Is the SEC this year the most dominant conference ever?

[ukfan1622]

Right now all 3 remaining undefeated teams are SEC(Florida, Oklahoma, UT) and the SEC has five of the top seven teams in the rankings and 8 of the top 17 and 11 of the top 28 teams. I can't remember any conference having a 9th best team in the top 28, much less 11. I'm going to say, yes, this is the strongest conference ever.

 

[TOMCATS1990]

YES should get 11-12 teams in the tourney and an SEC team should win the NATTY hopefully KY.

 

[UKBB4Ever]

No

 

[BlueBomb]

It should be in the conversation. But proof is in the pudding. The conference must finish strong, and the SEC has notoriously had problems doing that.

The Big East from way back was great, but top heavy.

 

[yabbadabbadoo]

No

Yes it is
Name one that was better
To this point

 

[HerrosHeroes]

No

Then who is?

 

[Blueheart32]

S.C. or LSU may be the worst teams in the conference, and they are currently 17-5. I can't think of any other year or conference where this years South Carolina team would finish dead last. And I don't think the NCAAT results is how you judge it. The overall body of work proves a lot more than a quirky tournament where anything can and does happen. The SEC this year is flat out brutal.

 

[oldsports_]

Right now all 3 remaining undefeated teams are SEC(Florida, Oklahoma, UT) and the SEC has five of the top seven teams in the rankings and 8 of the top 17 and 11 of the top 28 teams. I can't remember any conference having a 9th best team in the top 28, much less 11. I'm going to say, yes, this is the strongest conference ever.

Too early

 

[ukfan1622]

Off the top of my head, the Big East had three teams in the Final Four in 1985 -- Georgetown, Villanova and St. John's. And Boston College lost by one point if I'm remembering right to the other FF team (later vacated) that year, Memphis.

That would be hard to equal or surpass but the top of the conference is only half the story when you're talking about league strength.

 

[deep3]

Right now all 3 remaining undefeated teams are SEC(Florida, Oklahoma, UT) and the SEC has five of the top seven teams in the rankings and 8 of the top 17 and 11 of the top 28 teams. I can't remember any conference having a 9th best team in the top 28, much less 11. I'm going to say, yes, this is the strongest conference ever.

Yes

Right now all 3 remaining undefeated teams are SEC(Florida, Oklahoma, UT) and the SEC has five of the top seven teams in the rankings and 8 of the top 17 and 11 of the top 28 teams. I can't remember any conference having a 9th best team in the top 28, much less 11. I'm going to say, yes, this is the strongest conference ever.

yes

 

[ukfan1622]

Somebody double agreed with me; it's about time...

 

[ukjenning44]

We need to revisit this in April.

 

[ukfan1622]

Well, it is the half that matters, along with, especially, post season success.

At best, it is too soon to say how dominant the SEC will turn out to be. It's certainly possible that NO SEC teams make the Final Four. If that happens would anyone really look back at this year and say, "the SEC was the most dominant conference in college basketball history in 24-25." No, they would not.

But how about this: The SEC had the most dominant Out-Of-Conference November and December of any conference ever." I'd agree with that.

I mostly agree with you; I'd say the top half matters most but the bottom half matters too. If the bottom teams are cupcakes that has to be taken into account in determining conference strenth. I agree that the argument won't hold unless the SEC has tournament success. I'd say it would have to be four of the final 8 and 2 or more of the final 4.

 

[ukcatz12]

Yes it is
Name one that was better
To this point

To this point I believe the Big 12 had a higher median Kenpom ranking last year than the SEC does this year.

 

[The_Answer1313]

I don't get how one can say too early.

The majority of what remains is conference games which are a net zero on this stuff.

sure the tournament games but at that point you are putting a lot of stock in one and done tournament and a small sample supply. And if you're just looking at the NCAA, your doing it wrong. Given the sheer number of teams the SEC will get in, some of those will not be great seeds and thus might bounce early. It doesn't change the fact they were better than the teams that didn't even make it to begin with tho. Not to mention the fact people when talking about conference strength during the tournament seem to forget that conferences contain other teams that don't make the NCAA tourny. You have to look at things top to bottom.

Best conference ever? I dunno.

Definitely the best conference this season by a longshot? yes.

 

[The_Answer1313]

To this point I believe the Big 12 had a higher median Kenpom ranking last year than the SEC does this year.

I always feel the big 12 had a jump on this as they had a low number of teams overall. it was always at the bottom they made their biggest gains IMO. Most seasons, no "bad" teams whereas other power conferences there was always one or two or three teams that were just awful brining things down.

SEC this season there are no bad teams. Despite having multiple title contenders IMO, that is the biggest difference between the SEC and others right now.

 

[yabbadabbadoo]

To this point I believe the Big 12 had a higher median Kenpom ranking last year than the SEC does this year.

I hope you don’t believe that
Kenpom ain’t God
Sometimes you just have to be realistic about games played

 

[TucsonCat]

Aren't we like 10-8 against Big 10 and 6-6 against Big East. Not exact just trying to provide scale. Not sure greatest conference ever can be barely over. 500 with 2 others.

