In reading some posts on the board this year as well as the coaches in BE discuss the conference, it seems that most think the conference is very strong and deep this year. I don't think so. I think the conference has some good teams, but not great ones with G-town being the possible exception. Wtih the tradition of the teams in the conference, I think it will always be one of the top 5 conferences, but I don't think this is a particularly strong year. Up until the past two games, I thought MU was well-positioned to win it. Now, I would put my money on G-Town with the rest of the league battling for 2nd. But I don't think G-town is a top 5 team either.
Thoughts?
I dont think that the BE is NOT strong. I think that it has a very flat and extremely competitive field. The BE has something that Major League Baseball needs... Parity. In the BE, anyone could beat anyone on any given day.
Maybe this parity hurts the conference, because while the games are intense and (exclusion of some unmentionable MU games) rather close, it might appear that the Big East may be competitive only in its conference. But come on Mu went into the Kohl's center and beat an annual Big Ten contender. We took Duke to the wire. Georgetown stomped a multiple personality Michigan squad, West Virgina duked it out with Tennessee in a early season tourny. The BE has defeated talented nonconference teams.
I dont really think that traditional powerhouse teams like UConn and Syracuse not being ranked, or getting the credit they should, is lightening the strength of this conference.
When the 10th place team in the BE goes in and beats the Big Ten's top team on its court, what does that tell you? Georgetown is a Final Four contender, Pitt is tough as nails, Louisville when healthy can beat anyone, UConn has as many studs as the Knicks...and on and on.
While the BE has some strong victories, they also have some bad losses and teams who've had poor out-of-conference records doing quite well in conference - see Cincinnati and DePaul. In addition, the BE doesn't have a player of the year candidate or any of the top freshman. I don't think the conference is bad, but I thought it was stronger last year.
The Big East does not have any top 10 teams. Georgetwon nice team, but not great. However, there are no given wins in this league.
Quote from: AlumKCof93 on January 24, 2008, 02:03:48 PM
In reading some posts on the board this year as well as the coaches in BE discuss the conference, it seems that most think the conference is very strong and deep this year. I don't think so. I think the conference has some good teams, but not great ones with G-town being the possible exception. Wtih the tradition of the teams in the conference, I think it will always be one of the top 5 conferences, but I don't think this is a particularly strong year. Up until the past two games, I thought MU was well-positioned to win it. Now, I would put my money on G-Town with the rest of the league battling for 2nd. But I don't think G-town is a top 5 team either.
Thoughts?
Not strong in relation to what? Other conferences? I guess I'd like to know who is stronger besides the ACC and maybe the Pac Ten...top to bottom.
I don't think I've seen a rating system that didn't have this conference either 1, 2 or 3 in the country.
Injuries have hurt...Georgetown and Louisville (back at full strength) are Final Four caliber. If not for the inuries to FIelds and Cook, Pittsburgh would be on that list as well. Even with those injuries, they have hung around nicely.
MU will be in the Top 15 most of the year. UCOnn is drastically improved. Villanova, ND, WVU are all capable of winning every game on their scedule.
As far as having good teams, and not "great ones" goes, you could say that about just about any conference. The ACC has one potentially great team in UNC. Big 12 - Kansas, Pac10 - UCLA, CUSA - Memphis. Difference is, the middle and lower half of the Big East appears to be stronger than that on the ACC, Big 12, etc.
I'm in ACC country. I don't think the ACC, other than NC and Duke, is much to brag about.
The Big Ten? P l e a s e!
The Big East currently has 11 teams ranked in the top 50 in RPI.
11 out of 16. (69%)
The ACC has 4 out of 12. (33%)
The Big 10 has 4 out of 11. (36%)
The Big 12 has 5 out of 12. (42%)
The Pac 10 has 6 out of 10. (60%)
The SEC has 4 out of 12. (33%)
Top to bottom, the Big East this season may be the toughest conference in the history of college basketball. The *11th* best team has an RPI of 49. Completely unheard of. Only the Pac-10 is in the same ballpark.
Speaking of which, from this morning's New Haven Register. Even mentions the Big Ten.
________________________________________________________________
Posted on Friday, Jan 25, 2008
Tougher schedules lead to ratings boost
Big East's spot in RPI better than last season
By Brett Orzechowski, Register Staff
The Big East's demise last season could be attributed to a number of variables — once-successful programs hampered by youth and injury, an unfamiliar conference schedule, the ever-popular parity that has now grown thin on some conference coaches. In all, the Big East was comparable to the Missouri Valley Conference.
