Wall Street Journal: How Ditching Football Saved Big East Basketball

[BleedGopher]

per the WSJ:

In the big-is-better, football-is-king world of modern college athletics, a group of regional Catholic schools four years ago tried something radical: a conference focused primarily on basketball.

And it seems the experiment is actually working.

The new Big East currently has three schools—Villanova (No. 2), Butler (No. 22) and Creighton (No. 23) ranked in the AP Top 25. Four others—Xavier, Marquette, Seton Hall and Providence—also have a chance to join their rivals at next month’s NCAA tournament, In 2015 and ‘16, the league placed at least five teams—or half its membership—in the NCAAs. And Villanova is the defending national champion.

Founded in 1979 as a collection of basketball-centric schools in urban northeast media markets, the Big East grew into a hoops powerhouse in the 1980s while also providing a blueprint for the conference consolidation that later swept the country. But the continued expansion—the league eventually sponsored football and morphed into a hybrid arrangement of 16 schools, including seven that didn't play football at the Football Bowl Subdivision level—also brought the Big East to the brink of collapse.

“No disrespect to football, but it kind of ruined the original Big East,” said Chris Mullin, the St. John’s head coach and one of the league’s earliest star players.

By the early 2010s, the tensions between the football and basketball schools became untenable. Bowl and television revenues for football kept growing exponentially, and several Big East programs departed in pursuit of more lucrative arrangements with other leagues. The Big East sought to fill the void by adding a handful of geographic misfits.


“We were taking in the best football schools that we could, but they weren’t good basketball schools,” said the Rev. Brian Shanley, the president of Providence College, one of the Big East’s basketball-centric charter members. Some of the schools, Shanley added, concluded they were “degrading our basketball product, which was the thing we cared about the most.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-ditching-football-saved-big-east-basketball-1487616324?mod=e2tws

Go Gophers!!

 

[KillmeNow]

I'm not impressed just yet.

I'll wait a few years and see how it works out for them. My prediction is that they will end up being not much better than most of the Mid-Major Conferences out there.

I could be wrong? But I don't think so.

 

[adchester]

I don't know, I think they'll be fine if they can keep the FS1 deal, or another relevant TV deal. All the schools have some history of success (other than Depaul I suppose), and I don't see the conference on a whole truly struggling anytime soon.

Really depends on holding on to the TV deal though, that's what makes or breaks a conference.

 

[KillmeNow]

I just think its a collection of has beens and never beens.

Marquette hasn't gotten to the Final Four since 2003

Seton Hall hasn't gotten to the Final Four since 1989

Providence hasn't gotten to the Final Four since 1987

St John's hasn't gotten to the Final Four since 1985

Georgetown hasn't gotten to the Final Four since 1982

DePaul hasn't gotten to the Final Four since 1979

Butler was basically just a flash in the pan.

Xavier has never gotten to the Final Four

Creighton has never gotten to the Final Four.

And of the 10 teams, only 3 have ever won a Title, and only Villanova has won more than 1.


Compared to Minnesota, that might look good, but Minnesota's produced more NBA players than 8 of those 10 programs.

And the B1G conference dwarfs the BE in the # of Titles its won and the # of Final Fours its been to, as well.


So like so many other Mid-Major Conferences, 1 or 2 teams will probably always do well each year, but not much more than that, is my guess, and unless they get some super huge TV deal that brings tons of money into all of those programs, so that they can hire better coaches and improve their facilities and up their recruiting budgets and assistant coaching pay, etc,, I see them slowly declining more and more each year as recruits choose to play in the B1G and the ACC and the Pac-12 and even the Big 12 or the SEC.

Especially with Villanova, they should do as well as the SEC and mid-majors like the AAC and the Atlantic-10, etc., some years, and then not so good other years.

I just can't see them competing with the likes of the B1G and ACC? And without football to supplement them, a single down year in the NCAA tourney or in the polls could really cripple them?

But I'm not any kind of an expert. So I could be wrong.

 

[Urbandale]

I don't know, I think they'll be fine if they can keep the FS1 deal, or another relevant TV deal. All the schools have some history of success (other than Depaul I suppose), and I don't see the conference on a whole truly struggling anytime soon.

Really depends on holding on to the TV deal though, that's what makes or breaks a conference.

I remember the all-too-brief glory years of Depaul when they had Mark Aguirre and Terry Cummings and were coached my Ray Meyer. I was just a kid, but I remember them being pretty awesome. I wonder why they couldn't sustain it.

 

[UpAndUnder43]

Its easy to look at a conference and say they have been to a final four since 19xx or at all.

Pretty sure the big ten has plenty of has and has nots.

Who has sustained success the past 20 years? Michigan St.

The past 10? Michigan State, Purdue? (Have they made a final 4?),

Correct me if I'm wrong but it's been a long time since the following teams have been good: Rutgers, Nebraska, Penn State, Northwestern, Minnesota...let alone sustained success.

