MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: tower912 on April 18, 2014, 06:29:52 AM
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24530514/at-what-point-will-schools-realize-who-can-and-cannot-be-hired-away
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
-
Character revealed
-
So the question still stands, why did he have a small to virtually no buyout?
And if the answer was because of some standard clause in his contract saying it is reduced due to a change in AD how could MU be so dumb to allow that?
-
Could have easily just said that he left because he is a hillbilly whose more comfortable in Applachia, even if it means he has to be the league's doormat.
-
Who cares. If he didn't want to be here then good riddance.
-
Who cares. If he didn't want to be here then good riddance.
+1
These are excuses, not the reason. Fact is, he did not want to be here and MU lowered his buyout and "encouraged" him to leave. MU even quietly started the process of looking for a new head coach a week before he left (per a Cords quote right after Wojo was hired.)
The only surprise in this is why Buzz panicked and took a terrible job like VT and not Wake, BC, Cal or now Missouri.
-
+1
These are excuses, not the reason. Fact is, he did not want to be here and MU lowered his buyout and "encouraged" him to leave. MU even quietly started the process of looking for a new head coach a week before he left (per a Cords quote right after Wojo was hired.)
The only surprise in this is why Buzz panicked and took a terrible job like VT and not Wake, BC, Cal or now Missouri.
Does he strike you as someone who thinks things through, and is a high level thinker?
-
+1
These are excuses, not the reason. Fact is, he did not want to be here and MU lowered his buyout and "encouraged" him to leave. MU even quietly started the process of looking for a new head coach a week before he left (per a Cords quote right after Wojo was hired.)
The only surprise in this is why Buzz panicked and took a terrible job like VT and not Wake, BC, Cal or now Missouri.
Yeah Buzz at Wake could of done some pretty good things I bet
-
Character revealed
+1,000,000
Remember the odd way he arrived at MU- abandoning a D-1 head coaching position for an assistant job. Granted UNO is nothing big time in the college hoops world and doing what he did isn't unprecedented, but it certainly isn't close to being the norm either.
-
I'm sure it's been said here before, and even if so, bears repeating in light of Parrish's comments. He was unhappy about interims in both the AD and President positions at MU? Earth to Brent, who was largely, or maybe completely, responsible for that?
What an ego maniacal diva. Man, I didn't think I'd dislike someone more than Crean, but he has certainly risen to that level. Now he'll just play with VT as long as they conform completely to his dirtbag ways and then ditch them at the first signs of anything remotely approaching adversity.
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24530514/at-what-point-will-schools-realize-who-can-and-cannot-be-hired-away
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
Three of these four things were of his own doing.
lmao.
-
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
[/quote]
The last reason stated is certainly highly debatable and one I couldn't disagree more with. With the last two recruiting classes (granted this year's has temporarily fallen apart now), I find it hard to believe that's really how ole' Brent felt about the 2014-15 season. That comment sounds more to me speculation from a national writer making an assumption based on one down season.
-
+1
These are excuses, not the reason. Fact is, he did not want to be here and MU lowered his buyout and "encouraged" him to leave. MU even quietly started the process of looking for a new head coach a week before he left (per a Cords quote right after Wojo was hired.)
The only surprise in this is why Buzz panicked and took a terrible job like VT and not Wake, BC, Cal or now Missouri.
Not to mention Tulsa in the other half of the old Big East.
-
Truly a shame that he would have a second straight poor season thrust upon him - no reason he should have to endure that;)
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24530514/at-what-point-will-schools-realize-who-can-and-cannot-be-hired-away
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
At least now he won't be stuck with an average team next year. He'll have a bad one instead.
-
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
The last reason stated is certainly highly debatable and one I couldn't disagree more with. With the last two recruiting classes (granted this year's has temporarily fallen apart now), I find it hard to believe that's really how ole' Brent felt about the 2014-15 season. That comment sounds more to me speculation from a national writer making an assumption based on one down season.
Buzz realized the cupboard was bare with Jake graduating...
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24530514/at-what-point-will-schools-realize-who-can-and-cannot-be-hired-away
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
I don't want to over-simplify this, but Buzz left because that's who Buzz is.
The dude is always looking for the next challenge/opportunity. Ever since he's been 18yrs old, he's been pushing the rock up the hill. He's never going to stop, and he's never going to be someplace for 15 years.
It's Buzz's psychology. He can't help it. Even if everything goes wonderfully at VT, he'll find a reason to move on in 6 or 7 years. It's just who the guy is. He burns hot. He always will.
-
And I'm stuck with an autographed basketball signed by Buzz.
-
Does he strike you as someone who thinks things through, and is a high level thinker?
A lot of people on this board thought he was--and some still do.
-
I don't want to over-simplify this, but Buzz left because that's who Buzz is.
The dude is always looking for the next challenge/opportunity. Ever since he's been 18yrs old, he's been pushing the rock up the hill. He's never going to stop, and he's never going to be someplace for 15 years.
It's Buzz's psychology. He can't help it. Even if everything goes wonderfully at VT, he'll find a reason to move on in 6 or 7 years. It's just who the guy is. He burns hot. He always will.
The only thing this guy has been pushing uphill is his brand of BS!!!
-
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
The last reason stated is certainly highly debatable and one I couldn't disagree more with. With the last two recruiting classes (granted this year's has temporarily fallen apart now), I find it hard to believe that's really how ole' Brent felt about the 2014-15 season. That comment sounds more to me speculation from a national writer making an assumption based on one down season.
They would have been mediocre again next season because Buzz would have nailed those recruits' asses to the bench.
-
Buzz left for same reasons Stevens and crean left. He had success and knew he couldn't sustain it here. He also lost his team and that would have looked embarrassing to mass defections. The reasons list (except the avg team) were BS. Many here were beginning to figure it out so I can't say buzz was a full step ahead of everyone but he got out just in time. Would have been an ugly off season had he stayed.
-
A lot of people on this board thought he was--and some still do.
He always struck me as someone who was extremely lucky, and responded quickly. He had the humble attitude which always plays well in the media, but dancing at WVU ended it for me. When he was hired and started bursting stats right away you knew he was a little nuts.
-
Not interested in rehashing why that redneck left town. I just assumed his tobacco chewing was a better fit in Blacksburg.
-
Curly grabbed the first gig that would pay him big bucks after Pearl was snatched by AU. In short, he panicked.
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24530514/at-what-point-will-schools-realize-who-can-and-cannot-be-hired-away
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
Good old Gary seems to have omitted a paragraph or three about Buzz's...ahem...departure. But, as Buzz's mouthpiece and only hearing one version, this isn't surprising at all. Character reveals itself again and again.
Love the part about having an average team again in year two, in a league Buzz thinks wasn't very good. I'm trying to pinpoint who exactly assembled that team. :o
What would Scott Monarch say?
-
The common denominator with all of these examples is that they walked out before they were thrown out.
-
Three of these four things were of his own doing.
lmao.
Yup, you can't make this stuff up.
-
Not going to enable Brent and his horsesh1t comments towards Marquette or the Big East. Glad he's gone. He have a better coach and person in place now.
