Big East teams hurting each other; too much depth?

[stever20]

I firmly expect Georgetown to win at least the next 6 games in a row and would not be surprised if they won their last 8 in a row in BE play. Georgetown was really hurt during their 5 game skid and despite all that should have beaten Xavier, Marquette, and Nova and were competitive @ Creighton. If we hadn't lost two starters we would easily be 7-2. I think people are dismissing Georgetown too easily. Now that we have Jabril back and have adjusted to life with out Smith the Hoyas are a serious threat. 10-8 is the minimum this team will end up at.

I understand your enthusiasm Hooligan but I think you are peering through a hopeful Hoya fan's specs. Let's be honest about Gtwn. To assume that they would be 7-2 at this point with or without injuries is being overly optimistic. They just came out of a 5 game losing streak. What conf game snapped that? At DePaul minus their best player, Melvin. A win vs a top 5 team surely helped but MSU just came off a big emotional win vs a top B1G rival and was down a couple players. You play who is in front of you...I get that, but with Payne in I think that game could have been much different.

I like Gtwn. Respect the hell out of that program; recognize them as our top rival in conference and generally root for them in every game they play minus the Nova ones. The BE needs a good Gtwn. But I also see a team that struggles for long stretches to score in many games I think JTIII is a very good coach but their style of play sometimes keeps them from coming back on teams when down big. I hope Gtwn has turned the corner but I do not think they are as good as Creighton or Nova and I can't see those two teams winning 8 in a row let alone another BE team.

To me Georgetown is in this position...
they have 3 games where they are going to be favored. Butler, Providence, and Xavier. All 3 at home...
2 games where they are underdogs. Creighton, and at Villanova...
if all 5 games go as predicted- it's going to come down to 3 games. 2-1 in these 3 gets them to 9-9 and likely in. @ St John's, @ Seton Hall, and @ Marquette.

The only thing that could unravel this- if the 2 they win is St John's and Seton Hall(which would then be a 7 game winning streak by the way)- they would end the season on a 3 game losing streak. Not sure how the committee would view them on a if they lose in the BET 4 game losign streak.

[Lavinwood]

I think G'Town is much more likely to make a run than PC or SJ. After the MSU win they may just have their swag back. They lost a lot from last year and battled injuries, but their defense will make up for a lot of what they lost. They are used to success and I think their expectations of themselves are high and they can get it done. A team like PC just is not used to being 3rd in the Big East. SJ is not used to making runs to get into the tourney, but they did in 2011 albeit with the help of a ton of signature wins. If SJ makes a run, a lot of people will be angry. I look on paper and given the eye test from seeing the recent games, they just may be turning a corner. I think our key is unleashing Jordan. Just let him go. Not many teams can stop him. He reminds me of a Nova type player who can just get in the paint at will and draw fouls all game long with a few and-1's mixed in. He needs work on his shot, but if we let him penetrate and open it up outside for Harrison to nail 3's with Sampson down low or in the mid range, this team will be tough to beat. Our defense is erratic at times but it also wreaks havoc as we saw vs. Creighton. The other big issue to keep an eye on is can we win the close games or do we continue to drop them?

[MackNova]

There's a lot of depth, but it's mediocre depth. The old Big East had a few more cupcakes (USF most years, Rutgers every year), but the top level isn't that deep.

In the old Big East, you would have at least 3-4 opponents that were legitimate top 20 teams. In this conference, it's Nova, it's Creighton, then it's a huge batch of teams that are bubble teams or NIT teams. There aren't as many cupcakes to pad records on in the old league, but it's also very difficult to get big wins. That's what hurts the league. Unless you beat Villanova or Creighton, there aren't any wins at this league that are really standout wins.

It's not totally fair. I feel neither Nova nor Creighton gets the national credit it deserves, but that's what happens when you play for smaller fan bases on networks that people don't watch.

If by mediocre depth you mean pretty solid relative to the power conferences then I agree otherwise I think that's too harsh a critique of the league this season.

Adam Zagoria ‏@AdamZagoria:

Only 4 of the BIg East's 10 teams are above .500 in the league right now -- Villanova, Creighton, Providence and Xavier. By contrast, 6 of the Big 12's 10 teams (yes, that's right) are above .500 -- Kansas, Texas, OU, Iowa St, K-State and West Va. In the ACC 6 of 15 teams are above .500 in the league. In the A-10, 7 of 13 teams are above .500. Lastly, in the Big Ten, only 3 of 12 teams are above .500 in the league -- Michigan State, Michigan and Iowa. Northwestern is 5-5.