The Big East will be fine. Maybe not elite but a few top teams and some other tourney teams every year is a solid hoops conference

 

[coolhandgopher]

A couple thoughts/corrections on the post about the Big East:

* Georgetown's most recent Final Four was 2007
* While Xavier may have never made the Final Four, they have made it to two Elite Eights ('04 & '08), six Sweet Sixteen's since 2000, and 14 tournament appearances since 2000.
* Butler has made it to three NCAA tournaments since their back to back finals' appearances in 2010 & '11, despite moving into a tougher conference and losing their generational coach, Brad Stevens.
* Last Final Fours for Big Ten teams: Iowa (1980); Minnesota (1997, vacated); Indiana (2002); Illinois (2005); Ohio State (2012); Purdue (1980); Northwestern (never) Nebraska (never); Michigan (2013); Wisconsin (2015); Michigan State (2015); Penn State (1954); Rutgers (1976); Maryland (2002)
* Last National Champ for Big Ten: 2000 (Michigan State); prior to that, Michigan in 1989 and Indiana in 1987 (not counting Maryland's title in '02 as ACC member)
* Last National Champ for Big East: Villanova, 2016; prior to the dismantlement of the conference Syracuse and UConn garnered several titles for Big East

Personally, I hope the Big East continues to thrive, which would include a rejuvenation for Marquette and Georgetown and a rebirth for DePaul. While the Golden Gophers reap the benefits of being in one of the dominant athletic conferences in the nation, a beleaguered Big East does not benefit college basketball, IMO, but only weakens it, just as having Gonzaga continue as a strong program only benefits the overall product. A major aspect of college basketball's charm and allure is the smaller colleges and universities being able to compete and contend with the massive programs out of the Big 10, SEC, ACC, Pac 10, etc.

Plus, as the overall numbers reflect, the Big East squads are certainly holding their own over the course of the last 20-30 years comparatively. How many Big Ten fans wouldn't want to have had Xavier's run since 2000? Wouldn't Indiana or Purdue fans want to trade places with Butler fans since at least 2010?

From my perspective, every college basketball fan should hope that the Big East remains viable (along with the Atlantic 10, Missouri Valley, and West Coast Conference) for a long, long time.

 

[KillmeNow]

Its easy to look at a conference and say they have been to a final four since 19xx or at all.

Pretty sure the big ten has plenty of has and has nots.

Who has sustained success the past 20 years? Michigan St.

The past 10? Michigan State, Purdue? (Have they made a final 4?),

Correct me if I'm wrong but it's been a long time since the following teams have been good: Rutgers, Nebraska, Penn State, Northwestern, Minnesota...let alone sustained success.

The Big East will be fine. Maybe not elite but a few top teams and some other tourney teams every year is a solid hoops conference

Hey, very admirable of you to try to stick up for the little guy, but my guess is that you are just making a sort of only semi educated guess as to what the deal is. And that's ok, like I said, your coming to pool little ole Big East's defense is admirable.

But my first indication that its only a semi educated guess, is your exclusion of Wisconsin among teams with sustained success over the last 20 years, and I'd say 3 Final Fours for Ohio St isn't too bad, and a couple for Maryland, too. Kind of strange how you would forget those teams?

I mean, B1G teams have been to 3 times as many FFs as the current members of the Big East have been to in the last 20 years.



Final Fours over the years

Conf - Last 5 yrs - Last 10 yrs - Last 15 yrs - Last 20 yrs - Last 30 yrs - Last 40 yrs - Last 50 yrs - Last 60 yrs - Last 70 yrs - Last 77 years

B1G ------ 5 ----------- 8 ------------ 12 ---------- 17 ---------- 21 ----------- 25 ---------- 31 ----------- 37 ---------- 44 ---------- 50

Beast ----- 1 ----------- 5 ------------- 6 ----------- 6 ------------ 8 ------------ 15 ---------- 18 ----------- 18 --------- 19 ---------- 22



So sure Rutgers and NW and Nebraska and PSU and Minnesota haven't been to the FF or been there for awhile. But unlike the Big East, Minnesota has done very well in hockey and PSU has done very well in football and Nebraska has done very well in football and all 3 of those schools have done very well in VB, and PSU has a bright future in hockey and Minnesota has a bright future in football, and Minnesota has a bright future in basketball, and NW has done well in football and Rutgers, well, who knows, they looked promising in football about a decade ago, so who knows?

Can you say this about the bottom dwellers of the Big East? Or the top half of the Big East teams even?


I don't mean to pick on them, just being realistic. I don't see a promising future for a basketball only conference, especially when that's all they got and the ACC and AAC took the best bb schools from the Big East.

