Big Ten Conference vs. Big East Conglomeration

Donate To GopherHole
S

SelectionSunday

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
24,707
Reaction score
4,865
Points
113
IMO the Big East is the best conference in the country this season (with the Big 12 a close second), but that being said, is there really much difference between the Big East and Big Ten? Head-to-head results indicate the Big Ten has more than held its own.

Big 10 Wins (5)
Indiana (tied for 9th in Big 10) beat Pitt (3rd in Big East) on a neutral court.
Michigan (7th in Big 10) beat UConn (8th in Big East) in Ann Arbor.
Northwestern (8th in Big 10) beat Notre Dame (tied for 9th) on a neutral court.
Purdue (1st in Big 10) beat West Virginia (4th in Big East) in West Lafayette.
Wisconsin (4th in Big 10) beat Marquette (tied for 6th in Big East) in Madison.

Big East Wins (2)
Marquette (tied for 6th in Big East) beat Michigan (7th in Big 10) on a neutral court.
West Virginia (4th in Big East) beat Ohio State (tied for 2nd in Big 10) in Morgantown.

Yet ESPN (namely Bob "The Quitter" Knight) continues to tell us how much better the Big East is than the Big 10? Knight flat-out said on air the other day (Gameday) that when the Big East and Big Ten meet in the NCAAs, the Big East will win every time. Every game. That's one development I'm going to watch closely. Apparently The General wasn't paying attention last season when Michigan State plopped two #1 seeds from the Big East (Louisville & UConn) right out of the NCAAs.
 

I was thinking the same thing last night watching WVa vs. UConn. The Big East games I have seen appear to be just as "physical" as Big Ten games, but their players use their size and strength differently. Yesturday, both UConn and WVa were doubling in the post almost every possession, which led to a lot of fouls and thus free throw attempts: 65 total attempts from 45 combined fouls.

First of all, that is way too many charity tosses; the game took too long and became very predictable. But also, I believe that those team come to expect that brand of officiating.

Big Ten teams occasionally encounter those kind of games (e.g. Gophers in Anaheim). The difference is, the teams in the top half of the Big Ten are able to adapt and play through foul trouble. Perhaps Big Ten has less Micky D level players but they have more above average players with regard to overall skill and shooting per team.

When Purdue beat WVa there were 33 total free throw attempts on 34 fouls. That was a more interesting game and the Mount'neers didn't look as polished either!

Knight is a great analyst but I think he has this one wrong.
 

The Big East is better 5-9 due to thier glut of teams. But 1-4 I'll take the Big 10. The idea that they will own us in the NCAA's is laghable.
 

SelectionSunday said:
IMO the Big East is the best conference in the country this season (with the Big 12 a close second), but that being said, is there really much difference between the Big East and Big Ten? Head-to-head results indicate the Big Ten has more than held its own.

Big 10 Wins (5)
Indiana (tied for 9th in Big 10) beat Pitt (3rd in Big East) on a neutral court.
Michigan (7th in Big 10) beat UConn (8th in Big East) in Ann Arbor.
Northwestern (8th in Big 10) beat Notre Dame (tied for 9th) on a neutral court.
Purdue (1st in Big 10) beat West Virginia (4th in Big East) in West Lafayette.
Wisconsin (4th in Big 10) beat Marquette (tied for 6th in Big East) in Madison.

Big East Wins (2)
Marquette (tied for 6th in Big East) beat Michigan (7th in Big 10) on a neutral court.
West Virginia (4th in Big East) beat Ohio State (tied for 2nd in Big 10) in Morgantown.

Yet ESPN (namely Bob "The Quitter" Knight) continues to tell us how much better the Big East is than the Big 10? Knight flat-out said on air the other day (Gameday) that when the Big East and Big Ten meet in the NCAAs, the Big East will win every time. Every game. That's one development I'm going to watch closely. Apparently The General wasn't paying attention last season when Michigan State plopped two #1 seeds from the Big East (Louisville & UConn) right out of the NCAAs.
Click to expand...

Wow, he actually said that? That's kinda messed up, really. They do have depth in their league, but to say they'd win every single matchup is ridiculous.
 

Although they'd probably get killed in the physical aspect of the game I would challenge many teams to figure Northwestern out. They will give a lot of teams fits if they ever get the chance.
 


