Collier: Big East too big, full of flaws
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
By Gene Collier, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

There was a reasonable midwinter's opportunity, not terribly long ago, for those who disdained multitasking and wouldn't shift their attentions to college basketball until such time as the NFL had cleaned and burned its ridiculous Pro Bowl jerseys.

This was in the dark ages of, oh, 1990, when, then as now, Big East basketball meant some of the best teams in the land and most of the best teams in the land between the North Atlantic and the West End Bridge. In that era, you could lurch away from six months of NFL immersion and easily wrap your sports brain around college basketball, at least as it impacted Pitt and the aligned powers.

Tried this approach yesterday by searching out the Big East standings.

First impression: The Big East standings are about an inch too thick.

They're practically a poll unto themselves.

The storied conference once made up of seven schools now includes 12 states and the District of Columbia. The basketball map that once represented a highly manageable little v-chip of the Northeast -- Syracuse to D.C. to Boston -- is today not merely the Big East, but the Enormous East. A similar triangulation in 2006 requires a round trip of nearly 4,000 miles, from Milwaukee to Tampa to Providence and back to Point A.

Though with noted exceptions, superior basketball remains the common denominator of the conference's record-breaking 16 schools, the cavernous cultural dimensions of their very nature have continued to expand. The University of Cincinnati, for example, is more than eight times the size of Providence College. Georgetown University was 10 years old before George Washington was dead, but Rick Pitino was four years old before the University of South Florida was born.

Rarely has the overall quality of play in this league been better than it is today, and Villanova's explosive second half against Connecticut the other night not only ruptured the aura of the No. 1 team in the country, but the Wildcats' victory certainly whetted local appetites for the much-awaited Pitt-Villanova collision.

Do you have a year?

There is no Pitt-Villanova game this season, let alone the more traditional Pitt-Villanova home-and-home series, just as there is no Pitt-South Florida game, but, well, count your blessings. When Connecticut travels to West Virginia on Saturday for what ought to be a splendid basketball episode, Big East cohort DePaul needn't bother to acquire any game tape. DePaul doesn't play either team this season. Yet Pitt plays West Virginia twice, and DePaul plays Providence twice.

Does this mean that the Big East has passed the point of, you know, making sense? Probably not, but a 16-team league is certainly susceptible to some unprecedented questions, like, "How can you crown a conference champion in basketball without the champion playing all the basketball teams in the conference?" And, "Is Notre Dame the best 11-10 team in the country?" And, "How come if we're members of the Big East, we're still watching the Big East tournament on TV in a Chicago dorm room, just like last year?"

Big East coaches have apparently made it clear that they would prefer to play every team in the conference (why shouldn't West Virginia get a much-needed night off against DePaul, for example?), but the problem there is existing TV contracts, which require certain repeat matchups. Look for this to be rectified. The conference tournament, however, likely will continue to exclude 25 percent of the membership, as it will this March. The theory is that 16 teams in New York is too unwieldy, necessitating four rounds of games to win the fabled Big East tournament, and perhaps exhausting the poor fellas for the NCAA tournament at hand.

Many of the larger questions on the long-term impact of the conference's astounding girth, however, will not begin to be answered until Selection Sunday, when the NCAA's selection committee decides what to do about the fact that no conference has ever received more than seven tournament bids. The Big East used to get that when it had only nine teams. What will it deserve now that it has its own Sweet 16?

What will the committee make of Louisville, picked by Big East coaches to finish third in the conference and currently tied for 11th, but with an overall record of 16-8? Don't you have to be at least .500 in your league to be in the tournament? Louisville's 4-7.

I'm thinking it's probably going to take more than Dick Vitale calling the league the best and deepest in America for the Big East to get more than nine. If those are Villanova, Connecticut, West Virginia, Georgetown, Pitt, Seton Hall, Syracuse, Marquette, and Cincinnati, then Louisville, Rutgers, and Notre Dame, whose principle sins are consistently lining up against monstrous competition, will be penalized for exactly that.

Before the Really, Really, Amazingly Big East realizes its basketball manifest destiny, ultimately adding 16 new teams including Hawaii Eastern Shore, something like half the league's current schools might want to rethink this arrangement.

It's a shame writers don't think before they push these dumb articles.

As it is, the Big East will get at least 8 teams barring a total collapse by either Marquette or Syracuse.

Now, if Cincinnati doesn't lose that first game to Dayton, don't lose Kirkland, and they finish 7-9 in the Big East, they would be in as well (even with a sub .500 conference record) because their RPI and SOS would be too high and the committee couldn't use the 'they aren't the same team without Kirkland' excuse to keep them out.

If Louisville had beaten either St. John's or Rutgers on the road and had beat Pitt at home, they'd be 6-5 in the BE right now and have a shot to be in the NCAAs as #10.

If ND had beaten either NC State or Michigan, DePaul on the road, and either Villanova or Georgetown at home, they'd be 4-6 right now and likely to finish 8-8 in the Big East with a shot to be #11 in the NCAAs.

And notice that none of these game changing losses to victories impacts the upper echelon teams significantly to reduce their chances of making the Dance.

Now the article is correct in saying the current scheduling is a problem - and rightly lays the blame on the TV contracts that will be corrected.

As for not all 16 teams making it to MSG - well, at first I thought it was a bad thing as well. But having seen the intensity of the regular season BE games - it is obvious that only 12 going to NYC has increased it significantly over prior years.

I'm all in favor of an all-sports conference, but one thing (probably the only thing) this hybrid monstrosity is giving me as a fan - is a truly exciting basketball season. I really don't have any complaints in this regard. So, for however long this farce of a conference is together, I'm going to at least enjoy the men's basketball.

Cheers,
Neil

:shhh: His main concerns were ND and Nova, he has an agenda, just like Tiger Shark II does.

the Bearcats aren't exactly out of it yet.

we now are 8th in the conference standings.

who knows how the season ends, but its not yet time to write the obit.

Wilkie's main concern outing the BE originals for the cusa south group.Losing the BE strength and money is certainly a unique point of view.

Jackson1011 Wrote:Collier: Big East too big, full of flaws
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
By Gene Collier, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette













What will the committee make of Louisville, picked by Big East coaches to finish third in the conference and currently tied for 11th, but with an overall record of 16-8? Don't you have to be at least .500 in your league to be in the tournament? Louisville's 4-7.

Um, no. Do a little research.

No team with a losing league record, in any league, needs to be in the NCAA tournament. You have to draw a line somewhere and thats a good line. A team with a 7-9 league record needs to go home and try again next year.

TopCoog Wrote:No team with a losing league record, in any league, needs to be in the NCAA tournament. You have to draw a line somewhere and thats a good line. A team with a 7-9 league record needs to go home and try again next year.

It isn't a question of what should be the case. I agree that, except in the rarest of circumstances, a team should be at least .500 in conference play in order to get an at-large bid to the NCAA tourney. But, there have been teams with sub-.500 records that have been given at-large bids. So, to answer the author's question, a team doesn't have to be .500 or better to receive an at-large bid. And, of course, many teams with sub-.500 conference records have won their conference tournaments and earned automatic bids.

Re: The "must be .500 in conference" rule.

a) I'm pretty sure the writer knew teams had made it to the NCAAs in the past with sub-.500 conf. records before. (Didn't it happened last year?) I think this is merely used as a barometer, nothing viewed as hard and fast. The theory being that teams finishing with sub .500 conference records will marginal records overall and likely finished in the middle or bottom half of their conference. Thus, it seems hard to justify the necessity for that team to be included since you've likely already got X number of teams from that conference going to the dance. Teams that performed better within that conference. It's just a rule for guidance.

b) However, that rule was born when most conferences were smaller than 11 teams. At 16 members not only does the BE have a lot of quality teams, it has an inordinate share of the general basketball populace. Just as assuredly as the largest states in the union harbor the most representatives in Congress, the BE could/should garner a larger share of reps to the post-season. A point made more valid by the disjointed scheduling: Any team that finishes 7-9 but doubles up on the powers at the expense of games against the bottom dwellers should not ever have to worry about a .500 rule.


What bothers me most about the situation is three things:

1. Not playing certain teams in the conference at all during the season. Playing only once I can live with if the entire membership is equally appreciated;

2. Having TV set the schedules. It's one thing to have a rotation of match-ups over the years, but as it is now the networks could rig the schedule that never balance out over time, always pitting the high-profile teams against each other;

3. Not having everyone go to the conference tournament. I view the conf. tourny as an event celebrating the entire conference. It's a showcase for the players (especially the seniors) and fans as much as for TV, and I think it's a shame for anyone to miss it because of an otherwise cumbersome and unnecessary problem.

Quote:

tigersharktwo Wrote:Wilkie's main concern outing the BE originals for the cusa south group.Losing the BE strength and money is certainly a unique point of view.

No doubt, trading DePaul for 3rd-Ranked Memphis, which not only plays Division 1A football but brings a bowl game, would be the height of stupidity. Tigershark, we all know your desire to protect Notre Dame's parasitic relationship with the BE, but making ridiculous statements doesn't help your cause.

1) We most certainly should be playing every team once. Every team plays the 15 others and then play 1 rival home-away for 16 games.

2) The committee's mission is not to take the 34 at-large teams with the best record TopCoog, 7-9 in the Big East probably means 2nd in leagues like CUSA this year. A 7-9 team will most certainly need to have a great non-conference record or else have played about the toughest schedule in the country. The committee is supposed to pick the best 34 that didn't win their league. Most of the time that won't be a 7-9, but if they are considered among the 34 best, so be it.

3) I think the Big East gets 8 in this year. However, I don't think the teams that likely get left out will have much to complain about. They maybe can say they had a killer schedule (which is not untrue), but they just didn't get it done. If UofL gets left out at 6-10 or 7-9, its not so much because they had to play 5 games against Nova, UConn, & WVU, its that they could not beat bottom teams on the road like Rutgers & SJU and they gave up a late lead to Pitt at home.

Gene Collier ....Penn State (B.A. '75), has been writing crap like this for years..

WVU82 Wrote:Gene Collier ....Penn State (B.A. '75), has been writing crap like this for years..

Either way you slice it 7-9 in a 16 team league with 10 teams being very good and the other 6 not to shabby is good in my opinion. A losing record looks ugly at first but when you glance down at some of the teams schedules in the big east you have to say 7-9 isn't that bad. Notre Dame would be a top 25 team if they played in the CUSA or the SEC. Same goes for Louisville, Cincy, Syracuse, Marquette and any other team stuck in the middle of the league. You put those teams in other conferences and we wouldn't be talking about these teams being on the bubble. Playing in the Big East every team basically beats up on each other and some teams have to play multiple top 15 teams back to back to back. Thats makes it hard especially if you have 1 at home and 2 on the road. I don't care what anybody says the Big East has about 11 teams that are NCAA tournament caliber of teams. Unfortunately we will only get 8 in, and most years with a league being so big it will go in cycles. For teams like Depaul and South Florida there NCAA tournament is playing in the best conference. This is life in the Big East whether you agree or disagree.

Gray Avenger Wrote:

Quote:

tigersharktwo Wrote:Wilkie's main concern outing the BE originals for the cusa south group.Losing the BE strength and money is certainly a unique point of view.

No doubt, trading DePaul for 3rd-Ranked Memphis, which not only plays Division 1A football but brings a bowl game, would be the height of stupidity. Tigershark, we all know your desire to protect Notre Dame's parasitic relationship with the BE, but making ridiculous statements doesn't help your cause.

Gray the greatest parasites are the deficient group(location,market place,sports ,academics,ncaa compliance) of cusa south schools who want to live off the bcs funds tv revenue of the BE football members and try to subsitute the liberty bowl( a non bcs bowl)for 2 ND bowls with the BE and ND games during the season.(ND is not joining a situation in which they do not have political allies.)

GunnerFan Wrote:Re: The "must be .500 in conference" rule.

a) I'm pretty sure the writer knew teams had made it to the NCAAs in the past with sub-.500 conf. records before. (Didn't it happened last year?) I think this is merely used as a barometer, nothing viewed as hard and fast. The theory being that teams finishing with sub .500 conference records will marginal records overall and likely finished in the middle or bottom half of their conference. Thus, it seems hard to justify the necessity for that team to be included since you've likely already got X number of teams from that conference going to the dance. Teams that performed better within that conference. It's just a rule for guidance.

Agreed. A Cincinnati that finishes 7-9 this season has a better case for making the tourney than does a 7-9 Syracuse.

Quote:b) However, that rule was born when most conferences were smaller than 11 teams. At 16 members not only does the BE have a lot of quality teams, it has an inordinate share of the general basketball populace. Just as assuredly as the largest states in the union harbor the most representatives in Congress, the BE could/should garner a larger share of reps to the post-season. A point made more valid by the disjointed scheduling: Any team that finishes 7-9 but doubles up on the powers at the expense of games against the bottom dwellers should not ever have to worry about a .500 rule.

Again, depends. I think that said team should still show some quality wins (and some of those should be on the road) to make it to the Dance with a less than .500 record in conference. In the Bearcats case, their biggest out-of-conference win was OOC against LSU on a neutral court. They have good wins against Marquette and Syracuse in conference with the SU win happening on the road. So, if they only beat Providence from here on out and finish 7-9 (NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN Bearcats' fans, just supposing) I feel they should still get serious consideration.

However, with Syracuse, their only quality win will be against Cincinnati on the road, so if they only beat Louisville and DePaul to finish 7-9 (AGAIN, JUST SUPPOSING HERE) I don't think they have a good enough resume that would justify them making the Dance.

Of course the committee might feel otherwise (like they did about UAB last year) - but I'd consider it a tainted bid as an Orange fan - under those circumstances.

Quote:What bothers me most about the situation is three things:

1. Not playing certain teams in the conference at all during the season. Playing only once I can live with if the entire membership is equally appreciated;

The league knows this. But unfortunately, the contracts are signed and the only way to accomplish this was to expand to an 18 game conference regular season which the presidents weren't willing to do. So they will wait until the TV contracts are renegotiated next year for the following year.

Quote:2. Having TV set the schedules. It's one thing to have a rotation of match-ups over the years, but as it is now the networks could rig the schedule that never balance out over time, always pitting the high-profile teams against each other;

Not sure this will change with the next contract or not (the top 6-8 teams facing off against one another) - but keep in mind they didn't expect Pitt, Georgetown, or Seton Hall to be this good - so pairing off the seemingly better teams didn't necessarily create the hardest BE schedule. I'd argue that WVU got the harder schedule having to face G'Town, Pitt, and Cincinnati twice than UConn and Nova who had to face each other twice but also the extremely disappointing Orange and Louisville teams.

On the other hand, Syracuse and Louisville had the toughest schedules (in what turned out to be a down year) to have to face UConn, Nova, and Cincinnati twice.

Quote:3. Not having everyone go to the conference tournament. I view the conf. tourny as an event celebrating the entire conference. It's a showcase for the players (especially the seniors) and fans as much as for TV, and I think it's a shame for anyone to miss it because of an otherwise cumbersome and unnecessary problem.

Again, I think it has given meaning to the regular season games and you have exciting well-played games up and down the schedule as a result. It will also make the first day of the tourney better than any other Super-Conference's first day.

Cheers,
Neil

tigersharktwo Wrote:

Gray Avenger Wrote:

Quote:

tigersharktwo Wrote:Wilkie's main concern outing the BE originals for the cusa south group.Losing the BE strength and money is certainly a unique point of view.

No doubt, trading DePaul for 3rd-Ranked Memphis, which not only plays Division 1A football but brings a bowl game, would be the height of stupidity. Tigershark, we all know your desire to protect Notre Dame's parasitic relationship with the BE, but making ridiculous statements doesn't help your cause.

Gray the greatest parasites are the deficient group(location,market place,sports ,academics,ncaa compliance) of cusa south schools who want to live off the bcs funds tv revenue of the BE football members and try to subsitute the liberty bowl( a non bcs bowl)for 2 ND bowls with the BE and ND games during the season.(ND is not joining a situation in which they do not have political allies.)

You mean being allied with schools that are run by Priests that will always vote for you! lmfao lmfao lmfao

No the schools and fans that are ruled by the memory of General Lee will vote for cusa south east.

lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao
What a tool!

tigersharktwo Wrote:No the schools and fans that are ruled by the memory of General Lee will vote for cusa south east.

I become more convinced everyday that you've never ventured south of Pennsylvania or Maryland.

You think of yourself as highly educated but you definitely come off as an uneducated bigot. I find that funny and very ironic considering you try to play off the southern half of the country as bigots.

I know I'm not the only one that notices this bad case of projection you have going on either. You should get some help!

There really IS a whole other world outside of the triangle made by DC, Boston, and Columbus, Ohio. You should try it out someday, you'll discover that 95% of the rest of the country is less stuck in their way than you are!

tigersharktwo Wrote:No the schools and fans that are ruled by the memory of General Lee will vote for cusa south east.

What schools and fans are you exactly talking about?