...and I'm serious when I ask this:

Has the Big East been good for DePaul? I'm not trying to start a pissing match, but I'm honestly curious if there are any fans of Blue Demon basketball that wish the program had gone in another direction.

Obviously the goal of every program is to be in the BEST conference possible, but the truth is every conference has it's bottom feeders and nobody wants that to be their program no matter what conference they're in. Fans want NCAA tournaments, not the privilege of just getting to play big-named teams (at least that's the impression I get).

Just as there will be teams who will rise to the top of this new Big East, there will most likely be teams who will be perennial bottom feeders (which could very well be the teams who have grown used to that role in the old Big East), and I can't imagine that's great for the program, basically being a bottom feeder in a good conference.

And sort of a part B to this question: why do you think coaches have struggled at DePaul? Oliver Purnell had success pretty much everywhere else he's coached, Jerry Wainwright built an incredibly tough UNCW program and then had some solid Richmond teams. Why is it these good coaches have been so unsuccessful there?

As a VCU fan I look at JMU who just won the CAA tournament the season after we left. The CAA by all accounts was waaaaaay down this year, but that meant a trip to the NCAA tournament for the Dukes (and a win actually...all be it in the First 4). Their CAA tournament final attendance was almost double their regular season attendance even though the game was played 2.5 hours away from campus, and you can bet their home attendance will get a nice little bump because of that next year, even with smaller profile teams coming into their gym.

Just curious to hear from a DePaul fan how your Big East experience has been, and how you think things have changed for better or worse from your time in CUSA, the Metro, etc.

Not a DePaul fan, but I'll offer an opinion.

In the short run the Big East was bad for DePaul. IMO that's a factor of the monstrous size of the conference. DePaul isn't the only one who got mired in the lower half of the conference and couldn't climb out. With so many other schools in front of them, it proved to be a mountain to big to climb. I think that many schools are going to find this a problem in these new mega-conferences. It may lead to their eventual breakup.

In the long run, the move has paid off. DePaul is now in a much smaller league with a lucrative TV contract and with similar schools where it has a much better to succeed and to thrive. The future is bright. Hopefully the restructured Big East will understand the problems with being oversized and will not grow any larger than 12.

I have no comment about the coaching situation at DePaul.

Well, the answer is that it depends.

Is DePaul a better program competitively today than when it originally entered the Big East? Nope. I know it's hard for a lot of people to remember, but DePaul was a pretty good program back in what was an excellent C-USA league back in the day (including winning the C-USA championship in the year right before DePaul, Marquette, Louisville and Cincinnati defected to the Big East).

The coaching and recruiting have been uphill battles. Remember that DePaul is going head-to-head with Big Ten programs that have as large of alumni bases in Chicago as DePaul does (despite the fact that DePaul is a very large school even though it's private) with football money and exposure. I'm an Illinois undergrad alum and that's definitely a more prominent program in the Chicago area at this time. Schools such as Indiana, Purdue, Wisconsin and Iowa are fairly close, and then you add on top of the fact that Coach K and Bill Self both have strong Chicago ties to come in and scoop up elite players on a regular basis. At the end of the day, the top recruits that DePaul used to be getting up through the 1980s have been heading to Big Ten schools or national blue blood programs en masse.

That being said, I know that DePaul wouldn't trade places with anyone with where they are at this time. I recall speaking with DePaul leaders when I was there in law school (I graduated in 2003) and the overall institutional goal was explicitly to be with the Catholic members of the Big East that they considered to be peers. Whatever DePaul did going forward or how the college sports landscape had changed, they wanted to be with St. John's, Villanova, Georgetown, etc. Frankly, this new Big East is exactly what DePaul wanted in a conference - the school didn't really care about Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, etc., and just wanted to make sure that it was set up to be with the Catholic members down the road. I don't think the school could have ever anticipated how badly they ended up playing on-the-court once they got into the Big East, but there's almost sort of a feeling of a restart right now with the Syracuses and Louisvilles of the world heading off in separate directions. The new Big East is going to be tough, but it won't be the nightly meatgrinder of the old Big East. At the same time, the new arena is going to be a massive improvement even though it's not directly on-campus. DePaul's best asset is its city location (note that student surveys in the Princeton Review have shown that DePaul has the happiest students in the country on multiple occasions), yet the Allstate Arena is the antithesis of that as a suburban arena that's literally in the flight path of O'Hare. A new arena isn't the be-all end-all (you still have to win), but it can't be underestimated how *awful* Allstate Arena has been in a world where recruits increasingly care about facilities. I can't imagine how it's possible to get any type of top-flight talent when you show recruits that arena in today's age (especially when they're competing with Big Ten arenas or even close-by competitor Marquette that have packed stands in better facilities).