Not outstanding from this perspective but he BE isn't that different than the other conferences at the moment and from an RPI perspective the BE is even more competitive. Also if by a few more cupcakes you meant 4 or 5 more in a given season over the past 10 yrs or so for the oBE (typically: RU, SHU, PC, Depaul, SJU, USF) vs. 0-1 this season, then I agree also otherwise again I think you are being unfair about the quality of the current league. Just becuase the league needs to get stronger at the top doesn't mean it can't be more than mediocre n the middle or that it's weak at the bottom.

I'm not comparing it to other leagues. Personally, I think this league is as good as any league other than the Big Ten and Big 12 in the sense that there are no games off. Everyone says Florida is hot right now - they have played NOBODY in the SEC.

However, that doesn't change the fact that if you're a Big East bubble team, you have 2 wins you can hang your hat on: Villanova and Creighton. Everyone else is a bubble team or worse.

In the old Big East, you could survive an ugly non-conference schedule because you'd have opportunities to make it up in conference with top 10 and top 25 wins. Not in this league. In this league, if you don't beat Nova or Creighton, there are no opportunities for statement wins in this league that are gamechangers in terms of resume.

Hopefully, Marquette and (ugh) Georgetown get it together next year to give it more depth at the top.

To me, Xavier, Providence, Georgetown, St. John's and Marquette are all in a similar tier of talent where if things break right they can make the tournament as an 8-12 seed. If they don't win close games, they're NIT bound.

The league is deep in the sense that there aren't many cupcake games. But it doesn't get the credit it deserves because most of these teams have smaller fan bases, and don't get exposure because of that unless they force you to pay attention. There aren't any Syracuses in this league that would generate national interest regardless of the game result.

[Lavinwood]

There's a lot of depth, but it's mediocre depth. The old Big East had a few more cupcakes (USF most years, Rutgers every year), but the top level isn't that deep.

In the old Big East, you would have at least 3-4 opponents that were legitimate top 20 teams. In this conference, it's Nova, it's Creighton, then it's a huge batch of teams that are bubble teams or NIT teams. There aren't as many cupcakes to pad records on in the old league, but it's also very difficult to get big wins. That's what hurts the league. Unless you beat Villanova or Creighton, there aren't any wins at this league that are really standout wins.

It's not totally fair. I feel neither Nova nor Creighton gets the national credit it deserves, but that's what happens when you play for smaller fan bases on networks that people don't watch.

If by mediocre depth you mean pretty solid relative to the power conferences then I agree otherwise I think that's too harsh a critique of the league this season.

Adam Zagoria ‏@AdamZagoria:

Only 4 of the BIg East's 10 teams are above .500 in the league right now -- Villanova, Creighton, Providence and Xavier. By contrast, 6 of the Big 12's 10 teams (yes, that's right) are above .500 -- Kansas, Texas, OU, Iowa St, K-State and West Va. In the ACC 6 of 15 teams are above .500 in the league. In the A-10, 7 of 13 teams are above .500. Lastly, in the Big Ten, only 3 of 12 teams are above .500 in the league -- Michigan State, Michigan and Iowa. Northwestern is 5-5.

Not outstanding from this perspective but he BE isn't that different than the other conferences at the moment and from an RPI perspective the BE is even more competitive. Also if by a few more cupcakes you meant 4 or 5 more in a given season over the past 10 yrs or so for the oBE (typically: RU, SHU, PC, Depaul, SJU, USF) vs. 0-1 this season, then I agree also otherwise again I think you are being unfair about the quality of the current league. Just becuase the league needs to get stronger at the top doesn't mean it can't be more than mediocre n the middle or that it's weak at the bottom.

I'm not comparing it to other leagues. Personally, I think this league is as good as any league other than the Big Ten and Big 12 in the sense that there are no games off. Everyone says Florida is hot right now - they have played NOBODY in the SEC.

However, that doesn't change the fact that if you're a Big East bubble team, you have 2 wins you can hang your hat on: Villanova and Creighton. Everyone else is a bubble team or worse.

In the old Big East, you could survive an ugly non-conference schedule because you'd have opportunities to make it up in conference with top 10 and top 25 wins. Not in this league. In this league, if you don't beat Nova or Creighton, there are no opportunities for statement wins in this league that are gamechangers in terms of resume.

