Pages

Top College Basketball Programs Over the Last 10 Years: The 4 Seeds

4/23/2008 0 comments
Just to get the methodology straight...the rankings are based on the average Colton Index ranking (body-of-work performance of wins and losses over an entire season, including postseason play) over the past 10 years. NCAA Tournament performance is weighted double (each game counts as two). Each season counts the same. To the extent that you don't agree with the rankings, it probably means that you weight these things differently. More than likely you weight recent performance and tournament performance more heavily, or internally rank teams on how you expect them to perform over the next 5-10 years. For each team, I show tournament performance by year as well as rankings for the first five years and last years so you can see how teams are trending and how the rankings might look differently if you adjusted the weights to suit your needs.

Recap: The 9 Seeds
36. Iowa
35. Marquette
34. Oregon
33. Alabama

Recap: The 8 Seeds
32. North Carolina St
31. Mississippi St
30. Georgetown
29. Xavier

Recap: The 7 Seeds
28. Notre Dame
27. Villanova
26. Cincinnati
25. Louisville

Recap: The 6 Seeds
24. Wake Forest
23. Indiana
22. Tennessee
21. Memphis

Recap: The 5 Seeds
20. Oklahoma St
19. Pittsburgh
18. UCLA
17. Oklahoma

THE 4 SEEDS
16. Syracuse - ON THE DECLINE
Last 10 Years: 242-97; JCI Rk: 16 (Prev Rk:12); SOS: 52
2007-08: 21-14; JCI Rk: 51; SOS: 55; Tourney: None
Last 5 Years: 118-52; JCI Rk: 22; SOS: 48
First 5 Years: 124-45; JCI Rk: 12; SOS: 45
NCAA Apperances: 7 (11 wins)
National Championships: 1
Final Fours: 1
Elite 8's: 1
Sweet 16's: 3

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0821-145155None
2006-0724-115996None
2005-0623-122511L1
2004-0527-71862L1
2003-0423-81517S16
2002-0330-512NC
2001-0223-135588None
2000-0125-92158L2
1999-0026-6740S16
1998-9920-124145L1

15. Ohio State
Last 10 Years: 229-101; JCI Rk: 15 (Prev Rk:21); SOS: 24
2007-08: 24-13; JCI Rk: 35; SOS: 39; Tourney: None
Last 5 Years: 119-51; JCI Rk: 17; SOS: 41
First 5 Years: 110-50; JCI Rk: 15; SOS: 17
NCAA Apperances: 6 (12 wins)
Final Fours: 2
Elite 8's: 2
Sweet 16's: 2

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0824-133539None
2006-0735-419F4
2005-0626-61356L2
2004-0520-123840None
2003-0414-1610268None
2002-0317-155422None
2001-0224-82355L2
2000-0120-113428L1
1999-0023-71221L2
1998-9926-953F4

14. Gonzaga
Last 10 Years: 261-67; JCI Rk: 14 (Prev Rk:14); SOS: 83
2007-08: 25-8; JCI Rk: 29; SOS: 89; Tourney: L1
Last 5 Years: 131-31; JCI Rk: 13; SOS: 84
First 5 Years: 130-36; JCI Rk: 18; SOS: 83
NCAA Apperances: 10 (12 wins)
Elite 8's: 1
Sweet 16's: 4

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0825-82989L1
2006-0723-116175L1
2005-0629-4887S16
2004-0526-51480L2
2003-0428-312105L2
2002-0324-93886L2
2001-0228-414111L1
2000-0125-73299S16
1999-0026-93072S16
1998-9927-71370E8

13. Maryland - ON THE DECLINE
Last 10 Years: 231-103; JCI Rk: 13 (Prev Rk:10); SOS: 10
2007-08: 19-15; JCI Rk: 73; SOS: 65; Tourney: None
Last 5 Years: 101-62; JCI Rk: 30; SOS: 14
First 5 Years: 130-41; JCI Rk: 4; SOS: 10
NCAA Apperances: 7 (17 wins)
National Championships: 1
Final Fours: 2
Elite 8's: 2
Sweet 16's: 4

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0819-157365None
2006-0725-91934L2
2005-0618-135232None
2004-0519-134229None
2003-0420-12162L2
2002-0321-102329S16
2001-0232-415NC
2000-0125-1177F4
1999-0025-102525L2
1998-9927-6621S16

Top College Basketball Programs Over the Last 10 Years: The 5 Seeds

4/21/2008 0 comments
Just to get the methodology straight...the rankings are based on the average Colton Index ranking (body-of-work performance of wins and losses over an entire season, including postseason play) over the past 10 years. NCAA Tournament performance is weighted double (each game counts as two). Each season counts the same. To the extent that you don't agree with the rankings, it probably means that you weight these things differently. More than likely you weight recent performance and tournament performance more heavily, or internally rank teams on how you expect them to perform over the next 5-10 years. For each team, I show tournament performance by year as well as rankings for the first five years and last years so you can see how teams are trending and how the rankings might look differently if you adjusted the weights to suit your needs.