(06-10-2013 01:24 PM)Natty Wrote:  ...and I'm serious when I ask this:

Has the Big East been good for DePaul? I'm not trying to start a pissing match, but I'm honestly curious if there are any fans of Blue Demon basketball that wish the program had gone in another direction.

Obviously the goal of every program is to be in the BEST conference possible, but the truth is everyone conference has it's bottom feeders and nobody wants that to be their program no matter what conference they're in. Fans want NCAA tournaments, not the privilege of just getting to play big-named teams (at least that's the impression I get).

Just as there will be teams who will rise to the top of this new Big East, there will most likely be teams who will be perennial bottom feeders (which could very well be the teams who have grown used to that role in the old Big East), and I can't imagine that's great for the program, basically being a bottom feeder in a good conference.

And sort of a part B to this question: why do you think coaches have struggled at DePaul? Oliver Purnell had success pretty much everywhere else he's coached, Jerry Wainwright built an incredibly tough UNCW program and then had some solid Richmond teams. Why is it these good coaches have been so unsuccessful there?

As a VCU fan I look at JMU who just won the CAA tournament the season after we left. The CAA by all accounts was waaaaaay down this year, but that meant a trip to the NCAA tournament for the Dukes (and a win actually...all be it in the First 4). Their CAA tournament final attendance was almost double their regular season attendance even though the game was played 2.5 hours away from campus, and you can bet their home attendance will get a nice little bump because of that next year, even with smaller profile teams coming into their gym.

Just curious to hear from a DePaul fan how your Big East experience has been, and how you think things have changed for better or worse from your time in CUSA, the Metro, etc.

1. It's still better being the bottom feeder in a great league than the top dog in a bad league. You can move out of the basement in the better league while you have a glass ceiling in the worse league.

2. They have had issues because Wainright couldn't recruit at the higher level. Purnell has the team improving and I think they make some nice strides this season. Last year they took a few teams to OT who were lucky to beat the Blue Demons. It takes time to completely rebuild a program as down as DePaul is. My Johnnies weren't as down as DePaul and it's still taken us a decade and counting to get out of the basement.

3. No way in hell would they rather be anywhere but the Big East. They are the largest Catholic university in the country. While their BBall has underperformed (I know thats a VAST understatement) they still fit in with the Big East in every way.

The old Big East at 15-16 basketball schools was monstrous, but the new Big East is a better... ummm they already expanded to ten and are talking about more expansion? They'll be at 12 or 14 soon enough and basically the same size you're complaining about! If anything, it'll be easier on Depaul not because the size of the conference, but because they didn't recruit at the level to compete and with four of the top six programs the last few years ('Cuse, Louisville, UConn, and Cincy) moving on, there will be a leveling the playing field for who is left.

(06-10-2013 02:39 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  The old Big East at 15-16 basketball schools was monstrous, but the new Big East is a better... ummm they already expanded to ten and are talking about more expansion? They'll be at 12 or 14 soon enough and basically the same size you're complaining about! If anything, it'll be easier on Depaul not because the size of the conference, but because four of the top six programs the last few years ('Cuse, Louisville, UConn, and Cincy) will be gone, leveling the playing field for who is left.

Cincy was not a top 6 program in the Big East.

In no particular order teams who were better than Cincy in their time in the Big East.

Cuse
UofL
GTown
Marquette
Pitt
ND
WVU
Nova

They were a middle of the pack school.

St John's seemed to have UC's number too. I'd imagine DePaul wants to be with the only other major Vincentian university in the USA. (Niagara is the third and final Vincentian school)

(06-10-2013 02:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:39 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  The old Big East at 15-16 basketball schools was monstrous, but the new Big East is a better... ummm they already expanded to ten and are talking about more expansion? They'll be at 12 or 14 soon enough and basically the same size you're complaining about! If anything, it'll be easier on Depaul not because the size of the conference, but because four of the top six programs the last few years ('Cuse, Louisville, UConn, and Cincy) will be gone, leveling the playing field for who is left.

