2025-2026 B1G Basketball Thread

[SFBadger96]

Badgers live and die by the three, and they've done a lot of dying this year. But they were hot in Ann Arbor.

[FearlessF]

Associated Press Top-25 rankings.

The Huskers, now 16-0 this season, jumped up two spots in this week’s poll to No. 8, tying the highest rating in program history set in 1966.

[medinabuckeye1]

Badgers live and die by the three, and they've done a lot of dying this year. But they were hot in Ann Arbor.

My view:

• This isn't unique to the Badgers.  I don't have data at hand and don't want to take the time to look it up but it certainly seems that the three is a MUCH bigger part of the game than it was not too long ago.  
• I think that reliance on the three creates higher variability because on a good night any team is going to put up a LOT of points.  

[FearlessF]

my view as well

seems teams really don't try to score in the paint any longer.  At least the few games I've watched. 

[medinabuckeye1]

This is the 4th straight year of complete mediocrity. I'll pay more attention if they beat someone with a pulse.

They FINALLY did what needed to be done wrt the previous coach but at this point the current coach's seat should be considered warm at a minimum.  

I don't know enough about NIL to know for sure but it would seem likely to me that Ohio State has at least enough NIL funding that they *SHOULD* be able to field a competitive team so this is unacceptable*.  

• Likely to miss NCAA AGAIN in 2026
• 17-14/9-11 finish to regular season in 2025, lost BTT opener, no further postseason
• 19-12/9-11 finish to regular season in 2024, 1-1 in BTT, 2-1 in NIT
• 13-18/5-15 finish to regular season in 2023, 3-1 in BTT, no further postseason
• 19-10/12-8 finish to regular season in 2022, lost BTT opener, 1-1 in NCAA
• 18-8/12-8 finish to regular season in 2021, 3-1 in BTT, embarrassing 15 over 2 upset in NCAA (how the hell did we get a #2 seed with an 18-8 overall record?  They did got 3-1 in the BTT but in retrospect it was a four point win over a bad MN, an OT win over PU, and a one point win over Michigan.  This team wasn't appreciably better than 2022, 2024, or 2025.  
• 21-10/11-9 finish to regular season in 2020, no BTT or further postseason due to COVID.  
• 18-13/8-12 finish to regular season in 2019, 1-1 in BTT, 1-1 in NCAA.  
• 24-7/15-3 finish to regular season in 2018, 0-1 in BTT, 1-1 in NCAA.  
• 17-14/7-11 finish to regular season in 2017, 0-1 in BTT, no further postseason.  
• 19-12/11-7 finish to regular season in 2016, 1-1 in BTT, 1-1 in NIT.  
• 22-9/11-7 finish to regular season in 2015, 1-1 in BTT, 1-1 in NCAA.  
• 23-8/10-8 finish to regular season in 2014, 2-1 in BTT, 0-1 in NCAA (lost the play-in).  
• 23-7/13-5 finish to regular season in 2013, 2-1 in BTT, 3-1 in NCAA.  

Seasons in BOLD missed the NCAA.  

2025/26 is the 13th season since the last time Ohio State played a second weekend NCAA game.  I believe that is an all-time worst drought for the program (in terms of absence from the S16).  

*I don't know the in's and out's of NIL well enough to know which of the following is true, either:

• Ohio State isn't spending enough NIL on BBall to compete, or
• Ohio State isn't properly allocating BBall NIL.  

That said, it is either one of the two above of the coach isn't coaching well enough or some combination of the three.  

[betarhoalphadelta]

my view as well

seems teams really don't try to score in the paint any longer.  At least the few games I've watched.

What I think we've been seeing is that teams ONLY try to shoot three-pointers OR score in the paint. There's very little midrange game. 

The analytics seem to have shown that the midrange 2-point shot was too low of a shooting percentage to be worth it for only 2 points, i.e. your "expected point per attempt" isn't high enough.

Get closer [into the paint] and your expected points go up due to higher shooting percentage; move further away [beyond the arc] and your expected points go up due to an extra point being awarded for making the basket. 

[medinabuckeye1]

What I think we've been seeing is that teams ONLY try to shoot three-pointers OR score in the paint. There's very little midrange game.

The analytics seem to have shown that the midrange 2-point shot was too low of a shooting percentage to be worth it for only 2 points, i.e. your "expected point per attempt" isn't high enough.

Get closer [into the paint] and your expected points go up due to higher shooting percentage; move further away [beyond the arc] and your expected points go up due to an extra point being awarded for making the basket.

As a data guy, it always annoyed me when MY team would shoot a long two because of the expected points issue you outlined above.  However, now that EVERYBODY has pretty much abandoned the midrange game in favor of taking shots almost exclusively from either point blank or behind the arc, I don't like what it has done to the game. 

What makes it worse is that I don't think it can be fixed without RADICAL changes such as:

• Raising the rim:  This sounds a bit insane because it is radical but my argument for it is that when Nasmith invented the game over 100 years ago 6-footers were probably rarer than 7-footers are now.  Thus, raising the rim up to 11' would put today's players the same distance from it that the players of 100+ years ago were from the 10' rim. 
• Changing the scoring structure such that the long range shot gets a smaller bonus.  Ie, instead of 2 and 3 go to 3 and 4.  That way the bonus would only be 33.33% instead of 50%. 
• Pushing the arc back and/or making in uniform.