Mediocrity, thy name is Notre Dame

Notre Dame (and their overrated stat man Luke Harangody) is the perfect example of how ESPN has fallen in love with the Big East. I've been hearing for two years how great Notre Dame is, the hard luck they've had in the Big East (like they're the only team that plays in a tough conference), but in reality they're no different than Northwestern (in fact they lost to the Wildcats this season). Notre Dame is nothing more than an average basketball program, but you wouldn't know that listening to the wonks on ESPN. They'd have you believe the Irish would run away with the title if they were playing in the Big 10.
 

My $.02 -

Purdue is the only elite team in the B10 this year, IMO. OSU when firing and MSU are both very good teams, and Wisky and ILL are pretty good, besides that, the B10 really doesn't do much for me.

The Big East has 'Cuse, Nova, WVU, Pitt, Louisville, G'Town, Marquette, and UCONN who, IMO are all better than everyone in the B10 except Purdue, MSU, and OSU. But the Big East has a ton of bottom feeders too...but they have four in the RPI top 10, and like 8 in the top 65...

Big Ten has 4 in the top 65...

Big East>Big Ten.

Now I do not agree that they would beat the B10 every time, but if you matched up the top 11 from the BEast vs the B10 based on standings, how many B10 teams would you expect to win? Maybe 2-3?
 

Notre Dame (and their overrated stat man Luke Harangody) is the perfect example of how ESPN has fallen in love with the Big East. I've been hearing for two years how great Notre Dame is, the hard luck they've had in the Big East (like they're the only team that plays in a tough conference), but in reality they're no different than Northwestern (in fact they lost to the Wildcats this season). Notre Dame is nothing more than an average basketball program, but you wouldn't know that listening to the wonks on ESPN. They'd have you believe the Irish would run away with the title if they were playing in the Big 10.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of has to do with Mike Brey's hair. I mean the guy just looks so friggin' good all the time. Appearances are everything.
 

You can't just grab the top 11 for the Big East and say, okay match 'em up. You gotta take the proportion of the entire conference, not just the top 11 teams. If the Big Ten were to add 5 teams to get 16 in their conference, would they just add 5 bottom feeders? I doubt it, you'd probably see a mix, probably a couple of elite programs, a couple middling programs, and a bottom feeder. So you can't just throw out their 5 worst teams and compare it fairly.

Top to bottom, the Big East is tough, yes. But matchups and history shows that the disparity is nothing like advertised by people like ESPN. The Big Ten could hold their own head to head.

Do you really believe all of the top 8 in the Big East are better than anyone below the top 3 in the Big Ten? UConn they lost to Michigan. IU even beat Pitt. I'm just not getting how they are obviously better, that's all.
 



Monty519 said:
You can't just grab the top 11 for the Big East and say, okay match 'em up. You gotta take the proportion of the entire conference, not just the top 11 teams. If the Big Ten were to add 5 teams to get 16 in their conference, would they just add 5 bottom feeders? I doubt it, you'd probably see a mix, probably a couple of elite programs, a couple middling programs, and a bottom feeder. So you can't just throw out their 5 worst teams and compare it fairly.

Top to bottom, the Big East is tough, yes. But matchups and history shows that the disparity is nothing like advertised by people like ESPN. The Big Ten could hold their own head to head.

Do you really believe all of the top 8 in the Big East are better than anyone below the top 3 in the Big Ten? UConn they lost to Michigan. IU even beat Pitt. I'm just not getting how they are obviously better, that's all.
Click to expand...

Fair enough - but I still believe the BEast is better. This is not to rip on the B10, I think the BEast is better than any other conference.

Yes for the most part I believe that the top 8 in the big east are as good or better as the bottom 8 in the B10. Now would they beat all those teams every time, no...I think the Gophs are better than Michigan and Indiana, but we lost to both of them. Maybe not a huge deal better, but I do think that they are better. I think Purdue can play with any team in the BEast, and OSU when playing well can too. MSU probably could hold their own as well. But after that - I dont think that the B10 is as good. Match up Purdue against the top 8, I would predict 6-2 or 5-3, same with OSU. MSU maybe 5-3 or 4-4. After that, I dont think any of our teams are as good.

I do agree that if the B10 had 5 more teams and a couple of them were good, it would be a better comparison. But I was just going with the thread...
 