-
And I'm stuck with an autographed basketball signed by Buzz.
Lenny will buy it from you
-
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
The last reason stated is certainly highly debatable and one I couldn't disagree more with. With the last two recruiting classes (granted this year's has temporarily fallen apart now), I find it hard to believe that's really how ole' Brent felt about the 2014-15 season. That comment sounds more to me speculation from a national writer making an assumption based on one down season.
I think Buzz probably thought the statement was correct. We were going to lose Jamil, Ox, Otule, Thomas to graduation, and likely multiple others to transfer.
-
Not going to enable Brent and his horsesh1t comments towards Marquette or the Big East. Glad he's gone. He have a better coach and person in place now.
Until he leaves. Then we'll find all sorts of ways to hate him. ::)
-
Does he strike you as someone who thinks things through, and is a high level thinker?
There was a reason that Autry was busting his balls to talk him out of the decision until the last minute.
Bolt if it's the best thing for your career, but only an emotional decision-maker like Buzz would choose to go to a program like VT. $10 says that he believes God told him it was the right choice, lol.
-
Parrish isn't a great thinker. Misses the boat often.
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KwnO8sBs4fU/0.jpg)
-
Parrish isn't a great thinker. Misses the boat often.
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KwnO8sBs4fU/0.jpg)
Easy dude, guy-liner liner is becoming VERY popular in the sportswriter community. When you're up till 3AM chasing leads and writing stories, gotta make your eyes pop somehow the next day.
-
There was a reason that Autry was busting his balls to talk him out of the decision until the last minute.
I'd not heard this assertion before. Interesting.
-
A lot of people on this board thought he was--and some still do.
Guy was the best coach at MU since AL.
That is not an opinion, that is a fact!
-
Guy was the best coach at MU since AL.
That is not an opinion, that is a fact!
A lot goes into coaching, not just what is on the floor....you do realize this, correct?
-
I'd not heard this assertion before. Interesting.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=43796.msg616911#msg616911
-
just got into it on twitter with him...and the goodman piled on.
they think our team is terrible and won't be getting anytime soon. essentially they hate our league and think it stands no chance of winning or recruiting talent.
-
Does Buzz leave if the Big East hadn't died?
I certainly think he contributed to some of the problems that hastened his departure, but the new conference is a complete dud, and that has to be a factor.
-
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=43796.msg616911#msg616911
Thanks.
-
Does Buzz leave if the Big East hadn't died?
I certainly think he contributed to some of the problems that hastened his departure, but the new conference is a complete dud, and that has to be a factor.
You answered the question ... Brent stands as reason one the new conference did not do well last year. His team was highly ranked and predicted to win the conference title last year. And he guided it to a 17-15 record.
So when asking "why isn't the New Big East as good as everyone hoped for?" A very good answer is "Brent Williams"
-
Good old Gary seems to have omitted a paragraph or three about Buzz's...ahem...departure. But, as Buzz's mouthpiece and only hearing one version, this isn't surprising at all. Character reveals itself again and again.
Love the part about having an average team again in year two, in a league Buzz thinks wasn't very good. I'm trying to pinpoint who exactly assembled that team. :o
I can't believe Parrish is using a bad team as a valid excuse for leaving, it's mind boggling to me.
What I still don't get is....Why VT? I think people are vastly understating how bad of a job that is.
-
Does Buzz leave if the Big East hadn't died?
I certainly think he contributed to some of the problems that hastened his departure, but the new conference is a complete dud, and that has to be a factor.
Sorry if I call bovine excrement on this.
Conference finished 3rd strongest in the country.
Conference would have done better if the team picked to win the darn thing actually did something like not missing every tournament known to man. So if Buzz is blaming the new conference for being a dud and his team's performance is one of the main reasons then that is so rich and Machiavellian it is incredible.
Furthermore, he landed a great class knowing what the existing Big East composition consisted of, so that's another BS comment by Buzz.
Ultimately, Buzz left UNO after one year because he didn't want to see it through. He goes one year at MU under the new Big East, and bye bye. He is what he is, and that doesn't even get into the other nonsense tied to him over the last 5+ years.
-
Sorry if I call bovine excrement on this.
Conference finished 3rd strongest in the country.
Conference would have done better if the team picked to win the darn thing actually did something like not missing every tournament known to man. So if Buzz is blaming the new conference for being a dud and his team's performance is one of the main reasons then that is so rich and Machiavellian it is incredible.
Furthermore, he landed a great class knowing what the existing Big East composition consisted of, so that's another BS comment by Buzz.
Ultimately, Buzz left UNO after one year because he didn't want to see it through. He goes one year at MU under the new Big East, and bye bye. He is what he is, and that doesn't even get into the other nonsense tied to him over the last 5+ years.
Chicos, at best you're partially correct.
Nobody will know until several years have gone by what the effects of realignment will mean for the Big East long term, but to say that the conference hasn't taken a hit while losing the likes of UConn, Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, Cincinnati and Notre Dame is being willfully ignorant in my opinion. What Marquette's record was this year is irrelevant. It's not as good a conference period.
You also cannot assume what would have been a top 25 recruiting class this season for Buzz would have continued year after year no matter who the coach is because both the 14-15 recruits (Pierce, Cohen, Hill, Shayok, Harris) and the 13-14 recruits (Johnson, Burton, Dawson, Wilson) were being recruited heavily before the conference realignment. It's pure speculation to assume that would've continued even if Buzz would've stayed.
Finally, how many bids would the prior version of the conference gotten despite a down year from Marquette and Georgetown? If it's imperative for MU and Gtown to have successful seasons every year for the Big East to be successful then the conference isn't in the shape some would like to think.
-
Chicos, at best you're partially correct.
Nobody will know until several years have gone by what the effects of realignment will mean for the Big East long term, but to say that the conference hasn't taken a hit while losing the likes of UConn, Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, Cincinnati and Notre Dame is being willfully ignorant in my opinion. What Marquette's record was this year is irrelevant. It's not as good a conference period.
You also cannot assume what would have been a top 25 recruiting class this season for Buzz would have continued year after year no matter who the coach is because both the 14-15 recruits (Pierce, Cohen, Hill, Shayok, Harris) and the 13-14 recruits (Johnson, Burton, Dawson, Wilson) were being recruited heavily before the conference realignment. It's pure speculation to assume that would've continued even if Buzz would've stayed.
Finally, how many bids would the prior version of the conference gotten despite a down year from Marquette and Georgetown? If it's imperative for MU and Gtown to have successful seasons every year for the Big East to be successful then the conference isn't in the shape some would like to think.
I never said it hasn't taken a hit, I would agree with you. But let's not paint it as some dreg conference either. Remember when Buzz would say how great it is to be at a basketball only school...well, he was at a basketball only school in a basketball only conference.
How is Marquette's record this year irrelevant? He's bashing the conference through his mouthpiece as well as in an interview and saying he can't recruit to it. Reality is, the conference has landed a ton of very good recruits as did Buzz, but he couldn't get the job done in this supposedly diminished conference. It is entirely relevant.
No assumption is made that recruiting would continue year after year, but I've tended to find that if you win, recruits will come. Memphis would land top recruits despite playing in an average CUSA for years. Gonzaga. UNLV in their hey day. Boise State in football, etc.