 

[KillmeNow]

A couple thoughts/corrections on the post about the Big East:

* Georgetown's most recent Final Four was 2007
* While Xavier may have never made the Final Four, they have made it to two Elite Eights ('04 & '08), six Sweet Sixteen's since 2000, and 14 tournament appearances since 2000.
* Butler has made it to three NCAA tournaments since their back to back finals' appearances in 2010 & '11, despite moving into a tougher conference and losing their generational coach, Brad Stevens.
* Last Final Fours for Big Ten teams: Iowa (1980); Minnesota (1997, vacated); Indiana (2002); Illinois (2005); Ohio State (2012); Purdue (1980); Northwestern (never) Nebraska (never); Michigan (2013); Wisconsin (2015); Michigan State (2015); Penn State (1954); Rutgers (1976); Maryland (2002)
* Last National Champ for Big Ten: 2000 (Michigan State); prior to that, Michigan in 1989 and Indiana in 1987 (not counting Maryland's title in '02 as ACC member)
* Last National Champ for Big East: Villanova, 2016; prior to the dismantlement of the conference Syracuse and UConn garnered several titles for Big East

Personally, I hope the Big East continues to thrive, which would include a rejuvenation for Marquette and Georgetown and a rebirth for DePaul. While the Golden Gophers reap the benefits of being in one of the dominant athletic conferences in the nation, a beleaguered Big East does not benefit college basketball, IMO, but only weakens it, just as having Gonzaga continue as a strong program only benefits the overall product. A major aspect of college basketball's charm and allure is the smaller colleges and universities being able to compete and contend with the massive programs out of the Big 10, SEC, ACC, Pac 10, etc.

Plus, as the overall numbers reflect, the Big East squads are certainly holding their own over the course of the last 20-30 years comparatively. How many Big Ten fans wouldn't want to have had Xavier's run since 2000? Wouldn't Indiana or Purdue fans want to trade places with Butler fans since at least 2010?

From my perspective, every college basketball fan should hope that the Big East remains viable (along with the Atlantic 10, Missouri Valley, and West Coast Conference) for a long, long time.

Yeah, I noticed I missed that FF of Georgetown's in 2007, too. Didn't mean to do that on purpose.

Also, funny how you don't include Maryland's accomplishments before joining the B1G, but you do include teams accomplishments that are not in the current Big East anymore. That is not being fair to the argument I made. It's trying to manipulate the stats to make your argument seem stronger than it is.


Because the argument is what are the chances of the Big East being very successful.

I have nothing against the current Big East, and enjoyed the old Big East conference, it was the best bb conference in the country. But the AAC took a couple of the best programs and the ACC took a couple as well and now the ACC is the best bb conference.

But when talking about the future of a conference, counting accomplishments of teams that have LEFT that conference skews the discussion and covers up the truth. UConn and UL and Syracuse and Cincy are no longer a part of the Big East, in fact they are competitors with the Big East, if those schools improve, it will probably be at the expense of CURRECT Big East programs.

And when comparing the CURRENT Big East with the CURRENT B1G conference, it's also not fair to exclude the accomplishments of teams like Maryland and PSU and Rutgers from before they joined the B1G conference, because that ARE a part of the B1G now, its part of why those teams were brought into the B1G, to ADD to what the B1G already was, and now the B1G is more.

I'm not hoping for the demise of the Big East, but I don't hope for the demise of the nuclear family, or good ole fashioned morals, either, but those things are disappearing from the American culture, and admitting as much isn't the same as hoping for it.



And yes, Villanova won a Title just last year, but before that the entire CURRENT conference had only 3 titles, with the last one coming in 1985. The CURRENT B1G teams won titles in 1987, 1989, 2000 & 2002. I graduated in 1986, so the CURRENT B1G teams have won 4 titles since then compared to 1 for the CURRENT Big East. And the last 20 years, the current B1G has been to 3 times as many Final Fours as the CURRENT Big East teams.


You mentioned Butler? They were basically a flash in the pan. Will that flash ever translate into anything? Not sure since they lost their coach. And yes, Xavier has been to a couple Elite 8s and Sweet 16s, but if we expand the comparison beyond Final Fours, do you really think the Big East is going to compare?

Just being realistic.


Ohio St - 11 Final Fours - 5 title games - 1 title - 1 FF vacated
Mich St - 9 Final Fours - 3 title games - 2 titles
Indiana - 8 Final Fours - 6 title games - 5 titles
U Mich - 7 Final Fours - 6 title games - 1 title - 2 FF/title games vacated
Illinois - 5 Final Fours - 1 title game - 0 titles - 1 non NCAA Natl Title
U Wisc - 4 Final Fours - 2 title games - 1 title - 3 non NCAA Natl Titles
U Mary - 2 Final Fours - 1 title game - 1 title
U Iowa - 3 Final Fours - 1 title game - 0 titles
Purdue - 2 Final Fours - 1 title game - 0 titles - 1 non NCAA Natl Title
Penn St - 1 Final Four - 0 title games - 0 titles
Rutgers - 1 Final Four - 0 title games - 0 titles
U Minn - 1 Final Four - 0 title games - 0 titles - 1 FF vacated - 3 non-NCAA Natl Titles
NWstrn - 0 Final Fours - 0 title games - 0 titles - 1 non NCAA Natl Title

B1G Conf - 54 Final 4s - 26 title gms - 11 titles - 4 FFs vacated - 2 title gms vacated - 6 non NCAA Natl Titles

honestly, how do you think the CURRENT Big East teams compares to the CURRENT B1G teams?