3 or 4 for the Big 10 is about right

"But if you matched up the top 11 from the BEast vs the B10 based on standings, how many B10 teams would you expect to win? Maybe 2-3?"

I'm already on record saying I think the Big East is better than the Big 10 this season. But to answer your question, trying to be completely objective, here's how I'd pick the matchups to go in a 1-to-11 Big East-Big 10 tussle. Teams were placed on where they'd currently be seeded for their conference tournament.

Just going quickly off the cuff, I think you have it about right. I came up with three Big 10 wins, but I certainly could see Purdue, Ohio State, Wisconsin and/or the Gophers beating their opponents. It wouldn't be a stretch.

#1 -- Purdue vs. Syracuse (Syracuse)
#2 -- Ohio State vs. Villanova (Villanova)
#3 -- Michigan State vs. Pitt (Michigan State)
#4 -- Wisconsin vs. West Virginia (West Virginia)
#5 -- Illinois vs. Louisville (Illinois)
#6 -- Minnesota vs. Marquette (Marquette)
#7 -- Michigan vs. Georgetown (Georgetown)
#8 -- Northwestern vs. UConn (UConn)
#9 -- Iowa vs. Seton Hall (Seton Hall)
#10 -- Indiana vs. Notre Dame (Notre Dame)
#11 -- Penn State vs. South Florida (Penn State)

Certainly a lot of these teams are close enough that the result could go either way. I still don't see much of a gap, and that's with the Big East being able to dump its bottom 5 teams. ... no Rutgers, no DePaul, etc.
 

SelectionSunday said:
"But if you matched up the top 11 from the BEast vs the B10 based on standings, how many B10 teams would you expect to win? Maybe 2-3?"

I'm already on record saying I think the Big East is better than the Big 10 this season. But to answer your question, trying to be completely objective, here's how I'd pick the matchups to go in a 1-to-11 Big East-Big 10 tussle. Teams were placed on where they'd currently be seeded for their conference tournament.

Just going quickly off the cuff, I think you have it about right. I came up with three Big 10 wins, but I certainly could see Purdue, Ohio State, Wisconsin and/or the Gophers beating their opponents. It wouldn't be a stretch.

#1 -- Purdue vs. Syracuse (Syracuse)
#2 -- Ohio State vs. Villanova (Villanova)
#3 -- Michigan State vs. Pitt (Michigan State)
#4 -- Wisconsin vs. West Virginia (West Virginia)
#5 -- Illinois vs. Louisville (Illinois)
#6 -- Minnesota vs. Marquette (Marquette)
#7 -- Michigan vs. Georgetown (Georgetown)
#8 -- Northwestern vs. UConn (UConn)
#9 -- Iowa vs. Seton Hall (Seton Hall)
#10 -- Indiana vs. Notre Dame (Notre Dame)
#11 -- Penn State vs. South Florida (Penn State)

Certainly a lot of these teams are close enough that the result could go either way. I still don't see much of a gap, and that's with the Big East being able to dump its bottom 5 teams. ... no Rutgers, no DePaul, etc.
Click to expand...

A more fair representation would be to pull about every 3rd team. So pull Pitt, Marquette, and Seton Hall, move everyone up and add 3 teams 13, 14 and 16. You'd probably have a lot more favorable match-ups for the Big 10.
 

Notre Dame (and their overrated stat man Luke Harangody) is the perfect example of how ESPN has fallen in love with the Big East. I've been hearing for two years how great Notre Dame is, the hard luck they've had in the Big East (like they're the only team that plays in a tough conference), but in reality they're no different than Northwestern (in fact they lost to the Wildcats this season). Notre Dame is nothing more than an average basketball program, but you wouldn't know that listening to the wonks on ESPN. They'd have you believe the Irish would run away with the title if they were playing in the Big 10.
Click to expand...

If Notre Dame would actually play defense on a posession a few times here and there, they would find themselves in the NCAA Tournament more often at the end of the season. ESPN sees their offensive talent and assumes they have a good team.
 



No argument here. That's why I chuckle every time I hear someone say the Big East is so much deeper than any other conference, and how there are "no easy games" in the Big East.

