Is the New Big East Acutally Better Than The Old Big East?

[tower912]

No.  However, remembering all of the uncertainty and dread of just a few years ago, the current iteration is the best Marquette and the rest could ask for.  Like minded institutions, basketball at the highest level... The one thing I am grateful to Larry for is the work he put in on this.

[Dr. Blackheart]

So, using Pomeroy as it has a history and it has been a fairly stable methodology over time for comparison sake...as of right now, the Big East is ranked fourth for this season.

Since the 2001-02 season until the present, the Big East average conference standing is 3.4th best
Before MU et al joined, it was 3.5
After MU, et al joined until the exodus, the average standing was 3.1
The New Big East has averaged fourth best over the last three years

So, the Big East has dropped about one place since the mass exodus. MU, Georgetown and DePaul to blame.

[bamamarquettefan]

I absolutely prefer this incarnation of the Big East. I believe within a couple of years we will have 10 above average programs. The double round robin format is what gives this conference a lot of traction going forward. it makes for real rivalries.

I can't go that far - the packed BC for UConn et Al was unreal - but we rode the unbelievable luck of being in the League as long as we could, and then when it looked like all would crash we pulled out an incredible Plan B.

[DFW HOYA]

Not even close.

[Tugg Speedman]

In a weird alternate reality, one where John Marinatto actually accepts ESPN's $1 billion TV deal and makes the football/non-football hybrid continuing to work and be successful, you could have (conceivably) had this version of the Big East alive and kicking today:

Full Members
Cincinnati
Connecticut
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Rutgers
South Florida
Syracuse
West Virginia
Memphis - Addition
Temple - Addition

Full Members except in Football
DePaul
Georgetown
Marquette
Notre Dame
Providence
St. Johns
Seton Hall
Villanova

Football-Only Members
Navy - Addition
Army - Addition

If the conference had gone this route, they would have had their $1 billion TV deal with ESPN, a football conference championship game (which you could have held at MetLife Stadium), and they could have continued the football/non-football hybrid that would have appealed to all of the schools.  Memphis and Temple would have brought very solid basketball programs, in addition to rising football programs.  Navy and Army would bring national followings to the football side of things, as well a very competitive program in Navy.  No need to go west and try and poach Boise State, San Diego State, SMU, Houston, etc., and most definitely no need to try and bring in schools that had potential like UCF, ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa (seriously, what was the thought process in inviting those schools???). 

Nevertheless, I love our situation today in the current Big East.  Fun to think about what could have happened, however.

In no alternative universe would this have worked.  Pitt and Syracuse would have still jumped to the ACC and the entire thing would have crashed.

Further, that billion dollar deal would have given most of that money to the football schools.  Basketball only is better with the FS1 deal.

[79Warrior]

I absolutely prefer this incarnation of the Big East. I believe within a couple of years we will have 10 above average programs. The double round robin format is what gives this conference a lot of traction going forward. it makes for real rivalries.  The key for all our teams is that Basketball is the centerpiece and every program has something positive going for it.

For example,I went to a Creighton game the other night and the place was sold out for a cupcake and their fan base was wildly enthusiastic about the Big East, and they are coming off the same type of year we had. They feel they have a good recruiting pipeline and they support their coach. Everyone feels good about it. Even look at DePaul, the new arena will do wonders for that program.


I think MU is in a great place with this and when we get our program back to full health we can schedule plenty of big name opponents in the non conference part of the season.

No way. I don't care about Creighton selling out a cupcake. I miss ND, Ville , UCONN, Cuse. Those games had electric atmospheres. The new league was our best option, but give me the old league any day.

[Tugg Speedman]

No way. I don't care about Creighton selling out a cupcake. I miss ND, Ville , UCONN, Cuse. Those games had electric atmospheres. The new league was our best option, but give me the old league any day.

Other than ND, they were electric because they were consistently top 5 teams, with MU also being a ranked team.  Today other than 'Ville  most of them are "not receiving votes" teams with 'cuse probably not even a tourney team.  How electric would be 'cuse v MU if they played next week at the BC, two non-tourney teams facing off?

You're living in the past.  Today they are not that good.

Wanna know why?  For the same reason Butler and X are both top 10 teams.

Cuse, Pitt, uconn and the group got WORSE because they left the Big East.  X and Butler are national powers because they are in the Big East.

[keefe]

The one thing I am grateful to Larry for is the work he put in on this.

The man excelled at creating lesser value...

