Non-Big East Conference Realignment Thread v. 2017

[stever20]

VCU plays awful Gimmick Ball... can we enjoy the Big East for the awesomeness it is?! Instead people keep lobbying for their crappy teams on a Big East message board, dreaming of a day when they can water the Big East down?

If you are a fan of a non-Big East team... why not spend your time and energy lobbying your school's administration rather than coming on here talking about non-Big East teams.

...In the middle of a fantastic season and these people want to talk about this crap... awful.

Since when is a press a gimmick? I guess West Virginia is a gimmick as well..... That's the thing that just amazes me how folks here act like pressing is gimmicky.

[scoscox]

I pointed each one out to show that they weren't that far off the mark in the grand scheme of things.

And sure, Butler had done it 5 times in program history - but that also included the two years in a row they made the title game in 2010 and 2011. So before that, Butler had accomplished that achievement 3 times over the course of program history. Keep in mind, VCU has only had a basketball program since 1968, while the first time Butler won two games in the NCAA Tournament was, get this... 1962. They didn't even make the tournament again until 1997! By that point, VCU already had six tournament appearances. The next time Butler won two games in the tournament? 2003.

So really, what I should have pointed out even more is that RECENT success is what vaulted someone like Butler into the new Big East. And their recent success isn't that different than VCU's situation, other than Butler's high point included two straight back-to-back national title appearances (which obviously ranks higher than VCU's accomplishment, no arguments there).

Again, I clearly understand the reasons why Butler & Xavier were chosen over VCU. It's got far less to do with basketball ability though, and it's a little frustrating to see people minimize that when you take a closer look at things. Bill and I are in agreement here.

I agree with you for the most part. I think that metric can be somewhat disingenuous and was used as a knock on Xavier for a long time, but if you were going to bring up those numbers, I was going to point out how they supported my position. I don't have anything against VCU. I think they are doing a lot of good things. Saying they are a lot like X in the mid 90's is a compliment (mid-major, high commitment to basketball, trying to make their mark). Like I said, I was just taking offense to Stever saying VCU would've been the Big East's first choice for addition period end of story. Far from it being the end of the story, X and Butler were both clearly more deserving. This is not to say VCU is not a good program, as I also pointed out.

With regard to your argument in this post, even taking out the non-basketball aspects, the arguments for Xavier and Butler over VCU are still strong. It's rich that you would discount the two years that Butler went to the national championship. If that logic were applied to VCU's ONE run to the final four you would have no argument at all. Taking those years into consideration can you not agree that it is clear that Butler would be more qualified based on recent success? And STILL taking those years out, Butler had done it two more times than VCU. I just don't see any area where the argument over X and Butler has solid footing. Even granting that Butler and VCU aren't much different, which still requires significant stretching, they would still have to outpace what X has been doing since the mid 80's.

Reading your other posts, I don't think we really disagree all that much. In the grand scheme in relation to Duke or North Carolina, sure VCU and Butler are not that far off, but as far as proving their worth to earn membership into a conference, there are clear differences that would distinguish Butler and VCU. This is not a knock on VCU, just a refutation of stever's point.

I'm honestly getting tired of talking about this. I love what the Big East is doing right now. When you are good enough, the Big East will come calling. Until then, let your team do the talking. Can we agree on that?

[H.U.S.T.L.E.]

I pointed each one out to show that they weren't that far off the mark in the grand scheme of things.

And sure, Butler had done it 5 times in program history - but that also included the two years in a row they made the title game in 2010 and 2011. So before that, Butler had accomplished that achievement 3 times over the course of program history. Keep in mind, VCU has only had a basketball program since 1968, while the first time Butler won two games in the NCAA Tournament was, get this... 1962. They didn't even make the tournament again until 1997! By that point, VCU already had six tournament appearances. The next time Butler won two games in the tournament? 2003.

So really, what I should have pointed out even more is that RECENT success is what vaulted someone like Butler into the new Big East. And their recent success isn't that different than VCU's situation, other than Butler's high point included two straight back-to-back national title appearances (which obviously ranks higher than VCU's accomplishment, no arguments there).

Again, I clearly understand the reasons why Butler & Xavier were chosen over VCU. It's got far less to do with basketball ability though, and it's a little frustrating to see people minimize that when you take a closer look at things. Bill and I are in agreement here.

I agree with you for the most part. I think that metric can be somewhat disingenuous and was used as a knock on Xavier for a long time, but if you were going to bring up those numbers, I was going to point out how they supported my position. I don't have anything against VCU. I think they are doing a lot of good things. Saying they are a lot like X in the mid 90's is a compliment (mid-major, high commitment to basketball, trying to make their mark). Like I said, I was just taking offense to Stever saying VCU would've been the Big East's first choice for addition period end of story. Far from it being the end of the story, X and Butler were both clearly more deserving. This is not to say VCU is not a good program, as I also pointed out.