Cincy was not a top 6 program in the Big East.

In no particular order teams who were better than Cincy in their time in the Big East.

Cuse
UofL
GTown
Marquette
Pitt
ND
WVU
Nova

They were a middle of the pack school.

The quote says "in the last few years" in which Cincinnati finished in 6th place, 4th place and 9th place (not including tie-breakers at what not), that averages as 6.333. So yes, they were pretty much a top 6 program the last few years. Obviously the first few years were a struggle as we rebuilt the program. I think DePaul, St. Johns and Seton Hall's struggles shows how impressive Cincinnati's rebuilding project has been.

(06-11-2013 07:53 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:39 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  The old Big East at 15-16 basketball schools was monstrous, but the new Big East is a better... ummm they already expanded to ten and are talking about more expansion? They'll be at 12 or 14 soon enough and basically the same size you're complaining about! If anything, it'll be easier on Depaul not because the size of the conference, but because four of the top six programs the last few years ('Cuse, Louisville, UConn, and Cincy) will be gone, leveling the playing field for who is left.

Cincy was not a top 6 program in the Big East.

In no particular order teams who were better than Cincy in their time in the Big East.

Cuse
UofL
GTown
Marquette
Pitt
ND
WVU
Nova

They were a middle of the pack school.

The quote says "in the last few years" in which Cincinnati finished in 6th place, 4th place and 9th place (not including tie-breakers at what not), that averages as 6.333. So yes, they were pretty much a top 6 program the last few years. Obviously the first few years were a struggle as we rebuilt the program. I think DePaul, St. Johns and Seton Hall's struggles shows how impressive Cincinnati's rebuilding project has been.

Wow, you just used the last 3 years, and 4 years ago they finished 11th, and 5 years ago they finished 10th. Just funny how you stopped after 3 years.

(06-11-2013 09:31 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 07:53 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:39 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  The old Big East at 15-16 basketball schools was monstrous, but the new Big East is a better... ummm they already expanded to ten and are talking about more expansion? They'll be at 12 or 14 soon enough and basically the same size you're complaining about! If anything, it'll be easier on Depaul not because the size of the conference, but because four of the top six programs the last few years ('Cuse, Louisville, UConn, and Cincy) will be gone, leveling the playing field for who is left.

Cincy was not a top 6 program in the Big East.

In no particular order teams who were better than Cincy in their time in the Big East.

Cuse
UofL
GTown
Marquette
Pitt
ND
WVU
Nova

They were a middle of the pack school.

The quote says "in the last few years" in which Cincinnati finished in 6th place, 4th place and 9th place (not including tie-breakers at what not), that averages as 6.333. So yes, they were pretty much a top 6 program the last few years. Obviously the first few years were a struggle as we rebuilt the program. I think DePaul, St. Johns and Seton Hall's struggles shows how impressive Cincinnati's rebuilding project has been.

Wow, you just used the last 3 years, and 4 years ago they finished 11th, and 5 years ago they finished 10th. Just funny how you stopped after 3 years.

Yes, if you would be willing to read the post you may actually see it says "in the last few years" not in Cincinnati's entire time in the BE. I clearly stated how bad UC was in the first few years, which are now no longer relevant since UC has returned to normalcy with 3 straight NCAA tournament appearances (with a 3-3 record). So there isn't really much funny about it. Given how moronic you've made yourself look in the past I will stop here.

I think the comment in question was that Cincinnati was a Top 6 BE program over the past few years, but Pitt and Notre Dame and West Va had more success in that time, which would put Cincinnati 9th I guess. Their rebuilding has been amazing, but they've only had 2 years over .500 in the Big East out of 8. I think that says more about how incredible the conference has been all these years, because UC would be Top 3 regularly in any other conference. Their Sweet 16 win over Florida State in 2012 was one of our conference's most ballsy wins, especially coming against an ACC school. Bearcats definitely have balls.