Of course it's deeper. ... there are 16 frickin' teams! Of course a conference is likely to have more good teams if it has a minimum of 4 additional teams than any other major conference. My main point has always been, the crap at the bottom of the Big East (DePaul, Rutgers, usually USF) is no different than the crap at the bottom of all the major conferences.
 

I had forgotten about that Pitt/Indiana game. How did IU ever beat Pitt? Was Pitt missing starters or something? I suppose I could use "the Google" to find out, but I am too lazy.
 

In fairness to Pitt, yes, I think they were missing at least one key player. Gilbert Brown?
 

The BEast isn't even a real conference to me. They're a giant. They took the best basketball schools from Conference USA and made a super conference. They'll be the best every year so I don't even count them
 

It's a slap in the face to other major conferences to call the Big East a conference. It should be called the Big East Hodge-Podge.
 

SelectionSunday said:
It's a slap in the face to other major conferences to call the Big East a conference. It should be called the Big East Hodge-Podge.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The B10 has been the same for years with only PSU being fairly new. Same for the B12, SEC and Pac 10. The Big East was a power move to make a super conference. I mean they added Cincy, Marquette and Louisville, 3 schools that had been #1 seeds and F4 teams recently. G-Town, DePaul and Nova, Seton Hall, St Johns, Providence and Marquette are strictly basketball schools. This 'conference' is a joke
 

The only difference between the B10 and BE is that the BE has 5 more teams. The BE therefore has a few more great teams, a few more okay teams, and a few more bad teams.

The great/okay teams are the only ones that get talked about in the media, so naturally the BE "sounds" better. This season, yes, the BE is probably slightly better on average. Not nearly as much as the media would have you believe.
 

rcpratt said:
The only difference between the B10 and BE is that the BE has 5 more teams.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. It's also a basketball 1st conference. Big time. The Big 10 and Pac 10 are the only well-balanced conferences, IMO (Pac 10's current basketball disaster notwithstanding.) The Big 10 has 5 'football' schools (Michigan, PSU, OSU, Wisconsin and Iowa), 5 'basketball' schools (MSU, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue, and Minnesota) and Northwestern. The Big East has one true football school (West Virginia) one bad/mediocre one (Rutgers) and 14 basketball schools (several of which aren't even any good), half of which don't even bother to field a I-AA football team.
 

Pitt, Cincinnati, and Louisville aren't THAT bad at football ;)

Definitely basketball schools first, though. Not sure about Cinci?
 

rcpratt said:
Pitt, Cincinnati, and Louisville aren't THAT bad at football ;)

Definitely basketball schools first, though. Not sure about Cinci?
Click to expand...

Doesn't meant they're bad, just basketball first. OSU and Wisconsin are pretty decent at basketball too, but football comes first for them. 10-15 years ago Cincy wouldn't have even been a question. They were going to Final Fours and setting records for losing streaks in football. I don't think a few decent football seasons and a few mediocre basketball seasons overturn that.
 

howeda7 said:
Not exactly. It's also a basketball 1st conference. Big time. The Big 10 and Pac 10 are the only well-balanced conferences, IMO (Pac 10's current basketball disaster notwithstanding.) The Big 10 has 5 'football' schools (Michigan, PSU, OSU, Wisconsin and Iowa), 5 'basketball' schools (MSU, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue, and Minnesota) and Northwestern. The Big East has one true football school (West Virginia) one bad/mediocre one (Rutgers) and 14 basketball schools (several of which aren't even any good), half of which don't even bother to field a I-AA football team.
Click to expand...

Big 12?
 

gopherbadgerman said:
Big 12?
Click to expand...

They're not as unbalanced as the SEC, but they're still a heavy football conference. You'd have to say Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Colorado are all definate football schools. Kansas, Oklahoma State and Missouri are the only sure basketball schools. Baylor and Iowa State are niether really, but probably football if you have to pick one. Kansas State's a toss-up. In the hay-day of Bill Snyder they were pretty much a football school. That may be changing in the twightlight of Bill Snyder and emergence of the basketball team.
 

SelectionSunday said:
It's a slap in the face to other major conferences to call the Big East a conference. It should be called the Big East Hodge-Podge.
Click to expand...

If the Big Ten were to add Texas would it then be a hodge-podge conference. Just asking.
 

It would move closer to that. Nowhere near to the same extent as the Big East, but yes.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom