Right argument. Wrong league.

SEC! SEC!

Is he eating humble pie or is it just coach speak?

True. But he was also talking about the conference in general. I haven't checked but I wouldn't be surprised if some ACC teams had weak non conference schedules too.

I imagine teams in the other conferences were getting tired of hearing over & over again that the Big 12 was the best, even if it's objectively true over the past few years.

For the record, there is no question that some of our conference mates had terrible ooc schedules. We have had some discussions of that very topic on these boards.

It is these coaches' job to advocate for their league. No reason to pay any attention to it at all.

Mitch Henessey said:

---

Jeff Capel, Pitt's coach, got in on the nonsense and his team played the 340th non-conference schedule. It's ridiculous. The ACC needs to worry about their own fences before they go trying to mend other people's.

---

Capel's comments were even more galling for that reason.

But in the end his joke non con scheduling caused Pitt to miss the dance. Beautiful.

Clemson's own non conference schedule was nothing to shout about: Bama, South Carolina, TCU, & Memphis are the most consequential. It's not terrible & their record was pretty good. It's better than many of the Big 12 teams' schedules but not on the level of Baylor or Kansas. It's not exactly a schedule to brag about.

historian said:

---

Clemsons own non conference schedule was nothing to shout about: Bama, South Carolina, TCU, & Memphis are the most consequential. It's not terrible & their record was pretty good. It's better than many of the Big 12 teams' schedules but not on the level of Baylor or Kansas. It's not exactly a schedule to brag about.

---

I don't fully agree with their coach but that list is way better than anyone's but Bu and Ku.. by a significant margin. Probably part of the frustration.

I agree with bear2. Bu and Ku are not thought of when he and the rest of the country make comments like this.

Part of the perception is both of those teams weren't great in conference so folks automatically perceive it as weaker. They look at the junk OOC every other team put together and draw conclusions.

Agreed.

In reality, it seems like such criticism of the Big 12 is lazy. They don't completely understand the dynamics of the conference and are frustrated of national perceptions promoted by media, who themselves are often lazy because they don't always explain things well in detail or with great accuracy.

I should add: my point about Clemson's schedule is that it wasn't a whole lot better than the Big 12 teams he was complaining about. Maybe it's rather common across the country for teams to load up on lighter opponents. Only the more elite schools, regardless of conference, do otherwise. Given the rigors of conference play, especially in the Big 12, and the tournament , it would seem that those teams with soft schedules are not doing themselves any favor. Their regular season records aren't as good because they lose too many conference games (& sometimes to the ooc patsies).

Also, those schools tend to be the ones who lose early in the tournament. K State lost their first NIT game. BYU, Tech & TCU lost in the first round. None had much of an ooc schedule. The same is true of the teams with no post season.

#Clemson HC Brad Brownell said his comments about the #Big12MBB earlier this season were not meant to be disrespectful. Brownell said he just thought some Big 12 teams scheduled soft non-con schedules to boost NET.

"I wasn't saying anything that wasn't already put out there." https://t.co/I6GeAw7KUu

— Michael Haag (@MichaelHaag_) March 23, 2024

historian said:

---

Clemson's own non conference schedule was nothing to shout about: Bama, South Carolina, TCU, & Memphis are the most consequential. It's not terrible & their record was pretty good. It's better than many of the Big 12 teams' schedules but not on the level of Baylor or Kansas. It's not exactly a schedule to brag about.

---

That's a good non conference schedule.

Yes it was a good schedule & better than some Big 12. Others were similar. If the teams I listed, only Bama was ranked. Then again, IIRC Baylor didn't have any ranked wins until conference play.

Emoji was accidental

Asked a Baylor trio if they have added motivation to put on for the Big 12 following Brad Brownell's comments about teams manipulating their schedules.

"We're not trying to focus on that. We have the number one strength of schedule so he couldn't have been talking about us." pic.twitter.com/56ol14gIt3

— Eric Kelly (@EricKellyTV) March 23, 2024

It sure looks like Clemson's coach may be on to something here. A lower ranked ACC team takes out a higher ranked Big 12 team that was a 4.5 point favorite.

Big12Fan2024 said:

---

It sure looks like Clemson's coach may be on to something here. A lower ranked ACC team takes out a higher ranked Big 12 team that was a 4.5 point favorite.

---

Rankings mean nothing when you hit the tournament. The Bears were doomed from the start to ultimately face better, more solid and experienced bigs and the demise of their poor free throw shooting. It was just a matter of time.

Baylor was NEVER a Final 4 caliber team this year.

That was his point. Not necessarily Baylor's metrics but other Big 12 team metrics were artificially high through gaming the efficiency numbers in mop up wins in the non-conference.

The ACC goes 8-0 in the Round of 64 and 32.

That is tied for the best record by any conference in the history of the NCAA Tournament, most recently by the Big East in 2003.

🤷‍♂️

— Bryan Ives (@awaytoworthy) March 25, 2024

historian said:

---

Agreed.

In reality, it seems like such criticism of the Big 12 is lazy. They don't completely understand the dynamics of the conference and are frustrated of national perceptions promoted by media, who themselves are often lazy because they don't always explain things well in detail or with great accuracy.

---

I am one who thinks the Big 12 is overrated and has been for some time now. Perhaps it is the metrics that are being used are failing to fully gauge how good a team really is. But it was pretty obvious that when Baylor lost this year and their ranking only went down 2 spots--that much more credibility was being given to the Big 12 than it deserved.

It's almost as if there is some sort of "Coattail Effect" happening too often, to borrow from political terminology.

Big12Fan2024 said:

---

It sure looks like Clemson's coach may be on to something here. A lower ranked ACC team takes out a higher ranked Big 12 team that was a 4.5 point favorite.

---

After NC State knocked off Tech in the first round.

The Big 12's record head-to-head against the ACC this year is atrocious.

bear2be2 said:

---

Big12Fan2024 said:

---

It sure looks like Clemson's coach may be on to something here. A lower ranked ACC team takes out a higher ranked Big 12 team that was a 4.5 point favorite.

---

After NC State knocked off Tech in the first round.

The Big 12's record head-to-head against the ACC this year is atrocious embarrassing.

---

FIFY

So much early- and mid-season hype about Big XII being the elite hoops league with a large gap between it and the next contender...

Possibilities:

It was hype and the conference was "average".

It was true but the conference teams beat each other to a pulp during the season and entered the tournament 'spent'.

It was true but the inter-conference style of play and style of refs translated into poor performance when it mattered most against outside competition.

It was true and the entire conference needs a bus load of sports psychologists.

I'm leaning toward the first possibility, but combined with the second... I don't think B12 is the "best" conference, but it's one of the most difficult in which to play and survive strongly.

I think it was partly true but the gap wasn't very wide. The conference did beat up on each other over the past two months.