I respect pesik’s thoughts on this, but it’s B12 for me. More money and prestige, better recruiting potential and better preparation top to bottom come NCAA Tourney time. Our ceiling is higher in the B12. And, more alumni from B12 schools in Houston that will want to see their team than AAC schools.
Making the tournament, Big 12.
Seeding and having more juice for March, AAC.
We should all be able to agree on this, no?
Basically Gonzaga, how many times they’ve been a 1 seed. Have made the Final Four twice.
Like Kansas St is a 2 seed right now. But if they drop a few more tough road games, you start moving down to a 3 or maybe 4 seed.
While Gonzaga goes 17-1 or 18-0 during conference play. And they stay on the 1 seed line
Kansas has dropped 3 straight and is still projected as a one seed so I’m not sure I agree about your KState comment. Also iron sharpens iron. I think playing against tournament competition better prepares you for the tournament. Don’t get much of that in the AAC.
1 Like
The additional money coming in by being a B12 member allows UH to maintain and periodically upgrade its athletic facilities. Much sooner than AAC money. That alone is bigger than any seeding advantage.
After Kansas 3rd loss, I’ve seen projections they’re a 2 seed now.
And their remaining schedule is really tough. If you have depth, sure no problem.
But Kansas, is basically riding Jalen Wilson. Expecting him to do everything. How much gas 
in his tank by March
1 Like
@JLCoog no, i understand the money and platform.
We’re just talking what conference gives you an easier chance at a Natty
In my opinion, i agree with Pesik. The AAC is an easier path, where our players arent as banged up and worn down compared to other conferences
Kansas looks like they’re on fumes. And they’re next 4 games are At Kentucky, Kansas St, At Iowa St, Texas
i guarantee texas tech and wvu do… i guarantee wvu anf tech would think they would win out … you are too focused on q1 … the q lines is only 25% of net… efficiency and margin of victory play a bigger role… we were top 3 in net with like 4 q1 games total for the season a just last year
I’m also on team B12. The Quad 1 holds so much value to the committee that on sheer numbers alone, it’s better than the AAC imo.
1 Like
to be fair… in my original post i noted money was a big factor, and also ntoed the bg12 wasnt something we could turn down
i just noted as a fan i dont see any of that money,… as a fan i prefer the aac… a fan inst getting a pay raise in the big 12
I’m just looking forward to the matchups.
it doesnt hold much value …
the q system only weighs about 25% of the equation… and the q system is a punishment system it punishes for q4 losses, it doesnt reward for q1 wins in any major way… this is why we are always aton the net wit drastically less q1 games or win than the lext 50 teams below us
@pesik oh well thats not my argument…lol.
Im also tired of the AAC schedule. Give me Big 12.
Thought the question was what conference gives you a better chance in March.
Fresher legs with the AAC. Was my point
The aggregate still has them as a 1 but my comment didn’t mean I was saying they’ll end up as a 1. Just that I don’t see KState much if they lose a couple games because of how Kansas has held up despite losing 3 straight.
Agree with your assessment of Kansas. Theyd defend well still but without Jalen they would not be very good. Him and the sharp shooter are the entirety of their offense.
NET doesn’t really determine whether a team earns a bid. Q1 record definitely is the more important factor.
1 Like
i dont care about the aac schedule i was sweet 16s on down year… i want us to be able ot develop unprepared players and still win by 50
everyone always claims the want harder, becuase everyone always has this natural believe that they will keep winning but now on harder schedules … theres an iconic joke from the aac board when wichita first joined there fans said that there backups were good enough to win the aac (as an example of fan sentiments)
bob huggins is every bit as elite as samspon …i dont think huggins would ever miss a tournament in the AAC, wvu has only made 1 tournamnet in the last 5 years… note all 5 years wvu had good enough net to make the tournament entering conference play
So, basically, you think we will turn into what Wichita turned into in the AAC?
That doesn’t explain how a Providence team who had a NET in the 30s was seeded above us, Dayton being the very first team out with 3 Q4 losses or Rutgers even sniffing the NIT with a NET in the 70s and 3 Q3/4 losses
Put last year’s Rutgers in the AAC, they would have been autobid or bust by Christmas.
Unless the B12 regresses massively or the committee changes how they seed teams then unlikely IMO.
Well, Wichita regressed when they joined the AAC, mainly because the other teams were just as good and better. I feel like Pesik’s concern is that we would be joining the same situation.
I disagree.
In the AAC you have a 1 in 11 chance to make the tourney, sometimes 2 in 11 if a different team wins the useless conference season ending tournament.
Where as in the big 12, there will probably be 5 or 6 teams make the tournament.
1 Like