Bids aren't given to conferences, they are given to individual programs. People then tally up the bids in the conference to say how strong a conference is...that's fine, reasonable. It's about perception. When you have a program that has made some deep runs, is the defending conference champion and that conference got weaker yet you don't even get to the NIT despite being picked to win your conference (with two back to back to 25 classes), that's a problem. The Big East takes a hit in the reputation department, but the cause of it isn't the Big East...the cause of it the performance of the program.
-
Guy was the best coach at MU since AL.
That is not an opinion, that is a fact!
Sounds like an opinion to me...
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24530514/at-what-point-will-schools-realize-who-can-and-cannot-be-hired-away
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
Is this an admission by Buzz that had he stayed this team would have been blown apart by transfers?
-
He hates the league...that all the pundits said he was supposed to have won last year.
He lamented the vacuum of power with NO president or AD...yet, does not feel any concern for the university which he claims can have him for as long as they want him.
Buzz is a self-preservationist. That last line was the most truthful: Buzz knew he couldn't risk losing his leverage of past successes with two straight mediocre careers. Here in lies his character being revealed: No loyalty to others just himself; no building programs or maintaining success for a CAREER, just staying as hot as you can get.
VT fans should know - and probably do - that's he's not going to be there for the long term. They're just probably happy that someone with his successful history at MU is going to bring some relevance to VT.
MU fans, however, feel a connection and dedication to the program and its Head Coach. I hope Wojchiechowski understands that. As a California native, I've noticed that Wisconsin sports fans are deeply dedicated and fiercely loyal to their sports teams and their leaders. That must explain why Crean and Buzz really burns the fanbase because they throw around "commitment", "family", "loyalty" and "dedication" so loosely and with little understanding of what they mean to the program's supporters. It also explainss why Al was adored so much, not just for his success, but for building community and being a part of it.
Though he may realize some success at VT, jumping lilypads will burn him out.
-
Buzz had an excellent first five years, and watching his teams gave me great joy. He sucked last season, seemingly on purpose, and made the season about as much fun as a funeral. Finally, he wanted out ... and was so desperate that he took a crappy job to get out as quickly as possible -- which actually is good because it let us quickly start looking for a replacement who wants to be here.
Hasta la vista, Buzzy.
We've moved on, and we're better for it.
-
Buzz had an excellent first five years, and watching his teams gave me great joy. He sucked last season, seemingly on purpose, and made the season about as much fun as a funeral. Finally, he wanted out ... and was so desperate that he took a crappy job to get out as quickly as possible -- which actually is good because it let us quickly start looking for a replacement who wants to be here.
Hasta la vista, Buzzy.
We've moved on, and we're better for it.
And I think that will be Brett's rub for the length of his career: the guy can't sustain success.
He left UNO because of many reasons, one of which was lack of support for the program and an arena. A few called him out on the latter stating Buzz knew well it wasn't going to be ready any time soon: http://blog.nola.com/tpsports/2007/07/uno_coach_resigns.html
I guess the Tanned One was prophetic:
"Buzz is going to be great," Crean said. "And he'll get another head coaching job someday."
In the same article, Bert says:
"Everybody has a different perspective on what they believe to be right, but for me what is always right is doing what I believe is best for my wife and my children," said Williams, purposely (and tastefully) vague. "It may not have been publicly right or perceived the right way. But I have to always make sure I'm doing the right thing in my heart for my wife and my children, and in my heart I believed it was right for my wife and my children."
Did something happen this season to his wife and kids?
-
And I think that will be Brett's rub for the length of his career: the guy can't sustain success.
He left UNO because of many reasons, one of which was lack of support for the program and an arena. A few called him out on the latter stating Buzz knew well it wasn't going to be ready any time soon: http://blog.nola.com/tpsports/2007/07/uno_coach_resigns.html
I guess the Tanned One was prophetic:
"Buzz is going to be great," Crean said. "And he'll get another head coaching job someday."
In the same article, Bert says:
"Everybody has a different perspective on what they believe to be right, but for me what is always right is doing what I believe is best for my wife and my children," said Williams, purposely (and tastefully) vague. "It may not have been publicly right or perceived the right way. But I have to always make sure I'm doing the right thing in my heart for my wife and my children, and in my heart I believed it was right for my wife and my children."
Did something happen this season to his wife and kids?
And what would that be to make him think moving his kids a thousand miles away so he can take a paycut made it better? And then, if speculation can be believed, he tells Corey he has to take a further paycut so VT has money to pay Chew.
-
Did something happen this season to his wife and kids?
No, but he did something that he'll have to live with for the rest of his life.
-
Finally, how many bids would the prior version of the conference gotten despite a down year from Marquette and Georgetown? If it's imperative for MU and Gtown to have successful seasons every year for the Big East to be successful then the conference isn't in the shape some would like to think.
Kind of like the one year that UCLA and Zona were down and the PAC-10 (then) got two bids. Kind of like that?
And if Buzz was so concerned about conferences why did he flirt so much with SMU? Guess he thought the AAC was going to be a behemoth huh?
-
Kind of like the one year that UCLA and Zona were down and the PAC-10 (then) got two bids. Kind of like that?
And if Buzz was so concerned about conferences why did he flirt so much with SMU? Guess he thought the AAC was going to be a behemoth huh?
The fact that you're now comparing the Big East to the Pac 12 proves my point. The former Big East was light years ahead of the Pac 12 and nobody in their right mind would compare the two leagues as the drop off in quality top to bottom was huge.
-
No, but he did something that he'll have to live with for the rest of his life.
Something other than going to VPI?
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24530514/at-what-point-will-schools-realize-who-can-and-cannot-be-hired-away
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
Ask the sh##head Goodman who recruited the players that would lead to William's "average team next season for the second straight season"
-
Easy dude, guy-liner liner is becoming VERY popular in the sportswriter community. When you're up till 3AM chasing leads and writing stories, gotta make your eyes pop somehow the next day.
He lives in Memphis and talks about it a lot. Probably took that whole Elvis thing a little far.
-
Easy dude, guy-liner liner is becoming VERY popular in the sportswriter community. When you're up till 3AM chasing leads and writing stories, gotta make your eyes pop somehow the next day.
Yes - that's why s/he should embrace it. Instead, he lets CBS use a picture of him from well over a DECADE ago where he looks like a halfway normal human being. For all the work he does on his hair and makeup, they could at least use a picture from the last several years.
Odd thing too about him: outrage over Alford's contract, yet hasn't said a PEEP about the one in his backyard - Pastner's. That because most people don't know what's in that contract. (LNH does.)
Most writers take the easy stuff.. what's dangling in front of them. They lack the ability to analyze or get past the high level stuff... thus you get crap like Buzz leaving because he hated the BEast, autonomy and the disastrous season coming in 2014-15 .
Nonetheless, I don't think all angles of Buzz's departure need to be covered... I'd rather they aren't.
-
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24530514/at-what-point-will-schools-realize-who-can-and-cannot-be-hired-away
...Buzz Williams jumped to Virginia Tech from Marquette because the school had no president, no athletic director, and because he hated the new Big East and was probably going to have an average team next season for the second straight season......
