There was some discussion last week as we celebrated KU's 11th consecutive title as to how good the Big 12 has been over that period of time. The point was made that fans of a school use Final Fours as a measuring stick (Kansas 14, Missouruh 0) but that fans of a conference don't necessarily equate Final Fours to conference strength - i.e., because KU is the only team out of the Big 12 to make a Final Four since 2004 (Oklahoma State), that's "proof" that the conference isn't really that strong.
I'm not here to debate that at all. I'm kinda wondering why I brought it up in the first place right now, actually. Oh yeah, I remember. During the course of that conversation, the question was asked, "How has the Big 12 done relative to seed?" It seemed like an interesting question, so I went back and looked.
I meant to go back 11 years since that was the time period in question, but accidentally went back 12 years. Deal with it.
- I included West Virginia's records for the past 12 years even if they had not yet joined the conference
- TCU has not made the tournament since 1998
- I added Nebraska, Colorado, Missouruh, and Texas A&M just for fun (You're welcome)
- Nebraska's only appearance was in 2014 after they had already left for the Big 10. Meh.
For each year in the tournament, teams were given one of three grades:
A - team played "Above" their seed
T - team played "To" their seed
B - team played "Below" their seed
The grade received is based on how far a team would be expected to make it if the tournament were to go strictly according to seed.
- Any 1 seed making the Final Four played "To" their seed
- Any seed other than a 1 seed making the Final Four played "Above" their seed
- Any 9, 10, 11, 12, or lower seed losing in the first round played "To" their seed
- (3) Iowa State lost to (7) UConn in the 2014 Sweet Sixteen. ISU played "To" their seed because as a 3 they would have been expected to lose to a 2 in that spot.
I looked at a lot of teams and a lot of tournament brackets while doing this, so it's entirely possible I may have confused myself and miscalculated at some point. I'm sure y'all will let me know and I'll get it updated to the correct numbers if so.
On to the results!
|Baylor||08, 10, 12, 14||3||1||4|
|Iowa State||05, 12, 13, 14||2||2||4|
|Kansas State||08, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14||1||4||1||6|
|Oklahoma||03, 05, 06, 08, 09, 13, 14||3||4||7|
|Oklahoma State||03, 04, 05, 09, 10, 13, 14||1||3||3||7|
|Texas||All but 2013||7||4||11|
|Texas Tech||04, 05, 07||1||2||3|
|West Virginia||05, 06, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12||4||2||1||7|
|Colorado||03, 12, 13, 14||1||2||1||4|
|Missouruh||03, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13||2||2||2||6|
|Texas A&M||06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11||3||2||1||6|
So, what does this tell us? I have no idea. Probably nothing. Most of what it tells me I already knew - Nebraska sucks, KU is awesome, etc.
Just kidding. Not really. Anyway, I'll let y'all draw your own conclusions.
Also, those four NCAA Tournament appearances ain't impressing me, Iowa State. Maybe you and K-State cool it with the eff KU stuff and Farmageddon Solidarity crap and actually do something in March (like, I dunno, make the NCAA Tournament) before you get all up in our faces.
Huh? Oh, sorry, I digressed there. My bad. Um, yeah, anyway, draw your own conclusions.