Big East Year 2

The Big East will never be what it was, but who cares?
UCONN just won a natl championship from the American Conference.   If sju plays well, we have a big enough stage to compete with the other conferences.  That's all that matters.   Recruit well and continue to schedule big out of conference opponents.

We also need time to make the rivalries grow not something that happens in year one.

Exactly. It's ridiculous that some are comparing the "new" Big East in year one to what the "old" Big East came to be. You can't compare the two at this stage in the leagues development. A better comparison would be to look at year one of the old Big East.

The Big East will never be what it was, but who cares?
UCONN just won a natl championship from the American Conference.   If sju plays well, we have a big enough stage to compete with the other conferences.  That's all that matters.   Recruit well and continue to schedule big out of conference opponents.

Exactly Desco

Voters disagreed.  Computer numbers can't tell the whole story.  What was the most Top 25 teams we had ranked?

SMU was ranked in both the AP top 25 and the USA Today coaches poll leading up to Selection Sunday but did not make the NCAA tournament.  It would seem the NCAA selection committee is realizing that the top 25 polls are subjective, whereas computer metrics are strictly results driven.  That is not to say it is or should be based solely on metrics; but metrics are generally right.

The BE is not a major conference anymore. They are on par with the A10.

The BE was a top 4 or 5 conference (depending on the ranking system used) and placed 40% of it's conference in the NCAA tournament.  They were still a power conference in what many detractors were calling a "down" year.  While the BE is not the mega conference we had gotten used to, they are - and look to remain based on recent recruiting success - a power/high major conference.

ESPN seems to be giving the BE the cold shoulder; which is understandable since they do not make nearly as much money off of us anymore.

Quote from: Moose on October 27, 2014, 08:05:02 PM

Voters disagreed.  Computer numbers can't tell the whole story.  What was the most Top 25 teams we had ranked?

SMU was ranked in both the AP top 25 and the USA Today coaches poll leading up to Selection Sunday but did not make the NCAA tournament.  It would seem the NCAA selection committee is realizing that the top 25 polls are subjective, whereas computer metrics are strictly results driven.  That is not to say it is or should be based solely on metrics; but metrics are generally right.

You are right.  That's the other side to the argument.  SMU was probably ranked because of their name coach as well.  But as we know their SOS was a joke and they didn't dance because of it.

But lets just call a spade a spade.  Come the end of the year 4 teams danced.  One barely made it and had to go in the play in game (Xavier) and the other got in by winning the BE Tourney and based on their seeding wouldn't have made it otherwise.  Even look at pre-season polls this year.  Most have just Nova and then a massive drop.  I think the conference can succeed but a lot of things have to fall in place.

Quote from: LoganK on October 27, 2014, 09:14:59 PM

Quote from: Moose on October 27, 2014, 08:05:02 PM

Voters disagreed.  Computer numbers can't tell the whole story.  What was the most Top 25 teams we had ranked?

SMU was ranked in both the AP top 25 and the USA Today coaches poll leading up to Selection Sunday but did not make the NCAA tournament.  It would seem the NCAA selection committee is realizing that the top 25 polls are subjective, whereas computer metrics are strictly results driven.  That is not to say it is or should be based solely on metrics; but metrics are generally right.

You are right.  That's the other side to the argument.  SMU was probably ranked because of their name coach as well.  But as we know their SOS was a joke and they didn't dance because of it.

But lets just call a spade a spade.  Come the end of the year 4 teams danced.  One barely made it and had to go in the play in game (Xavier) and the other got in by winning the BE Tourney and based on their seeding wouldn't have made it otherwise.  Even look at pre-season polls this year.  Most have just Nova and then a massive drop.  I think the conference can succeed but a lot of things have to fall in place.

All the major conferences have down years in the big dance.  As for comparing the polls to the tournament only six teams during the past 35 years entered the tournament ranked #1 in at least one of the AP, UPI, or USA Today polls and won the tournament.  The polls have always been biased one way or the other and the tournament is one and done.  It seems that the computer rankings accounting for the full season's worth of out of conference match-ups are more reliable.

