(01-24-2026 09:23 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(01-24-2026 05:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Maybe gosports1 and Bill Marsh will know ...

I watched the last four minutes or so of the PC vs. GU game and heard some booing on multiple occasions. Were the Providence fans fed up?

Obviously, an ugly loss for the Friars.

And a much-needed win for the Hoyas.

I wasn't at the game so i can't confirm the booing. From what i've read on various social media sites the fans have had enough. Granted PC fans, well most fans of things New England, are not a patient bunch. The complainers are very vocal justified or not. Some of the fault lies with the team but i have to remind myself these are 20 year old kids. The coaching staff should shoulder most of the blame. They need to steer and guide this team. How many times do we have to go through the same scenario before the well compensated adults take action and take steps to correct it? As a coach at that level how do you permit this pattern to continue game after game after game?

I didn't watch (was coaching bball), but I would guess given it was vs Cooley, it just made things that much worse.....

That was pretty bad today. Blowing a big lead against UConn you can accept, although be disappointed, because they're one of the top teams in the country. But blowing a second half 20 point lead to a bad Georgetown team, especially when considering the Cooley factor, is simply not acceptable. English reminds me of the Neptune situation with Nova. Both underachieved with respectable talent. Nova made the right decision to move on, I think Providence should do the same.

(01-24-2026 10:08 PM)Traderwill Wrote:  That was pretty bad today. Blowing a big lead against UConn you can accept, although be disappointed, because they're one of the top teams in the country. But blowing a second half 20 point lead to a bad Georgetown team, especially when considering the Cooley factor, is simply not acceptable. English reminds me of the Neptune situation with Nova. Both underachieved with respectable talent. Nova made the right decision to move on, I think Providence should do the same.

It's funny, I was just posting a message in another thread about English and was thinking how similar this feels to the Neptune situation. Feels like we are all in agreement on him needing to go. But as I just posted in the other thread, who do they bring in?

(01-24-2026 10:14 PM)Nameless Wrote:  

(01-24-2026 10:08 PM)Traderwill Wrote:  That was pretty bad today. Blowing a big lead against UConn you can accept, although be disappointed, because they're one of the top teams in the country. But blowing a second half 20 point lead to a bad Georgetown team, especially when considering the Cooley factor, is simply not acceptable. English reminds me of the Neptune situation with Nova. Both underachieved with respectable talent. Nova made the right decision to move on, I think Providence should do the same.

It's funny, I was just posting a message in another thread about English and was thinking how similar this feels to the Neptune situation. Feels like we are all in agreement on him needing to go. But as I just posted in the other thread, who do they bring in?

And that’s the problem. Villanova could roll the dice and fire Neptune because . . . they’re Villanova. They came up smelling like roses when they landed Kevin Willard. But the Kevin Willards of the world are not coming to PC. It would probably be someone like Tim Welsh, bringing years of mediocrity.

(01-24-2026 10:41 PM)Bill Marsh Wrote:  

(01-24-2026 10:14 PM)Nameless Wrote:  

(01-24-2026 10:08 PM)Traderwill Wrote:  That was pretty bad today. Blowing a big lead against UConn you can accept, although be disappointed, because they're one of the top teams in the country. But blowing a second half 20 point lead to a bad Georgetown team, especially when considering the Cooley factor, is simply not acceptable. English reminds me of the Neptune situation with Nova. Both underachieved with respectable talent. Nova made the right decision to move on, I think Providence should do the same.

It's funny, I was just posting a message in another thread about English and was thinking how similar this feels to the Neptune situation. Feels like we are all in agreement on him needing to go. But as I just posted in the other thread, who do they bring in?

And that’s the problem. Villanova could roll the dice and fire Neptune because . . . they’re Villanova. They came up smelling like roses when they landed Kevin Willard. But the Kevin Willards of the world are not coming to PC. It would probably be someone like Tim Welsh, bringing years of mediocrity.

I heard from a reliable source that PC was seriously going to bring Rick Pitino back after Cooley but Pitino told them news was going to break about him and he didnt want PC to be associated with his baggage. Not sure if that is fact or legend. Maybe Georgetown will fire Cooley and he can come back?

(01-24-2026 09:23 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(01-24-2026 05:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Maybe gosports1 and Bill Marsh will know ...

I watched the last four minutes or so of the PC vs. GU game and heard some booing on multiple occasions. Were the Providence fans fed up?

Obviously, an ugly loss for the Friars.

And a much-needed win for the Hoyas.