(06-11-2013 10:55 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 09:31 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 07:53 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:39 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  The old Big East at 15-16 basketball schools was monstrous, but the new Big East is a better... ummm they already expanded to ten and are talking about more expansion? They'll be at 12 or 14 soon enough and basically the same size you're complaining about! If anything, it'll be easier on Depaul not because the size of the conference, but because four of the top six programs the last few years ('Cuse, Louisville, UConn, and Cincy) will be gone, leveling the playing field for who is left.

Cincy was not a top 6 program in the Big East.

In no particular order teams who were better than Cincy in their time in the Big East.

Cuse
UofL
GTown
Marquette
Pitt
ND
WVU
Nova

They were a middle of the pack school.

The quote says "in the last few years" in which Cincinnati finished in 6th place, 4th place and 9th place (not including tie-breakers at what not), that averages as 6.333. So yes, they were pretty much a top 6 program the last few years. Obviously the first few years were a struggle as we rebuilt the program. I think DePaul, St. Johns and Seton Hall's struggles shows how impressive Cincinnati's rebuilding project has been.

Wow, you just used the last 3 years, and 4 years ago they finished 11th, and 5 years ago they finished 10th. Just funny how you stopped after 3 years.

Yes, if you would be willing to read the post you may actually see it says "in the last few years" not in Cincinnati's entire time in the BE. I clearly stated how bad UC was in the first few years, which are now no longer relevant since UC has returned to normalcy with 3 straight NCAA tournament appearances (with a 3-3 record). So there isn't really much funny about it. Given how moronic you've made yourself look in the past I will stop here.

So you have been here since May and you know how i have looked in the past. Gotcha. Also to me, few can equal four or five but not in your opinion. If you want to insult posters please stay on the AAC board.

(06-11-2013 07:53 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:39 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  The old Big East at 15-16 basketball schools was monstrous, but the new Big East is a better... ummm they already expanded to ten and are talking about more expansion? They'll be at 12 or 14 soon enough and basically the same size you're complaining about! If anything, it'll be easier on Depaul not because the size of the conference, but because four of the top six programs the last few years ('Cuse, Louisville, UConn, and Cincy) will be gone, leveling the playing field for who is left.

Cincy was not a top 6 program in the Big East.

In no particular order teams who were better than Cincy in their time in the Big East.

Cuse
UofL
GTown
Marquette
Pitt
ND
WVU
Nova

They were a middle of the pack school.

The quote says "in the last few years" in which Cincinnati finished in 6th place, 4th place and 9th place (not including tie-breakers at what not), that averages as 6.333. So yes, they were pretty much a top 6 program the last few years. Obviously the first few years were a struggle as we rebuilt the program. I think DePaul, St. Johns and Seton Hall's struggles shows how impressive Cincinnati's rebuilding project has been.

Let's follow the math all the way through. Here's what each team averaged in the Big East standings over the past 3 years:

3.0 - Syracuse
3.3 - Notre Dame
3.7 - Louisville
4.0 - Marquette
4.3 - Georgetown
6.0 - Pitt
6.3 - Cincinnati
7.0 - West Virginia
8.3 - St. John's
8.3 - UConn
9.7 - Villanova
10.7 - South Florida
11.3 - Seton Hall
12.0 - Rutgers
12.7 - Providence
15.7 - DePaul

By your own methodology, Cincinnati is clearly not a top 6 program since this ranking places them 7th.

And 7th is really the best anyone can claim for Cincinnati in the past 3 years. The case can certainly be made that UConn was a stronger program than Cincinnati since these years include both a Big East championship and national championship run for UConn. Cincy gets credit for finishing ahead of UConn in the regular season standings in 2010-11, but no one in their right mind would rank Cincy ahead of UConn that year. In the next 2 years, Ciincy finished ahead of UConn in 2011-12 and behind them in 2012-13, or pretty much a wash.

When UConn is appropriately ranked ahead of Cincinnati over the past 3 years, Cincy becomes 8th in the Big East, or middle of the pack, which is what they've been in recent years.

Before that, they spent 5 years without a winning season in conference play and with an average ranking of 11 in the standings, or one of the league's lower echelon programs.