Recap: The 9 Seeds
36. Iowa
35. Marquette
34. Oregon
33. Alabama

Recap: The 8 Seeds
32. North Carolina St
31. Mississippi St
30. Georgetown
29. Xavier

Recap: The 7 Seeds
28. Notre Dame
27. Villanova
26. Cincinnati
25. Louisville

Recap: The 6 Seeds
24. Wake Forest
23. Indiana
22. Tennessee
21. Memphis

THE FIVE SEEDS
20. Oklahoma St
Last 10 Years: 220-103; JCI Rk: 20 (Prev Rk:16); SOS: 42
2007-08: 16-16; JCI Rk: 60; SOS: 9; Tourney: None
Last 5 Years: 109-56; JCI Rk: 21; SOS: 28
First 5 Years: 111-47; JCI Rk: 19; SOS: 56
NCAA Apperances: 7 (11 wins)
Final Fours: 1
Elite 8's: 2
Sweet 16's: 3

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0816-16609None
2006-0721-136362None
2005-0617-168463None
2004-0525-71119S16
2003-0430-4318F4
2002-0321-102013L2
2001-0223-93046L1
2000-0119-105780L1
1999-0026-7933E8
1998-9922-114375L2

19. Pittsburgh - ON THE RISE
Last 10 Years: 231-96; JCI Rk: 19 (Prev Rk:23); SOS: 37
2007-08: 26-10; JCI Rk: 17; SOS: 18; Tourney: L2
Last 5 Years: 130-40; JCI Rk: 7; SOS: 20
First 5 Years: 101-56; JCI Rk: 36; SOS: 53
NCAA Apperances: 7 (10 wins)
Sweet 16's: 4

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0826-101718L2
2006-0729-81032S16
2005-0625-81629L2
2004-0520-93148L1
2003-0430-5521S16
2002-0328-5430S16
2001-0228-6960S16
2000-0118-146453None
1999-0013-1511276None
1998-9914-168928None

18. UCLA - ON THE RISE
Last 10 Years: 221-106; JCI Rk: 18 (Prev Rk:18); SOS: 14
2007-08: 34-4; JCI Rk: 4; SOS: 4; Tourney: F4
Last 5 Years: 124-45; JCI Rk: 11; SOS: 18
First 5 Years: 97-61; JCI Rk: 23; SOS: 14
NCAA Apperances: 8 (19 wins)
Final Fours: 3
Elite 8's: 3
Sweet 16's: 6

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0834-444F4
2006-0729-633F4
2005-0632-7627F4
2004-0518-113627L1
2003-0411-1713593None
2002-0310-1913524None
2001-0221-12223S16
2000-0123-9910S16
1999-0021-123113S16
1998-9922-92339L1

17. Oklahoma
Last 10 Years: 235-92; JCI Rk: 17 (Prev Rk:17); SOS: 46
2007-08: 23-12; JCI Rk: 24; SOS: 11; Tourney: L2
Last 5 Years: 102-54; JCI Rk: 36; SOS: 44
First 5 Years: 133-38; JCI Rk: 9; SOS: 44
NCAA Apperances: 8 (12 wins)
Final Fours: 1
Elite 8's: 2
Sweet 16's: 3

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0823-122411L2
2006-0715-158647None
2005-0620-95077L1
2004-0525-82042L2
2003-0419-103945None
2002-0327-7810E8
2001-0231-539F4
2000-0127-81974L1
1999-0027-72163L2
1998-9921-113663S16

Fantasy Hoops: 2007-08 Season Recap

4/18/2008 0 comments
I've gotta admit...I am glad the 2007-08 NBA season is finally done. Had the fantasy season dragged on for another six weeks, I would've probably gone certifiably insane. The amount of injuries and random DNP's from high-caliber players is simply too much for one guy to take. In some ways, the 2008 season was just as bad as 2007 in terms on injuries, which is really saying something. Just don't get me started about Shawn Marion.