I wasn't at the game so i can't confirm the booing. From what i've read on various social media sites the fans have had enough. Granted PC fans, well most fans of things New England, are not a patient bunch. The complainers are very vocal justified or not. Some of the fault lies with the team but i have to remind myself these are 20 year old kids. The coaching staff should shoulder most of the blame. They need to steer and guide this team. How many times do we have to go through the same scenario before the well compensated adults take action and take steps to correct it? As a coach at that level how do you permit this pattern to continue game after game after game?

Generally speaking (and with any team/program in any sport), in situations of this type, the coaching staff deserves the bulk of the blame.

(01-25-2026 09:01 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  

(01-24-2026 10:41 PM)Bill Marsh Wrote:  

(01-24-2026 10:14 PM)Nameless Wrote:  

(01-24-2026 10:08 PM)Traderwill Wrote:  That was pretty bad today. Blowing a big lead against UConn you can accept, although be disappointed, because they're one of the top teams in the country. But blowing a second half 20 point lead to a bad Georgetown team, especially when considering the Cooley factor, is simply not acceptable. English reminds me of the Neptune situation with Nova. Both underachieved with respectable talent. Nova made the right decision to move on, I think Providence should do the same.

It's funny, I was just posting a message in another thread about English and was thinking how similar this feels to the Neptune situation. Feels like we are all in agreement on him needing to go. But as I just posted in the other thread, who do they bring in?

And that’s the problem. Villanova could roll the dice and fire Neptune because . . . they’re Villanova. They came up smelling like roses when they landed Kevin Willard. But the Kevin Willards of the world are not coming to PC. It would probably be someone like Tim Welsh, bringing years of mediocrity.

I heard from a reliable source that PC was seriously going to bring Rick Pitino back after Cooley but Pitino told them news was going to break about him and he didnt want PC to be associated with his baggage. Not sure if that is fact or legend. Maybe Georgetown will fire Cooley and he can come back?

Cooley is not coming back. His family situation dictates otherwise.

I didn't even see this, but Lunardi was making the case in the latest bracketology that the new Pac may surpass the Big East next year. I don't see it in terms of overall strength, but they may challenge the league in terms of bids on a yearly basis.

"It's hard not to notice the declining number of at-large bids outside the power conferences. At the same time, the majority of those bids are coming from schools that, next season, will comprise the new Pac-12. Led by Gonzaga and San Diego State, the new Pac-12 will immediately chase, and perhaps surpass, the Big East in both total bids and percentage of teams making the NCAA tournament. Interestingly, both groups have each collected 22 bids since 2020. UConn has its two national titles, but the Zags and SDSU have both played in the title game, and the new Pac-12 will have achieved its total with two fewer schools. It's worth monitoring, especially if the Pac-12 eventually adds Saint Mary's -- by far the best "free agent" basketball school. The Big East would be hard pressed to compete when it comes to tourney bids (the Gaels have had four straight, with seeds of 5, 5, 5, 7) or revenue units." https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/...redictions

I just hope they don't try to use this narrative to argue the leagues are "tweener leagues" like they used to with the AAC.

(01-25-2026 09:38 PM)Nameless Wrote:  I didn't even see this, but Lunardi was making the case in the latest bracketology that the new Pac may surpass the Big East next year. I don't see it in terms of overall strength, but they may challenge the league in terms of bids on a yearly basis.

"It's hard not to notice the declining number of at-large bids outside the power conferences. At the same time, the majority of those bids are coming from schools that, next season, will comprise the new Pac-12. Led by Gonzaga and San Diego State, the new Pac-12 will immediately chase, and perhaps surpass, the Big East in both total bids and percentage of teams making the NCAA tournament. Interestingly, both groups have each collected 22 bids since 2020. UConn has its two national titles, but the Zags and SDSU have both played in the title game, and the new Pac-12 will have achieved its total with two fewer schools. It's worth monitoring, especially if the Pac-12 eventually adds Saint Mary's -- by far the best "free agent" basketball school. The Big East would be hard pressed to compete when it comes to tourney bids (the Gaels have had four straight, with seeds of 5, 5, 5, 7) or revenue units." https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/...redictions

I just hope they don't try to use this narrative to argue the leagues are "tweener leagues" like they used to with the AAC.

I read the article. The future PAC (particularly if it lands Saint Mary's) will be a very solid league. It's one reason I'd like to see Memphis join the PAC. But "as good" as the Big East? I don't see it.

Both the Pac and the Big East will face the same challenge as it relates to success and positive perception compared to the all-sports P4: Lack of numbers. We've discussed this topic on the board.

