Most Dominant Conference?

[mcgufcm 4,107]

So full disclosure, I live in ACC country now. I'm in law school at an ACC school after living my entire life in SEC college towns (grew up in Starkville, went to school at Auburn). I also listen to sports talk radio an inordinant amount. I blame my dad for that. So today, I was in the car, and they were talking about ACC basketball on the radio. You kinda get used to it, and I've even gotten used to the over-inflated opinions of the conference that pervade any conversation about basketball (for example: this week MULTIPLE talking heads claimed the ACC was the toughest conference in America this year... despite the fact that the Big East is likely to have 3/4 of the Final Four, has half of the Elite Eight, and had 5 in the 16... yeah, the ACC was better this year. Sure it was).

Anyway, today was like a breaking point for me. The guys are talking about ball and conference strength, etc. Then they just dismissively say "Of course the ACC has been the best conference over the last 20 years. I don't think anyone would refute that." At which point, I raised my hand. I would. I would like to have that conversation. I think you can make a case for the ACC, but it's not a hands-down winner. It just isn't. Why? Because it's really just a two team league. If you think conference strength is expressed in seeing multiple teams play at a high level... the ACC may not meet the standard.

So I was interested in finding out whether my suspicion was correct. I say upfront that my measure is the Final Four and National Titles. You could add number 1 seeds and the like to the mix, but I think you can get a pretty good picture of what conference dominates by looking at the Final Four/Champion. So I broke down the last 20 Fours (since that was the claim), I looked at number of teams, number of appearances, number of title teams, and number of titles. I also included every four by a team currently in the conference. So I counted Louisville's FF to the Big East (for example). I marked teams that were in other conferences at the time with an *. Here are the results.

ACC – FF teams: 4 (Duke, UNC, Maryland, GT); FF #: 20 (Duke has 8, UNC 8, UMd 2, and GT 2); NC teams: 3 (Duke, UNC, and UMd); NC #: 6 (Duke 3, UNC 2, UMd 1)

Big East – FF teams: 7 (Seton Hall, Cincinatti*, Georgetown, Syracuse, UConn, Marquette*, Louisville*); FF #: 9 (Cuse had 2, UConn had 2, everyone else had one); NC teams: 2 (Cuse and UConn); NC #: 3 (UConn 2 and Cuse 1)

Big 10 – FF teams: 7 (Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Ohio State); FF #: 15 (Michigan State 4, Michigan 3, Illinois 2, Indiana 2, OSU 2, Wisconsin 1, Minnesota 1); NC teams: 2 (Michigan and Michigan State); NC #: 2 (one each)

Big 12 – FF teams: 4 (Kansas, Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Texas); FF #: 9 (Kansas 5, Okie State 2, OU and UT 1); NC teams: 1 (Kansas); NC #: 1

Pac 10 – FF teams: 3 (UCLA, Arizona, Stanford); FF #: 8 (UCLA 4, Arizona 3, Stanford 1); NC teams: 2 (UCLA and Arizona); NC #: 2 (one each)

SEC – FF teams: 5 (Arkansas*... not in SEC for the 1990 Four, Kentucky, Florida, MSU, LSU); FF #: 13 (Kentucky 4, Florida 4, Arkansas 3, MSU and LSU 1); NC teams: 3 (Arkansas, Kentucky, Florida); NC #: 5 (UK and UF 2 each, Arkansas 1)

Non-BCS – FF teams 5 (UNLV, Umass, Memphis, Utah, George Mason); FF #: 6 (UNLV had 2); NC teams: 1 (UNLV); NC #: 1 (same)

So here's my push back. I think you could make a clear case for the Big 10 or the SEC over the ACC. By raw numbers of # of FF or # of titles, the ACC is the clear leader. No question. But here are my two MAJOR knocks on the ACC: 1) only one league has a lower number of teams that have made the FF (the Pac 10 had only three but it should be noted there are 3 less teams in the Pac 10 than the ACC) and 2) the dominance by only two teams.