(The reason why you came up with a 6.3 average ranking is because you rounded up on ties. I followed your approach and did the same thing with everyone. If ties were properly accounted for by picking the middle position of the tie, Cincy's average ranking would be 7.0.)

(06-11-2013 10:55 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 09:31 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 07:53 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:39 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  The old Big East at 15-16 basketball schools was monstrous, but the new Big East is a better... ummm they already expanded to ten and are talking about more expansion? They'll be at 12 or 14 soon enough and basically the same size you're complaining about! If anything, it'll be easier on Depaul not because the size of the conference, but because four of the top six programs the last few years ('Cuse, Louisville, UConn, and Cincy) will be gone, leveling the playing field for who is left.

Cincy was not a top 6 program in the Big East.

In no particular order teams who were better than Cincy in their time in the Big East.

Cuse
UofL
GTown
Marquette
Pitt
ND
WVU
Nova

They were a middle of the pack school.

The quote says "in the last few years" in which Cincinnati finished in 6th place, 4th place and 9th place (not including tie-breakers at what not), that averages as 6.333. So yes, they were pretty much a top 6 program the last few years. Obviously the first few years were a struggle as we rebuilt the program. I think DePaul, St. Johns and Seton Hall's struggles shows how impressive Cincinnati's rebuilding project has been.

Wow, you just used the last 3 years, and 4 years ago they finished 11th, and 5 years ago they finished 10th. Just funny how you stopped after 3 years.

Yes, if you would be willing to read the post you may actually see it says "in the last few years" not in Cincinnati's entire time in the BE. I clearly stated how bad UC was in the first few years, which are now no longer relevant since UC has returned to normalcy with 3 straight NCAA tournament appearances (with a 3-3 record). So there isn't really much funny about it. Given how moronic you've made yourself look in the past I will stop here.

How is an NCAA bid a "return to normalcy" for Cincinnati?

As far as Cincinnati's Big East history is concerned, they have received an NCAA bid only 3 times in 8 years. "Normal" for Cincinnati's as a Big East program is missing the tournament.

Even if you want to go back to include Cincinnati's pre-Big East history, you have to go beyond the past 10 years before things tip in Cincy's favor to make them better than a 50-50 shot at a tournament bid.

Sure, you can point to 14 straight tournament bids during the CUSA/Great Midwest era. But that was the Huggins era. Was that "normal" for Cincinnati? We can point to 14 straight years before that when Cincy missed the tournament every year.

So, if we take the long view over the past 36 years, Cincinnati has received 17 bids and has missed the tournament 19 times. So, normal for Cincinnati is pretty much a little less than a 50/50 shot at a tournament bid, which is exactly what they've been in the Big East.

(06-12-2013 06:58 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 10:55 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 09:31 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 07:53 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Cincy was not a top 6 program in the Big East.

In no particular order teams who were better than Cincy in their time in the Big East.

Cuse
UofL
GTown
Marquette
Pitt
ND
WVU
Nova

They were a middle of the pack school.

The quote says "in the last few years" in which Cincinnati finished in 6th place, 4th place and 9th place (not including tie-breakers at what not), that averages as 6.333. So yes, they were pretty much a top 6 program the last few years. Obviously the first few years were a struggle as we rebuilt the program. I think DePaul, St. Johns and Seton Hall's struggles shows how impressive Cincinnati's rebuilding project has been.

Wow, you just used the last 3 years, and 4 years ago they finished 11th, and 5 years ago they finished 10th. Just funny how you stopped after 3 years.

Yes, if you would be willing to read the post you may actually see it says "in the last few years" not in Cincinnati's entire time in the BE. I clearly stated how bad UC was in the first few years, which are now no longer relevant since UC has returned to normalcy with 3 straight NCAA tournament appearances (with a 3-3 record). So there isn't really much funny about it. Given how moronic you've made yourself look in the past I will stop here.

How is an NCAA bid a "return to normalcy" for Cincinnati?

As far as Cincinnati's Big East history is concerned, they have received an NCAA bid only 3 times in 8 years. "Normal" for Cincinnati's as a Big East program is missing the tournament.

Even if you want to go back to include Cincinnati's pre-Big history, you have to go beyond the past 10 years before things tip in Cincy's favor to make them better than a 50-5- shot at a tournament bid.