[79Warrior]

Other than ND, they were electric because they were consistently top 5 teams, with MU also being a ranked team.  Today other than 'Ville  most of them are "not receiving votes" teams with 'cuse probably not even a tourney team.  How electric would be 'cuse v MU if they played next week at the BC, two non-tourney teams facing off?

You're living in the past.  Today they are not that good.

Wanna know why?  For the same reason Butler and X are both top 10 teams.

Cuse, Pitt, uconn and the group got WORSE because they left the Big East.  X and Butler are national powers because they are in the Big East.

Living in the past? I think the same can be said for many Marquette fans.

[brewcity77]

Did the Big Ten lose half of its programs? did the SEC? Did the ACC? Did any of those programs lose anybody nearly as consequential as Louisville, Syracuse, UConn, ND, etc? (The ACC did lose Maryland, a great basketball school, and more than made up for that with the schools it gained.)

Those conferences were added to, bolstered. The Big East was completely altered. One might even say "new."

It simply will take time for the newness to wear off. Hell, every year, a few announcers call us the Warriors! Change isn't always easy to digest.

The Big East is probably closer to what the original conference was than any of the others out there. I realize it's different than the 16-team conference we saw for the bulk of the 2000s, but I'd argue this incarnation of the Big East would be less "New" than what this conference became when we joined in the first place.

I get people's arguments, but I have a hard time when we are the only conference labeled "New" yet no one points out that 44% of the ACC membership is new in the past decade and the Big 10 and Big 12 have changed so thoroughly that it appears they can no longer count.

At least the Pac-12 had the good sense to adjust their name to suit the new makeup of their conference.

[MU82]

Cuse, Pitt, uconn and the group got WORSE because they left the Big East.  X and Butler are national powers because they are in the Big East.

Well, Butler did go to consecutive national title games when the Big East wasn't even a twinkle in their eyes.

Xavier was an NCAA tourney regular long before it joined the Big East and went to the Elite Eight in 2004 and 2009. From 2008-12, X went E8-S16-S16-First Rd-S16 -- pretty impressive, and the Big East had nothing to do with it.

Hell, Butler had its worst season in eons in 2013-14, its first in the Big East. I don't think the Big East was to "blame." It just was part of the cycle.

Bulter and X wanted to come to the Big East for the money and the prestige ... and the Big East wanted them because they already were big-time, established programs.

[Tugg Speedman]

Well, Butler did go to consecutive national title games when the Big East wasn't even a twinkle in their eyes.

Xavier was an NCAA tourney regular long before it joined the Big East and went to the Elite Eight in 2004 and 2009. From 2008-12, X went E8-S16-S16-First Rd-S16 -- pretty impressive, and the Big East had nothing to do with it.

Hell, Butler had its worst season in eons in 2013-14, its first in the Big East. I don't think the Big East was to "blame." It just was part of the cycle.

Bulter and X wanted to come to the Big East for the money and the prestige ... and the Big East wanted them because they already were big-time, established programs.

Butler and X have moved to the next level in the Big East.  They are both top 10 and Andy Katz has X penciled in as a Final 4 team.

That said,  what are you arguing?  that we'd be better off in a conference with a bunch of teams not getting votes a day potentially headed to the NIT called Pitt, Syracuse WVU and Rutgers over a conference with 2 top 10 teams and a legitimate FF candidate?

[MU82]

Butler and X have moved to the next level in the Big East.  They are both top 10 and Andy Katz has X penciled in as a Final 4 team.

That said,  what are you arguing?  that we'd be better off in a conference with a bunch of teams not getting votes a day potentially headed to the NIT called Pitt, Syracuse WVU and Rutgers over a conference with 2 top 10 teams and a legitimate FF candidate?

I'm arguing that entrance into the Big East did not suddenly transform downtrodden schmoes Butler and Xavier into instant wonderfulness. Butler and Xavier were pretty darn good before the Big East beckoned. Again, Butler didn't need the Big East to go to back-to-back national title games.

I maintain that the previous incarnation of the Big East was better than this one. We have 10 teams now, most of which are solid. A few years ago, we had 11 IN THE NCAA TOURNEY!

Now, if you are arguing that the Big East is better with today's Butler, today's Xavier and today's Creighton than it would have been with today's UConn, today's Louisville, today's Pitt, today's West Virginia, today's Cincinnati, today's Syracuse and today's Notre Dame ...

1. Maybe, but it's impossible to prove.

2. Wouldn't UConn, et al, be benefiting from the positive "Big East Effect" that you are attaching to Butler and Xavier?

3. Your opinion is duly noted, as is mine.

Having said all of that, I do believe the Big East is a good conference for Butler, Xavier and Creighton, and I am glad the Big East has them as members.

