Big East Is Better Now Than The 90's

[friars321]

This was a post shared on the PC board by another poster and I thought it would be a good information to share here. Premise being we are in very good shape:


"One of the problems with people's memories is that they forget stuff. To refresh, from 1990-91 to 1997-98, the vaunted Big East had a grand total of one Final Four team, a surprise Syracuse squad led by John Wallace that lost to Kentucky in the national championship in 1996. They averaged about 4.5 teams per year into the tournament in a league that had 13 teams for half this time. That works out to about 40% of the league getting bids in a given year.

Since realignment, the ten team Big East has averaged 5.6 teams per season in the NCAA tournament in five years. This is obviously 56% of the league getting bids in a given year. While we also have only had one Final Four team (subject to change this season), that team won the national title.

The Big East winning percentage over the past five years is far higher than during this period, too. Don't forget that the Big East went from Villanova in 1985 to UConn in 1999 between championships.

I also could have have picked a small sample of the ACC, where they only got the bids in consecutive years, or the Big Ten, where they had several stretches of early flame-out, and the same with the Big 12 or SEC.

Sometimes you have to look at the big picture. A couple of bounces or foul calls here and there could have meant having four or five Big East teams still alive. As long as the league continues what it has been doing, Final Fours and national championships will continue to come, even if there are blips along the way."

Regarding lottery picks as a measure of reputability: In that 90's period, the Big East had 12 or 13 in nine years, or roughly 1.3 per year. In the past four years, we've had four, with a good shot at 1 more this year, which would make 5 in five years, or 1/year. That's also with the fewer teams.

[Bill Marsh]

This was a post shared on the PC board by another poster and I thought it would be a good information to share here. Premise being we are in very good shape:


"One of the problems with people's memories is that they forget stuff. To refresh, from 1990-91 to 1997-98, the vaunted Big East had a grand total of one Final Four team, a surprise Syracuse squad led by John Wallace that lost to Kentucky in the national championship in 1996. They averaged about 4.5 teams per year into the tournament in a league that had 13 teams for half this time. That works out to about 40% of the league getting bids in a given year.

Since realignment, the ten team Big East has averaged 5.6 teams per season in the NCAA tournament in five years. This is obviously 56% of the league getting bids in a given year. While we also have only had one Final Four team (subject to change this season), that team won the national title.

The Big East winning percentage over the past five years is far higher than during this period, too. Don't forget that the Big East went from Villanova in 1985 to UConn in 1999 between championships.

I also could have have picked a small sample of the ACC, where they only got the bids in consecutive years, or the Big Ten, where they had several stretches of early flame-out, and the same with the Big 12 or SEC.

Sometimes you have to look at the big picture. A couple of bounces or foul calls here and there could have meant having four or five Big East teams still alive. As long as the league continues what it has been doing, Final Fours and national championships will continue to come, even if there are blips along the way."

Regarding lottery picks as a measure of reputability: In that 90's period, the Big East had 12 or 13 in nine years, or roughly 1.3 per year. In the past four years, we've had four, with a good shot at 1 more this year, which would make 5 in five years, or 1/year. That's also with the fewer teams.

Excellent piece. It’s always eye opening to see the picture that emerges when someone starts with the facts and let’s them tell their own story.

Far too often we see people with their own pre-conceived beliefs who then seek facts to support their beliefs while ignoring those that don’t.

[stever20]

that is assuming that tournament bids is the measure of conference strength.

1990s big east (going 1989-90 to 1998-99 seasons)
90 6 bids, 8 wins
91 7 bids, 11 wins
---------------------league goes to 10 teams
92 5 bids, 5 wins
93 3 bids 2 wins
94 6 bids, 8 wins
95 4 bids, 6 wins
--------------------- league goes to 13 teams
96 5 bids, 12 wins
97 4 bids, 5 wins
98 5 bids 6 wins
99 5 bids, 10 wins
so in 10 years had 50 bids and 73 wins. 73-49 overall for a winning percentage of .598 in the tourney. Also, in there time of using 1990-91 to 1997-98, the league had 13 teams in 3 of the 8 years.
even if you wanted to use 99-00 instead of 89-90- that year had 5 bids and 8 wins. So 49 bids and 73 wins doing it that way.

Compare the decade to the 5 years of the New Big East
14 4 bids, 2 wins
15 6 bids, 5 wins
16 5 bids, 9 wins
17 7 bids, 6 wins
18 6 bids, 5 wins so far
so a total of 28 bids and 27 wins. Double that and it's 56 bids and 54 wins. 90's Big East had 2 final 4's and 1 title (and 11 elite 8's) 14-18 Big East had 1 final 4 and 1 title(and 2 elite 8's). Oh, and the average number of teams in the 90-99 seasons was 11.

It's what you want to focus on. Some folks want to focus on regular season. That's fine. Others want to focus on the postseason. I so happen to think a pretty high percentage of fans want to focus on the postseason.

[stever20]

Also, the number of guys taken in the draft lottery is off.

The New Big East has had only 2- McDermott and Dunn. Ellensen(18) and Patton(16) were both just taken outside the draft lottery.

90's era had 7 guys taken in the top 5 of the draft. Coleman, Owens, Mutumbo, Mourning, Marshall, Iverson, and Allen. The NBE has had McDermott at 11 and Dunn at 5. So a 7-1 advantage in top 5 picks. So yeah, don't think they want to go there.