Sure, you can point to 14 straight tournament bids during the CUSA/Great Midwest era. But that was the Huggins era. Was that "normal" for Cincinnati? We can point to 14 straight years before that when Cincy missed the tournament every year.

So, if we take the long view over the past 36 years, Cincinnati has received 17 bids and has missed the tournament 19 times. So, normal for Cincinnati is pretty much a little less than a 50/50 shot at a tournament bid, which is exactly what they've been in the Big East.

He's too busy throwing out insults to realize that.

Cincy was only in the Big East for a few years anyway, so I don't see how we can't use most of their time here and not just the last three years because those are the years they actually played decent.

(06-12-2013 06:58 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 10:55 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 09:31 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 07:53 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 02:46 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Cincy was not a top 6 program in the Big East.

In no particular order teams who were better than Cincy in their time in the Big East.

Cuse
UofL
GTown
Marquette
Pitt
ND
WVU
Nova

They were a middle of the pack school.

The quote says "in the last few years" in which Cincinnati finished in 6th place, 4th place and 9th place (not including tie-breakers at what not), that averages as 6.333. So yes, they were pretty much a top 6 program the last few years. Obviously the first few years were a struggle as we rebuilt the program. I think DePaul, St. Johns and Seton Hall's struggles shows how impressive Cincinnati's rebuilding project has been.

Wow, you just used the last 3 years, and 4 years ago they finished 11th, and 5 years ago they finished 10th. Just funny how you stopped after 3 years.

Yes, if you would be willing to read the post you may actually see it says "in the last few years" not in Cincinnati's entire time in the BE. I clearly stated how bad UC was in the first few years, which are now no longer relevant since UC has returned to normalcy with 3 straight NCAA tournament appearances (with a 3-3 record). So there isn't really much funny about it. Given how moronic you've made yourself look in the past I will stop here.

How is an NCAA bid a "return to normalcy" for Cincinnati?

As far as Cincinnati's Big East history is concerned, they have received an NCAA bid only 3 times in 8 years. "Normal" for Cincinnati's as a Big East program is missing the tournament.

Even if you want to go back to include Cincinnati's pre-Big East history, you have to go beyond the past 10 years before things tip in Cincy's favor to make them better than a 50-50 shot at a tournament bid.

Sure, you can point to 14 straight tournament bids during the CUSA/Great Midwest era. But that was the Huggins era. Was that "normal" for Cincinnati? We can point to 14 straight years before that when Cincy missed the tournament every year.

So, if we take the long view over the past 36 years, Cincinnati has received 17 bids and has missed the tournament 19 times. So, normal for Cincinnati is pretty much a little less than a 50/50 shot at a tournament bid, which is exactly what they've been in the Big East.

You always seem to choose arbitrary parameters to fit your arguments, so let me choose mine. Since 1990 (which is when I was born), Cincinnati has reached the NCAA tournament 17 times. That is, they've made the tournament all but a 6 year stretch in my life for a 74% success rate at making the NCAA tournament. Not to mention their 27 all-time appearances ranks them at 19th (tied with several schools). So if the school with the 19th most NCAA appearances isn't considered "normal" to make it, then I have no clue what is.

Do you consider Kentucky to be an elite program, Melky? Using your same arbitrary parameter, they have made 21 appearances in the last 36 years (so two more then Cincinnati). Is it not considered normal for them to make the NCAA tournament?

How about Connecticut? Using those same parameters they 19 appearances in the last 36 years. So it clearly isn't normal to expect them to make the NCAA tournament every year.

See how fun number manipulation can be???

(06-12-2013 04:54 PM)123az Wrote:  

(06-12-2013 06:58 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 10:55 AM)123az Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 09:31 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 07:53 AM)123az Wrote:  The quote says "in the last few years" in which Cincinnati finished in 6th place, 4th place and 9th place (not including tie-breakers at what not), that averages as 6.333. So yes, they were pretty much a top 6 program the last few years. Obviously the first few years were a struggle as we rebuilt the program. I think DePaul, St. Johns and Seton Hall's struggles shows how impressive Cincinnati's rebuilding project has been.

Wow, you just used the last 3 years, and 4 years ago they finished 11th, and 5 years ago they finished 10th. Just funny how you stopped after 3 years.