Sounds like someone has bought the Buzz spin hook, line, and sinker. Once the hook is set, Gary, all you can do is get a firm hold and yank quickly. It'll hurt like hell, but you'll get your eyes opened again.
-
I guess the Tanned One was prophetic:
"Buzz is going to be great," Crean said. "And he'll get another head coaching job someday."
Hardly, all head coaches gush over their assistants as if the next break in the coaching business will show the world they've been harboring Coach K junior on their bench.
-
The fact that you're now comparing the Big East to the Pac 12 proves my point. The former Big East was light years ahead of the Pac 12 and nobody in their right mind would compare the two leagues as the drop off in quality top to bottom was huge.
Okay. So your point is Buzz gave a parting shot because the new Bis East is not a top 5wo conference. Point taken. Wonder how many National Champions have come from a conference not in the top two in a given year?
-
Okay. So your point is Buzz gave a parting shot because the new Big East is not a top 5wo conference. Point taken. Wonder how many National Champions have come from a conference not in the top two in a given year?
-
Okay. So your point is Buzz gave a parting shot because the new Bis East is not a top 5wo conference. Point taken. Wonder how many National Champions have come from a conference not in the top two in a given year?
No, you're so far off topic it's amazing.
Comparing this year's Big East being down because Marquette and Georgetown had bad seasons to UCLA and Arizona as you did earlier is a terrible analogy.
The tradition, history and success of the former versions of the Big East carry over to this conference in name only. To believe otherwise when four of the most successful Big East teams are no longer in the conference is wishful thinking. This league will succeed or fail based on what it does from the 13-14 season forward.
Moving forward here's how it appears the conference realignment looks to have left the landscape.
TIER 1: ACC, B1G
TIER 2: PAC12, BIG12, SEC
TIER 3: BIG EAST, AAC
If you look at the teams CURRENTLY in each conference, only the Big East is without an NCAA champion within the last 20 years.
I certainly think the Big East is closer to a power conference than a mid major, but to think that everything will be business as usual with the Big East conference in name only is illogical.
And to my original comment to Chicos, I have found much fault with Buzz Williams throughout his tenure with MU. I just personally agree with his take on the new conference and therefore don't fault him for his sentiments in that regard.
-
Did something happen this season to his wife and kids?
In Blacksburg, the kids won't have to wear shoes to school.
-
No, you're so far off topic it's amazing.
Comparing this year's Big East being down because Marquette and Georgetown had bad seasons to UCLA and Arizona as you did earlier is a terrible analogy.
The tradition, history and success of the former versions of the Big East carry over to this conference in name only. To believe otherwise when four of the most successful Big East teams are no longer in the conference is wishful thinking. This league will succeed or fail based on what it does from the 13-14 season forward.
Moving forward here's how it appears the conference realignment looks to have left the landscape.
TIER 1: ACC, B1G
TIER 2: PAC12, BIG12, SEC
TIER 3: BIG EAST, AAC
If you look at the teams CURRENTLY in each conference, only the Big East is without an NCAA champion within the last 20 years.
I certainly think the Big East is closer to a power conference than a mid major, but to think that everything will be business as usual with the Big East conference in name only is illogical.
And to my original comment to Chicos, I have found much fault with Buzz Williams throughout his tenure with MU. I just personally agree with his take on the new conference and therefore don't fault him for his sentiments in that regard.
It seems pretty clear to me that when you compare conferences, you are cherry picking the top teams from each conference and actually comparing them rather than comparing the complete conferences to each other. That's the only way you could have the Big East ranked in a third tier when it actually finished with the fourth highest average RPI, just ahead of one of your first tier conferences, the ACC. BTW, the AAC finished well below the Big East and the ACC.
-
Lenny will buy it from you
Not interested. I was always a player rather than a name dropper and memorabilia guy like you.
-
No, you're so far off topic it's amazing.
Comparing this year's Big East being down because Marquette and Georgetown had bad seasons to UCLA and Arizona as you did earlier is a terrible analogy.
The tradition, history and success of the former versions of the Big East carry over to this conference in name only. To believe otherwise when four of the most successful Big East teams are no longer in the conference is wishful thinking. This league will succeed or fail based on what it does from the 13-14 season forward.
Moving forward here's how it appears the conference realignment looks to have left the landscape.
TIER 1: ACC, B1G
TIER 2: PAC12, BIG12, SEC
TIER 3: BIG EAST, AAC
If you look at the teams CURRENTLY in each conference, only the Big East is without an NCAA champion within the last 20 years.
I certainly think the Big East is closer to a power conference than a mid major, but to think that everything will be business as usual with the Big East conference in name only is illogical.
And to my original comment to Chicos, I have found much fault with Buzz Williams throughout his tenure with MU. I just personally agree with his take on the new conference and therefore don't fault him for his sentiments in that regard.
Is the new Big East anywhere close to the old Big East? No.
Did the Big East take a monsterous hit because of realignment. Absolutely.
Did Marquette have a better option than the new Big East. I haven't heard one yet.
Do I believe that the Big East is "3rd Tier" behind the ACC, B1G, B12, SEC, and PAC 12? Absolutely not.
There is no data to suggest that the Big East is 3rd tier. They finished 4th this season, behind the B1G, B12, and PAC 12 I believe. They got 40% of their teams to the tournament, a respectable percentage for any conference. And there's no data to suggest that they will decline. The Big East ranks 3rd in Top 100 recruits for 2014 and 2nd in overall average class grades. To me that suggests an upward trajectory. Could recruiting drop off in 2015? Absolutely. But there is no facts to support that claim, only opinion. At least, I haven't seen any facts, I'd be open to seeing some data.
I think the true rankings are:
Tier 1: ACC, B1G
Tier 2: B12, BEast, PAC 12, SEC
Tier 3: AAC, A10, MWC, CUSA (also known as mid majors)
I know your standard for success in a season is a sweet 16. So I know in your eyes, the 0 BEast teams had a successful season this year. But you have to see that there is so much more to conference strength than tournament success. No we don't have a North Carolina, a Michigan State, a Kansas, a UCLA, a Kentucky, or a UConn to bolster our championship and final four numbers. But we also don't have a Virginia Tech, a Northwestern, a TCU, a Washington State, or a East Carolina slumming it with sub 150 numbers every single year. (besides Depaul, who would have been +150 this year if Melvin hadn't left the team. And they at least have a rich tradition of success)
-
Why so much love for the SEC? It's Florida, Kentucky and garbage.
The AAC is uconn, Louisville and garbage, it should be ranked with the SEC, if not higher.
I the rank the conferences by the strength of their worst teams, the BE comes out well.
-
Why so much love for the SEC? It's Florida, Kentucky and garbage.
The AAC is uconn, Louisville and garbage, it should be ranked with the SEC, if not higher.
I the rank the conferences by the strength of their worst teams, the BE comes out well.
Florida and Kentucky are that good, IMHO
-
Florida and Kentucky are that good, IMHO
So a conference is merely its two best teams?