In general, it was a pretty disappointing season for my 52 fantasy teams, even though I did manage to win 20 of them and make a nice profit of about $12K (which equates to roughly 45 cents per hour, if you were wondering). But it's all for fun and science anyways. I guess I shouldn't complain. But about six weeks ago I was staring at somewhere between 30-32 wins. But it's safe to say if you had teams built around Yao Ming, Dwyane Wade, Shawn Marion (don't get me started), Chris Kaman, Gerald Wallace, Caron Butler, Manu Ginobili, Mike Miller, Kevin Martin and Maurice Williams, you probably didn't fare too well down the stretch. Thankfully, I had enough of a cushion in some leagues to hold on..many cases just barely (as in 1 or 2 field-goal makes barely). Thank goodness for Chris Paul, Marcus Camby and Lamar Odom, the only guys I had big exposure to that actually played well down the stretch.

THE PROJECTIONS COMPETITION - FINAL RESULTS

If only my fantasy teams had been as successful as my preseason stat projections (maybe I should've listened to my own numbers and drafted Mike Dunleavy, but I just couldn't pull the trigger on him). The stat projection competition really wasn't much of a competition at all, I had the best projections so far. In fact, I finished ahead of the combined consensus projections, so you could say that I outperformed all of the other projections combined. If you received the projections before the season, I hope it helped lead you to the title.

As I've done in the past, I look at the results two ways. The first measures the improvement in the projections across category (measured by sum of squared-error) using the 2006-07 numbers as a baseline (the crudest projection set you could come up with). The second ranking looks at each player and gives 14 points for the closest projection down to 1 point for the worst. Click here if you want a detailed run-down of each of the contenders.

IMPROVEMENT VERSUS BASELINE
1 COLTON INDEX (free) 26.63%
2 CONSENSUS PROJECTIONS 22.51%
3 ROTOFREAK (free) 15.86%
4 NBA.COM (free) 13.54%
5 HOOPSKLYCE ($16) 13.14%
6 FANTASY SPORTS CENTRAL (free) 12.05%
7 FANTASY HOOPS REALM ($14.95) 11.89%
8 ESPN/TALENTED MR ROTO (free) 11.80%
9 BASKETBALL MONSTER ($14.99) 9.75%
10 ROTOWORLD ($14.99) 9.04%
11 ROTOWIRE/YAHOO ($14.99) 6.50%
12 CBS SPORTS (free) 4.26%
13 2006-07 BASELINE 0.00%
14 FANTASY LOUNGE ($7.99) -4.45%

Fantasy Lounge gets the boobie prize for coming out worse than the previous season baseline. Previously, this spot was reserved for CBS but they managed to get above the Mendoza line. Just think about how hard this is to do. A monkey would use the previous season as a starting point and adjust from there. The adjustments that a so-called fantasy expert would make to this baseline in a set of projections should add value, not destroy value.

POINTS-BASED
1 COLTON INDEX 2107
2 CONSENSUS PROJECTIONS 2097
3 ROTOFREAK 1786
4 ESPN/TMR 1786
5 BASKETBALL MONSTER 1717
6 FANTASY SPORTS CENTRAL 1674
7 HOOPSKLYCE 1670
8 NBA.COM 1602
9 ROTOWORLD 1582
10 2006-07 BASELINE 1558
11 ROTOWIRE 1549
12 FANTASY HOOPS REALM 1539
11 CBS SPORTS 1528
14 FANTASY LOUNGE 1510

I'm a little surprised to have finished ahead of the consensus picks considering the consensus is going to be consistently solid across the board. In other words, at worst the Consensus is going to finish in the middle of the pack for any one pick and will more likely be near the top, while my projections could be last (or near last, at least ahead of the Lounge) for any given player. I'm also surprised to see four projections below the 2006-07 baseline.

To dig a little deeper, let's look how each performed in measuring the rookies, which in my opinion is the toughest thing to do. This is where the proverbial bread is buttered. Fantasy Sports Central took the cop-out route and opted not to make projections on rookies at all (what's the point in that?). So here's the top 12...obviously you can't measure versus the 2006-07 baseline so I'll show the results Nascar style and display the results in terms of how they were behind the leader. The results are based on 12 rookies that were common to each projection set (with the exception, again, of Fantasy Sports Central...I just can't get over the fact that they'd choose to leave the rookies out).