The ACC might be historically bad. And Big 12 not far behind. But with other 2 that close, need tourney success. Not where we get seeded, but how many advance to S16.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Actually going through the conferences pages which has data from 1997 to 2025 only three times has the average conference team exceeded a +20 net ranking;

1997 ACC (21,.37)
2004 ACC (20.32)
2025 SEC (20.03)

Tho those 97 and 04 ACC conferences only had 9 teams. 6 of the 9 making the tournament in both years. It's just easier to have good conferences from top to bottom when there's not many teams.

The fact the SEC is doing this with 16 teams is amazing.

 

[bbncal02]

Actually going through the conferences pages which has data from 1997 to 2025 only three times has the average conference team exceeded a +20 net ranking;

1997 ACC (21,.37)
2004 ACC (20.32)
2025 SEC (20.03)

Tho those 97 and 04 ACC conferences only had 9 teams. 6 of the 9 making the tournament in both years. It's just easier to have good conferences from top to bottom when there's not many teams.

The fact the SEC is doing this with 16 teams is amazing.

Yep.

And remember who those ACC teams were too. Syracuse was pretty great for a while. Duke and UNC of course. NC State was really good in some of those years.

ACC is a shell of its former self.

 

[UKBB4Ever]

Yes it is
Name one that was better
To this point

The old Big East.

The SEC is counterfeit.

 

[JonathanW]

Off the top of my head, the Big East had three teams in the Final Four in 1985 -- Georgetown, Villanova and St. John's. And Boston College lost on a steal and last second shot to the other FF team (later vacated) that year, Memphis, if I am remembering correctly. So, that was close to a one-conference Final Four. IF the SEC approaches that, you'll have an argument.

The year after (so 86) was the year the SEC put 5 of 10 teams in the NCAA-T, and in that tournament SEC teams only lost to each other or the eventual champion (UL).
No, the league that year was not one of the best ever, I just always find that interesting.

 

[JonathanW]

Actually going through the conferences pages which has data from 1997 to 2025 only three times has the average conference team exceeded a +20 net ranking;

1997 ACC (21,.37)
2004 ACC (20.32)
2025 SEC (20.03)

Tho those 97 and 04 ACC conferences only had 9 teams. 6 of the 9 making the tournament in both years. It's just easier to have good conferences from top to bottom when there's not many teams.

The fact the SEC is doing this with 16 teams is amazing.

Using averages (means) is a bad way to assess. Because a single bad outlier can skew the results. Looking at the median NET team (the team in the middle) is better. Or maybe even better than that is the 25th percentile.

I think what separates the SEC this year is how legit good the bottom 4 (25%) teams in the league are. Those 4, IMO, could go compete for 3rd or 4th place in the ACC or Big East, and for middle of the pack in the B10 and B12 this year.

 

[know1]

Oh look, another thread on this.

The major conferences keep getting larger and larger, so you can't even make this comparison. It's a lot different than when the SEC only had 10 teams.

Plus, people have been talking about how great it is for several years now and the post season has dispelled that.

Personally, I don't care. We're KY. We don't need to puff up our conference to make us feel better about not dominating it anymore.

 

[Aike]

To this point I believe the Big 12 had a higher median Kenpom ranking last year than the SEC does this year.

The overall level of play is better this year, according to my analysis. So while this is definitely an interesting point, I don’t think it’s exactly apples to apples.

 

[yabbadabbadoo]

Yep.

And remember who those ACC teams were too. Syracuse was pretty great for a while. Duke and UNC of course. NC State was really good in some of those years.

ACC is a shell of its former self.

Syracuse didn’t join the ACC until 2013, along with Pitt and Notre Dame.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Using averages (means) is a bad way to assess. Because a single bad outlier can skew the results. Looking at the median NET team (the team in the middle) is better. Or maybe even better than that is the 25th percentile.

I think what separates the SEC this year is how legit good the bottom 4 (25%) teams in the league are. Those 4, IMO, could go compete for 3rd or 4th place in the ACC or Big East, and for middle of the pack in the B10 and B12 this year.

While I agree that outliers skew averages I'm not so sure using medians would be the correct way to go about it either.

Using medians would just tell you what middle team is better in each conference. You'd be comparing the 5th best team in a 10 team conference to the 8th best team in a 16 team conference (or around there). I think that would be worse than averages.

Actually the calculation on Kenpom is neither. If I take the average for the SEC it comes out to 20.45.

This page states:
Ranking of conferences by NetRtg of team expected to go .500 in conference play.

So not taking averages. Not using the median either tho. That would be 18.85 Not sure how that's calculated but it seems like a logical way to do it.

So maybe I was incorrect in thinking that specific teams were weighing down some conferences.

Currently Miss St (20.30) is projected to finish 9-9 in conference. Miss (17.97) is projected to go 8-10 so the 20.03 number makes sense.

 

[uky8unc5]

It should be in the conversation. But proof is in the pudding. The conference must finish strong, and the SEC has notoriously had problems doing that.

The Big East from way back was great, but top heavy.

In 1985, the Big East had 8 teams in tournament.

3 made it to the Final Four (WHICH WAS HELD IN RUPP ARENA)

Villanova shocked the world, upsetting Georgetown.

 

[The_Answer1313]

To me there's an issue with looking just at tournament results.

You are only focused on the specific teams that make the tournament in that case. Some people in my St Johns group was trying to make the argument that since the Big East won back to back titles, they had the toughest conference. No, that just means you had one really dominant team the past two years lol.

The only way IMO to compare conference strength is to factor every single team in that conference.