Hopefully, Marquette and (ugh) Georgetown get it together next year to give it more depth at the top.

To me, Xavier, Providence, Georgetown, St. John's and Marquette are all in a similar tier of talent where if things break right they can make the tournament as an 8-12 seed. If they don't win close games, they're NIT bound.

The league is deep in the sense that there aren't many cupcake games. But it doesn't get the credit it deserves because most of these teams have smaller fan bases, and don't get exposure because of that unless they force you to pay attention. There aren't any Syracuses in this league that would generate national interest regardless of the game result.

Agreed. This is the kind of conference that will be appreciated by diehards but maybe not the casual NCAAB fan. The fans who only turn on college hoops in March will not care much for the Big East unless one of our teams goes on a huge run, but the fans who can't wait to watch from the first game in November will care. It takes an educated basketball fan to understand that while the Big East may not ever get the attention or power at the top it once had, it is still a premier conference.

[theNEWbigeast]

Long time reader; first time poster.

I'm not sure this is the thread in which to bring this up, but as I was reading it, this thought popped into my head. With the NCAA tournament selection committee placing a strong emphasis on OOC scheduling and quality wins, should the NCAA consider moving up the conference schedule by a few weeks (earlier in December), and having a 2-week stretch in late-January to have two or three OOC games? Take the scheduling from early in the season, remove 2-3 teams, and put them in this time January time-period.

Here's why I'm thinking that might be a good idea and at least worthy of consideration. Teams grow, develop, deal with injuries over the course of a season. You could have a completely different team in the second half, but by then it's too late - you can't strengthen your resume with any additional OOC wins. Seton Hall, SJU, and Providence are all seemingly playing better now than they were earlier in the season. But there's no chance of making up for the setbacks in the early OOC schedule. A prime example of how this could impact a team is G'Town managing to schedule (and beat) MSU. That win literally may be the only reason the Hoyas have any chance at all at an at-large bid, but only if everything else goes near-perfectly from here on out.

In a deep conference like the Big East (and most of the other top conferences), it might be beneficial to give teams a chance to make a statement with some more quality OOC wins later in the season. Let's call it an extended version of what mid-majors looked to accomplished with the bracketbuster (which, I acknowledge, wasn't that great a system).

Is this the dumbest idea ever? Or can people see what I'm getting at?

[hoyahooligan]

Long time reader; first time poster.

I'm not sure this is the thread in which to bring this up, but as I was reading it, this thought popped into my head. With the NCAA tournament selection committee placing a strong emphasis on OOC scheduling and quality wins, should the NCAA consider moving up the conference schedule by a few weeks (earlier in December), and having a 2-week stretch in late-January to have two or three OOC games? Take the scheduling from early in the season, remove 2-3 teams, and put them in this time January time-period.

Here's why I'm thinking that might be a good idea and at least worthy of consideration. Teams grow, develop, deal with injuries over the course of a season. You could have a completely different team in the second half, but by then it's too late - you can't strengthen your resume with any additional OOC wins. Seton Hall, SJU, and Providence are all seemingly playing better now than they were earlier in the season. But there's no chance of making up for the setbacks in the early OOC schedule. A prime example of how this could impact a team is G'Town managing to schedule (and beat) MSU. That win literally may be the only reason the Hoyas have any chance at all at an at-large bid, but only if everything else goes near-perfectly from here on out.

In a deep conference like the Big East (and most of the other top conferences), it might be beneficial to give teams a chance to make a statement with some more quality OOC wins later in the season. Let's call it an extended version of what mid-majors looked to accomplished with the bracketbuster (which, I acknowledge, wasn't that great a system).

Is this the dumbest idea ever? Or can people see what I'm getting at?

well in theory every team has a bye some where in league play that allows them to schedule an OOC if they so choose. Georgetown filled theirs with Michigan St. St. John's filled theirs with Dartmouth. Other teams didn't choose to play a game and take the extra rest.

[SecureDaBall]

Long time reader; first time poster.

I'm not sure this is the thread in which to bring this up, but as I was reading it, this thought popped into my head. With the NCAA tournament selection committee placing a strong emphasis on OOC scheduling and quality wins, should the NCAA consider moving up the conference schedule by a few weeks (earlier in December), and having a 2-week stretch in late-January to have two or three OOC games? Take the scheduling from early in the season, remove 2-3 teams, and put them in this time January time-period.