ROOKIES - SUM OF SQUARE ERRORS
1 COLTON INDEX
2 CONSENSUS PROJECTIONS 5.04% worse
3 BASKETBALL MONSTER 12.42%
4 ROTOFREAK 19.01%
5 ESPN/TALENTED MR ROTO 28.55%
6 FANTASY LOUNGE 36.11%

7 ROTOWIRE/YAHOO 40.06%
8 FANTASY HOOPS REALM 46.15%
9 HOOPSKLYCE 46.88%
10 ROTOWORLD 54.03%
11 CBS SPORTS 106.17%
8 NBA.COM 178.94%

The points-based method pretty much shows the same thing so I won't bore you with the details.

One area I spent a lot of time on this year was trying to project games played. The results prove what I already knew...games played is nearly impossible to predict. I was able to be a little more precise than the competition, but was still off by about 10 games on average per player. Here's the sum of squared error results for the 10 projections that bothered trying to project games relative to the 2006-07 baseline:

GAMES PLAYED
1 COLTON INDEX 21.67% improvement vs 2006-07
2 CONSENSUS PROJECTIONS 15.14%
3 FANTASY SPORTS CENTRAL 14.90%
4 ROTOWIRE/YAHOO 14.45%
5 NBA.COM 13.88%
6 CBS SPORTSLINE 13.23%
7 FANTASY HOOPS REALM 12.90%
8 BASKETBALL MONSTER 12.58%
9 HOOPSKLYCE 12.42%
10 ROTOWORLD 8.62%
11 2006-07 BASELINE 0.00%

Hopefully, you find this information interesting and useful in deciding which projection to buy or not to buy next season.

If I get up enough courage, I may take a closer look at some of my draft picks and trades, which promises to be a rather depressing exercise. I can only cringe at the thought of finding out how many times I picked Dwyane Wade over Chris Paul or Elton Brand over Hedo Turkoglu.

Top College Basketball Programs Over the Last 10 Years: The 6 Seeds

0 comments
Just to get the methodology straight...the rankings are based on the average Colton Index ranking (body-of-work performance of wins and losses over an entire season, including postseason play) over the past 10 years. NCAA Tournament performance is weighted double (each game counts as two). Each season counts the same. To the extent that you don't agree with the rankings, it probably means that you weight these things differently. More than likely you weight recent performance and tournament performance more heavily, or internally rank teams on how you expect them to perform over the next 5-10 years. For each team, I show tournament performance by year as well as rankings for the first five years and last years so you can see how teams are trending and how the rankings might look differently if you adjusted the weights to suit your needs.

Recap: The 9 Seeds
36. Iowa
35. Marquette
34. Oregon
33. Alabama

Recap: The 8 Seeds
32. North Carolina St
31. Mississippi St
30. Georgetown
29. Xavier

Recap: The 7 Seeds
28. Notre Dame
27. Villanova
26. Cincinnati
25. Louisville

THE 6 SEEDS
24. Wake Forest
Last 10 Years: 201-120; JCI Rk: 24 (Prev Rk:20); SOS: 12
2007-08: 17-13; JCI Rk: 66; SOS: 69; Tourney: None
Last 5 Years: 97-62; JCI Rk: 26; SOS: 7
First 5 Years: 104-58; JCI Rk: 20; SOS: 21
NCAA Apperances: 5 (5 wins)
Sweet 16's: 1

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0817-136669None
2006-0715-167523None
2005-0617-176830None
2004-0527-667L2
2003-0421-10105S16
2002-0325-61146L2
2001-0221-133112L2
2000-0119-112311L1
1999-0022-143426None
1998-9917-144730None

23. Indiana
Last 10 Years: 203-118; JCI Rk: 23 (Prev Rk:22); SOS: 6
2007-08: 25-8; JCI Rk: 27; SOS: 68; Tourney: L1
Last 5 Years: 94-60; JCI Rk: 38; SOS: 22
First 5 Years: 109-58; JCI Rk: 14; SOS: 3
NCAA Apperances: 8 (9 wins)
Final Fours: 1
Elite 8's: 1
Sweet 16's: 1

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0825-82768L1
2006-0721-112622L2
2005-0619-123312L2
2004-0515-146123None
2003-0414-157536None
2002-0321-132712L2
2001-0224-1281F4
2000-0121-132912L1
1999-0020-9227L1
1998-9923-111612L2