Big East - 22 Final 4s - 12 title gms - 4 titles - 1 FF vacated - 1 title gm vacated - 1 non NCAA Natl Title


Last Final Fours

B1G Conf - Big East

Wisc - 2015 - Villanova - 2016
MSU - 2015 - Butler - 2011
Mich - 2013 - G-twn - 2007
OSU - 2012 - Marquette - 2003
Illini - 2005 - SetonHall - 1989
Indy - 2002 - Providence - 1987
Mary - 2002 - St Johns - 1985
Minn - 1997 - DePaul 1979

Purd - 1980 - Xavier - NEVER
Iowa - 1980 - Creighton - NEVER
Rutg - 1976
PnSt - 1954
NW - NEVER
Neb - NEVER


Ok, for NW, Neb, PSU, Rutgers and Minnesota since their FF was vacated, they don't have a lot to brag about, but the thing is, the B1G is not a bb only conference, so Nebraska and Penn St are very ok with their football more than covering their lack of having great bb programs. NW's football hasn't been too bad, and their bb is up and coming. Minnesota had actually done pretty well for how badly their football and basketball has been lately, with some help from their Hockey program, and just being a part of the B1G as well, with the help of the BTN, but that's not the only reasons, Minnesotans just love their bb. That leaves basically only Rutgers, and their fb showed some glimpse of promise back a decade ago about, so there is potential there, and the B1G can carry one lame program.

Can the Big East?


Like you, I hope they can, it would be great for cbb if they can. I just don't know that they can or will.


And in case you are wondering, YES, I do have way too much free time on my hands, lol. It's only during the winter months as I work from spring through the end of fall.

 

[GophersInIowa]

They're better than the mid-majors in my opinion. They're kinda right in between the top 5 conferences and the mid majors.

 

[adchester]

I just don't think Final Fours are the best measurement for the success of a conference. The Big East is not going to compete with the Big Ten/ACC on that level annually. I think the goal for the Big East should be having a competitive conference where 5-6 teams make the tournament annually and 1-2 make the sweet sixteen every year, with a team going further every 3-4 years. This is enough to remain above mid-major status and keep a top notch TV deal imo.

Grading the conference on the last time every team went to the final four seems irrelevant to me. You don't need every team in the conference to be a contender just as long as they aren't a complete pushover year in and year out. The only team that you can say that about is DePaul.

 

[adchester]

I think you're conflating being a major conference with being as successful as the Big Ten. The Big Ten is (for the most part) large prestigious research universities while the Big East is smaller Catholic schools. I don't think the Big East NEEDS to be as successful as the B10 to remain above mid-major status. Almost all the schools in the BE have historically been basketball first schools who have had some success, if not as successful as the B10 schools.

 

[bemidjigopher]

Big East is legit, top to bottom, with the exception of DePaul. St. Johns should take another big step next year with their recruiting class they have coming in, the team I am surprised with is Georgetown they were very competitive in the old Big East and they have seemed to have fallen off a cliff in recent years. Those are very passionate fan bases with passionate boosters, Marquette spennds more money on hoops than any program in the nation. The top coaches in the league seem to want to stay in the conference, Wright, Mack etc. As long as they have a legit TV deal they will be fine. I would say right now the Big East is the second best league in the NCAA behind the ACC

 

[dpodoll68]

I don't understand the poo-pooing of the Big East. Sagarin isn't great for basketball (and I welcome any other data sources people have), but according to him, the Big East is the third-best conference in the country this year, and better than the Big Ten: http://sagarin.com/sports/cbsend.htm. Particularly considering the fact that almost all of the schools are in major metro areas with abundant local talent, I see no reason to believe they'll fall back anytime soon. It's certainly a better basketball conference than the SEC, and no one considers the SEC anything but a power conference.

 

[Gophers7633]

The Big East is right up there with all the other major conferences. It can't really be disputed at this point. Since the current format of the league has been in place this is how the conference finished ranked in the RPI:

2013-2014 - 4th ranked conference(ahead of ACC and SEC)
2014-2015 - 2nd ranked conference(ahead of ACC, B1G, SEC and Pac 12)
2015-2016 - 4th ranked conference(ahead of B1G, and SEC)
2016-2017 - currently 3rd ranked conference(ahead of B1G, SEC and Pac 12)

As you can see they've finished ahead of the B1G 3 of the last 4 years, which shouldn't be too surprising as the B1G has been down as of late.

As a whole, they are probably the 3rd or 4th best conference since realignment. And I'd probably lean 3rd at this point only behind the Big 12 and ACC.

 

[Gophers7633]

Yeah, I noticed I missed that FF of Georgetown's in 2007, too. Didn't mean to do that on purpose.

Also, funny how you don't include Maryland's accomplishments before joining the B1G, but you do include teams accomplishments that are not in the current Big East anymore. That is not being fair to the argument I made. It's trying to manipulate the stats to make your argument seem stronger than it is.


Because the argument is what are the chances of the Big East being very successful.

I have nothing against the current Big East, and enjoyed the old Big East conference, it was the best bb conference in the country. But the AAC took a couple of the best programs and the ACC took a couple as well and now the ACC is the best bb conference.

But when talking about the future of a conference, counting accomplishments of teams that have LEFT that conference skews the discussion and covers up the truth. UConn and UL and Syracuse and Cincy are no longer a part of the Big East, in fact they are competitors with the Big East, if those schools improve, it will probably be at the expense of CURRECT Big East programs.