Here's why I'm thinking that might be a good idea and at least worthy of consideration. Teams grow, develop, deal with injuries over the course of a season. You could have a completely different team in the second half, but by then it's too late - you can't strengthen your resume with any additional OOC wins. Seton Hall, SJU, and Providence are all seemingly playing better now than they were earlier in the season. But there's no chance of making up for the setbacks in the early OOC schedule. A prime example of how this could impact a team is G'Town managing to schedule (and beat) MSU. That win literally may be the only reason the Hoyas have any chance at all at an at-large bid, but only if everything else goes near-perfectly from here on out.

In a deep conference like the Big East (and most of the other top conferences), it might be beneficial to give teams a chance to make a statement with some more quality OOC wins later in the season. Let's call it an extended version of what mid-majors looked to accomplished with the bracketbuster (which, I acknowledge, wasn't that great a system).

Is this the dumbest idea ever? Or can people see what I'm getting at?

well in theory every team has a bye some where in league play that allows them to schedule an OOC if they so choose. Georgetown filled theirs with Michigan St. St. John's filled theirs with Dartmouth. Other teams didn't choose to play a game and take the extra rest.

Also, I have a suspicion that January OOC games would be more in line with St. John's-Dartmouth than G'town-Sparty but I think it's worth a try. Anything is better than the pre-season tourneys in obscure locals with no fans in attendance.

[TheHall]

I'm not comparing it to other leagues. Personally, I think this league is as good as any league other than the Big Ten and Big 12 in the sense that there are no games off. Everyone says Florida is hot right now - they have played NOBODY in the SEC.

However, that doesn't change the fact that if you're a Big East bubble team, you have 2 wins you can hang your hat on: Villanova and Creighton. Everyone else is a bubble team or worse.

In the old Big East, you could survive an ugly non-conference schedule because you'd have opportunities to make it up in conference with top 10 and top 25 wins. Not in this league. In this league, if you don't beat Nova or Creighton, there are no opportunities for statement wins in this league that are game changers in terms of resume.

Hopefully, Marquette and (ugh) Georgetown get it together next year to give it more depth at the top.

To me, Xavier, Providence, Georgetown, St. John's and Marquette are all in a similar tier of talent where if things break right they can make the tournament as an 8-12 seed. If they don't win close games, they're NIT bound.

The league is deep in the sense that there aren't many cupcake games. But it doesn't get the credit it deserves because most of these teams have smaller fan bases, and don't get exposure because of that unless they force you to pay attention. There aren't any Syracuses in this league that would generate national interest regardless of the game result.

Although I agree w/your current assessment of the league, this is stiil only the first year of a new league, remember Syracuse wasn't always SYRACUSE just check the history of the league. Also remember at one time Gonzaga wasn't on the map (and Butler for that matter). This league WILL get respect going forward for 3 reasons: $$, TV exposure & good coaches (recruiting and X's & O's). Those are all leading indicators and they are trending extremely well for BE schools on a whole.

[MackNova]

I'm not comparing it to other leagues. Personally, I think this league is as good as any league other than the Big Ten and Big 12 in the sense that there are no games off. Everyone says Florida is hot right now - they have played NOBODY in the SEC.

However, that doesn't change the fact that if you're a Big East bubble team, you have 2 wins you can hang your hat on: Villanova and Creighton. Everyone else is a bubble team or worse.

In the old Big East, you could survive an ugly non-conference schedule because you'd have opportunities to make it up in conference with top 10 and top 25 wins. Not in this league. In this league, if you don't beat Nova or Creighton, there are no opportunities for statement wins in this league that are game changers in terms of resume.

Hopefully, Marquette and (ugh) Georgetown get it together next year to give it more depth at the top.

To me, Xavier, Providence, Georgetown, St. John's and Marquette are all in a similar tier of talent where if things break right they can make the tournament as an 8-12 seed. If they don't win close games, they're NIT bound.

The league is deep in the sense that there aren't many cupcake games. But it doesn't get the credit it deserves because most of these teams have smaller fan bases, and don't get exposure because of that unless they force you to pay attention. There aren't any Syracuses in this league that would generate national interest regardless of the game result.

Although I agree w/your current assessment of the league, this is stiil only the first year of a new league, remember Syracuse wasn't always SYRACUSE just check the history of the league. Also remember at one time Gonzaga wasn't on the map (and Butler for that matter). This league WILL get respect going forward for 3 reasons: $$, TV exposure & good coaches (recruiting and X's & O's). Those are all leading indicators and they are trending extremely well for BE schools on a whole.