Lunardi update:
UConn 4
St JOhn's 20
Villanova in (not shown)

Seton Hall 1st team out
Creighton 7th team out
Butler 9th team out

(01-26-2026 10:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Lunardi update:
UConn 4
St JOhn's 20
Villanova in (not shown)

Seton Hall 1st team out
Creighton 7th team out
Butler 9th team out

I have to imagine one of those 3 just outside makes it in once all is said and done. I know Nova isn't shown but I'm assuming we are tracking for a 1, 5 and 7 seed with the 3 teams currently in the field.

(01-26-2026 09:43 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(01-25-2026 09:38 PM)Nameless Wrote:  I didn't even see this, but Lunardi was making the case in the latest bracketology that the new Pac may surpass the Big East next year. I don't see it in terms of overall strength, but they may challenge the league in terms of bids on a yearly basis.

"It's hard not to notice the declining number of at-large bids outside the power conferences. At the same time, the majority of those bids are coming from schools that, next season, will comprise the new Pac-12. Led by Gonzaga and San Diego State, the new Pac-12 will immediately chase, and perhaps surpass, the Big East in both total bids and percentage of teams making the NCAA tournament. Interestingly, both groups have each collected 22 bids since 2020. UConn has its two national titles, but the Zags and SDSU have both played in the title game, and the new Pac-12 will have achieved its total with two fewer schools. It's worth monitoring, especially if the Pac-12 eventually adds Saint Mary's -- by far the best "free agent" basketball school. The Big East would be hard pressed to compete when it comes to tourney bids (the Gaels have had four straight, with seeds of 5, 5, 5, 7) or revenue units." https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/...redictions

I just hope they don't try to use this narrative to argue the leagues are "tweener leagues" like they used to with the AAC.

I read the article. The future PAC (particularly if it lands Saint Mary's) will be a very solid league. It's one reason I'd like to see Memphis join the PAC. But "as good" as the Big East? I don't see it.

Both the Pac and the Big East will face the same challenge as it relates to success and positive perception compared to the all-sports P4: Lack of numbers. We've discussed this topic on the board.

St. Mary’s will not be invited to join the new PAC, IMHO. Lunardi is viewing this from the POV of a basketball fan and he’s making the same mistake we fans always make: he’s ignoring the business side of the league.

St. Mary’s presents multiple problems as a potential league member:

1. Even at the peak of their success, they drew fewer than 3000 fans (2972) per game last year. That’s not viable.
2. They could theoretically move home games to the Oakland Coliseum 15 miles away. But they have no history of playing there, so there is no ready made fan base for ticket sales.
3. They are a small school with an enrollment under 2000, so there’s not a big alumni base ready to buy tickets and support the team.
4. Randy Bennett, who’s now 63 years old, has turned them into a power, but before he did they only had 3 winning seasons in 14 years. What happens to that program after he’s gone? Not a long history of success there.

When the Big East took on schools like Marquette and later Creighton, they were already drawing big crowds. DePaul, Butler, and Xavier were embedded in the heart of big cities with the potential to draw big crowds, which they had already doing to some extent, and the location for recruiting top players.

(01-26-2026 10:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Lunardi update:
UConn 4
St JOhn's 20
Villanova in (not shown)

Seton Hall 1st team out
Creighton 7th team out
Butler 9th team out

So, this is just a post updating his latest bracket which came out on Friday. He mentions teams which were significantly affected by results over the weekend. Since Villanova is not mentioned I’m thinking that their road loss to #2 UConn does not significantly change their 6-seed where he had them on Friday.

(01-26-2026 12:20 PM)Bill Marsh Wrote:  

(01-26-2026 09:43 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(01-25-2026 09:38 PM)Nameless Wrote:  I didn't even see this, but Lunardi was making the case in the latest bracketology that the new Pac may surpass the Big East next year. I don't see it in terms of overall strength, but they may challenge the league in terms of bids on a yearly basis.

"It's hard not to notice the declining number of at-large bids outside the power conferences. At the same time, the majority of those bids are coming from schools that, next season, will comprise the new Pac-12. Led by Gonzaga and San Diego State, the new Pac-12 will immediately chase, and perhaps surpass, the Big East in both total bids and percentage of teams making the NCAA tournament. Interestingly, both groups have each collected 22 bids since 2020. UConn has its two national titles, but the Zags and SDSU have both played in the title game, and the new Pac-12 will have achieved its total with two fewer schools. It's worth monitoring, especially if the Pac-12 eventually adds Saint Mary's -- by far the best "free agent" basketball school. The Big East would be hard pressed to compete when it comes to tourney bids (the Gaels have had four straight, with seeds of 5, 5, 5, 7) or revenue units." https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/...redictions

I just hope they don't try to use this narrative to argue the leagues are "tweener leagues" like they used to with the AAC.