It is pretty clear that 90% of the casual fans and certain talk radio people don't care about the season and consider the tournament everything.   On that count the BE did not leave an impression.

SJU has to step up and beat Cuse this season.  It would go a long way towards erasing the poor ending to last season.

Quote from: LoganK on October 27, 2014, 09:14:59 PM

Quote from: Moose on October 27, 2014, 08:05:02 PM

Voters disagreed.  Computer numbers can't tell the whole story.  What was the most Top 25 teams we had ranked?

SMU was ranked in both the AP top 25 and the USA Today coaches poll leading up to Selection Sunday but did not make the NCAA tournament.  It would seem the NCAA selection committee is realizing that the top 25 polls are subjective, whereas computer metrics are strictly results driven.  That is not to say it is or should be based solely on metrics; but metrics are generally right.

You are right.  That's the other side to the argument.  SMU was probably ranked because of their name coach as well.  But as we know their SOS was a joke and they didn't dance because of it.

But lets just call a spade a spade.  Come the end of the year 4 teams danced.  One barely made it and had to go in the play in game (Xavier) and the other got in by winning the BE Tourney and based on their seeding wouldn't have made it otherwise.  Even look at pre-season polls this year.  Most have just Nova and then a massive drop.  I think the conference can succeed but a lot of things have to fall in place.

Every high major conference has highly seeded teams and low seeded teams in the dance.  4 teams in is still 4 teams in.  We certainly did not show well, but in a single elimination tournament there is a lot of chance involved.  Kind of like "On any given Sunday..." 

On paper the conference should continue to do well.  Depaul will usually suck, Villanova will usually be good, and everyone else will have their ups and downs.  The conference will continue to get 4 or 5 bids, with the occasional 3 or 6 bid year. 

I see Nova as a "lock" with GT, SJU, Xavier, and Prov having a solid chance.  Just my opinion.  We'll find out soon enough.

Quote from: Moose on October 27, 2014, 09:56:21 PM

Quote from: LoganK on October 27, 2014, 09:14:59 PM

Quote from: Moose on October 27, 2014, 08:05:02 PM

Voters disagreed.  Computer numbers can't tell the whole story.  What was the most Top 25 teams we had ranked?

SMU was ranked in both the AP top 25 and the USA Today coaches poll leading up to Selection Sunday but did not make the NCAA tournament.  It would seem the NCAA selection committee is realizing that the top 25 polls are subjective, whereas computer metrics are strictly results driven.  That is not to say it is or should be based solely on metrics; but metrics are generally right.

You are right.  That's the other side to the argument.  SMU was probably ranked because of their name coach as well.  But as we know their SOS was a joke and they didn't dance because of it.

But lets just call a spade a spade.  Come the end of the year 4 teams danced.  One barely made it and had to go in the play in game (Xavier) and the other got in by winning the BE Tourney and based on their seeding wouldn't have made it otherwise.  Even look at pre-season polls this year.  Most have just Nova and then a massive drop.  I think the conference can succeed but a lot of things have to fall in place.

Every high major conference has highly seeded teams and low seeded teams in the dance.  4 teams in is still 4 teams in.  We certainly did not show well, but in a single elimination tournament there is a lot of chance involved.  Kind of like "On any given Sunday..." 

On paper the conference should continue to do well.  Depaul will usually suck, Villanova will usually be good, and everyone else will have their ups and downs.  The conference will continue to get 4 or 5 bids, with the occasional 3 or 6 bid year. 

I see Nova as a "lock" with GT, SJU, Xavier, and Prov having a solid chance.  Just my opinion.  We'll find out soon enough.

Last year was just one year. When conference started I saiid 5 every year. Maybe more. Now I don't see more than 5 ever happening. Too much has to go right. I see 3 bids that should be certain. After that up in the air and a lot hinges on that week at MSG

The one good thing about the new BE vs the old BE, is that at least it puts the BE name out there. If people hate the conference of love the conference, their talking about it. The A10 have a great year last year and how many articles are they in?  Do better this year and more people for good and bad will continue to talk about the BE.