Respect For And Strength Of The Big East...

[stever20]

You yourself admitted that the Big East has been getting a lot of good press. And the reason of that was not just the Nova title, but the 44 point win over Oklahoma. So quick question, when did both of those things happen? That's right March/April and the tournament.

The non conference results are quite frankly a mixed bag. Yes, there are some good wins- St John's over Duke.

Here's quad 1 results OOC this year- 10-6 for the 6 tourney teams. 11-10 overall
Xavier over #6 Cincy home
St John's over #7 Duke home
Nova over #8 Tennessee neutral
Butler loss #9 Purdue neutral
Marquette loss #9 Purdue home
DePaul loss #14 Michigan St neutral
Marquette loss #16 Wichita neutral
Providence loss to #18 Houston neutral
Seton Hall loss to #19 Rhode Island neutral
Providence loss to #19 Rhode Island away
Butler over #20 Ohio St neutral
Nova over #21 Gonzaga neutral
Creighton loss to #21 Gonzaga away
Seton Hall over #23 Texas Tech neutral
Creighton over #36 UCLA neutral
Seton Hall over #38 Louisville away
Nova over #39 W Kentucky neutral
St John's loss to #43 Missouri neutral
Nova over #52 Temple away
Butler loss to #74 Maryland away

That's not exactly great results. Nova's title has far more to do with the press than the OOC results.

[Savannah Jay]

I think my point is pretty simple...

All your points are very simple...most are moot, inane, or just "whatever I can say in this moment that attempts to put shade on the Big East."

If it's all about March, I figured you'd be swinging from a noose by now given how your conference performed in March. Your new darling didn't even make it to the conference championship game then shit the bed, as a 4 seed, against a 13 seed. Cincy blew a 22 point lead, the second largest choke job in NCAA tournament history.

So, if your terminology for the Big East teams is "Creighton and Providence couldn't even get out of the first round after losses to 9 seeded Kansas State and 7 seeded Texas A&M." An 8 seed loses to a 9 seed (oh, the shock of it all) and a 10 seed loses to a 7 seed (how can that happen!?!?!?!?), what do you have to say about a 4 seed losing to a 13 seed (4 seed was a 13.5 favorite) or a 2 seed losing to a 7 seed by blowing the second largest lead ever lost in the NCAAT? How do you phrase that kind of debacle?

Maybe you should worry about your conference's viability and we'll worry about ours...

[billyjack]

Response to Stev post at 1:59pm today cuz i don't want to hit quote that will make this page 8 miles long:

This was my quote from Page 1 that you must not have read:
"- while i understand the "strength is measured in March" cliche or whatever TF people say, that's only a piece of the entire package".

And we're over 500 in Quad 1 games, and that's not impressive?
Wins over UCLA, Tennessee, Cincinnati, Gonzaga, Duke, Ohio State, Texas Tech, Lousville Hooker U, etc...

[herodotus]

Xavier's loss was very disappointing, but other than that, the league performed as expected. The other four teams were clearly second tier teams, no different than URI, NC St., Texas, Arkansas, or any other teams seeded between 7 and 12. These are all nice teams, but not teams expected to last past the first weekend. The few teams of this ilk that reach the Sweet 16 get lots of attention, because they're not supposed to be there. Those 4 BE schools had tossup games in round one. As would be expected, they split those 4 games, and performed respectably in all 4. The 2 teams that advanced had to play high seeds in round 2, and were dispatched, as expected, although they both acquitted themselves well against more talented opponents. While it would have been nice for one of these teams to make an unexpected run, they did what they were expected to do. There is no shame at all for the league in their performance. This does feed into the argument that some have put forth, that it would be better if the league had three or four powerhouses that ran roughshod over the league, resulting in maybe 5 bids instead of 6, but higher seeds for the third and fourth team. Such a scenario might make for more deep runs in the tourney, but when your league becomes top heavy, you run the risk of creating a permanent underclass, such as had developed in the old Big East. Great for the teams up top, but not so great for the rest.