I read the article. The future PAC (particularly if it lands Saint Mary's) will be a very solid league. It's one reason I'd like to see Memphis join the PAC. But "as good" as the Big East? I don't see it.

Both the Pac and the Big East will face the same challenge as it relates to success and positive perception compared to the all-sports P4: Lack of numbers. We've discussed this topic on the board.

St. Mary’s will not be invited to join the new PAC, IMHO. Lunardi is viewing this from the POV of a basketball fan and he’s making the same mistake we fans always make: he’s ignoring the business side of the league.

St. Mary’s presents multiple problems as a potential league member:

1. Even at the peak of their success, they drew fewer than 3000 fans (2972) per game last year. That’s not viable.
2. They could theoretically move home games to the Oakland Coliseum 15 miles away. But they have no history of playing there, so there is no ready made fan base for ticket sales.
3. They are a small school with an enrollment under 2000, so there’s not a big alumni base ready to buy tickets and support the team.
4. Randy Bennett, who’s now 63 years old, has turned them into a power, but before he did they only had 3 winning seasons in 14 years. What happens to that program after he’s gone? Not a long history of success there.

When the Big East took on schools like Marquette and later Creighton, they were already drawing big crowds. DePaul, Butler, and Xavier were embedded in the heart of big cities with the potential to draw big crowds, which they had already doing to some extent, and the location for recruiting top players.

I agree with you that the chances of the Pac inviting Saint Mary's are modest.

But my take is the Lunardi is essentially suggesting that (SMU or not) if, say, over the next 10 years (and not based on the history of individual programs as the BE is MUCH more impressive than the future Pac in that regard), the Big East and the Pac both average 3.5 to four teams per NCAA tourney (and I strongly feel the BE will have a better shot at that number than the Pac), fans and the media might start "classifying" the two leagues in the same category.

If that unfolds (and who knows if it will?), will the Pac be consider a "power" league in hoops like the BE. Or will both the Pac and Big East be grouped in a "special tier" below the all-sports P4 and that is considered "high major" but not "power"? In other words, if the Pac achieves a similar level of success as the Big East in the future (and, again, I don't anticipate this happening), how do we (fans and media) assess and address that?

It's an interesting topic.

I saw the PAC line by Lunardi as well. I mean, going off the past 30 years:

Boise State (6), Colorado State (6), Fresno State (2), Oregon State (2), Texas State (1) and Washington State (3) have made a combined 20 NCAAT. That's less than one team per year, on-average. The league will absolutely be led by Gonzaga, San Diego State and (to a lesser extent) Utah State, IMO. Gonzaga and SDSU should make (or compete for) the NCAAT every year, and Utah State should in most years. Maybe one of those previously mentioned ones will also get in (but not every year, based on historical numbers). In a given year, if the PAC gets four teams, that is huge.

Now, compared to the Big East - a down year is when we only get four teams in (and that has to be when we don't win in non-con and then cannibalize each other in conference play; not to mention a year where any program is having a historic bad season - cough, cough, Marquette).

The new Pac is a multi-bid league, sure. But is it on-par or able to steal bids from the Big East? I don't think there is overlap with either of those statements, IMO. Basketball-wise, I hope the PAC can get a St. Mary's or a Memphis. I think that absolutely helps their league. But with only nine teams and six of those programs historically being non-NCAAT competitive? Yeah, very little room for error.

Yes, Bill, it is a very interesting topic. Frankly I hope that the PAC schools are successful.

The big change in college basketball is that the SEC and the Big XII schools have become interested in basketball. The core of these leagues were historically laser focused on football. The only teams who cared about hoops were Kentucky in the SEC and Kansas in the Big XII. Maybe it’s the money that can mow be made in basketball the has changed everything, but in the last 5 years alone SEC football powers Florida, Alabama, and Auburn have all gone to the Final 4 and Tennessee & Arkansas have both gone to multiple Elite 8’s. Adding Houston has brought another basketball-first school into the Big XII, but Baylor, Texas Tech, and K Statehave all gotten as far as the Elite 8 just in the last few years. So, clearly there’s a lot more competition for tournament spots among schools who take the sport a lot more seriously.