And when comparing the CURRENT Big East with the CURRENT B1G conference, it's also not fair to exclude the accomplishments of teams like Maryland and PSU and Rutgers from before they joined the B1G conference, because that ARE a part of the B1G now, its part of why those teams were brought into the B1G, to ADD to what the B1G already was, and now the B1G is more.

I'm not hoping for the demise of the Big East, but I don't hope for the demise of the nuclear family, or good ole fashioned morals, either, but those things are disappearing from the American culture, and admitting as much isn't the same as hoping for it.



And yes, Villanova won a Title just last year, but before that the entire CURRENT conference had only 3 titles, with the last one coming in 1985. The CURRENT B1G teams won titles in 1987, 1989, 2000 & 2002. I graduated in 1986, so the CURRENT B1G teams have won 4 titles since then compared to 1 for the CURRENT Big East. And the last 20 years, the current B1G has been to 3 times as many Final Fours as the CURRENT Big East teams.


You mentioned Butler? They were basically a flash in the pan. Will that flash ever translate into anything? Not sure since they lost their coach. And yes, Xavier has been to a couple Elite 8s and Sweet 16s, but if we expand the comparison beyond Final Fours, do you really think the Big East is going to compare?

Just being realistic.


Ohio St - 11 Final Fours - 5 title games - 1 title - 1 FF vacated
Mich St - 9 Final Fours - 3 title games - 2 titles
Indiana - 8 Final Fours - 6 title games - 5 titles
U Mich - 7 Final Fours - 6 title games - 1 title - 2 FF/title games vacated
Illinois - 5 Final Fours - 1 title game - 0 titles - 1 non NCAA Natl Title
U Wisc - 4 Final Fours - 2 title games - 1 title - 3 non NCAA Natl Titles
U Mary - 2 Final Fours - 1 title game - 1 title
U Iowa - 3 Final Fours - 1 title game - 0 titles
Purdue - 2 Final Fours - 1 title game - 0 titles - 1 non NCAA Natl Title
Penn St - 1 Final Four - 0 title games - 0 titles
Rutgers - 1 Final Four - 0 title games - 0 titles
U Minn - 1 Final Four - 0 title games - 0 titles - 1 FF vacated - 3 non-NCAA Natl Titles
NWstrn - 0 Final Fours - 0 title games - 0 titles - 1 non NCAA Natl Title

B1G Conf - 54 Final 4s - 26 title gms - 11 titles - 4 FFs vacated - 2 title gms vacated - 6 non NCAA Natl Titles

honestly, how do you think the CURRENT Big East teams compares to the CURRENT B1G teams?

Big East - 22 Final 4s - 12 title gms - 4 titles - 1 FF vacated - 1 title gm vacated - 1 non NCAA Natl Title


Last Final Fours

B1G Conf - Big East

Wisc - 2015 - Villanova - 2016
MSU - 2015 - Butler - 2011
Mich - 2013 - G-twn - 2007
OSU - 2012 - Marquette - 2003
Illini - 2005 - SetonHall - 1989
Indy - 2002 - Providence - 1987
Mary - 2002 - St Johns - 1985
Minn - 1997 - DePaul 1979

Purd - 1980 - Xavier - NEVER
Iowa - 1980 - Creighton - NEVER
Rutg - 1976
PnSt - 1954
NW - NEVER
Neb - NEVER


Ok, for NW, Neb, PSU, Rutgers and Minnesota since their FF was vacated, they don't have a lot to brag about, but the thing is, the B1G is not a bb only conference, so Nebraska and Penn St are very ok with their football more than covering their lack of having great bb programs. NW's football hasn't been too bad, and their bb is up and coming. Minnesota had actually done pretty well for how badly their football and basketball has been lately, with some help from their Hockey program, and just being a part of the B1G as well, with the help of the BTN, but that's not the only reasons, Minnesotans just love their bb. That leaves basically only Rutgers, and their fb showed some glimpse of promise back a decade ago about, so there is potential there, and the B1G can carry one lame program.

Can the Big East?


Like you, I hope they can, it would be great for cbb if they can. I just don't know that they can or will.


And in case you are wondering, YES, I do have way too much free time on my hands, lol. It's only during the winter months as I work from spring through the end of fall.

I don't think Indiana winning a bunch of titles in the 70's and 80's has any bearing on where they stand in the current landscape of college basketball. There's no doubt, since 2000 Butler has been a better basketball program. The B1G's last title was in 2000(I don't count MD's since they were in the ACC). That's a pretty long drought, and one that looks like it will continue this year.

Obviously the Big East won't be able to compare to the B1G just based on numbers alone, one conference has 14 members, the other 10. The Big East is in great shape right now, and that's considering two of their premier programs are on a downswing right now(Gtown and St. Johns).

There's just been no evidence to suggest they will become a mid major basketball league.