Yes, if you would be willing to read the post you may actually see it says "in the last few years" not in Cincinnati's entire time in the BE. I clearly stated how bad UC was in the first few years, which are now no longer relevant since UC has returned to normalcy with 3 straight NCAA tournament appearances (with a 3-3 record). So there isn't really much funny about it. Given how moronic you've made yourself look in the past I will stop here.

How is an NCAA bid a "return to normalcy" for Cincinnati?

As far as Cincinnati's Big East history is concerned, they have received an NCAA bid only 3 times in 8 years. "Normal" for Cincinnati's as a Big East program is missing the tournament.

Even if you want to go back to include Cincinnati's pre-Big East history, you have to go beyond the past 10 years before things tip in Cincy's favor to make them better than a 50-50 shot at a tournament bid.

Sure, you can point to 14 straight tournament bids during the CUSA/Great Midwest era. But that was the Huggins era. Was that "normal" for Cincinnati? We can point to 14 straight years before that when Cincy missed the tournament every year.

So, if we take the long view over the past 36 years, Cincinnati has received 17 bids and has missed the tournament 19 times. So, normal for Cincinnati is pretty much a little less than a 50/50 shot at a tournament bid, which is exactly what they've been in the Big East.

You always seem to choose arbitrary parameters to fit your arguments, so let me choose mine. Since 1990 (which is when I was born), Cincinnati has reached the NCAA tournament 17 times. That is, they've made the tournament all but a 6 year stretch in my life for a 74% success rate at making the NCAA tournament. Not to mention their 27 all-time appearances ranks them at 19th (tied with several schools). So if the school with the 19th most NCAA appearances isn't considered "normal" to make it, then I have no clue what is.

Do you consider Kentucky to be an elite program, Melky? Using your same arbitrary parameter, they have made 21 appearances in the last 36 years (so two more then Cincinnati). Is it not considered normal for them to make the NCAA tournament?

How about Connecticut? Using those same parameters they 19 appearances in the last 36 years. So it clearly isn't normal to expect them to make the NCAA tournament every year.

See how fun number manipulation can be???

How did I manipulate anything? I provided all of the information;

1. I mentioned their Big East record - 3 trips in 8 years.
2. I mentioned their 14 straight appearances (1992-2005).
3. I mentioned that it was preceded by 14 straight years without a bid.

Would you like me to keep going back further? I didn't pick an arbitrary number. I simply reported the facts. Bragging about 14 straight bids and ignoring the previous 14 no-bid seasons. That's arbitrary.

I have no idea what Kentucky or UConn have to do with it. I'm simply saying that a trip to the tournament is not a given for Cincy or anyone else. The Huggins era was unique. It was special. He's a great coach, an exceptional coach. You're taking him for granted, saying that you expect to be there every year. It doesn't work that way.

Times like the Huggins era should be cherished because they're so special. You sound like a Yankee fan who thinks that his team will get to the playoffs every year just because they've been there 17 of the past 18 years. If I pointed out that those 18 years had been preceded by 14 straight years without a playoff appearance, would I be picking an arbitrary time frame? Is 17 of 18 years "normal"? If I pointed out that the Yankees have been to the playoffs 17 of the past 32 years, making it a little better than a 50/50 shot for them to get there, would I be being arbitrary? heck, the Yankees are the most successful franchise in the history of sports. isn't it "normal" for them to get to the postseason? No, it isn't. Their fans should chericsh what they've had in the past 2 decades precisely because it isn't normal and because it's so hard to do.

UCLA went to the Final Four 14 times in 15 years (1962-76). If we were having this conversation back in 1976, wouldn't it have been fair to say that getting to the Final Four was "normal" for them and it was highly likely that they'd also win a NC as they'd done 10 times in those 15 years. Would I have been wrong to point out how special the Wooden Era was, given that UCLA hadn't even made the tournament once, not to mention the Final Four, in the first 23 years of tournament history prior to 1962? UCLA fans learned how special that era was the hard way. They went to the Final Four only once in the next 18 years and only twice in the next 20 years. (1962-76) was hardly normal. It was nowhere close to normal.

Cincinnati destroyed my bracket a bunch of times in the Huggins era.

Cincy is 5-6 against St. John's while in the Big East.