Insider?

[Galway Eagle]

Anyone with insider willing to post the new Joe Lundardi article talking about how good/bad the catholic seven really are

[onetime]

So here's the thing. The new "Catholic Seven" basketball alliance? It's not very good. At least not yet.



And you don't have to take my word for it. It's all in the numbers. In this case, a 12-year study of the schools involved using the only criteria that really matter in college basketball: NCAA tournament revenue units.



Why 12 years? That's two full NCAA revenue distribution cycles of six years apiece. In other words, more than enough time for even the most downtrodden programs to put their best foot forward.



To quantify success (or lack of same) on and off the court, we first ranked the departing Big East basketball schools via a League Partner Index (LPI). We think the formula is both basic and informative. It's 80 percent revenue-based (e.g., schools ranked by NCAA units earned) and 20 percent performance-based (a rolling average of RPI and nonconference schedule strength). We must include the latter, of course, as the ability to first reach and then be seeded in the NCAA tournament is based to a substantial degree on the quality of any team's conference partners.

Ranked best to worst, with the lower a school's LPI the better, here are the Catholic Seven:










TEAM

UNITS (rank)

RPI (rank)

SOS (N/C)

INDEX




Villanova

19 (1)

41.17 (1)

73.00 (1)

1.00



Marquette

19 (1)

45.67 (2)

120.45 (6)

1.60



Georgetown

17 (3)

46.83 (3)

126.45 (7)

3.40



Seton Hall

3 (4)

87.58 (4)

105.18 (4)

4.00



Providence

2 (5)

92.75 (5)

88.73 (2)

4.70



St. John's

2 (5)

113.67 (6)

101.18 (3)

4.90



DePaul

2 (5)

139.75 (7)

113.00 (5)

5.20




Seems like one big, happy family, right? Maybe not. Let's see what happens when we add seven other private, mostly Catholic institutions to the mix:








TEAM

UNITS (rank)

RPI (rank)

SOS (N/C)

INDEX




Xavier

25 (1)

39.42 (1)

52.18 (1)

1.00



Villanova

19 (3)

41.17 (2)

73.00 (4)

3.00



Butler

23 (2)

71.25 (7)

111.27 (8)

3.10



Marquette

19 (3)

45.67 (3)

120.45 (11)

3.80



Georgetown

17 (3)

46.83 (3)

126.45 (7)

5.70



Saint Joseph's

8 (6)

75.67 (8)

55.00 (2)

5.80



Creighton

8 (6)

51.50 (5)

129.00 (14)

6.70



Dayton

4 (9)

69.58 (6)

71.55 (3)

8.10



Richmond

5 (8)

110.42 (12)

120.73 (12)

8.80



Seton Hall

3 (10)

87.58 (9)

105.18 (7)

9.60



Providence

2 (11)

92.75 (10)

88.73 (5)

10.30



St. John's

2 (11)

113.67 (13)

101.18 (6)

10.70



Saint Louis

2 (11)

104.75 (11)

115.64 (10)

10.90



DePaul

2 (11)

139.75 (14)

113.00 (9)

11.10




Suddenly, the big, happy family is showing more than a little vulnerability. Outsiders Xavier and Butler claim two of the three top spots on the list, and four of the bottom five are "Catholic Seven" underachievers.



The bottom line of all this number-crunching, even if tweaked to the advantage of certain schools or groups of schools, is that the so-called Catholic Seven is a long, long, long way from its Big East glory days. Villanova, Marquette and Georgetown can never be good enough to carry their four average-to-below-average (and we're being kind) partners.



As for any proposed expansion, it would need to add real basketball chops to the new league. Otherwise, the product on the floor -- and broadcast rights for same -- won't come close to matching the rhetoric coming from current and prospective members. Even a 10-team league, adding Xavier and whomever else, won't have enough at the top to consistently place half its members in the Big Dance. More upper-end teams with beneficial RPI/SOS histories will be needed to deliver the expected five to seven NCAA bids per season along with the tourney advancement opportunities needed to pile up revenue units quickly.



Me? I'd go 12-14 teams, based on deeper data in the categories above, in an East/West format. Play your own division twice and the other division once (traveling in alternate seasons). It would look something like this:
EAST: Villanova, Georgetown, Saint Joseph's, Richmond*, Seton Hall, Providence, St. John's

WEST: Xavier, Butler, Marquette, Creighton, Dayton, Saint Louis*, DePaul


* not included if a 12-team alignment



Unlike the fractured football confederations, rivalries in these divisions are real and immediate. The markets, like the original Big East, are substantial and basketball-centric. If the thinking expands to public institutions (non-football, presumably), VCU and others make the cut. All that's needed is a name (and for Gonzaga to be 2,000 miles closer).