 

[KillmeNow]

I don't understand the poo-pooing of the Big East. Sagarin isn't great for basketball (and I welcome any other data sources people have), but according to him, the Big East is the third-best conference in the country this year, and better than the Big Ten: http://sagarin.com/sports/cbsend.htm. Particularly considering the fact that almost all of the schools are in major metro areas with abundant local talent, I see no reason to believe they'll fall back anytime soon. It's certainly a better basketball conference than the SEC, and no one considers the SEC anything but a power conference.

Actually, I am the only one poo-pooing the Big East, everyone else is defending them and/or saying very nice things about them dpodoll68? Hope you aren't only reading my posts? A good and balanced discussion needs input from all sides.


And thank you everyone else. I hope the best for the Big East, so its nice to see so many B1G fans thinking they will do alright in the future.


That being said, I don't think straight up comparisons of the Big East vs say the SEC or the B1G conference tell the whole story. The SEC makes so damned much money with football, and they make money on baseball, too, that they really don't need their basketball to do well, and they sort of ignore it to some extent. So they don't have to outperform the Big East.

Same is true of the B1G. The B1G outperforms the BE in bb, but it doesn't have to, because it too has football, and to a much lesser degree, hockey and its already got a great TV deal and most likely will never have a problem in this regard, no matter how poor their bb does.


I come closest to agreeing with the person that said the Big East comes in around 6th, right behind the Big 5 Conferences, except that I think they rank ahead of the SEC.

And I hope all of you guys are right, but as a basketball only conference, I don't think they can afford to come in 6th or 7th. 3rd or 4th could be enough, but I'm obviously in the minority thinking this.


And we all know how little the rpi rankings really mean when it comes to March and the Big Dance. Big East can finish 3rd or 2nd in the rpi every season, but if they don't send teams to the Final Four more often than have been, won't that hurt recruiting? Maybe I'm putting too much importance on the whole Final Four thing?

 

[dpodoll68]

Actually, I am the only one poo-pooing the Big East, everyone else is defending them and/or saying very nice things about them dpodoll68? Hope you aren't only reading my posts? A good and balanced discussion needs input from all sides.

I'm not just referencing this thread. I've seen the same thing on other threads here and elsewhere. It doesn't appear to have much factual basis.

 

[KillmeNow]

What kind of factual basis are you looking for? Conf rpi ratings do not translate into NCAA tourney success.


EIGHT final fours and ONE natl title in the last 30 years for the CURRENT teams in the Big East.



Am I missing something? I am fallible, I missed the Georgetown FF in 03. So let me know if I'm missing something.



Before Villanova won the title last year, you had to go back to 1985 to find them winning the Title. Grand total of just 4 Titles. For the CURRENT members of the Big East.

As light as the B1G's Title resume has been, they have won 4 Titles to the Big East's 1 since 1987, the last 30 years.


Creighton has a grand total of 1 Elite 8, and zero Final Fours.
Butler has a grand total of 2 Elite 8s.
Xavier has a grant total of 2 Elite 8s.
Seton Hall has a grant total of 2 Elite 8s.
Providence only has 4 Elite 8s.

That's half the conference, making only 11 Elite 8s in what? 77 years?

Creighton, Butler, Providence and Seton Hall have only been to 17 Sweet 16s in the same amount of time and not a one of those 4 have more than 19 total trips to the tourney.


The teams in the BE now, that were in the BE in the late 70s and early 80s, kicked some arse, with 3 of them making the same Final Four once.

But they simply have not done much since then. And responding by saying the B1G hasn't done much either since then, doesn't mean anything, because its not true, for one, the B1G has sent over 20 teams to the Final Four in the last 30 years. The Big East can only claim 8 Final Four teams in the last 30 years.

8 Final Fours and 1 Natl Title, in 30 years compared to 21 Final Fours and 4 Natl Titles.

And the B1G has football, the teams that suck at basketball are from decant to great in football, NW, Nebraska and Penn St, maybe even Rutgers, if not, the B1G can carry that one lame program. As for Minnesota, well, somehow we've gotten by without bb or fb doing great the last 20-30 years, but they've done good enough.


Maybe Big East schools have faithful fanbases and get lots of people watching their games? I'm not an expert on every aspect of this, I just know how to look up sh1t on Wikipedia, lol. And I have my personal recollections, I remember how great the old Big East was, but good Big East teams left for the ACC and the AAC, and now whats left over just doesn't impress me as much as it apparently does so many of the rest of you all.


Personally, I'm a fan of Villanova, and I cheered for Butler when they got to the Final Four and I ALWAYS cheer for Xavier when they play Cincy, so I'm not hating on the Big East, just telling it like I see it is all, hoping that I'm wrong.

 

[Gophers7633]

I don't think anybody would dispute the history of the current Big East doesn't compare to that of the current Big 10. Creighton, Butler, Xaiver have been mid major programs up until 4 years ago.

With that said, since they realigned they've as a whole been better than the Big 10 has been.

 

[KillmeNow]

I don't think anybody would dispute the history of the current Big East doesn't compare to that of the current Big 10. Creighton, Butler, Xaiver have been mid major programs up until 4 years ago.

With that said, since they realigned they've as a whole been better than the Big 10 has been.

How do you measure that? When did they realign? 2013??


