Well thats all folks

[Bill Marsh]

Funny, because as a Creighton fan I think the conference season is the key to the whole season. The conference tournament is great and all but the round robin season is what makes the Big East special. I also find it humorous that Providence hung a banner and gave out rings as "Big East champs" after a 4th place finish in the league but that's just me.

Yeah, and UConn has the nerve to claim the "national" championship after finishing 3rd in their conference. It's everywhere. The SF Giants even call themselves "World Champions" in MLB when they couldn't even win their own division.

Welcome to the 21st century. It's a brave new world.

BTW, Providence didn't finish 4th in the league. They finished 3rd.

All kidding aside, I actually sympathize with Creighton's situation. They won the most league games last year (regular season + tournament), but they walk away with nothing as Villanova gets recognized as regular seasons champs and PC as league/tourney champs.

[Bill Marsh]

Funny, because as a Creighton fan I think the conference season is the key to the whole season. The conference tournament is great and all but the round robin season is what makes the Big East special. I also find it humorous that Providence hung a banner and gave out rings as "Big East champs" after a 4th place finish in the league but that's just me.

You don't know the Big East then. I'm not sure how other conferences do it, but The BET has always been the crown jewel on the conference. Having the top conference record is impressive over the long haul, but in the end only 1 team is conference champion, the one who stood last at MSG. Otherwise what is the point of the tournament?

Let's be honest. The point of the tournament is to make money.

[R Jay]

Think the point Omaha is trying to make is that a single elimination tournament is not a good method to determine the best team in the conference. It's a really small sample size and extremely vulnerable to randomness. Think about it this way: last year Seton Hall upset Villanova and Providence beat St. John's, then Providence beat Seton Hall and then Creighton. Would anyone argue that Providence was the best team in the conference last year? Probably not. That was clearly Villanova.

[NJRedman]

Funny, because as a Creighton fan I think the conference season is the key to the whole season. The conference tournament is great and all but the round robin season is what makes the Big East special. I also find it humorous that Providence hung a banner and gave out rings as "Big East champs" after a 4th place finish in the league but that's just me.

The winner of the Big East Tournament is the Conference Champion. It has always been that way in the Big East. If you ask who holds the most Big East Championships, its Georgetown and UConn with 7 each. Both have also won regular season championships but the league officially recognizes the tourney champion as the conference champion. St. John's, Syracuse, Louisville, all have similar banners hanging in their arenas.

Thats not true at all. It totally recognizes the regular season champion with a trophy.

Do you forget Marquette getting their trophy on our home floor?



Or GTown that same season?



The conference recognizes both the regular season and tournament champs as the champs of the league. Though they give out the auto-bid to the tournament champs. They give out trophies to regular season champs as well.

[stever20]

look at the trophy from last years BET though:
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/rqu9Z7jM ... /Ed+Cooley

it says Men's Basketball Champion. Not Men's Basketball Tournament Champion.

[Bill Marsh]

Think the point Omaha is trying to make is that a single elimination tournament is not a good method to determine the best team in the conference. It's a really small sample size and extremely vulnerable to randomness. Think about it this way: last year Seton Hall upset Villanova and Providence beat St. John's, then Providence beat Seton Hall and then Creighton. Would anyone argue that Providence was the best team in the conference last year? Probably not. That was clearly Villanova.

Clearly Villanova?

Kind of hard to make that argument when Creighton not only won just as many league games as Villanova did but literally blew the doors off Nova - not once but twice.

[shupat08]

Think the point Omaha is trying to make is that a single elimination tournament is not a good method to determine the best team in the conference. It's a really small sample size and extremely vulnerable to randomness. Think about it this way: last year Seton Hall upset Villanova and Providence beat St. John's, then Providence beat Seton Hall and then Creighton. Would anyone argue that Providence was the best team in the conference last year? Probably not. That was clearly Villanova.

So then, I guess the NCAA Tournament isn't a good way to determine the top team in the nation?

Single elimination (check), small sample size (check), extremely vulnerable to randomness (check).

Yet, everyone says the NCAA Tournament is one of the best, if not the best events in sports.

[R Jay]

Think the point Omaha is trying to make is that a single elimination tournament is not a good method to determine the best team in the conference. It's a really small sample size and extremely vulnerable to randomness. Think about it this way: last year Seton Hall upset Villanova and Providence beat St. John's, then Providence beat Seton Hall and then Creighton. Would anyone argue that Providence was the best team in the conference last year? Probably not. That was clearly Villanova.

So then, I guess the NCAA Tournament isn't a good way to determine the top team in the nation?

Single elimination (check), small sample size (check), extremely vulnerable to randomness (check).

Yet, everyone says the NCAA Tournament is one of the best, if not the best events in sports.

Nope, it isn't. It is definitely exciting and very good television, but as a method of determining who is the best team in the country, it fails. Guess who KenPom had as his champion last year? Louisville. Guess who Sagarin had as his champion last year? Louisville. Guess where KenPom had UCONN? eighth. Guess where Sagarin had UCONN? sixth.

[RDinNY]

Think the point Omaha is trying to make is that a single elimination tournament is not a good method to determine the best team in the conference. It's a really small sample size and extremely vulnerable to randomness. Think about it this way: last year Seton Hall upset Villanova and Providence beat St. John's, then Providence beat Seton Hall and then Creighton. Would anyone argue that Providence was the best team in the conference last year? Probably not. That was clearly Villanova.

So then, I guess the NCAA Tournament isn't a good way to determine the top team in the nation?

Single elimination (check), small sample size (check), extremely vulnerable to randomness (check).

Yet, everyone says the NCAA Tournament is one of the best, if not the best events in sports.

Nope, it isn't. It is definitely exciting and very good television, but as a method of determining who is the best team in the country, it fails. Guess who KenPom had as his champion last year? Louisville. Guess who Sagarin had as his champion last year? Louisville. Guess where KenPom had UCONN? eighth. Guess where Sagarin had UCONN? sixth.

So...Kenpom should decide the national championship?

[shupat08]

So...Kenpom should decide the national championship?

YES! LOL.

I mean, Louisville played Kentucky in the regular season last year and lost to Kentucky... Louisville played Kentucky and lost in the Tournament. Kentucky then went onto become National Runner-Up.

That's not randomness. It's pretty simple, in my eyes.

Kentucky was more talented than Louisville. Louisville lost, Kentucky went on to be the #2 team in the Nation behind UConn.