Big 12 Basketball: Five-Year Ranking

    
October 19th, 2008

 

BIG 12 FIVE-YEAR STANDINGS

 

This ranking tries to answer a simple question: Who has been the best team in the Big 12 over the last five years?

 

A heavy emphasis is put on league play & NCAA Tournament success. NIT wins are meaningless here, as are non-conference wins.. if you feel your team is slighted by this, feel free to make your own ranking. No doubt other factors could be taken into account such as the RPI, or one could have favored postseason success more heavily. But I feel satisfied this simple system does a good job of ranking the teams recent performance.

 

100 total points is set up to be the equivalent of batting .300 in baseball.. anything above and beyond is all-world stuff. 50 points is mediocre and you only start to get bad below 40 points. Baylor, for example, at 28 points is one of the worst of all BCS teams. Colorado at 38 is also weak, and the Big 12 is more stratified as compared to the ACC which didn't have any perennial doormats.

 

The postseason scoring system is listed below, along with some related notes & thoughts. Check back next for the Big East ranking..

 

 

                     
                     
Pos. Team 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Wins Gms. Points  
                     
1 Kansas 12 12 13 14 13 64 80 80 Win %
Elite 8 1st Round 1st Round Elite 8 Champs     32 Post Pts.
                  112  
                     
2 Texas 12 9 13 12 13 59 80 74 Win %
Sweet 16 1st Round Elite 8 2nd Round Elite 8     28 Post Pts.
                  102  
                     
3 Okla. State 14 11 6 6 7 44 80 55 Win %
Final Four Sweet 16 NIT NIT NIT     19 Post Pts.
                  74  
                     
4 Texas Tech 9 10 6 9 7 41 80 51 Win %
2nd Round Sweet 16 2nd Round 1st Round X     16 Post Pts.
                  67  
                     
5 Oklahoma 8 12 11 6 9 46 80 58 Win %
NIT 2nd Round 1st Round X 2nd Round     7 Post Pts.
                  65  
                     
6 Texas A&M 0 8 10 13 8 39 80 49 Win %
X NIT 2nd Round Sweet 16 2nd Round     15 Post Pts.
                  64  
                     
7 Kansas St 6 6 6 10 10 38 80 48 Win %
X X X Nit 2nd Round     5 Post Pts.
                  53  
                     
8 Missouri 9 7 5 7 6 34 80 43 Win %
NIT NIT X X X     2 Post Pts.
                  45  
                     
9 Iowa St 7 9 6 6 4 32 80 40 Win %
NIT 2nd Round X X X     5 Post Pts.
                  45  
                     
10 Nebraska 6 7 7 6 7 33 80 41 Win %
NIT X NIT X NIT     3 Post Pts.
                  44  
                     
11 Colorado 10 4 9 3 3 29 80 36 Win %
NIT X NIT X X     2 Post Pts.
                  38  
                     
12 Baylor 3 1 4 4 9 21 80 26 Win %
X X X X 1st Round     2 Post Pts.
                  28  
                     

 

-Ties are broken by favoring conference winning %

 

Thoughts

- Note that Kansas at 112 and Texas at 102 is equal to the ACC's top 2: UNC at 112 and Duke at 102.

- As mentioned in the intro, Baylor and Colorado are particularly bad, winning under 40% of Big 12 games and accomplishing little in the postseason.

- Texas Tech at 4th and Oklahoma at 5th is surprising considering the reputations of these two programs. The Sooners have had virtually no postseason success despite having the 3rd best Big 12 winning percentage.

- The bottom of the Big 12 is much worse than the bottom of the ACC. The Big 12's bottom six teams combined for 17 postseason points (around 1 NCAA 1st round loss and 1 NIT trip per team) while the ACC's worst six had 38 points (about 2 NCAA trips and 2 NITs per team).

- Colorado, Iowa State, and Nebraska have all gone 5 years without an NCAA Tourney bid.

 

Postseason Points

NIT = 1

NCAA 1st Round = 2

NCAA 2nd Round = 4

Sweet = 6

Elite 8 = 8

Final Four = 10

Final = 11*

Champs = 12*

 

* I've stopped giving 2 points per win in the final games, to prevent one year wonder teams from getting too much of a boost (ie, Georgia Tech or Ohio State in the Big Ten). Also, CBI bids receive no credit.