Lets look at how both conferences did in the NCAA tourney.

Last Final Fours

Villanova - 2016

Wisconsin - 2015
Mich State - 2015

Final Fours favor B1G.

Last Elite 8s

Villanova - 2016
Marquette - 2013

Wisconsin - 2015
Mich State - 2015
Ohio State - 2013
Michigan - 2014

Elite 8s favor B1G


Last Sweet 16s

Villanova - 2016
Marquette - 2013
Xavier ----- 2015

Wisconsin - 2016
Mich State - 2015
Ohio State - 2013
Michigan --- 2014
Indiana ---- 2016
Maryland -- 2016

Sweet 16s favor B1G


Last win

Villanova -- 2016
Marquette - 2013
Xavier ----- 2016
G-town ---- 2015
Creighton - 2014
Providenc - 2016
Butler ----- 2016

Wisconsin - 2016
Mich State - 2015
Ohio State - 2015
Michigan --- 2016
Indiana ---- 2016
Maryland -- 2016
Illinois ----- 2013
Iowa ------- 2016
Minnesota - 2013

Getting a win in the tourney favors the B1G.


What am I missing here? B1G has produced more FFs, more Elite 8s, more Sweet 16s, more opening round wins than the Big East.


OR do Natl Titles trump every other measurement??? Or did Villanova make the Elite 8 in 15, 14 and 13, too, while Wisconsin and Mich St did not?

I mean, I'm bored, I'll go look up each tourney and see the complete numbers, but at first glance, I mean, TWICE as many different B1G teams went to the FF, TWICE as many different B1G teams went to the Elite 8, and TWICE as many different teams made trips to the Sweet 16.


So what am I not getting?

 

[KillmeNow]

I don't think anybody would dispute the history of the current Big East doesn't compare to that of the current Big 10. Creighton, Butler, Xaiver have been mid major programs up until 4 years ago.

With that said, since they realigned they've as a whole been better than the Big 10 has been.

I'm starting to feel like an arsehole, and I feel like I am beating a dead horse, but you guys keep posting opinions with very little in the way of facts to back them up.


Final Fours since 2013

Big East, just ONE. Villanova in 2016 which yes did end with them winning the Title.

B1G Conf, THREE, Wisconsin in 2014 & 2015 and Michigan St in 2015.


That is 3 to 1.



Elite 8s?

TWO for the Big East, Villanova in 2016 and Marquette in 2013

SIX for the B1G Conf, Wisconsin in 2014 and 2015, Michigan St in 2014 & 2015, Ohio St in 2013 & Michigan in 2014.

That's THREE TIMES as many for the B1G again.


This is getting embarrassing.


Sweet 16s?

THREE for the Big East, Villanova in 2016, Marquette in 2013 and Xavier in 2015

TEN for the B1G Conference. The 6 listed above and 1 more for both Wisc and MSU and Indiana in 2016 and Maryland in 2016

Again, THREE times as many.




How is it that you guys get this impression that the Big East is doing so much better than the B1G??? Is it just because you have such high expectations for the B1G and maybe not so much for the BE???

I mean, its charming that you all are jumping to the BE's defense and all, but remember the whole "alternative reality" debate going on in the political debates in our country, or the alternative or "fake" news? You guys are making me feel like a bad guy.

 

[Gophers7633]

How do you measure that? When did they realign? 2013??


Lets look at how both conferences did in the NCAA tourney.

Last Final Fours

Villanova - 2016

Wisconsin - 2015
Mich State - 2015

Final Fours favor B1G.

Last Elite 8s

Villanova - 2016
Marquette - 2013

Wisconsin - 2015
Mich State - 2015
Ohio State - 2013
Michigan - 2014

Elite 8s favor B1G


Last Sweet 16s

Villanova - 2016
Marquette - 2013
Xavier ----- 2015

Wisconsin - 2016
Mich State - 2015
Ohio State - 2013
Michigan --- 2014
Indiana ---- 2016
Maryland -- 2016

Sweet 16s favor B1G


Last win

Villanova -- 2016
Marquette - 2013
Xavier ----- 2016
G-town ---- 2015
Creighton - 2014
Providenc - 2016
Butler ----- 2016

Wisconsin - 2016
Mich State - 2015
Ohio State - 2015
Michigan --- 2016
Indiana ---- 2016
Maryland -- 2016
Illinois ----- 2013
Iowa ------- 2016
Minnesota - 2013

Getting a win in the tourney favors the B1G.


What am I missing here? B1G has produced more FFs, more Elite 8s, more Sweet 16s, more opening round wins than the Big East.


OR do Natl Titles trump every other measurement??? Or did Villanova make the Elite 8 in 15, 14 and 13, too, while Wisconsin and Mich St did not?

I mean, I'm bored, I'll go look up each tourney and see the complete numbers, but at first glance, I mean, TWICE as many different B1G teams went to the FF, TWICE as many different B1G teams went to the Elite 8, and TWICE as many different teams made trips to the Sweet 16.


So what am I not getting?

It was the 2013-2014 season when the conference realigned. Anything 2013 and before shouldn't count for either side.

