(08-05-2013 11:56 PM)kardphan Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:38 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:26 PM)kardphan Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:13 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  The major premise of the article is flawed.

It's true that playing Louisville, UConn, & Memphis will help RPI but will only have a significant benefit if the lower teams get some wins over these 3. OTOH, playing the conference's lower tier teams will hurt RPI, negating the benefits of playing the top 3. Bottom line is that the conference's credibility will be established by what they do OOC. They must win those games.

This conference has no guarantee of getting "at least 4 or 5 bids" as Rothstein suggests.

Yes the bottom teams ar pretty bad but uconn, Memphis, temple, and uc has traditionally played solid OOC games. Plus the top 4 will all play each other twice and I get your point but all you have to do is look at how awful the sec and PAC have been with some putrid teams. This league isn't great by any stretch but its not cusa. All the sec has had has been 4 teams. UK, Florida,vandy, and one other team . PAC has been very mediocre with only 2-3 teams worthy of discussion. The AAC is nothing like the former league but I still say its a solid 4 bid league minimum. If the sec somehow can get 5 teams in with only two teams worth a salt then the aac can get 4.

Good points.

The way I see it, the top 3 should make it.

Cincy and SMU have a shot, but both have work to do. I don't see the other 5 in the running.

That's a minimum of 3 with 4 & 5 being "maybe's". That's if all goes well. If one of the top 3 stumbles due to injury or other factor, that "minimum" could shrink because no one else is in position to step up and replace them as would have been the case in the old BE.

To be honest going forward none of this really matters.lol The same 10 to 12 teams which I'm including UConn in this group will continue to battle for the title in the end. I think I read somewhere that since the tourney expanded in 85 only 18 teams have won the title and 8 more than once. Only unlv won outside of a power league and I don't see unlv getting g back to that level anytime soon. This is why I say none of this has any effect on the huskies going forward.

Here's the optimist's spin on that same info.

1. 18 in 29 years is amore of an open field than during the UCLA era.LOL. In the previous 29 years (1956-84), only 15 different schools won the championship.

2. The tournament has always been open to new blood. Here's a list of the schools who won the championship for the first time in those 29 years:

Villanova
Michigan
UNLV
Duke
Arkansas
Arizona
UConn
Maryland
Syracuse
Florida

3. In the past decade, there was an influx of mid majors making the Final Four whereas UMass was the only one in the previous decade, giving further testimony to a more open tournament.

Butler (twice)
Wichita State
VCU
George Mason

(08-06-2013 12:23 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:56 PM)kardphan Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:38 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:26 PM)kardphan Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:13 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  The major premise of the article is flawed.

It's true that playing Louisville, UConn, & Memphis will help RPI but will only have a significant benefit if the lower teams get some wins over these 3. OTOH, playing the conference's lower tier teams will hurt RPI, negating the benefits of playing the top 3. Bottom line is that the conference's credibility will be established by what they do OOC. They must win those games.

This conference has no guarantee of getting "at least 4 or 5 bids" as Rothstein suggests.

Yes the bottom teams ar pretty bad but uconn, Memphis, temple, and uc has traditionally played solid OOC games. Plus the top 4 will all play each other twice and I get your point but all you have to do is look at how awful the sec and PAC have been with some putrid teams. This league isn't great by any stretch but its not cusa. All the sec has had has been 4 teams. UK, Florida,vandy, and one other team . PAC has been very mediocre with only 2-3 teams worthy of discussion. The AAC is nothing like the former league but I still say its a solid 4 bid league minimum. If the sec somehow can get 5 teams in with only two teams worth a salt then the aac can get 4.

Good points.

The way I see it, the top 3 should make it.

Cincy and SMU have a shot, but both have work to do. I don't see the other 5 in the running.

That's a minimum of 3 with 4 & 5 being "maybe's". That's if all goes well. If one of the top 3 stumbles due to injury or other factor, that "minimum" could shrink because no one else is in position to step up and replace them as would have been the case in the old BE.

To be honest going forward none of this really matters.lol The same 10 to 12 teams which I'm including UConn in this group will continue to battle for the title in the end. I think I read somewhere that since the tourney expanded in 85 only 18 teams have won the title and 8 more than once. Only unlv won outside of a power league and I don't see unlv getting g back to that level anytime soon. This is why I say none of this has any effect on the huskies going forward.

Here's the optimist's spin on that same info.

1. 18 in 29 years is amore of an open field than during the UCLA era.LOL. In the previous 29 years (1956-84), it only 15 different schools won the championship.

2. The tournament has always been open to new blood. Here's a list of the schools who won the championship for the first time in those 29 years:

Villanova
Michigan
UNLV
Duke
Arkansas
Arizona
UConn
Maryland
Syracuse
Florida

3. In the past decade, there was an influx of mid majors making the Final Four whereas UMass was the only one in the previous decade, giving further testimony to a more open tournament.

Butler (twice)
Wichita State
VCU
George Mason

What's crazy is since the field expanded in 85 7 teams have combined to win 70 percent of the titles. 7 teams combined to win it 17 times. UNC, duke, UConn, UK,kansas, Louisville, and Florida. Random stats I know but I thought it was interesting. I know football had a similar scenario. Will be interesting to see if another team from a traditional mid major wins it. Unlv was the last team.

