-Matt Cox
Excessive consumption - that’s Thanksgiving in a nutshell…
Oh yes, it’s that special time of year when the phrase “everything in moderation” loses all meaning. There’s simply nothing better than being warped into a trance of extreme laziness, fueled by the need to gorge around the clock while watching what seems like a never-ending supply of competitive college hoops.
Eat. Watch. Repeat. That’s the only recipe for peace and mind this week…
But before you slip into a blissful oblivion, enjoy a Turkey Week appetizer served up by one of the Weave’s three founding fathers, who goes by his [self appointed] nickname ‘DJ Dimes’…
Power Rankings
My desire to walk the slippery plank of ranking all 353 division 1 teams was inspired by a few other name brands in the industry (cc: Matt Norlander of CBS and Barstool Reags), and made reasonably possible by the data backbones of the CBB sector - if you don’t know their names, get acquainted now: Ken Pomeroy and Bart Torvik.
Please take note of the ‘Tiers’, which are meant to serve as guideposts between where I see natural breaks in the field of 353. For example, if the season ended today, there’s roughly 6 teams I would seriously consider to pick to win the national title. You can find those guys in Tier 1.
Once you’ve read though THE ENTIRE LIST (that means all 353 teams one by one) you officially reserve the right to call me a fool. Please send all reactions, no matter how biased or how irrational, to @3MW_CBB via the Twitter-sphere. Whether you’re a sharp, level-headed individual, or a blithering idiot - like the dude who put 35 guys ahead of Zion Williamson in his preseason player rankings - all voices need be heard in the marketplace of ideas.
But rather than just lazily spewing out hollow takes, such as “wow, [insert school] is WAY too low”, specify two teams you think should be swapped and perhaps add a concise argument as to why my rankings are off. I’d prefer if you challenge me on two teams in separate tiers, given the margin of separation within any one tier is rather slim.
I will examine your challenge response and do one of two things:
Change my rankings, because you brilliantly pointed out a blemish in my highly flawed assessment two weeks into the season.
Do nothing, because these are my rankings and I’m stubborn!
Do note that these are intended to be predictive rankings. All forward looking team evaluation tools have some degree of historical results baked in, but my rankings are grounded in factors beyond just ‘who beat who’ and ‘who lost to who’. Preseason expectations and game-to-game performances carry tremendous weight in this first iteration of my rankings (I plan to refine and re-post throughout the season).