Yet with just seven weeks remaining until the first NCAA Tournament game, the numbers have changed and so has the perspective.
The Big East has improved and as of Thursday sits behind the ACC and Pac-10 in Ken Pomeroy's simulated ratings percentage index (it finished fifth last season). As for popular thought, the conference placed four teams in this week's Associated Press Top 25 but that may change with Pittsburgh and Villanova both losing this week. Still, a number of Big East coaches mentioned in October that a program may lose four conference games and claim the regular-season title. At the current rate, those predictions carry some validity.
The Big Ten has replaced the Big East of the six major conferences in terms of mediocrity this season even though Indiana, Michigan State and Wisconsin are responsible for a quarter of the rankings' top 12 spots. Of the three, only Indiana will play a non-conference game the rest of the season with a home date against the University of Connecticut on Saturday. That means the noncompetitive non-conference games earlier in the season hold less clout in the RPI, but for Indiana, a win against a middle-of-the-pack Big East team may help.
Still, the overall goal of the Big East conference and commissioner Mike Tranghese was to strengthen the core and it will continue to do so now that an 18-game conference schedule is in place for the next few years. This allows programs to schedule more competitive games around long-term agreements made before the extension. Or, at least, the conference and fans would like to hope.
There has been more improvement. Of the six major conferences, only the ACC has a more competitive non-conference schedule than the Big East this winter. For comparison, the Southern, Metro Atlantic and Sun Belt Conferences all own tougher collective schedules than the Pac-10, currently second in the RPI.
This will change as the season progresses, but statistics show the Big East did, in fact, face tougher competition the past three months. For instance, UConn, which did improve its schedule from last season with dates against Gonzaga and, with a fortuitous twist (see: Holy Cross, Gardner-Webb), Memphis, has played the ninth-toughest non-conference slate of the Big East's 16 teams. That should jump after the Indiana game but still play a factor when bids are considered for postseason tournaments.
At this point, the strengthening of the core may also have an adverse effect on NCAA Tournament bids. Four teams already have double-digit losses while DePaul is .500 at 9-9 and injury-plagued Syracuse, which many thought was snubbed by the committee, is 13-7. Even before February, the list of possible NCAA Tournament teams has already been whittled down.
With all his convictions, Tranghese believed in October that at least half the conference should fill 12 percent of the overall NCAA field. With half the Big East hovering around the .500 mark in conference play, this allows more debate about where at-large bids should go.
After all, 15th-ranked Butler isn't even the top team in the Horizon League. Coupled with the emergence of middle-tier conferences like the Atlantic-10 with Dayton and Xavier (both ranked) and regional programs like the University of Massachusetts and Rhode Island, those at-large spots will be minimal.
There's also one more variable — the mid-major that is slowly supplanting the majors — the Missouri Valley. Fortunately for the Big East, everyone's favorite upstart has faltered a bit this season.
Brett Orzechowski can be reached at borzechowski@nhregister.com.
hum, now how competitive is the Big East when Uconn goes into Indiana to beat a highly ranked Hoosier squad?
I know that the BE is doing well in the RPI, but my post had more to do with the fact that while the BE is deep and has some good teams, I don't think there are any great ones, except for Georgetown and even that's questionable. While the parity of the league is great, I think it also shows that every team in the BE is beatable and I'm not convinced the BE will do great in the NCAA tourney this year. While UCONN beating IU is great, I don't think it points to how poor the Big 10 is than how superior the BE is.
Quote from: AlumKCof93 on January 28, 2008, 10:17:29 AM
While the parity of the league is great, I think it also shows that every team in the BE is beatable and I'm not convinced the BE will do great in the NCAA tourney this year.
So What makes a great team? Who are the great teams? UNC? They are obviously beatable since the lost to Maryland - at home. UCLA? Lost to USC - at home. Kansas? Maybe, but the Big 12 is obviously nowhere near as strong as the Big East. Memphis? Yeah, I think they are probably a great team this year, and in their crap conference they are probably unbeatable.
So the question becomes what is your point? You don't think the BE will do good in the NCAA, why? Because there are no great teams? Which conference(s) is going to do good in the NCAA then, and why?
My point is that when the NCAA tournament is set, I don't think there are many BE teams that scare me. Except maybe G-Town. Louisville? Could be really good, but they keep losing to teams they shouldn't. ND? Average. Pitt, very good if no injuries. But the injuries they've suffered really hurt them. WVU, good at home but not a great team. UCONN - improving and may be the surprise of the leage. Villanova and Providence are disappointing.