Since 85 duke has had a very impressive run. Same can be said of UConn as well 3 titles in 12 years is insane and very difficult to do. Where as duke had 3 in a 10 year span also crazy.

(08-06-2013 12:47 AM)kardphan Wrote:  Since 85 duke has had a very impressive run. Same can be said of UConn as well 3 titles in 12 years is insane and very difficult to do. Where as duke had 3 in a 10 year span also crazy.

How about North Carolina?

6 Final Fours in 10 years (1991-2000). That's crazy good. I think that only UCLA and Duke have done it.

And then 2 more national titles (2005, 2009) in addition to the one from the previous decade in 1993.

(08-06-2013 12:39 AM)kardphan Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 12:23 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:56 PM)kardphan Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:38 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 11:26 PM)kardphan Wrote:  Yes the bottom teams ar pretty bad but uconn, Memphis, temple, and uc has traditionally played solid OOC games. Plus the top 4 will all play each other twice and I get your point but all you have to do is look at how awful the sec and PAC have been with some putrid teams. This league isn't great by any stretch but its not cusa. All the sec has had has been 4 teams. UK, Florida,vandy, and one other team . PAC has been very mediocre with only 2-3 teams worthy of discussion. The AAC is nothing like the former league but I still say its a solid 4 bid league minimum. If the sec somehow can get 5 teams in with only two teams worth a salt then the aac can get 4.

Good points.

The way I see it, the top 3 should make it.

Cincy and SMU have a shot, but both have work to do. I don't see the other 5 in the running.

That's a minimum of 3 with 4 & 5 being "maybe's". That's if all goes well. If one of the top 3 stumbles due to injury or other factor, that "minimum" could shrink because no one else is in position to step up and replace them as would have been the case in the old BE.

To be honest going forward none of this really matters.lol The same 10 to 12 teams which I'm including UConn in this group will continue to battle for the title in the end. I think I read somewhere that since the tourney expanded in 85 only 18 teams have won the title and 8 more than once. Only unlv won outside of a power league and I don't see unlv getting g back to that level anytime soon. This is why I say none of this has any effect on the huskies going forward.

Here's the optimist's spin on that same info.

1. 18 in 29 years is amore of an open field than during the UCLA era.LOL. In the previous 29 years (1956-84), it only 15 different schools won the championship.

2. The tournament has always been open to new blood. Here's a list of the schools who won the championship for the first time in those 29 years:

Villanova
Michigan
UNLV
Duke
Arkansas
Arizona
UConn
Maryland
Syracuse
Florida

3. In the past decade, there was an influx of mid majors making the Final Four whereas UMass was the only one in the previous decade, giving further testimony to a more open tournament.

Butler (twice)
Wichita State
VCU
George Mason

What's crazy is since the field expanded in 85 7 teams have combined to win 70 percent of the titles. 7 teams combined to win it 17 times. UNC, duke, UConn, UK,kansas, Louisville, and Florida. Random stats I know but I thought it was interesting. I know football had a similar scenario. Will be interesting to see if another team from a traditional mid major wins it. Unlv was the last team.

During the previous 30 years (1955-84), 7 schools repeated as champs, combining to win 22 of 30 titles, an even higher percent.

Of those, San Francisco & NC State have not been heard from again in the Final Four. Cincinnati has been to only 1 Final Four in the past 50 years. None of those 3 has won another title. OTOH, UCLA, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Indiana have gone on to win titles again.

So, some programs continue to be highly successful, some do not.

(08-05-2013 02:20 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Sucks to see UCF last, but I guess this is how memphis fans feel during football season. UCF loses its best player and doesn't really replace him in the middle with any proven commodity, so not totally surprised. I think UCF will finish middle of the pack in the American, but understand most will have reservations until we prove it on the court.

USF knows first hand how good of a player Sykes is though, he destroyed them at their place last year.

4-4 last year in cusa

You clowns will be lucky to win 4 conference basketball games this year...enjoy the cellar.

(08-06-2013 05:39 AM)TigerSeth Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 02:20 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Sucks to see UCF last, but I guess this is how memphis fans feel during football season. UCF loses its best player and doesn't really replace him in the middle with any proven commodity, so not totally surprised. I think UCF will finish middle of the pack in the American, but understand most will have reservations until we prove it on the court.

USF knows first hand how good of a player Sykes is though, he destroyed them at their place last year.

4-4 last year in cusa

You clowns will be lucky to win 4 conference basketball games this year...enjoy the cellar.

4-4 in cusa? LOL if UCF went 4-4 in CUSA i'd consider it an absolute travesty. Im just glad Memphis is coming over, we needed at least one cupcake in the American. Get back to basketball, Memphis has no room to talk about football.

(08-05-2013 11:42 PM)kardphan Wrote:  Again Cincy will be fine their conference schedule is set up for them to win and win big. Playing gtown, nd, and Louisville isn't remotely close to the teams replacing them.