With regard to your argument in this post, even taking out the non-basketball aspects, the arguments for Xavier and Butler over VCU are still strong. It's rich that you would discount the two years that Butler went to the national championship. If that logic were applied to VCU's ONE run to the final four you would have no argument at all. Taking those years into consideration can you not agree that it is clear that Butler would be more qualified based on recent success? And STILL taking those years out, Butler had done it two more times than VCU. I just don't see any area where the argument over X and Butler has solid footing. Even granting that Butler and VCU aren't much different, which still requires significant stretching, they would still have to outpace what X has been doing since the mid 80's.

Reading your other posts, I don't think we really disagree all that much. In the grand scheme in relation to Duke or North Carolina, sure VCU and Butler are not that far off, but as far as proving their worth to earn membership into a conference, there are clear differences that would distinguish Butler and VCU. This is not a knock on VCU, just a refutation of stever's point.

I'm honestly getting tired of talking about this. I love what the Big East is doing right now. When you are good enough, the Big East will come calling. Until then, let your team do the talking. Can we agree on that?

Totally agree on the last point here. And yeah, we really aren't disagreeing that much on things, just semantics. But hey, isn't that why message boards exist?

But just re-read what I wrote - I wasn't discounting Butler's two back-to-back appearances. Hell, I even said it "obviously ranks higher than VCU's accomplishment, no arguments there." I just think numbers can be skewed to help whatever your argument is presenting, which is why the "VCU has only done it once" narrative rings false to me.

But recency clearly matters here, and it's one of the reasons Butler is DESERVEDLY in the Big East. All I was trying to point out (and Bill has also done quite well) is that VCU is deservedly in the conversation for Big East membership from a basketball and results-oriented perspective. Obviously other factors have been weighed to be more important than others, and that's perfectly fine by me. And when you do weigh all the factors together, Butler, Xavier and Creighton make much more sense. I've got no issue with any of that.

As I've mentioned elsewhere in the past, I went to Virginia Tech but grew up in Richmond and went to lots of UR and VCU games growing up. I was a ballboy for lots of games during Beilein's tenure at Richmond, so I've got a soft spot in my heart for those programs. I just thought people were dismissing VCU too easily for basketball reasons, when I think it's pretty clear that market & institutional fit were clearly the reasons not to be included in the new Big East.

[Bill Marsh]

I don't see how I'm going to an extreme by pointing out facts. I think you guys are still way off the mark here.

Xavier had only been past the second round once before 2004 and then they rattled off six NCAA runs in the last decade. Even then we'd been going to the tournament virtually every year since 1983. Xavier was, bar none, the most consistent mid-major program in the country and had proved to be so under 5 different head coaches.

Butler had been making the tournament consistently since the mid 90's and then had both of their runs, still significantly more consistent and successful than VCU by a considerable margin.

By a considerable margin? 13 tournaments since the mid 90's for Butler and 10 for VCU, 2 Final 4's vs 1. Hardly a wide margin. Of course Butler has other bragging points in terms of Elite 8's and Sweet 16's. But so does VCU. One of only 8 teams to have gone to the tournament for each of the past 6 years and the only team in the country besides Kansas to have won 24+ games each of the last 10 years. And then there was their upset of Duke in the 2007 tournament.

Only when you define the period of success as "since the mid 90's", does Butler look so good because that's the period that's to their advantage. But they did nothing before that. If we define it as since 1980, virtually the entire open tournament era, we have VCU going to more tournaments and making the tournament multiple times in each of the last 4 decades, something which Butler can't claim. That is consistency over a longer period of time.

Creighton is more of an argument, but Creighton had been dominating their conference and going to the tournament consistently since the late 90's. VCU has only found consistent success as recently as 2011.

Well, Creighton is the only one I cited in my particular argument and I did it based on the terms you proposed. Only by changing the conditions does Creighton come out looking as good or better. But if that's what it takes, then both have been good. Again I refer you to VCU's success going back as far as 1980. By comparison, Creighton is a johnny-come-lately.

VCU is starting to show a strong commitment under Will Wade and their recent spate of coaches is encouraging (Jeff Capel, Anthony Grant, Shaka, Wade). I see a lot of similarities between them and the Xavier program in the mid 90's. To say they personify inconsistent and bad basketball is obviously not true, but then to say VCU would have been the first choice for the Big East period end of story is laughable and belittles what the programs the Big East added had been doing for decades.