At one point last year Nova and Creighton were top 10. Nova and Georgetown could (repeat could) crack the top 10 next year. That makes the NBE an elite conference, correct?
-
No, you're so far off topic it's amazing.
If your point is the Big East wasn't what it was no one will disagree with you. I am not taking issue with you in my tone rather Buzz's logic.
But Buzz's parting shot on the Big East can be taken two ways: 1) The Big East is so weak he cannot recruit in it. That has been disproven by showing it is one of the Top 5-6 conferences.
Or 2) It is not a Top 2 conference anymore so I am leaving. That would have been more honest. Also, comical and disingenuous since we know he flirted a lot with SMU.
His bad mouthing of the Big East is akin of bad mouthing the Marquette program. Using Parish as his mouthpiece was classless.
-
So a conference is merely its two best teams?
At one point last year Nova and Creighton were top 10. Nova and Georgetown could (repeat could) crack the top 10 next year. That makes the NBE an elite conference, correct?
No. I'm not looking at a single year. I'm looking at the quality of conferences for the years to come. And both Kentucky and Florida have had so much consistant success that they raise the overall profile of the entire conference. Kentucky and Florida have more Final Fours and Championships in the past 10 years than the entirety of the Big East. Tournament success isn't the only factor but it is still a factor.
But I would agree that the SEC is ranked below the BEast. But still in the same tier.
-
No. I'm not looking at a single year. I'm looking at the quality of conferences for the years to come. And both Kentucky and Florida have had so much consistant success that they raise the overall profile of the entire conference. Kentucky and Florida have more Final Fours and Championships in the past 10 years than the entirety of the Big East. Tournament success isn't the only factor but it is still a factor.
But I would agree that the SEC is ranked below the BEast. But still in the same tier.
So a conference is its two top teams.
Not arguing that Kentucky and Floria are not elite teams. But after that the rest of the SEC is horrible. They only sent three teams to this year's Tourney (the third was Tennessee and now that Cuonzo left, they are a mess).
The SEC is two truly great teams and the rest is mid-major quality.
-
Bert needs to just shut his f ucking mouth. His new parable about the warts of Marquette is too transparent.
-
So a conference is its two top teams.
Not arguing that Kentucky and Floria are not elite teams. But after that the rest of the SEC is horrible. They only sent three teams to this year's Tourney (the third was Tennessee and now that Cuonzo left, they are a mess).
The SEC is two truly great teams and the rest is mid-major quality.
My point isn't that a conference is only their top two teams. My point is that the top two teams matter.
And the middle of the SEC is actually decent. Not as good as other tier 2 conferences but certainly better than tier 3.
-
No, but he did something that he'll have to live with for the rest of his life.
Is this a reference to the "Happy Ending" rub down legend?
-
So a conference is its two top teams.
Not arguing that Kentucky and Floria are not elite teams. But after that the rest of the SEC is horrible. They only sent three teams to this year's Tourney (the third was Tennessee and now that Cuonzo left, they are a mess).
The SEC is two truly great teams and the rest is mid-major quality.
Heisenberg,
The bottom half of the old Big East was just as bad as any other major conference. It's not as if you can take the old team building addage 'we're only as good as our weakest link' and apply it here. I'll try this a different way. How many elite college basketball programs currently are in each power conference?
B1G: MSU, UW
ACC: Duke, UNC, SYR, UL (next year)
B12: Kansas
SEC: FL, UK
P12: AZ, UCLA
BE: ???
Who is truly an elite program in the current Big East? Six out of the ten conference members have either never had a final four team or haven't for 25 years. Marquette had one in '03, Georgetown in '07, Villanova in '09 and a Brad Stevens led Butler team (who wasn't in the Big East) in '10 and '11.
And I find the use of RPI here comical, not because it's inaccurate, but because most using the conference RPI to validate the Big East this season were the same people puking all over Chicos' topic regarding RPI and it's use in selecting at large bids.
I'm sorry if I think one of the more genuine thing's our previous coach said happened to be about the make up of the new Big East. I feel the same way.
-
Ask the sh##head Goodman who recruited the players that would lead to William's "average team next season for the second straight season"
EXACTLY.
-
Not interested. I was always a player rather than a name dropper and memorabilia guy like you.
Some of us are both, I'm fortunate that my life has allowed me to work with some of the movers and shakers in sports. Allows me a bit of expertise on what happens in the back room for NCAA selections, or why certain people are squirmy as hell. But hey, you're a playa
-
Florida and Kentucky are that good, IMHO
So in your viewpoint, the WCC in the last few years should have been very highly ranked because of Gonzaga? or UNLV in the early 1990's had national champion UNLV and powerhouses UC Irvine, Cal State Fullerton, Pacific, Nevada, Long Beach State, UC Santa Barbara, San Jose State, Fresno State, New Mexico State. ;)
Sorry, but I don't understand why people rate conferences based on the top 2 or 3 teams and ignore the other 7 to 10 teams, but people do it all the time.
-
So in your viewpoint, the WCC in the last few years should have been very highly ranked because of Gonzaga? or UNLV in the early 1990's had national champion UNLV and powerhouses UC Irvine, Cal State Fullerton, Pacific, Nevada, Long Beach State, UC Santa Barbara, San Jose State, Fresno State, New Mexico State. ;)
Sorry, but I don't understand why people rate conferences based on the top 2 or 3 teams and ignore the other 7 to 10 teams, but people do it all the time.
It's simple. Most schools like people are mediocre. It's the top schools and individuals that get the accolades and recognition.
-
Heisenberg,
The bottom half of the old Big East was just as bad as any other major conference. It's not as if you can take the old team building addage 'we're only as good as our weakest link' and apply it here. I'll try this a different way. How many elite college basketball programs currently are in each power conference?
B1G: MSU, UW
ACC: Duke, UNC, SYR, UL (next year)
B12: Kansas
SEC: FL, UK
P12: AZ, UCLA
BE: ???
Who is truly an elite program in the current Big East? Six out of the ten conference members have either never had a final four team or haven't for 25 years. Marquette had one in '03, Georgetown in '07, Villanova in '09 and a Brad Stevens led Butler team (who wasn't in the Big East) in '10 and '11.
And I find the use of RPI here comical, not because it's inaccurate, but because most using the conference RPI to validate the Big East this season were the same people puking all over Chicos' topic regarding RPI and it's use in selecting at large bids.
I'm sorry if I think one of the more genuine thing's our previous coach said happened to be about the make up of the new Big East. I feel the same way.
You could probabaly add the AAC and UConn to your list.
One problem wth the new version of the Big East is its supposed virtue of "balance". When your bottom half teams are capable of beating the top half teams, you don't get credit for having a lot of great teams--you get tabbed as a mediocre conference. We need a consistent group of 3 to 5 teams that can split from the middle of the pack. Instead, we had too little separation in quality among the 3rd through 8th place teams.
The second problem is that teams over-scheduled their non-conference trying to boost their own SOS, ignoring the W/L impact. Marquette's five non-conference losses--even though they were to solid teams--did no favors to the rest of the league RPI wise.