[stever20]

Xavier's loss was very disappointing, but other than that, the league performed as expected. The other four teams were clearly second tier teams, no different than URI, NC St., Texas, Arkansas, or any other teams seeded between 7 and 12. These are all nice teams, but not teams expected to last past the first weekend. The few teams of this ilk that reach the Sweet 16 get lots of attention, because they're not supposed to be there. Those 4 BE schools had tossup games in round one. As would be expected, they split those 4 games, and performed respectably in all 4. The 2 teams that advanced had to play high seeds in round 2, and were dispatched, as expected, although they both acquitted themselves well against more talented opponents. While it would have been nice for one of these teams to make an unexpected run, they did what they were expected to do. There is no shame at all for the league in their performance. This does feed into the argument that some have put forth, that it would be better if the league had three or four powerhouses that ran roughshod over the league, resulting in maybe 5 bids instead of 6, but higher seeds for the third and fourth team. Such a scenario might make for more deep runs in the tourney, but when your league becomes top heavy, you run the risk of creating a permanent underclass, such as had developed in the old Big East. Great for the teams up top, but not so great for the rest.

what has been so strange about the Big East is that they've had now 9 teams in the last 4 years in the 7-10 range of seeds, and of those 9 teams, none of them advanced to the 2nd weekend.....

And yes you can make the case that for instance if Seton Hall had beaten Butler in the BET, and say they're a 6 seed instead of a 8 seed, they've got a much stronger chance of still playing now. Even with Butler maybe missing the tourney, you can make the case that's a better scenario.

As far as the permanent underclass part. In the last 3 years of the OBE, 12 teams make the tourney. With 11 of those 12 winning a game. Of the other 4, Providence hired Cooley after 2011, and he in 2 years had turned the program into a 9-9 program in the BE. They probably make the tourney in 2014 in the OBE regardless. The other 3 were Rutgers, Seton Hall, and DePaul. Seton Hall in 2012 was one of the 1st 4 teams left out. So really not seeing the underclass part.

[Trifecta]

I think my point is pretty simple... etc...

Oooh, some guy from NBC who no one's ever heard of has a dimwit hot take. I couldn't give 2 sh-ts.

1. Open a link to a story by NBC Sports
2. Read the byline and confirm who the author is

Is it Rob Dauster?

Yes----> Take story seriously
No----> Disregard

[stever20]

The thing that's amazing listening to you folks is you think that March is a no consequence situation. Almost like college football bowl games.

I just totally 100% disagree with that. If nothing else, not winning is a lost chance.

Also to herodutus- you said that the other 4 teams were clearly second tier teams- no different than URI, NC St, Texas, or Arkansas. Maybe true, but they were also no different than Kansas St, Nevada, Florida St, or Texas A&M. In the last 4 years the Big East has had 9 teams seeded between 7-10. 0 made the sweet 16. There were 23 other teams seeded 7-10. Of those 23, 12 made the sweet 16. That's just insane quite frankly.

[billyjack]

The thing that's amazing listening to you folks is you think that March is a no consequence situation. Almost like college football bowl games.

I just totally 100% disagree with that. If nothing else, not winning is a lost chance.

Also to herodutus- you said that the other 4 teams were clearly second tier teams- no different than URI, NC St, Texas, or Arkansas. Maybe true, but they were also no different than Kansas St, Nevada, Florida St, or Texas A&M. In the last 4 years the Big East has had 9 teams seeded between 7-10. 0 made the sweet 16. There were 23 other teams seeded 7-10. Of those 23, 12 made the sweet 16. That's just insane quite frankly.

We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.

[stever20]

The thing that's amazing listening to you folks is you think that March is a no consequence situation. Almost like college football bowl games.

I just totally 100% disagree with that. If nothing else, not winning is a lost chance.

Also to herodutus- you said that the other 4 teams were clearly second tier teams- no different than URI, NC St, Texas, or Arkansas. Maybe true, but they were also no different than Kansas St, Nevada, Florida St, or Texas A&M. In the last 4 years the Big East has had 9 teams seeded between 7-10. 0 made the sweet 16. There were 23 other teams seeded 7-10. Of those 23, 12 made the sweet 16. That's just insane quite frankly.

We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.
We did not say March is of no consequence. It's just not the only factor.

It might not be the only factor, but it's the #1 factor. By a pretty big margin.

[scoscox]

The pac-12 is completely done, the sec champion lost by 30, the acc champion by four games lost by 20 to the 16 seed, the big ten champion is out. The big east is fine