In response to H.U.S.T.L.E., so EVERY. SINGLE. TEAM. you listed has done it more than once and, more to the point, Butler has done it 5 times and Xavier 7. The Big East added it's third and fourth most successful programs, with regard to that metric, with those additions. VCU would be added as it's least successful program according to that metric. I'm only saying that Stever vaulting VCU over Xavier, Butler, and Creighton is to ignore the actual accomplishments of each program and I was trying to put that in perspective. I realize it's a difficult accomplishment. Pointing this out only amplifies the gulf between those numbers. To put VCU's success on par with Xavier or Butler is insulting to those programs. It's nothing against VCU. Perhaps a better word would be "unproven". I agree they have been pretty consistent for the better part of a decade as far as being a tournament team.

In response to Fieldhouse Flyer... yea, all of what you just posted is exactly what I'm talking about. That is a grand total of 8 tournament appearances in 28 years. That's not a really great model of consistency.

What's the significance of 28 years? Why not 25? Why not 30? To have to repeatedly change the criteria with each comparison only shows that the argument doesn't sustain itself if we look at the bigger picture. Whether we're talking about VCU or Dayton, both have their strong points and both have their issues. But in the end both have strengths that make them worth considering.

"Archie Miller has won 5 NCAA Tournament games in the past 3 seasons, and it appears that he will remain at Dayton for a number of years to come." - Archie is consistently talked about as one of the top candidates for open jobs every offseason, so this seems like wishful thinking.

Look, I granted you that they had been better under Archie and I really don't have anything against Dayton. If they were to prove themselves a worthy addition, I'd gladly welcome them, but that is not yet the case. I'd suggest taking the "be so good they cant ignore you" route and let the team do your talking.

[kayako]

Creighton did have an all-time great player on its roster at the time. In hindsight, we needed that factor with the league not very strong in its inaugural year. I'd hate to think if the league passed up on a better program simply because it wasn't catholic enough. VCU is a solid consistent program that'd be among 5 or 6 schools on my list of candidates if the BE is forced to expand.

[Edrick]

Many consider the 1985 season the start of the modern era, so that's a pretty good starter for your ranging.

I suppose you could argue the Bird/Magic 1979 season but that was still 32 teams.

Anything before that is just the dark ages. An age that didn't live broadcast the freaking NCAA Tournament has no bearing on the current state of the sport.

[DudeAnon]

The 2016 Conference Realignment Thread averaged 3 posts a day whereas this one is averaging 9. Nice.

[DudeAnon]

VCU plays awful Gimmick Ball... can we enjoy the Big East for the awesomeness it is?! Instead people keep lobbying for their crappy teams on a Big East message board, dreaming of a day when they can water the Big East down?

If you are a fan of a non-Big East team... why not spend your time and energy lobbying your school's administration rather than coming on here talking about non-Big East teams.

...In the middle of a fantastic season and these people want to talk about this crap... awful.

Since when is a press a gimmick? I guess West Virginia is a gimmick as well..... That's the thing that just amazes me how folks here act like pressing is gimmicky.

Did you ever watch VCU before the rule changes? They were a great team and Shaka was a hell of a coach. But HAVOC was a hell of a lot more than just a press. And a lot of it is now illegal.

[scoscox]

Bill, fair enough. Those are all legitimate points to consider. However, on a case by case basis, I think there are fewer concerns about the future success of Xavier than there are of VCU and Dayton. I think we were more of a known quantity than any non-major program at the time of realignment outside of Gonzaga. When VCU or Dayton or any other school elevate their status to that level, I think they will be worth bringing in. Until that happens, I don't think there is any good reason to expand.

[stever20]

lets look at the numbers.....

Smart was at VCU for 6 years.... looking at team defensive stats....
2010- FTRate was #41 in the country. TO rate was #130
2011- FT Rate was #93 in the country. TO rate was #62.
2012- FT Rate was #186 in the country. TO rate was #1
2013- FT Rate was #272 in the country. TO rate was #1
2014- FT Rate was #158 in the country. TO rate was #1
2015- FT Rate was #198 in the country. TO rate was #11
At Texas
2016 FT rate was #203 in the country. TO rate #152
2017 FT rate is #49 in the country. TO Rate #179

So while it did hurt them a bit in 2013 really only- the turnovers still were coming. But get this. The freedom of movement stuff started up not in 2013, but in 2014.

And look at VCU now....
2016- FT Rate #171 TO Rate #18
2017- FT Rate #242 TO Rate #22

So they're still turning teams over more than just about anyone. Get turnovers on about 2 of every 9 possessions.

As far as Texas this year- they are 7-7, but against a really tough schedule. 7 losses, and only 1 is outside the KP top 100. Northwestern, Colorado, Michigan, Arkansas, and Kansas St- all 5 away from home. Their SOS right now is #33. Projected to finish with a top 10 SOS overall.