All those facts are correct, I just think you're putting too much emphasis on tournament results. For example the WCC had more teams in the Elite 8 than the Big 12 did in 2015, but nobody in their right mind would try to argue the WCC as being superior to the Big 12 that season. Random stuff happens in the tournament, such as a 7 seed winning the whole thing(Uconn in 2014) and a 2 seed losing in the first round(MSU in 2016)

The Big East has been better every year since realignment except for the 2013-2014 season according to Sagarin, and RPI, which are the only 2 metrics I've found that rank conferences. But taking those out of the equation, just based off of how each of the respective teams have performed both OOC and in conference I'd personally rank the Big East as having been better since realignment.

 

[KillmeNow]

It was the 2013-2014 season when the conference realigned. Anything 2013 and before shouldn't count for either side.

All those facts are correct, I just think you're putting too much emphasis on tournament results. For example the WCC had more teams in the Elite 8 than the Big 12 did in 2015, but nobody in their right mind would try to argue the WCC as being superior to the Big 12 that season. Random stuff happens in the tournament, such as a 7 seed winning the whole thing(Uconn in 2014) and a 2 seed losing in the first round(MSU in 2016)

The Big East has been better every year since realignment except for the 2013-2014 season according to Sagarin, and RPI, which are the only 2 metrics I've found that rank conferences. But taking those out of the equation, just based off of how each of the respective teams have performed both OOC and in conference I'd personally rank the Big East as having been better since realignment.

When they start giving out trophies for having the best RPI rating or Sagarin Rating, then I'll let those metrics decide who I think is successful or not.


I think you are the first person I've ever known who has said that they think NCAA tournament results are not what should be looked at to judge a team or a conference.

I mean that, the first, and I've chatted online with thousands of cbb fans, over the last 2+ decades.

The vast majority, probably about 99%, feel that NCAA tourney results are the ONLY thing that matters.

They say the proof is in the pudding or something like that?


But you are free to have a different opinion.

 

[Otis]

If conference A is full of oranges and conference B is full of apples, which one is better?

a. the conference with the better record in games between the two.

b. the conference with better NCAA Tournament results.

c. the one that makes a better pie.

I'm going with a and b for my answer.

BTW - 2016-17 inter-conference games between Big East and B1G, yielded a 10-7 record for B1G teams. Combine that with the NCAA results and B1G WINS!!!!

 

[Gophers7633]

When they start giving out trophies for having the best RPI rating or Sagarin Rating, then I'll let those metrics decide who I think is successful or not.


I think you are the first person I've ever known who has said that they think NCAA tournament results are not what should be looked at to judge a team or a conference.

I mean that, the first, and I've chatted online with thousands of cbb fans, over the last 2+ decades.

The vast majority, probably about 99%, feel that NCAA tourney results are the ONLY thing that matters.

They say the proof is in the pudding or something like that?


But you are free to have a different opinion.

My opinion isn't based off of tournament results. Because I'm not going to try and sit there and say the Big East was the best conference last year because a representative of their conference has the trophy. Because the Big East wasn't the best conference last year.

The ACC and Big 12 are widely regarded as the two best leagues this year. If they don't send a team to the FF and Michigan State somehow got there, I'm not going to suddenly use 4 games of evidence to replace what I've seen over 30+ games of evidence.

 

[GophersInIowa]

I believe UCLA and Arizona are the only two current Pac-12 teams to make it to the Final 4 since Utah won it all in 1998.

 

[WoodburyTim]

On a somewhat related note, does anyone think it might have been better for UConn to stay in the Big East for basketball and then play football as an independent or perhaps at the 1-AA level? I think UConn basketball will fall from relevance in the American Athletic conference.

 

[Gophers7633]

On a somewhat related note, does anyone think it might have been better for UConn to stay in the Big East for basketball and then play football as an independent or perhaps at the 1-AA level? I think UConn basketball will fall from relevance in the American Athletic conference.

Interestingly enough, it seems like they've had discussions with the Big East. I think it's a much better fit for them than the AAC is.

http://www.fanragsports.com/cbb/rothstein-uconn-big-east-recent-discussions-expansion/

 

[KillmeNow]

Interestingly enough, it seems like they've had discussions with the Big East. I think it's a much better fit for them than the AAC is.

http://www.fanragsports.com/cbb/rothstein-uconn-big-east-recent-discussions-expansion/

It would probably be better for their men's bb program. They've never been very good at football, so not sure how on earth they could resolve that, maybe be an independent in fb, like ND? Might jazz things up enough to make UConn fb more interesting?

And I've always thought that Cincy should move to the Big 12, which would sort of leave UConn and I guess SMU alone in the AAC and I always sort of felt badly for UConn, not having somewhere to go, so if the Big East wants them, that's a good thing. If UConn leaves first, maybe that will give Cincy more reason to bolt? Who knows, maybe the Big 12 could or would or should take both Cincy and SMU. I know that leaves the AAC without probably their 3 best bb programs, but that's just the way things go basically. It's a hard reality these days, but there is not much we can do about it.

So I agree, it would be a better fit for UConn, join them back up with some of their old rivals. Might help get their bb program back on track.