22. Tennessee - ON THE RISE
Last 10 Years: 204-110; JCI Rk: 22 (Prev Rk:24); SOS: 16
2007-08: 30-5; JCI Rk: 6; SOS: 15; Tourney: S16
Last 5 Years: 105-54; JCI Rk: 18; SOS: 6
First 5 Years: 99-56; JCI Rk: 24; SOS: 33
NCAA Apperances: 6 (8 wins)
Sweet 16's: 3

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0830-5615S16
2006-0724-11144S16
2005-0622-81413L2
2004-0514-179632None
2003-0415-135519None
2002-0317-124743None
2001-0214-166713None
2000-0122-123022L1
1999-0025-71646S16
1998-9921-92444L2

21. Memphis - ON THE RISE
Last 10 Years: 244-96; JCI Rk: 21 (Prev Rk:28); SOS: 77
2007-08: 38-2; JCI Rk: 2; SOS: 48; Tourney: F4
Last 5 Years: 148-34; JCI Rk: 4; SOS: 74
First 5 Years: 96-62; JCI Rk: 62; SOS: 80
NCAA Apperances: 5 (12 wins)
Final Fours: 1
Elite 8's: 3
Sweet 16's: 3

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0838-2248F4
2006-0733-4485E8
2005-0633-4568E8
2004-0522-167983None
2003-0422-82542L2
2002-0323-72882L1
2001-0226-940114None
2000-0120-156870None
1999-0014-1610997None
1998-9913-1511676None

Top College Basketball Programs Over the Last 10 Years: The 7 Seeds

4/17/2008 0 comments
Just to get the methodology straight...the rankings are based on the average Colton Index ranking (body-of-work performance of wins and losses over an entire season, including postseason play) over the past 10 years. NCAA Tournament performance is weighted double (each game counts as two). Each season counts the same. To the extent that you don't agree with the rankings, it probably means that you weight these things differently. More than likely you weight recent performance and tournament performance more heavily, or internally rank teams on how you expect them to perform over the next 5-10 years. For each team, I show tournament performance by year as well as rankings for the first five years and last years so you can see how teams are trending and how the rankings might look differently if you adjusted the weights to suit your needs.

Recap: The 9 Seeds
36. Iowa
35. Marquette
34. Oregon
33. Alabama

Recap: The 8 Seeds
32. North Carolina St
31. Mississippi St
30. Georgetown
29. Xavier

THE 7 SEEDS
28. Notre Dame
Last 10 Years: 202-116; JCI Rk: 28 (Prev Rk:32); SOS: 35
2007-08: 25-8; JCI Rk: 20; SOS: 53; Tourney: L2
Last 5 Years: 99-54; JCI Rk: 35; SOS: 40
First 5 Years: 103-62; JCI Rk: 31; SOS: 34
NCAA Apperances: 5 (5 wins)
Sweet 16's: 1

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0825-82053L2
2006-0724-82873L1
2005-0616-145722None
2004-0517-125354None
2003-0417-124016None
2002-0324-1093S16
2001-0221-113731L2
2000-0122-113750L2
1999-0022-154032None
1998-9914-1510259None

27. Villanova
Last 10 Years: 204-119; JCI Rk: 27 (Prev Rk:25); SOS: 26
2007-08: 22-13; JCI Rk: 34; SOS: 25; Tourney: S16
Last 5 Years: 110-52; JCI Rk: 16; SOS: 8
First 5 Years: 94-67; JCI Rk: 48; SOS: 50
NCAA Apperances: 5 (7 wins)
Elite 8's: 1
Sweet 16's: 3

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0822-133425S16
2006-0721-113831L1
2005-0628-543E8
2004-0524-81324S16
2003-0415-156115None
2002-0315-167440None
2001-0219-135150None
2000-0120-144327None
1999-0020-135068None
1998-9920-114056L1

26. Cincinnati - ON THE DECLINE
Last 10 Years: 222-102; JCI Rk: 26 (Prev Rk:19); SOS: 66
2007-08: 13-19; JCI Rk: 104; SOS: 14; Tourney: None
Last 5 Years: 94-66; JCI Rk: 51; SOS: 46
First 5 Years: 128-36; JCI Rk: 13; SOS: 67
NCAA Apperances: 7 (7 wins)
Sweet 16's: 1

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0813-1910414None
2006-0711-1915663None
2005-0620-133617None
2004-0525-82565L2
2003-0425-72459L2
2002-0317-126161L1
2001-0231-4674L2
2000-0125-102865S16
1999-0029-4555L2
1998-9926-61468L2

25. Louisville - ON THE RISE
Last 10 Years: 215-109; JCI Rk: 25 (Prev Rk:29); SOS: 53
2007-08: 27-9; JCI Rk: 12; SOS: 5; Tourney: E8
Last 5 Years: 122-47; JCI Rk: 15; SOS: 35
First 5 Years: 93-62; JCI Rk: 50; SOS: 63
NCAA Apperances: 7 (9 wins)
Final Fours: 1
Elite 8's: 2
Sweet 16's: 2

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0827-9125E8
2006-0723-103553L2
2005-0621-134844None
2004-0531-5328F4
2003-0420-103844L1
2002-0325-71855L2
2001-0219-136968None
2000-0112-1911562None
1999-0018-124952L1
1998-9919-113441L1

Top College Basketball Programs Over the Last 10 Years: The 8 Seeds

4/16/2008 0 comments
Just to get the methodology straight...the rankings are based on the average Colton Index ranking (body-of-work performance of wins and losses over an entire season, including postseason play) over the past 10 years. NCAA Tournament performance is weighted double (each game counts as two). Each season counts the same. To the extent that you don't agree with the rankings, it probably means that you weight these things differently. More than likely you weight recent performance and tournament performance more heavily, or internally rank teams on how you expect them to perform over the next 5-10 years. For each team, I show tournament performance by year as well as rankings for the first five years and last years so you can see how teams are trending and how the rankings might look differently if you adjusted the weights to suit your needs.

Recap: The 9 Seeds
36. Iowa
35. Marquette
34. Oregon
33. Alabama

THE 8 SEEDS
32. North Carolina St
Last 10 Years: 192-134; JCI Rk: 32 (Prev Rk:26); SOS: 13
2007-08: 15-16; JCI Rk: 81; SOS: 31; Tourney: None
Last 5 Years: 99-66; JCI Rk: 28; SOS: 4
First 5 Years: 93-68; JCI Rk: 47; SOS: 28
NCAA Apperances: 5
Sweet 16's: 1

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0815-168131None
2006-0720-166430None
2005-0622-102734L2
2004-0521-14284S16
2003-0421-10136L2
2002-0318-134934L1
2001-0223-112519L2
2000-0113-168315None
1999-0020-145353None
1998-9919-145038None

31. Mississippi St
Last 10 Years: 207-115; JCI Rk: 31 (Prev Rk:34); SOS: 58
2007-08: 23-11; JCI Rk: 42; SOS: 64; Tourney: L2
Last 5 Years: 108-55; JCI Rk: 29; SOS: 51
First 5 Years: 99-60; JCI Rk: 45; SOS: 52
NCAA Apperances: 5
Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0823-114264L2
2006-0721-144627None
2005-0615-157846None
2004-0523-113253L2
2003-0426-4848L2
2002-0321-102627L1
2001-0227-81642L2
2000-0118-134943None
1999-0014-1612067None
1998-9919-135860None

30. Georgetown - ON THE RISE
Last 10 Years: 207-116; JCI Rk: 30 (Prev Rk:36); SOS: 39
2007-08: 28-6; JCI Rk: 10; SOS: 40; Tourney: L2
Last 5 Years: 113-51; JCI Rk: 19; SOS: 23
First 5 Years: 94-65; JCI Rk: 49; SOS: 51
NCAA Apperances: 4
Final Fours: 1
Elite 8's: 1
Sweet 16's: 3

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0828-61040L2
2006-0730-7614F4
2005-0623-10156S16
2004-0519-134949None
2003-0413-1510955None
2002-0319-155325None
2001-0218-114958None
2000-0125-82075S16
1999-0018-156347None
1998-9914-168832None

29. Xavier
Last 10 Years: 238-93; JCI Rk: 29 (Prev Rk:30); SOS: 79
2007-08: 30-7; JCI Rk: 13; SOS: 37; Tourney: E8
Last 5 Years: 119-50; JCI Rk: 37; SOS: 77
First 5 Years: 119-43; JCI Rk: 29; SOS: 84
NCAA Apperances: 7
Elite 8's: 2
Sweet 16's: 2

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0830-71337E8
2006-0725-95199L2
2005-0621-116993L1
2004-0517-12113147None
2003-0426-112229E8
2002-0326-62289L2
2001-0226-61261L2
2000-0121-84185L1
1999-0021-1277113None
1998-9925-1144104None

Top College Basketball Programs Over the Last 10 Years: The 9 Seeds

0 comments
It's that time of the year again. Now that the basketball season is over, let's update the final Colton Index rankings for the year and add 2007-08 to the record books. That means we can update my last 10 year rankings by replacing 1997-98 with 1998-99. Previous versions of my 10-year rankings have received more attention than one of my normal blog posts (which means about 10 hits instead of 1 or 2, if my math is correct that's up to a 500% increase in readership. How many blogs can say that?)

