The Holy Land of Hoops

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketb ... conference

Nice to get a little respect from the WWL. Take it away, stever.

EDIT: behind paywall, not sure if I can post the whole text here. Here's the MU thread on it (with full text for now)

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=48560.0

Thanks for sharing. The key sentence:

Over the past two seasons there's been a clear distinction to be drawn between Division I's top six conferences and the rest of the country, and the Big East is on the good side of that line.

"Butler, Xavier, Villanova, Georgetown and Marquette have all won at least 11 NCAA tournament games since 2000. Only the Big Ten (with seven such teams) can top that number. What the Big East lacks in flagships it makes up for in depth."

My fav.

admin wrote:Thanks for sharing. The key sentence:

Over the past two seasons there's been a clear distinction to be drawn between Division I's top six conferences and the rest of the country, and the Big East is on the good side of that line.

Yes sir. I also liked the kenpom numbers he cites.

Avg. Ratings: '13-'14 And '14-'15
1. Big 12 .8045
2. Big Ten .7926
3. ACC .7836
4. Big East .7590
5. Pac-12 .7508
6. SEC .7424
7. Atlantic 10 .6528
8. American .6443
9. West Coast .6015
10. Missouri Valley .5656
11. Mountain West .5569

They show a clear separation between the top 6 and everyone else. The difference between 6 and 7 is nearly twice difference between 1 and 6.

Whoa, ESPN giving us love? Color me shocked.

It's surprising that ESPN is saying this. What's not surprising is that on the other board Stever says that it's to small of a sample size to say we're a major conference. Hahaha

NJRedman wrote:It's surprising that ESPN is saying this. What's not surprising is that on the other board Stever says that it's to small of a sample size to say we're a major conference. Hahaha

We all knew stever was gonna stever.

AAC below the A-10. Wonder how the AAC apologist of the board will spin this one.

I do think that statement that alludes to us having many solid teams but no stars is accurate at this point. We need to get some final four teams in there every couple of years to stake our claim as a top conference. That is the lone thing that has been missing IMO--tourney success. Now I say that while openly admitting that my own team has crapped the bed the last few years. But in Nova's defense the entire league's hopes in March can't hinge on one program. We need to have multiple teams that are E8/FF contenders, and just hope for your team to perform and have a good matchup.

Kudos to X last year making the SW16. When a 5-6 place team makes a run like that it is a good sign of conf health.

2 things would be the argument against this article...
1- sample size. It's just 2 years.
2- The gap is entirely last year.

Not saying the AAC is ahead of the BE, but the metrics this article uses are pretty flimsy.

It's rather bizarre that ESPN would post this.

stever20 wrote:2 things would be the argument against this article...
1- sample size. It's just 2 years.
2- The gap is entirely last year.

Not saying the AAC is ahead of the BE, but the metrics this article uses are pretty flimsy.

It's rather bizarre that ESPN would post this.

An argument against Stever's argument:

1) the change occurred 2 years ago. what else should the sample size be?
2) the gap last year was enormous.

Not even you could say the AAC is ahead of the BE. They simple aren't.

but to agree, it is sort of bizarre that ESPN took this position.