But you can't have everything. The Big East has proven that once and for all.

[Galway Eagle]

Interesting thanks

[kryza]

For anyone without insider, you can buy a year subscription to the ESPN magazine on Amazon for $5 (Until 12/25). It comes with insider access too.


http://www.amazon.com/ESPN-The-Magazine-1-year-auto-renewal/dp/B002BCCOFY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355867349&sr=8-1&keywords=espn+magazine

[MuMark]

It should also be pointed out that Lunardi has a bias as far as St. Joes is concerned.....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lunardi

[Dawson Rental]

In conclusion, the new league will fall short of what the old Big East was.  Duh!
It will also be ahead of what the Atlantic 10 is now, and way better than an Atlantic 10 without Xavier and Butler.

[Ellenson Guerrero]

I don't really think his analysis supports the point he is trying to make. We're gonna get Xavier and Butler. That gives us 5 programs who should be year in, year out tournament teams (MU, Nova, Gtown, X and Butler). Assume that most every year four out of the five make the tournament. I think in an average year one or two of the others make it as well. That means that each year we should have 5-6 tournament teams in a 10 team league (assuming that is the route we take). What other conferences can boast 50% NCAA tournament placement on a yearly basis? The ACC and Big Ten are usually right around that mark and only occasionally do better. Big 12 and SEC sporadically reach it, and the Pac-12 might do it in a good year. A-10 is usually does about 4 out of 14.

Our top is a step down from the ACC and Big 10, but our bottom is relatively comparable to those other conferences. Looking at the new conference in a vacuum doesn't really tell you anything.

[honkytonk]

I don't really think his analysis supports the point he is trying to make. We're gonna get Xavier and Butler. That gives us 5 programs who should be year in, year out tournament teams (MU, Nova, Gtown, X and Butler). Assume that most every year four out of the five make the tournament. I think in an average year one or two of the others make it as well. That means that each year we should have 5-6 tournament teams in a 10 team league (assuming that is the route we take). What other conferences can boast 50% NCAA tournament placement on a yearly basis? The ACC and Big Ten are usually right around that mark and only occasionally do better. Big 12 and SEC sporadically reach it, and the Pac-12 might do it in a good year. A-10 is usually does about 4 out of 14.

Our top is a step down from the ACC and Big 10, but our bottom is relatively comparable to those other conferences. Looking at the new conference in a vacuum doesn't really tell you anything.

Nova fans are hitting the panic button. It will be an uphill battle for them to make the tournament this year. Then they lose Yarou and Sutton. Their young players are underwhelming and their incoming class next year isnt very good. It's a bad time for Nova to be so down.

[Aughnanure]

The media seems to love bringing up St. Joe's. More than VCU or Richmond it seems. Odd.

[Tugg Speedman]

Let me summarize, please correct.

The new C7+ is not as good as it could be because Depaul, Seton Hall and Providence really suck.  If they were to stop sucking (not get good, just stop sucking) the conference would get a lot better.

How is that?

[StillAWarrior]

Obviously, the new Big East is not as strong as the conference we joined.  And it's not as strong as the conference this year.  It's probably not even as strong as the C7+ UConn and Cincy. But, I think that the C7+ Butler and Xavier is a hell of a lot stronger than the C7+ the remnants of the Big East after UConn and Cincy bolt for greener pastures. Ultimately that's the standard by which this should be judged. It's a great move for Marquette.

[Silkk the Shaka]

Obviously, the new Big East is not as strong as the conference we joined.  And it's not as strong as the conference this year.  It's probably not even as strong as the C7+ UConn and Cincy. But, I think that the C7+ Butler and Xavier is a hell of a lot stronger than the C7+ the remnants of the Big East after UConn and Cincy bolt for greener pastures. Ultimately that's the standard by which this should be judged. It's a great move for Marquette.

This is exactly right.  It took me a while to come to terms with the idea of the "Catholic Conference," but once Louisville left this was without a doubt our best option.  While I'm depressed we are no longer in the greatest hoops league ever assembled, going forward we should be competing for championships year in and year out in one of the top 3-6 conferences (depending on the year).  There's some value in that, and over time I think there will be value in the basketball-centric nature of the league as well as the assumed stability.  Onward and upward!

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

I don't think the teams he proposes after X, Butler and Creighton make any sense to add. If this were the league, I'd be disappointed. Go get two more really good programs (Gonzaga and VCU). I could see VCU being left out and one team we all don't want it (SLU, Dayton, St. Joe's, etc.).

[Galway Eagle]

A good point he makes is that the conference isn't good yet.  I mean I think he's hinting at the fact that Depaul St Johns and Providence are looking like they coud turn it around in a year or two given what's returning and the recruiting classes becoming better