The Big 10 deserves recognition for the fact that so so many of its members are having MAJOR success. I mean 7 of 11 teams have made the Four, and 5 of the 11 have been to multiple Fours. The knock on the Big 10 is the low success rate once you get there. They've only won twice in 15 appearances. Only the Big 12 has a lower success rate.

Then there's the SEC, which is really a mixture of the two. We've had more members make the Four than the ACC, the same number of schools win it, and only one less championship... in 7 less appearances. Basically, the SEC has more balance, and we only show up to win, not to place.

To me, those are the CLEAR top 3 conferences. The Big East has had a lot of teams make it, but surprisingly not many of them have multiple appearances. The Pac 10 and Big 12 are clearly the step-children of the BCS conferences, and those conferences would be even worse if they weren't being carried by one or two schools (Kansas, UCLA, and Arizona account for 70% of the appearances and 100% of the titles).

I dunno. Maybe the answer is the ACC, but it really seems odd to say the ACC has been so good when really, it's a two team conference. The ACC is UNC, Duke, and everyone else. At least the SEC and Big 10 show some depth.

[dyehardaufan 0]

Nice write up but I dispute counting appearances of teams that were not part of the conference when they were in the final four. This would actually bring the Big East to only 6 teams in the final four the last 20 years(Lville, cincy, and marquette were not in the league when they made it)

I have grown up loving ACC basketball so my opinion may be a little biased. I understand your argument about it being a 2 team conference but you can make the same argument that the Big East is only Uconn and Syracuse, SEC is only KY and UF(Arky hasnt been relevant since last decade), Big 12 is only Kansas, Pac 10 is only UCLA.

I think you can make an argument that the Big10 may be the deepest 1-11 but there is a reason until this year the ACC won the ACC/Big10 challenge every year.

It is no argument the Big East was the toughest conf this year(even though the bottom of the conf is some of the worst teams in the country) but over the last 20 years I think the ACC has shown they are the best basketball conference in the country. It never has the ups and downs the other BCS conferences have.

[mcgufcm 4,107]

See here's the thing I don't like about ACC fans. The claim that the ACC has been dominant for 20 years; then discounting the fact that Arkansas was one of the top 5 programs in America for almost 10 years. Have they been good since the late-90s? Not really. But their decline is directly followed with Florida's rise to prominence. And THAT is my point with the ACC. There is no decline by one of the big two followed by a rise by another team. There's just the big two. No one is about to knock them off. No one has risen into Duke's place since their struggles started (I mean have they really been a threat to win it all since the Jay Williams/Dunleavy/Boozer squad? Not in my mind... even with that 2004 Four appearance).

Basketball, for whatever reason, seems like it is completely dominated by a handful of teams (more so than any other sport), but it's still odd to me that the ACC is so incredibly lopsided. It looked for about 10 minutes like Maryland was going to make it a big three, but that flamed out as quickly as Juan Dixon graduated.

I guess you'd have to say that they are the best conference, but it's really just two teams and a bunch of dead weight. Maryland is fading fast. FSU was a one-man wonder. Clemson has the worst post-season coach in the country. GT looks as bad as it has in years. UVA sucks. VT is on the same level as Auburn (football school with a decent coach with some sporadic success). And on and on and on.

The ACC isn't getting any better outside of tobacco road. The only team I could even potentially see coming up to take Duke's fallen star is Wake, but that team may be gutted by the draft (Teague, Aminu, and Johnson are all projected in the Top 20 by nbadraft.net).

In all honesty it seems like we're headed back to the early-80s when it was the Big East, UNC, and everyone else. Looking at the Big East in just the last six years, you've seen Syracuse and UConn win national titles, Gtown in the Four, Louisville and Marquette make it before they joined the league, and this year UConn and Nova are in with Louisville favored to make it. Odds are the Big East is going to get its 3rd national title in 6 years (with UNC claiming one of the other years)... the Big East was unquestionably the conference of the 80s. The SEC and ACC split the 90s. The ACC controlled the early 00s, and the Big East appears to be taking control now.

I'll concede that UNC and Duke have been the best conference in America for 20 years. I just don't know that the rest of the ACC stacks up.