My concern for the Big East is for the Catholic schools + Butler who bonded to form this new version of the league. The addition of UConn and the success of Villanova has masked the fact that the rest of the league hasn’t been as successful as we might have hoped. UConn might be just a temporary interloper and Villanova isn’t the same without Jay Wright.

I don’t think that most casual fans pay much attention to how many teams make the tournament. Of the 68 teams getting in, 52 are gone and forgotten after the first weekend. People tend to remember championships, Final Fours, and maybe Elite 8’s but not much more than that.

The Big East made such a big splash in its first decade of existence back in the 1980s because of Georgetown’s 3 championship games but also because 5 other Big East teams made it to the Final Four in that decade and 3 of them were in championship games where they won or lost by 1 point.

Villanova and UConn have maintained the championship pedigree over the past decade, but no one else had made it to a Final Four and only Creighton & Xavier have made it to an isolated Elite 8 in the refurbished Big East. Take away UConn, which could happen at any time, and what do we have left?

(01-26-2026 12:35 PM)Bill Marsh Wrote:  

(01-26-2026 10:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Lunardi update:
UConn 4
St JOhn's 20
Villanova in (not shown)

Seton Hall 1st team out
Creighton 7th team out
Butler 9th team out

So, this is just a post updating his latest bracket which came out on Friday. He mentions teams which were significantly affected by results over the weekend. Since Villanova is not mentioned I’m thinking that their road loss to #2 UConn does not significantly change their 6-seed where he had them on Friday.

correct- though he posted a seed list before the game on Saturday, and Nova was #24. So just 1 spot drop and they're a 7 seed. And looking, 2 teams on the 7 seed line got good wins with Kentucky vs Ole Miss and especially Tennessee at Alabama.

(01-26-2026 01:28 PM)Bill Marsh Wrote:  Yes, Bill, it is a very interesting topic. Frankly I hope that the PAC schools are successful.

The big change in college basketball is that the SEC and the Big XII schools have become interested in basketball. The core of these leagues were historically laser focused on football. The only teams who cared about hoops were Kentucky in the SEC and Kansas in the Big XII. Maybe it’s the money that can mow be made in basketball the has changed everything, but in the last 5 years alone SEC football powers Florida, Alabama, and Auburn have all gone to the Final 4 and Tennessee & Arkansas have both gone to multiple Elite 8’s. Adding Houston has brought another basketball-first school into the Big XII, but Baylor, Texas Tech, and K Statehave all gotten as far as the Elite 8 just in the last few years. So, clearly there’s a lot more competition for tournament spots among schools who take the sport a lot more seriously.

My concern for the Big East is for the Catholic schools + Butler who bonded to form this new version of the league. The addition of UConn and the success of Villanova has masked the fact that the rest of the league hasn’t been as successful as we might have hoped. UConn might be just a temporary interloper and Villanova isn’t the same without Jay Wright.

I don’t think that most casual fans pay much attention to how many teams make the tournament. Of the 68 teams getting in, 52 are gone and forgotten after the first weekend. People tend to remember championships, Final Fours, and maybe Elite 8’s but not much more than that.

The Big East made such a big splash in its first decade of existence back in the 1980s because of Georgetown’s 3 championship games but also because 5 other Big East teams made it to the Final Four in that decade and 3 of them were in championship games where they won or lost by 1 point.

Villanova and UConn have maintained the championship pedigree over the past decade, but no one else had made it to a Final Four and only Creighton & Xavier have made it to an isolated Elite 8 in the refurbished Big East. Take away UConn, which could happen at any time, and what do we have left?

You note some valid concerns, Bill.

I feel optimistic the Big East will be fine in the long term. Time will tell.

(01-26-2026 05:51 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-26-2026 12:35 PM)Bill Marsh Wrote:  

(01-26-2026 10:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Lunardi update:
UConn 4
St JOhn's 20
Villanova in (not shown)

Seton Hall 1st team out
Creighton 7th team out
Butler 9th team out

So, this is just a post updating his latest bracket which came out on Friday. He mentions teams which were significantly affected by results over the weekend. Since Villanova is not mentioned I’m thinking that their road loss to #2 UConn does not significantly change their 6-seed where he had them on Friday.

correct- though he posted a seed list before the game on Saturday, and Nova was #24. So just 1 spot drop and they're a 7 seed. And looking, 2 teams on the 7 seed line got good wins with Kentucky vs Ole Miss and especially Tennessee at Alabama.

Thanks for the update, Stever.

Jerry Palm does his own bracketology. His latest update came out today:

2-seed (East) - UConn
6-seed (South) - St. John’s
8- seed (South) - Villanova