Just to get the methodology straight...the rankings are based on the average Colton Index ranking (body-of-work performance of wins and losses over an entire season, including postseason play) over the past 10 years. NCAA Tournament performance is weighted double (each game counts as two). Each season counts the same. To the extent that you don't agree with the rankings, it probably means that you weight these things differently. More than likely you weight recent performance and tournament performance more heavily, or internally rank teams on how you expect them to perform over the next 5-10 years. For each team, I show tournament performance by year as well as rankings for the first five years and last years so you can see how teams are trending and how the rankings might look differently if you adjusted the weights to suit your needs.

We'll group the teams by seed and list them one at a time, building up a to an anti-climatic announcement of the 1 seeds in the next week or so. Stay tuned and enjoy!

36. Iowa - ON THE DECLINE (but they did win the Big Ten Tournament in 2006 and 2001)
Last 10 Years: 185-135; JCI Rk: 36 (Prev Rk:31); SOS: 25
2007-08: 13-19; JCI Rk: 160; SOS: 74; Tourney: None
Last 5 Years: 92-66; JCI Rk: 55; SOS: 57
First 5 Years: 93-69; JCI Rk: 33; SOS: 9
NCAA Apperances: 4
Sweet 16's: 1

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0813-1916074None
2006-0717-147852None
2005-0625-92339L1
2004-0521-123018L1
2003-0416-126761None
2002-0317-147071None
2001-0219-166536None
2000-0123-132721L2
1999-0014-16362None
1998-9920-10114S16

35. Marquette
Last 10 Years: 199-111; JCI Rk: 35 (Prev Rk:42); SOS: 69
2007-08: 24-10; JCI Rk: 19; SOS: 16; Tourney: L2
Last 5 Years: 100-54; JCI Rk: 42; SOS: 67
First 5 Years: 99-57; JCI Rk: 46; SOS: 70
NCAA Apperances: 5
Final Fours: 1
Elite 8's: 1
Sweet 16's: 1

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0824-101916L2
2006-0723-103955L1
2005-0619-114026L1
2004-0518-1285100None
2003-0416-117979None
2002-0327-6718F4
2001-0226-71869L1
2000-0117-158779None
1999-0015-148973None
1998-9914-1511998None

34. Oregon
Last 10 Years: 194-120; JCI Rk: 34 (Prev Rk:38); SOS: 56
2007-08: 18-14; JCI Rk: 49; SOS: 12; Tourney: L1
Last 5 Years: 90-65; JCI Rk: 49; SOS: 42
First 5 Years: 104-55; JCI Rk: 35; SOS: 57
NCAA Apperances: 5
Elite 8's: 2
Sweet 16's: 2

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0818-144912L1
2006-0729-8817E8
2005-0614-1811358None
2004-0514-136835None
2003-0415-129389None
2002-0323-104275L1
2001-0225-91325E8
2000-0117-157849None
1999-0021-83249L1
1998-9918-134953None

33. Alabama
Last 10 Years: 197-124; JCI Rk: 33 (Prev Rk:27); SOS: 31
2007-08: 17-16; JCI Rk: 97; SOS: 78; Tourney: None
Last 5 Years: 98-62; JCI Rk: 34; SOS: 17
First 5 Years: 99-62; JCI Rk: 42; SOS: 47
NCAA Apperances: 5
Elite 8's: 1
Sweet 16's: 1

Performance by Season
SeasonW-LJCI RkSOSNCAA
2007-0817-169778None
2006-0720-124336None
2005-0618-13399L2
2004-0523-82441L1
2003-0420-13218E8
2002-0317-124831L1
2001-0227-81541L2
2000-0125-113666None
1999-0013-1610166None
1998-9917-155326None

 
Wegoblogger #31 © 2011 | Designed by Bingo Cash, in collaboration with Modern Warfare 3, VPS Hosting and Compare Web Hosting