[GoldenWarrior11]

I posted this on the other board, but since we frequent both (and he complains about Big East fans on the other board) I figured I'd share here too:

Stever, I really respect you as a poster. I think you often provide great counterpoints and valuable insight. However, I think you need to not take fans' opinions of liking the Big East too personal. You seem to respond to each and every post that paints the Big East in a bright light only to attempt to "correct" those thoughts. It's ok if you don't share others' opinions, just like it's ok if others don't share yours.

[Bill Marsh]

that is assuming that tournament bids is the measure of conference strength.

1990s big east (going 1989-90 to 1998-99 seasons)
90 6 bids, 8 wins
91 7 bids, 11 wins
---------------------league goes to 10 teams
92 5 bids, 5 wins
93 3 bids 2 wins
94 6 bids, 8 wins
95 4 bids, 6 wins
--------------------- league goes to 13 teams
96 5 bids, 12 wins
97 4 bids, 5 wins
98 5 bids 6 wins
99 5 bids, 10 wins
so in 10 years had 50 bids and 73 wins. 73-49 overall for a winning percentage of .598 in the tourney. Also, in there time of using 1990-91 to 1997-98, the league had 13 teams in 3 of the 8 years.
even if you wanted to use 99-00 instead of 89-90- that year had 5 bids and 8 wins. So 49 bids and 73 wins doing it that way.

Compare the decade to the 5 years of the New Big East
14 4 bids, 2 wins
15 6 bids, 5 wins
16 5 bids, 9 wins
17 7 bids, 6 wins
18 6 bids, 5 wins so far
so a total of 28 bids and 27 wins. Double that and it's 56 bids and 54 wins. 90's Big East had 2 final 4's and 1 title (and 11 elite 8's) 14-18 Big East had 1 final 4 and 1 title(and 2 elite 8's). Oh, and the average number of teams in the 90-99 seasons was 11.

It's what you want to focus on. Some folks want to focus on regular season. That's fine. Others want to focus on the postseason. I so happen to think a pretty high percentage of fans want to focus on the postseason.

Stever, you’re comparing apples and oranges.

Second, you included this season, which isn’t even complete. If Villanova loses its next game or if Villanova wins out to gain a NC, the measure of the BE will be very different for this season. It’s simply not valid to lump a partial result in with the rest and treat it the same.

[stever20]

well it's absolute best case scenario with Nova winning the title with 31 wins/pace for 62. It'll be somewhere from 54-62 pace- with only 1 team left, it's not as open as you want to make it to be.

what's interesting is the leagues are pretty close in 2 spots...
top 4 seeds- 90's BE had 21 top 4 seeds. '10's BE has had 10(so pace for 20)
7-10 seeds- 90's BE had 17 7-10 seeds. '10s BE has had 9(so pace for 18)

So it's not like the 90's Big east had a huge seed advantage on the 10's Big East.

[butlerguy03]

That's like trying to compare LeBron James and Michael Jordan. The eras are completely different (Physical 1990's vs Finesse 2010's as just one example).

[billyjack]

Also, the number of guys taken in the draft lottery is off.

The New Big East has had only 2- McDermott and Dunn. Ellensen(18) and Patton(16) were both just taken outside the draft lottery.

90's era had 7 guys taken in the top 5 of the draft. Coleman, Owens, Mutumbo, Mourning, Marshall, Iverson, and Allen. The NBE has had McDermott at 11 and Dunn at 5. So a 7-1 advantage in top 5 picks. So yeah, don't think they want to go there.

So, you know this "1990's" discussion has to do with the relative BE downturn when Miami of Fla was added for the 1992 season.

Of the lottery picks you named, only Donyell Marshall, Iverson and Allen were considered as part of the "Miami of Fla" generation of BE players.

So:
- 3 lottery picks in 8 years from 92 thru 99.
- 2 lottery picks thru 4 years from 14 thru 17.

Coleman, Mutombo, Billy Owens, and Mourning (last year 92) are considered to have played in the Big East heyday.

But thanks for trying to mislead everyone.

[stever20]

Also, the number of guys taken in the draft lottery is off.

The New Big East has had only 2- McDermott and Dunn. Ellensen(18) and Patton(16) were both just taken outside the draft lottery.

90's era had 7 guys taken in the top 5 of the draft. Coleman, Owens, Mutumbo, Mourning, Marshall, Iverson, and Allen. The NBE has had McDermott at 11 and Dunn at 5. So a 7-1 advantage in top 5 picks. So yeah, don't think they want to go there.

So, you know this "1990's" discussion has to do with the relative BE downturn when Miami of Fla was added for the 1992 season.

Of the lottery picks you named, only Donyell Marshall, Iverson and Allen were considered as part of the "Miami of Fla" generation of BE players.

So:
- 3 lottery picks in 8 years from 92 thru 99.
- 2 lottery picks thru 4 years from 14 thru 17.

Coleman, Mutombo, Billy Owens, and Mourning (last year 92) are considered to have played in the Big East heyday.

But thanks for trying to mislead everyone.

If you aren't counting Mourning, than you can't count that draft as a year. You either have to count Mourning and the year, or not count Mourning or the year.

Also from 93 thru 99- while a 3-1 advantage in top 5 picks, it's also for total draft lottery selections a 7-2 lead. Have to add in Kittles, Thomas, Croushere, and Hamilton. Oh, and the early '90s also didn't have 14 draft lottery selections- but did also have Dehere going 13 and Williams going 14. So if it's top 14 selections it's 9-2.