The depth of the old league was just insane. It's why I think everything to preserve the two together would have helped for TV and NCAA credits. But anyway, people always look at the top to compare leagues. The top changes every year, and in any given year any league but the PAC 12 can have 2 top ten teams. What separates the old Big East from any other conference, is how deep you go and find teams locking down 1-4 NCAA seeds and how deep you find teams as the home team in the first round games (i.e. 8 seed or better). In most years, you had 12 teams competing for NCAA spots. I remember one year where Notre Dame was killing everybody OOC, and was a top ten or fifteen team, and got rocked in conference so hard they fell into the NIT. UConn won the title and finished 0.500 in the league, good for ninth place. When you played the tenth ranked team in the league, they beat you.

Every team in the o.Big East had been to the final four in the last 30 years except for USF. 7 of the teams had won titles. It was just ridiculous.

(08-05-2013 11:56 PM)kardphan Wrote:  I think I read somewhere that since the tourney expanded in 85 only 18 teams have won the title and 8 more than once. Only unlv won outside of a power league and I don't see unlv getting g back to that level anytime soon.

Well it should be pointed out though that Louisville won outside of a major conference and Arkansas won a year or two after joining the SEC (i.e. they built their team outside of the power conferences).

(08-06-2013 12:23 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  3. In the past decade, there was an influx of mid majors making the Final Four whereas UMass was the only one in the previous decade, giving further testimony to a more open tournament.

Butler (twice)
Wichita State
VCU
George Mason

I'd point out two things. One, you left out Cincinnati in 92 (GMW), Arkansas in 90 (SWC), and UNLV in 90 and 91. But also none of the teams you mentioned were seeded to make it that far. The best seeding I see there was Butler as a 5 seed , with the rest seeded to lose in the first round (Wichita State, George Mason), the second round (Butler the second time), or not even to make it to the opening weekend (VCU)

(08-06-2013 11:56 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 12:23 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  3. In the past decade, there was an influx of mid majors making the Final Four whereas UMass was the only one in the previous decade, giving further testimony to a more open tournament.

Butler (twice)
Wichita State
VCU
George Mason

I'd point out two things. One, you left out Cincinnati in 92 (GMW), Arkansas in 90 (SWC), and UNLV in 90 and 91. But also none of the teams you mentioned were seeded to make it that far. The best seeding I see there was Butler as a 5 seed , with the rest seeded to lose in the first round (Wichita State, George Mason), the second round (Butler the second time), or not even to make it to the opening weekend (VCU)

He said "in the past decade"; i.e. 2000-2010. Teams from the early 90s didn't make the Final Four in the past decade.

no he said only UMass made it in the previous decade (i.e. 1990 - 1999. Umass made it in 96. But he left out the others.

(08-06-2013 12:16 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  no he said only UMass made it in the previous decade (i.e. 1990 - 1999. Umass made it in 96. But he left out the others.

Ah, my bad

There has been an uptick in past 10 years but when you look at the long term pattern it says something different.
Last 10 years 7 non division 1 football schools made Final Four
10 years prior. Only 2
10 years before 6
10 years before 7
10 years before 9
10 years before 10

That may be a tad unfair. How many of those teams on that list are Big East (C7) teams? Because those were generally considered major conference teams.

(08-06-2013 12:45 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  That may be a tad unfair. How many of those teams on that list are Big East (C7) teams? Because those were generally considered major conference teams.

Which was my point, we will have to see how the C7 do in the future to see if they will suffer from not being allied to a football league. The sat non football school to win the title was in 1985 Villanova, that's 28 years ago. You go back 28 years from that point and there were 4 non football schools winning the title

(08-06-2013 08:02 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 05:39 AM)TigerSeth Wrote:  

(08-05-2013 02:20 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Sucks to see UCF last, but I guess this is how memphis fans feel during football season. UCF loses its best player and doesn't really replace him in the middle with any proven commodity, so not totally surprised. I think UCF will finish middle of the pack in the American, but understand most will have reservations until we prove it on the court.

USF knows first hand how good of a player Sykes is though, he destroyed them at their place last year.

4-4 last year in cusa

You clowns will be lucky to win 4 conference basketball games this year...enjoy the cellar.

4-4 in cusa? LOL if UCF went 4-4 in CUSA i'd consider it an absolute travesty. Im just glad Memphis is coming over, we needed at least one cupcake in the American. Get back to basketball, Memphis has no room to talk about football.

You can talk now.

How did this turn into a UCF vs. Memphis (football) pissing contest?

(08-06-2013 12:52 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(08-06-2013 12:45 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  That may be a tad unfair. How many of those teams on that list are Big East (C7) teams? Because those were generally considered major conference teams.

Which was my point, we will have to see how the C7 do in the future to see if they will suffer from not being allied to a football league.

Well the irony of that is the years they did better, they were not aligned with a "football" league. The years they did worse, they were. Remember Big East football started in 1991.

(08-06-2013 01:13 PM)No Bull Wrote:  How did this turn into a UCF vs. Memphis (football) pissing contest?

Every thread turns into a pissing contest of some sort. And 9 times out of 10 Memphis or ECU fans are on one side of it.