I think MU should finish in the top 3 of the league, but we all know we are vulnerable to any teams with a productive big.
So what's my point? My point is that the BE is a good league with great depth, but may not have the ability to win on a neutral court in the tournament due to a lack of top players. Who is the best player in the league right now? It might be DJ.
Agree with Naivin. I think the Big East will do very well in the tourney. Acc has North Carolina and Duke but after those two who scares you? Big 12 has Kansas and who else? Texas is inconsistent and Baylor's a nice story but a Big East team crushes them in the tourney. Big 10-we saw what UConn did to Indiana. SEC-Tennessee's good but not great then who's the second best team-Miss.St or Florida? Pac10 has some good teams. UCLA, WSU, Arizona, Stanford, USC. Georgetown and Louisville are Elite 8 teams and could make the Final 4 with some breaks. UConn is darn talented and seems to be putting it together and I think WV, Marq, ND, and Pitt if they get healthy could win a game or two.
I think we all get frustrated by our team because we follow them so closely. But when you compare us to some of the teams mentioned by tonyreeder...Texas, Florida, WSU...I like our chances.
I think we're also all paranoid because we've been one and done in 3 of Crean's 4 trips to the tourney.
Quote from: HarveysWallbangers on January 28, 2008, 10:56:03 AM
I think we all get frustrated by our team because we follow them so closely. But when you compare us to some of the teams mentioned by tonyreeder...Texas, Florida, WSU...I like our chances.
I think we're also all paranoid because we've been one and done in 3 of Crean's 4 trips to the tourney.
True - my pessimism does stem in large part from the BE performance last year. I thought teams like MU, ND and Villanova would do very well in the tourney last year and was surprised when it didn't happen. As a result, I'm taking a more cynical approach this year. But I am expecting Marquette to finish in the top 3 this year.
I'll ask again then. What conference(s) is going to do well in the tournament? You could pretty much say the same thing about every conference out there. There is a very, very small handful of teams that will be safe when they take the floor in the first couple rounds. Likely Memphis and Kansas, after that, change the names of the teams in your post above and you are describing every major conference. Somebody's gotta win those games. Are Texas, or Vanderbilt, or Wisconsin, or USC appreciably better than Louisville, or Pittsburgh, or MU. Not from where I'm sitting.
As far as great players go, here are just a few guys who may well be getting paid next year...Hibbert, Blair, Williams, Reynolds, Gransbery, Thabeet, Young, Laing,...If you want to throw out the highs and lows, take Gerorgetown, UNC, Kansas, UCLA, out of their respective conferences, and I'll put the BE roster up against any other.
Quote from: AlumKCof93 on January 24, 2008, 03:35:49 PM
While the BE has some strong victories, they also have some bad losses and
teams who've had poor out-of-conference records doing quite well in conference - see Cincinnati and DePaul.
In addition, the BE doesn't have a player of the year candidate or any of the top freshman. I don't think the conference is bad, but I thought it was stronger last year.
1) is there any conferences out there that didn't have 'some bad losses'?
2) I don't get it, is this a bad thing? both teams are young and coming together and will be better than their overall record will indicate. If depaul was in c-usa they would probably finish the season ranked.
3) hmm... what a sad and nba-ish sounding comment. But if it makes you feel better cuse and GT both have a pretty solid freshman...
2) I don't get it, is this a bad thing? both teams are young and coming together and will be better than their overall record will indicate. If depaul was in c-usa they would probably finish the season ranked.
Ok, your other points may be valid, but DePaul would not be ranked under any circumstances. With home losses to both UIC and North Carolina A&T, I don't think they're getting any votes regardless of which conference they're in.
I personally think we are the strongest in the land... with UCONN beating Indiana, and Pitt beating Duke, it shows that even middle to upper tier of the pack in the Big East are beating the beasts from other conferences. Obviously we can look at this differently since Marquette lost to Duke and the conference has had some other OOC losses to other major programs. However up and down the line, scratching the bottom 4, we are as a conference very strong, and I think the strongest. Pac 10 may compete with us, but with the SEC in a slump this year, and besides Duke and UNC in the ACC, they aren't the strongest. In my eyes, it is between the Big East and Pac 10 for the best conference.
I think the depth of the Big East is best evidenced by the fact that Marquette (a darkhouse Final Four contender according to multiple college basketball analysts) was ranked 10th in the Conference as recently as this past Saturday. Looking ahead at the difficulty of our upcoming schedule (the remainder of this week aside) it is not inconceivable that if we do not improve our level of play in a hurry we might finish as low as 10th.