Big East as seen from the infamous Bleacher Report

[robinreed]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2252 ... son/page/2

The infamous Bleacher Report has given us their view of the 2014-2015 Big East season. A few brief quotes follow:

1. Once the most influential and trend setting conference in college basketball, the Big East Conference fell back into the pack last season in its new, smaller form.

2. Heading into year two, the 10-team league made entirely of private schools is searching for a new identity beyond just being the remnants of a once-great league.

3. The 2014-15 season figures to be a good one for the conference as a whole, though it might not be that competitive at the top. More intrigue should occur in the middle of the pack, as a major departure of talent has led some schools to have to treat this season like a rebuilding one.

On our talent they comment thusly;

4. In fact, five of the six players who made the all-conference first team and nine of 16 who earned all-conference honors either graduated or left early for the NBA.

The BR gives us at least 3 bids and perhaps as many as 5 bids to the dance. This seems reasonable considering we are a 10 team conference. By no means a horrible review considering the source.

Some of the comments are pure Bleacher Report. For example "remnants of a once-great league" and "but that's when the Big East was a 16-team super conference".

"The four bids in 2013-14 were half of what the league had the year before, but that's when the Big East was a 16-team super conference".

Their version of the all conference team is not bad. They list the first team as follows;
Hilliard
Smith-Rivera
Henton
Pinskton
Stainbrook.

The real problem begins with their rankings but I will let you read the article to get that.

[NJRedman]

I hate that CBS (or is it TBS?) that bought Bleacher Report and now advertise it like it's a legit sports news page. It's just a bunch of hacks at home playing sports writer. They banned me from making comments for constantly pointing out all of their mistakes.

[Hall2012]

The rankings look perfectly reasonable to me. Is he gonna be spot on, probably not (who ever is?), but I wouldn't be shocked at all if it played out that way. My biggest problem with it is the lazy writing that's typical of Bleacher Report. It's a small league, there's only 10 teams, and he completely ignored 2 of them. Seton Hall got 1 sentence (that they got Isaiah Whitehead) and Butler got no mention at all! Providence didn't get a season outlook either but at least got a little paragraph on its frontcourt.