ACC is better than the B10, probably the same as the Big East, better then the PAC12, and very similar to the SEC. B12 is better but not as good as the computer nerds make it out to be. Last year the ACC had no title contenders and then had two teams make the final four.
Interestingly enough, KP ranks conferences by the AdjEM of a team projected to go .500 in-conference.
I'll be honest... I've been one of the biggest KenPom fanboys on this board.
... But, I'm falling off of the bandwagon this season.
Let's take a look at the resume of a team projected to go .500 in the
'better than the ACC' Pac 12:
Here's the start of the season for
Washington State. Who is ranked #64 in KenPom's system, and projected to go (10-10) in conference play:
That, my friends, is some grade A bullshit.
... If an average team in the PAC 12 is taking double digit losses to
Prairie View A&M (#273) en route to a 6-10 start, I'm not buying into any nonsense that says the PAC 12 is superior to the ACC.
Not to mention the fact that VT (#46), losers of their last 5, including a loss against B.C. (#200), & projected losers of their next 2, is maintaining an AdjEM ~30 spots above WF (#75).
This is all indicative of major flaws in the system, IMO.