Thrid is the mistaken belief that you need a strong conference to be recognized as a great team. Memphis, Gonzaga, Xavier in the old A10, Butler in the old Horizon, now UConn in the AAC--they all get plenty of respect and attention without being in powerhouse conferences.
All that having been said, Buzz wants to be in a leage that masks his own coaching and recruiting deficiencies. In the old Big East, he could take 6 to 9 losses and still be praised as a great coach. In the new incarnation, he's took 9 losses, but because overall quality down, it reflects on his coaching.
-
Buzz had an excellent first five years, and watching his teams gave me great joy. He sucked last season, seemingly on purpose, and made the season about as much fun as a funeral. Finally, he wanted out ... and was so desperate that he took a crappy job to get out as quickly as possible -- which actually is good because it let us quickly start looking for a replacement who wants to be here.
Hasta la vista, Buzzy.
We've moved on, and we're better for it.
Sums up my feelings on first 5 years vs. last year quite well.
-
It's simple. Most schools like people are mediocre. It's the top schools and individuals that get the accolades and recognition.
No disputing that, but that is also a perception from mediocre people that aren't in the know. People in the know certainly understand that the SEC is crap for most of the conference, just like the AAC, etc. This is why conference rankings don't rate the top 2 or 3 teams, but the entire conference.
As an example, DePaul was their usual horrid self, yet three ACC teams finished below them in the RPI...Georgia Tech, Boston College and Vagina Tech
(http://2.media.collegehumor.cvcdn.com/2/a/collegehumor.1c8a65029ca97f6596c3313ae61f1ea2.jpg)
-
No disputing that, but that is also a perception from mediocre people that aren't in the know. People in the know certainly understand that the SEC is crap for most of the conference, just like the AAC, etc. This is why conference rankings don't rate the top 2 or 3 teams, but the entire conference.
As an example, DePaul was their usual horrid self, yet three ACC teams finished below them in the RPI...Georgia Tech, Boston College and Vagina Tech
**cringe**
The RPI is stupid. As for DePaul vs. those other teams... 1) DePaul wasn't QUITE their usual horrid self... a little bit better than usual both real record and adjusting for road wins.. 2) Georgia Tech played more teams with miserable records.. that's what did them in... 3) BC & VT both couldn't win games...
Was DePaul better than any of those teams? GT, there's zero question that DePaul was not as good as GT.
The other two are debatable, but the CONSENSUS would be DePaul is the worst of all four teams you mentioned. RPI doesn't think so because it's stupid (and DePaul played fewer worst-of-the-worst W-L teams).
-
**cringe**
The RPI is stupid. As for DePaul vs. those other teams... 1) DePaul wasn't QUITE their usual horrid self... a little bit better than usual both real record and adjusting for road wins.. 2) Georgia Tech played more teams with miserable records.. that's what did them in... 3) BC & VT both couldn't win games...
Was DePaul better than any of those teams? GT, there's zero question that DePaul was not as good as GT.
The other two are debatable, but the CONSENSUS would be DePaul is the worst of all four teams you mentioned. RPI doesn't think so because it's stupid (and DePaul played fewer worst-of-the-worst W-L teams).
Again....you can call it stupid until the cows come home, it is what the NCAA uses.
The consensus...what's the consensus?
DePaul is rated higher than Vagina Tech in the RPI, Sagarin, Warren Nolan, Team Rankings. They are practically equal in Ken Pom (192 vs 198)
DePaul is rated higher than Boston College in RPI, Team Rankings, Warren Nolan. They are practically the same in Sagarin.
I'm failing to see consensus....let alone CONSENSUS that they are the 4th worst of those 4 teams. In fact, there is no consensus at all.
*** cringe ***
-
Oh, there is.
-
So in your viewpoint, the WCC in the last few years should have been very highly ranked because of Gonzaga? or UNLV in the early 1990's had national champion UNLV and powerhouses UC Irvine, Cal State Fullerton, Pacific, Nevada, Long Beach State, UC Santa Barbara, San Jose State, Fresno State, New Mexico State. ;)
Sorry, but I don't understand why people rate conferences based on the top 2 or 3 teams and ignore the other 7 to 10 teams, but people do it all the time.
Absolutely not. Gonzaga has not won multiple national championships nor had a history of sustained success. And UNLV is not nearly on the level of Kentucky.
-
Heisenberg,
The bottom half of the old Big East was just as bad as any other major conference. It's not as if you can take the old team building addage 'we're only as good as our weakest link' and apply it here. I'll try this a different way. How many elite college basketball programs currently are in each power conference?
B1G: MSU, UW
ACC: Duke, UNC, SYR, UL (next year)
B12: Kansas
SEC: FL, UK
P12: AZ, UCLA
BE: ???
Who is truly an elite program in the current Big East? Six out of the ten conference members have either never had a final four team or haven't for 25 years. Marquette had one in '03, Georgetown in '07, Villanova in '09 and a Brad Stevens led Butler team (who wasn't in the Big East) in '10 and '11.
And I find the use of RPI here comical, not because it's inaccurate, but because most using the conference RPI to validate the Big East this season were the same people puking all over Chicos' topic regarding RPI and it's use in selecting at large bids.
I'm sorry if I think one of the more genuine thing's our previous coach said happened to be about the make up of the new Big East. I feel the same way.
What do you count as elite program? Two seasons ago ESPN did their "50 in 50" series where the ranked the best 50 college basketball programs of the past 50 years. They aren't the end all be all but I'm using them because they used an objective formula to rank programs.
You listed several elite teams from each confrence. Your choices are interesting. UW isn't even ranked in the top 50 by ESPN and Florida is tied for 40th. Granted, this was 2 season ago, so both programs will move up. But hardly either are considered an elite program when you take their history into account.
If you look at just the top 20 in those rankings, here is how it shakes out.
ACC: UNC (1) Duke (4) Louisvile (6) Syracuse (8)
B1G: Indiana (7) Michigan State (11), Michigan (13), Ohio State (15), Purdue (20)
PAC 12: UCLA (2) Arizona (10) Utah (20)
BEast: Georgetown (12), Villanova (16), Marquette (17)
AAC: UConn (9), Temple (18), Memphis (19)
SEC: Kentucky (3)
B12: Kansas (5)
MWC: UNLV (14)
Obviously, you can't just use this information to make your judgements. But I think you are seriously off base thinking that the BEast has no quality programs.
And to suggest UW is elite is laughable. They made the Final Four this year....that's about all they have going for them.
-
What do you count as elite program? Two seasons ago ESPN did their "50 in 50" series where the ranked the best 50 college basketball programs of the past 50 years. They aren't the end all be all but I'm using them because they used an objective formula to rank programs.
You listed several elite teams from each confrence. Your choices are interesting. UW isn't even ranked in the top 50 by ESPN and Florida is tied for 40th. Granted, this was 2 season ago, so both programs will move up. But hardly either are considered an elite program when you take their history into account.
If you look at just the top 20 in those rankings, here is how it shakes out.
