.

I mean, a stronger schedule to date would have us in better position, obviously.

But I think the logic still holds. As good as the SEC has been this year, 8-10 will make the Tourney. Looking at SEC standings from past years, that would be about 9th in a conference that right now is projected to get 10-12 teams into the tournament. And while we be a little lighter in the resume than some of our conference mates, we also aren't trying to overcome a loss to Grambling either.

I suppose that it depends a bit on *which* 8 games we win, but I feel like the way the SEC has beaten up on people to boost our overall SOS, plus the fact that going 8-10 would virtually guarantee multiple quad I wins ... yeah, I feel like 8-10 would leave up 80%+ likely to get in, and at 9-9 we'd be virtual lock.

FWIW, right now the projections at kenpom shows the top 8 teams in the league finishing 9-9 or better. Then there are 4 teams projected to finish 8-10, if all of those teams make the tournament that would be 12 SEC teams in. Those four teams are Tx, Ark, UGA and OK. Of those teams the losses they have are all Quad 1 lossess, while our loss is a Quad 2. Three of the four have Quad 1 wins while we do not have any. So if we manage to also end up 8-10, odds are our resume will be worse than them and us getting in would depend upon the committee selecting multiple SEC teams with losing records into the tournament, or to take us over a team that likely has more Quad 1 wins than we do.

Maybe that does happen because the league is so strong, but it would be unprecedented to have that many teams from 1 league get in. The key here is that almost nobody in the league has picked up a bad loss. The only bad loss by all 16 teams through this point has been USC, which lost at home to UNF in their first game. It is arguable, but our loss to Drake on a Neutral floor is probably the 2nd worst loss in the entire conference, and it isn't a bad loss. Because of this it is unlikely our resume looks better than any other conference team outside of USC with an equal number of SEC wins.

[Versus75]

It is arguable, but our loss to Drake on a Neutral floor is probably the 2nd worst loss in the entire conference, and it isn't a bad loss.

Drake is still undefeated after beating Valpo this week and ranked #32/#31 in last week’s polls. Also, #43 in the NET.

Let’s hope Drake doesn’t falter versus St. Ambrose on Thursday

[Jason94]

It is arguable, but our loss to Drake on a Neutral floor is probably the 2nd worst loss in the entire conference, and it isn't a bad loss.

Drake is still undefeated after beating Valpo this week and ranked #32/#31 in last week’s polls. Also, #43 in the NET.

Let’s hope Drake doesn’t falter versus St. Ambrose on Thursday

That wasn't a slight at Drake, who is a good team, it is more a statement on how well SEC teams have taken care of business this season and completely avoided the bad losses that we would typically see. Bhoyal made a point that high major teams lose to mid and low major teams pretty regularly, and would highlight some of those losses. He might still be doing so, but the league hasn't given him the chance this year so far. The league will not have many opportunities for bad losses, if any.