How is TV exposure trending well? It might get there, but no one watches FS1 at the moment. And coaches? While it's certainly not a bad coaching league, other than Jay Wright, Buzz Williams and JT3, no one cares about the coaches. Not saying the others are bad, but not a single one has much meat on his resume. And how will money earn the league respect? It earns the teams money, which has benefits, but it doesn't improve the league profile.

What will improve the league profile? Winning in March and April. No current Big East team has won a title in my lifetime. That's why I want more teams in the dance. Losing on the road at Kansas St or California or Indiana has far less impact than losing on the road at Providence does. Or even Georgetown this year, and Georgetown was a 2 seed last year. At least that's the perception I get. When Providence could prove itself by knocking off Louisville or Georgetown beating Pitt or St. John's beating Cincinnati, there were more games to prove that they belong on a national level.

[TheHall]

Although I agree w/your current assessment of the league, this is stiil only the first year of a new league, remember Syracuse wasn't always SYRACUSE just check the history of the league. Also remember at one time Gonzaga wasn't on the map (and Butler for that matter). This league WILL get respect going forward for 3 reasons: $$, TV exposure & good coaches (recruiting and X's & O's). Those are all leading indicators and they are trending extremely well for BE schools on a whole.

How is TV exposure trending well? It might get there, but no one watches FS1 at the moment. And coaches? While it's certainly not a bad coaching league, other than Jay Wright, Buzz Williams and JT3, no one cares about the coaches. Not saying the others are bad, but not a single one has much meat on his resume. And how will money earn the league respect? It earns the teams money, which has benefits, but it doesn't improve the league profile.

What will improve the league profile? Winning in March and April. No current Big East team has won a title in my lifetime. That's why I want more teams in the dance. Losing on the road at Kansas St or California or Indiana has far less impact than losing on the road at Providence does. Or even Georgetown this year, and Georgetown was a 2 seed last year. At least that's the perception I get. When Providence could prove itself by knocking off Louisville or Georgetown beating Pitt or St. John's beating Cincinnati, there were more games to prove that they belong on a national level.

In one paragraph you trashed the core recruiting pitch that every coach in the league used this year for signing the best per/team class in our first season.

- The BE just signed a 10yr, $500M media deal with FOX and you don't understand how TV exposure is trending well. 2 years ago no one saw this coming except you I guess. Ask Uconn, Memphis, BC, WVU, Wichita st or VCU if they would like this tv expsore for their bball programs?

- No one watches FS1 because it didn't exist 9 months ago. The same thing was true about the current worldwide leader in sports not that long ago. I could picture you back then - nobody's gonna watch the channel with all the dirt bike & speed boat racing. Are you making a bold prediction that FS1 won't be successful going forward? Fox OTA & news have overcome similar hurdles (w/less than reputable means IMO- Rupert) to become successful.

- No one cares about coaches??? How about recruits, their families, AAU/hs coaches, boosters, alumni, etc.? Also why do you consider only the coaches that have made it to a F4 as "good coaches" in the league? If a coach can recruit he's already a good coach, if he can win he's a great coach too. Many programs have good X's & O's guys but they can't get the talent. Right now BU has the "worst" class of recruits/transfers (SJU doesn't count so far this yr), yet they are still bringing in Kelan Martin who is going to be a star IMO.

- How will money help BE as a whole get respect?? Really...how about better facilities for its programs, more fundraising ability for them, and the ability to hire better coaches & assistant coaches to be in the league. The original profile of the BE was founded on the strength of coaches, many who actually became great while in the BE during those early years, others went elsewhere & became great later (Pitino) and its great players over the years. The dominant coaching presence continued all the way until the end of the oBE. The same thing can happen with this group too.

Basically you're 2nd paragraph is like "no kidding" who doesn't want all the glory. But this league isn't owed that status, the BE is going to have to re-group and earn that. I can't hep it if you don't see that's exactly what they have been doing (and doing well) post the defections & since partnering with FOX. You used Cincy as an example, you must don't know how long it has taken Cronin to get Cincy to this level, pretty much the majority of the time in the BE was a struggle to become Top 10 for Cincy. Cronin's on record plenty saying as much over the years. The trick is not to get caught up in the short term only. Yet you keep talking about this moment in time (no one watches FS1, there's no Syracuse in the league, etc.) but everything about realignment is focused on the long term.