ACC: UNC (1) Duke (4) Louisvile (6) Syracuse (8)
B1G: Indiana (7) Michigan State (11), Michigan (13), Ohio State (15), Purdue (20)
PAC 12: UCLA (2) Arizona (10) Utah (20)
BEast: Georgetown (12), Villanova (16), Marquette (17)
AAC: UConn (9), Temple (18), Memphis (19)
SEC: Kentucky (3)
B12: Kansas (5)
MWC: UNLV (14)
Obviously, you can't just use this information to make your judgements. But I think you are seriously off base thinking that the BEast has no quality programs.
And to suggest UW is elite is laughable. They made the Final Four this year....that's about all they have going for them.
Can you name a more consistent program in regards to wins and NCAAT appearances the last 20 seasons not named Kentucky, UConn, Louisville, MSU, Kansas, Duke, UNC, AZ, FL, Gonzaga or UCLA?
If you can find more than 2-3 programs you'd be lying to yourself.
Understand, 50 years is a lot of history. Most of it is no longer relevant to the current basketball landscape. Is Indiana a better basketball program currently than either Wisconsin or Marquette? I'd say no.
-
Again....you can call it stupid until the cows come home, it is what the NCAA uses.
The consensus...what's the consensus?
DePaul is rated higher than Vagina Tech in the RPI, Sagarin, Warren Nolan, Team Rankings. They are practically equal in Ken Pom (192 vs 198)
DePaul is rated higher than Boston College in RPI, Team Rankings, Warren Nolan. They are practically the same in Sagarin.
I'm failing to see consensus....let alone CONSENSUS that they are the 4th worst of those 4 teams. In fact, there is no consensus at all.
*** cringe ***
And lets not forget that coaches know that.
The big diffrence between RPI and other services is that RPI doesn't include margin of victory, and that tends to be the central argument as to why RPI is bad.
Yet its stupid to think coaches wouldn't adjust their game plan if the NCAA switched to a measurment that factored margin of victory.
For example, we see many coaches give reserves extended playing time in sure-win situations. So their team wins by 8 instead of 18. The RPI is indifferent to that choice, but Sagarin and Ken Pom would penalize the 8 point victory compared to the 18 point win becuase they take margin of victory into account.
Same thing with end-of-game strategy. With the RPI, coaches almost always opt to pursue a foul strategy, because at worst you'll still lose, at best you steal a win. If margin of victory was factored, coaches would have to decide whether the possiblity of the other team hitting its FTs and winding up with a more sizeable victory margin was worth the potential of winning.
You'd also see teams with leads playing to score at the end. 10 point lead with the ball and 10 seconds to go? You'll see coaches going for another score to build margin of victory.
And you'll almost never see a walk on in a game.
Its simplistic to say the RPI isn't as good because it doesn't incorporate margin of victory.
-
Absolutely not. Gonzaga has not won multiple national championships nor had a history of sustained success. And UNLV is not nearly on the level of Kentucky.
UNLV might have been the greatest college team to ever play, at least by some standards. What you seem to be saying is if Kentucky were suddenly moved to the Southern Conference, the Southern Conference would be a top conference because of Kentucky. At the end of the day, your argument is the conference is good because of one or two of its members and that falls apart pretty quickly.
-
Oh, there is.
By all means, provide it.
-
UNLV might have been the greatest college team to ever play, at least by some standards. What you seem to be saying is if Kentucky were suddenly moved to the Southern Conference, the Southern Conference would be a top conference because of Kentucky. At the end of the day, your argument is the conference is good because of one or two of its members and that falls apart pretty quickly.
Conferences should be rated heavily by what their good teams have accomplished, otherwise you're simply arguing that these 4-7 mediocre teams are slightly better or worse collectively than these other 4-7 mediocre teams in another conference.
Look at it this way.
Best 2 teams (these names may vary slightly)
ACC: Duke, UNC
AAC: UConn, Louisville
P12: UCLA, AZ
B12: KANSAS, (OK, OKst, Baylor, KState)
SEC: UK, FL
Big East: Villanova, Georgetown
Any set of top teams you would swap out from any other conference would be an upgrade over the current Big East's top teams.
Now, if we did the same thing with the bottom feeders nobody would really care because is it even worth arguing who is worse between Oregon St, DePaul, Auburn, VTech, and Northwestern?
-
Conferences should be rated heavily by what their good teams have accomplished, otherwise you're simply arguing that these 4-7 mediocre teams are slightly better or worse collectively than these other 4-7 mediocre teams in another conference.
Look at it this way.
Best 2 teams (these names may vary slightly)
ACC: Duke, UNC
AAC: UConn, Louisville
P12: UCLA, AZ
B12: KANSAS, (OK, OKst, Baylor, KState)
SEC: UK, FL
Big East: Villanova, Georgetown
Any set of top teams you would swap out from any other conference would be an upgrade over the current Big East's top teams.
Now, if we did the same thing with the bottom feeders nobody would really care because is it even worth arguing who is worse between Oregon St, DePaul, Auburn, VTech, and Northwestern?
Would you judge the state of Michigan based on Detroit? Would you judge how hot women are in Montana based on Miss Montana?
In my view, a conference is rated in totality. The fact UNC and Duke are good is great for the ACC and UNC and Duke, but it doesn't mean Vagina Tech, BC, Miami, etc are good simply because they play in the same conference as Duke and UNC.
-
Would you judge the state of Michigan on Detroit? Would you judge how hot women are in Montana based on Miss Montana?
In my view, a conference is rated in totality. The fact UNC and Duke are good is great for the ACC and UNC and Duke, but it doesn't mean Vagina Tech, BC, Miami, etc are good simply because they play in the same conference as Duke and UNC.
To your first two questions people do so every day. It's called making value judgements and it's one of the most fundamental aspects of decision making. It may not always be accurate. It may not be right. It is instinctual and happens multiple times a day across the planet by over 7 billion humans.
Nobody is saying the teams you mentioned are good because they play in the ACC, but the ACC would be a horrendous conference without Duke and UNC (now including Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville). The ACC is regarded as the premier basketball conference in America because of who their top teams are, not the other way around.
You're arguing simply to satisfy your contrarian needs at this point.
-
To your first two questions people do so every day. It's called making value judgements and it's one of the most fundamental aspects of decision making. It may not always be accurate. It may not be right. It is instinctual and happens multiple times a day across the planet by over 7 billion humans.
Nobody is saying the teams you mentioned are good because they play in the ACC, but the ACC would be a horrendous conference without Duke and UNC (now including Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville). The ACC is regarded as the premier basketball conference in America because of who their top teams are, not the other way around.
You're arguing simply to satisfy your contrarian needs at this point.
True, but it is one of the reasons why 99.5% of people are incapable of rational thought.
-
Would you judge the state of Michigan based on Detroit? Would you judge how hot women are in Montana based on Miss Montana?
In my view, a conference is rated in totality. The fact UNC and Duke are good is great for the ACC and UNC and Duke, but it doesn't mean Vagina Tech, BC, Miami, etc are good simply because they play in the same conference as Duke and UNC.
Good post
-
To your first two questions people do so every day. It's called making value judgements and it's one of the most fundamental aspects of decision making. It may not always be accurate. It may not be right. It is instinctual and happens multiple times a day across the planet by over 7 billion humans.