[brewcity77]

I don't think the current Big East is better than what the league was in its heyday. Pittsburgh, UConn, Syracuse, and Louisville were title contenders every year. Villanova, West Virginia, Notre Dame, Cincy, and Marquette were all good bets to make the tournament. Now granted, at the time Providence, Rutgers, South Florida, and DePaul were all consistently bad, so you had more chaff at the bottom of the league, but there's no doubt in terms of sheer power, the old league was better.

Xavier and Butler are having good seasons, they aren't close to being national powers just yet. The only school that's played at all like a national power since the formation of this league is Villanova, and they've folded the tents come the first weekend in March. To get to the point where this league is better, we need teams that can consistently compete for titles. We don't have that yet. We don't have one, much less the 2-3 it would take to be on par percentage wise with the old league.

It's definitely a better fit, though, and I'd much rather be here. Do some people forget the agony of watching our best programs leave like thieves in the night, not knowing if we'd even have a conference to start the next season when rumors that not only would all the football programs split, but schools like Georgetown and Villanova were interested in basketball-only deals in the ACC? When the only nearby conferences that looked viable were the MVC and Horizon, and Dayton fans were trolling us?

Granted, I never thought we'd fall off the map, but that uncertainty was not fun, and this league has been the best possible thing for all of us. If we can get some teams to start making deep runs in March and put up a couple legitimate perennial powers, the way Pittsburgh used to do (not a glory program, but always was in the top-10...though hopefully with better March results), this league could be better than the old Big East. If we regularly get 6 bids, and occasionally get 7-8 while putting multiple teams into the second weekend and getting some teams to the Final Four (maybe not every year, but every other) then yes, it can be better than the old league.

Oh, one last thing it will need to be better...national championships. UConn, Louisville, and Syracuse all won national titles in that last decade of the Big East. If we want to be better than the old league, we need to win at least 1-2 titles per decade. Doesn't matter who, but someone has to cut down the nets at the Final Four for this league to ever truly match those heights.

[Tugg Speedman]

I'm arguing that entrance into the Big East did not suddenly transform downtrodden schmoes Butler and Xavier into instant wonderfulness. Butler and Xavier were pretty darn good before the Big East beckoned. Again, Butler didn't need the Big East to go to back-to-back national title games.

I maintain that the previous incarnation of the Big East was better than this one. We have 10 teams now, most of which are solid. A few years ago, we had 11 IN THE NCAA TOURNEY!

Now, if you are arguing that the Big East is better with today's Butler, today's Xavier and today's Creighton than it would have been with today's UConn, today's Louisville, today's Pitt, today's West Virginia, today's Cincinnati, today's Syracuse and today's Notre Dame ...

1. Maybe, but it's impossible to prove.

2. Wouldn't UConn, et al, be benefiting from the positive "Big East Effect" that you are attaching to Butler and Xavier?

3. Your opinion is duly noted, as is mine.

Having said all of that, I do believe the Big East is a good conference for Butler, Xavier and Creighton, and I am glad the Big East has them as members.

Yes I'm only talking about this season.  The current 10 team New Big East is a better basketball conference this year than the collective play of the old Big East 16 teams combined.

The New Big East only has 2 completed seasons.  Way to earlier to compare it to the old Big East.  Stop me if you heard this before, we have to wait at least 5 years!

And, as I posted above, UConn and Cincy would love to get into the New Big East right now.  The American conference is hurting them.  But we are not taking them unless they dump football (which they will not).

[MU82]

Yes I'm only talking about this season.  The current 10 team New Big East is a better basketball conference this year than the collective play of the old Big East 16 teams combined.

The New Big East only has 2 completed seasons.  Way to earlier to compare it to the old Big East.  Stop me if you heard this before, we have to wait at least 5 years!

And, as I posted above, UConn and Cincy would love to get into the New Big East right now.  The American conference is hurting them.  But we are not taking them unless they dump football (which they will not).

Okey dokey. We're mostly in agreement ... especially about all of this being impossible to prove and about it being too early to judge anything!

[Tugg Speedman]

Okey dokey. We're mostly in agreement ... especially about all of this being impossible to prove and about it being too early to judge anything!

Yes but in year 3 (at for now) the New Big East is an improvement over the play of all the old teams.  So, for now, we can stop with all the reminiscing of what could have been the old Big East stayed together,.  For now, it is better!