Nobody is saying the teams you mentioned are good because they play in the ACC, but the ACC would be a horrendous conference without Duke and UNC (now including Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville). The ACC is regarded as the premier basketball conference in America because of who their top teams are, not the other way around.
You're arguing simply to satisfy your contrarian needs at this point.
Nope, I'm arguing because the question is how good is a CONFERENCE, not how good is the TOP OF THE CONFERENCE nor is it HOW GOOD ARE THE BEST TEAMS IN THE CONFERENCE. Words have meanings
-
And lets not forget that coaches know that.
The big diffrence between RPI and other services is that RPI doesn't include margin of victory, and that tends to be the central argument as to why RPI is bad.
Yet its stupid to think coaches wouldn't adjust their game plan if the NCAA switched to a measurment that factored margin of victory.
For example, we see many coaches give reserves extended playing time in sure-win situations. So their team wins by 8 instead of 18. The RPI is indifferent to that choice, but Sagarin and Ken Pom would penalize the 8 point victory compared to the 18 point win becuase they take margin of victory into account.
Same thing with end-of-game strategy. With the RPI, coaches almost always opt to pursue a foul strategy, because at worst you'll still lose, at best you steal a win. If margin of victory was factored, coaches would have to decide whether the possiblity of the other team hitting its FTs and winding up with a more sizeable victory margin was worth the potential of winning.
You'd also see teams with leads playing to score at the end. 10 point lead with the ball and 10 seconds to go? You'll see coaches going for another score to build margin of victory.
And you'll almost never see a walk on in a game.
Its simplistic to say the RPI isn't as good because it doesn't incorporate margin of victory.
Kind of true. I get so wrapped up in stats, if MU loses I feel good if it's a "computer win" (a game that we beat Pomeroy's projection). Pomeroy takes into account an 8 vs. 18 point win, but it's per possession. Let's say a 65 possession game, 70-52 win, it's 0.3 point per possession victory. a 70-62 win, it's 0.13 point per possession victory.
End of game scenarios don't really change. A team fouls, it's more points, but also more possessions. I'm not sure coaches pay attention that closely to this stuff anyway. Our own coach the past few years was supposed to be a stats savant and couldn't figure out 2 for 1 possessions at the end of halves and games.
-
Can you name a more consistent program in regards to wins and NCAAT appearances the last 20 seasons not named Kentucky, UConn, Louisville, MSU, Kansas, Duke, UNC, AZ, FL, Gonzaga or UCLA?
But your standard of success is making the Sweet 16. At least that was your standard for Marquette. So only 7 out of those 20 are successes. Consistency is great, but it is not the only thing. Tournament success is important. Winning conferences is important. Recruiting is important. Resources are important. And yes, history and tradition are important.
If you can find more than 2-3 programs you'd be lying to yourself.
More consistent? No. Close to same level of consistency and much better in everything else that matters when deciding which programs are elite? Yes. Texas (19 appearances in the past 20 seasons), Syracuse (17 appearances), Cincinnati (16 appearances), Xavier (15 appearances), Illinois (15 appearances), and Maryland (14 appearances) are the ones off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more.
Understand, 50 years is a lot of history. Most of it is no longer relevant to the current basketball landscape. Is Indiana a better basketball program currently than either Wisconsin or Marquette? I'd say no.
I realize that history is history, but it is always relevant. People remember who the great programs were. The prestige and tradition are essential to a program's image and success. We fans get so caught up in the "what have you done lately" craze that we forget there is more factors. Bo Ryan has them playing some damn good basketball right now. He's a vastly underrated coach, one of the best Xs and Os guys. But you can't overlook the fact that Wisconsin only had TWO, that's right, TWO NCAA tournament appearance before Dick Bennett. One in 1941 and one in 1947. That is abysmal. They had a 34 year period where they only had EIGHT WINNING SEASONS. It takes a long time to overcome that kind of brutal history.
As for Wisconsin's program being better than Indiana's, I think if you asked 100 random college basketball fans which was a better job, Indiana or Wisconsin, at least 90 would say Indiana. Like it or not, they are still a blue blood.
-
Conferences should be rated heavily by what their good teams have accomplished, otherwise you're simply arguing that these 4-7 mediocre teams are slightly better or worse collectively than these other 4-7 mediocre teams in another conference.
Look at it this way.
Best 2 teams (these names may vary slightly)
ACC: Duke, UNC
AAC: UConn, Louisville Memphis
P12: UCLA, AZ
B12: KANSAS, (OK, OKst, Baylor, KState)
SEC: UK, FL
Big East: Villanova, Georgetown
Any set of top teams you would swap out from any other conference would be an upgrade over the current Big East's top teams.
Now, if we did the same thing with the bottom feeders nobody would really care because is it even worth arguing who is worse between Oregon St, DePaul, Auburn, VTech, and Northwestern?
First off, move Louisville from the AAC to the ACC. They were a one year rental and that season is over.
2nd, the Big 12 lacking a second clear elite team should be of concern to your argument. Kansas is damn good but I would take the BEast over the B12 using this standard.
3rd, why is two the magic number? Let's see what happens when you add three.
ACC: UNC, Duke, LVILL. Okay, still dominant
AAC: UCONN, Memphis, Temple. That's a little concerning but still good.
B1G: IND, MSU, MICH. Very strong top 3.
B12: KAN, TEX, OKLA. Those last two are kinda scary.
BEast: Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette. Pretty solid, not dominant but solid.
P12: UCLA, Arizona, Utah. That's not very good.
SEC: UK, FLA, ARK. Florida, not good in the past, Arkansas, not good in the present.
In that scenario I would rank the conferences ACC, B1G, BEast, P12, AAC, B12, SEC.
The B12, P12, and SEC get even more exposed when you add a 4th team, and a 5th team.
No one is trying to argue that the BEast is the best conference. No one is trying to say it is anywhere as good as the old BEast. But to say it is 3rd tier behind the other power conferences is just plain wrong. No data to support it whatsoever.
-
Arizona and UCLA would be an upgrade over any two Big East teams they'd be replacing TAMU. You don't watch enough basketball if you don't recognize that.
You obviously disagree, but consider me one who views this new Big East as severely lacking. Of all the things Buzz Williams has been dishonest about and deserving of criticism, his remarks on the conference he left aren't one of them.
-
Arizona and UCLA would be an upgrade over any two Big East teams they'd be replacing TAMU. You don't watch enough basketball if you don't recognize that.
You obviously disagree, but consider me one who views this new Big East as severely lacking. Of all the things Buzz Williams has been dishonest about and deserving of criticism, his remarks on the conference he left aren't one of them.
So what? What exactly is your point? Everyone here agrees with you that the BE is not as good now as it was. I would venture to say that even Lenny and Chicos can agree on that. It's not the ACC, but neither is it the Horizon League. The BE is still a good conference that can attract recruits and big OOC matchups. It will not replicate the good ol' days from a few years ago because a lot of the teams that were so important to those days are now gone. Would you prefer that MU stayed in the reformulated BE that would include UConn, MU, Georgetown, Nova, Cincy and noone else of any value whatsoever? What they have now is just as good as that option and offers stability, because conference realignment isn't over - it's just taking a breather.