(10-28-2013 12:45 PM)billyjack Wrote:  Steve,
A team can finish 8-10 in conference and still make the NCAA tourney. I had a post a while back that broke down the numbers in the old 9-team Big East.

The numbers showed something like:
100% of BE teams over .500 made the NCAAs.
90% of teams at .500 made the NCAAs (only 1 team didn't make NCAAs at .500, BC in '84 when tourney was only 48 teams).
50% of teams who finished 2 games under (7-9) made the NCAAs. (like, 4 of 8).
0% of teams 4 games under (6-10) made the NCAAs. (might've been 0 of 6).

Also, you cannot dismiss Ken Pomeroy putting us as the 2nd best conference, ahead of the ACC. Ken Pom is basically the most trusted name in projections like this. Repeat, do not dismiss Ken Pom.

Also, repeating from above... 100% of Big East teams finishing at .500 or better made the NCAAs during the 9-team years in the 64 team tourney. 100%...! 100%...!

Also, 50% of teams 2-games under made the NCAAs...! 50%...! Half...! Half...!!!

The Big East was also much larger in the past and the top 10 teams were probably rated much higher than the current 10 teams. You're comparing apples to oranges due to a completely different makeup of the conference today vs. previous years.

The old 9 team big east bares nothing to the new 10 team big east. It just doesn't... For one- in the 80's, there wasn't a 15 team ACC, 12(soon to be 14 team) Big Ten, 14 team SEC, etc. Just in those 3 conferences, instead of 28 teams, there's now going to be 43 teams. That equals a lot more teams going from there, taking from conferences that would have gotten more back then.

Guess if we have to respect Ken Pom, that means that the AAC is #4 conference.

(10-28-2013 01:11 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The old 9 team big east bares nothing to the new 10 team big east. It just doesn't... For one- in the 80's, there wasn't a 15 team ACC, 12(soon to be 14 team) Big Ten, 14 team SEC, etc. Just in those 3 conferences, instead of 28 teams, there's now going to be 43 teams. That equals a lot more teams going from there, taking from conferences that would have gotten more back then.

Guess if we have to respect Ken Pom, that means that the AAC is #4 conference.

Considering the AAC has Louisville, Memphis, UConn and Cincinnati, I think #4 is fairly accurate. That will change next year, though, when Louisville moves to the ACC.

(10-28-2013 01:11 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The old 9 team big east bares nothing to the new 10 team big east. It just doesn't... For one- in the 80's, there wasn't a 15 team ACC, 12(soon to be 14 team) Big Ten, 14 team SEC, etc. Just in those 3 conferences, instead of 28 teams, there's now going to be 43 teams. That equals a lot more teams going from there, taking from conferences that would have gotten more back then.

Guess if we have to respect Ken Pom, that means that the AAC is #4 conference.

We've discussed this already. It's like there's a 2-month reset button on this board.

The additional teams in the ACC, Big Ten, SEC, etc, are basically coming from dissolved conferences... so to counter the 15 ACC team setup, there is now no Metro, Big-8/Southwest Conference, and almost no Independents. We determined that it's a wash.

Saying that the 2014 Big East "just doesn't" bare resemblance to the 1991 Big East is not a convincing argument... not when half the teams are the same entities and the other half are traditional rivals to them.

Wolfpack,
I was giving numbers only from the years when the Big East had 9 teams... the 9 seasons from 1983 thru 1991. Miami of Florida's entrance in '92 messed things up as they initially stunk and hurt the BE's RPI, etc..

not really....
Metro= AAC
Big 8/SWC=Big 12

also- A10 back then was a 1 bid conference. Not so much now.

Independents- even back in 1990- they were vanishing. There were 19, but only 1, Notre Dame, made the tourney.

the new teams may be traditional rivals, but they aren't Syracuse, UConn, Pitt, BC either. Also, the old teams aren't at the same level as they used to be(Georgetown, Villanova, St John's, Providence, Seton Hall- all 5 of whom made final 4's in the last half of the period you're referring to). St John's, Providence, Seton Hall aren't remotely close to where they were in the 80's, and really neither is Georgetown(just because of the insane level they were in the 80's). Only Nova is close.

also, a team like Villanova in '90-'91 at 16-14 never makes the tourney now. The committee is much different now than it used to be. Heck a Georgetown same year at 14-12 is out as well.

and bottom line- in the 9 years you refer to- how many ff teams did the big east have? I come up with 7- with several teams losing as well elite 8. The top of the conference was way stronger back then than they are now. That lifts the bubble teams into the tourney. Remains to be seen if that happens now. You just can't use the numbers from 83-91 and just automatically assume that's the case now. The committee is too different and the other conferences are too different to do that.

(10-28-2013 02:14 PM)billyjack Wrote:  Wolfpack,
I was giving numbers only from the years when the Big East had 9 teams... the 9 seasons from 1983 thru 1991. Miami of Florida's entrance in '92 messed things up as they initially stunk and hurt the BE's RPI, etc..

Got it. Still, you are comparing a selection process 20+ years ago to the selection process today. To me, that's still comparing apples to oranges.

Personally, I can't see how Ken Pomeroy can put the Big East ahead of the ACC in conference ranking. Based on the Coaches poll, the ACC has 5 teams ranked in the top 25 and the Big East has 1. Based on the Coaches poll, below is a breakdown of # of schools included by conference:
Big 10 - 5 (3 in top 15)
ACC - 5 (3 in top 15)
Pack 12 - 3 (1 in top 15)
AAC - 3 (2 in top 15)
SEC - 2 (2 in top 15)
Big East - 1 (0 in top 15)

I'm sorry. Pomeroy placing the Big East at #2 just doesn't pass the "eye" test based on the Coaches poll pre-season predictions.

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle there. Not as good as Ken Pom, but not as bad as the coaches poll would indicate. Think part of things quite frankly are that the talent in the Big East isn't necessarily at the top- but rather the middle. It's an extremely deep league already. Nothing "great" at the top, but outside of maybe DePaul nothing "awful" at the bottom either. It's the age old question, is it parity or is it mediocrity?

Even with Pomeroy, look at the ratings. He's got St Johns at 47 and that's right on the bubble, then teams 7-10 at 53 57 63 84. That's great for overall ratings, but not as great for getting teams into the tourney. He's got for the ACC 7 teams making the tourney easily, then Maryland is 44. That'd be 8 teams getting in.

The thing with Maryland and Providence(along with St John's) the margin is so razor thin that 1-2 things go differently- that impacts them a lot.

(10-28-2013 01:08 PM)Wolfpack Ram Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 12:45 PM)billyjack Wrote:  Steve,
A team can finish 8-10 in conference and still make the NCAA tourney. I had a post a while back that broke down the numbers in the old 9-team Big East.

The numbers showed something like:
100% of BE teams over .500 made the NCAAs.
90% of teams at .500 made the NCAAs (only 1 team didn't make NCAAs at .500, BC in '84 when tourney was only 48 teams).
50% of teams who finished 2 games under (7-9) made the NCAAs. (like, 4 of 8).
0% of teams 4 games under (6-10) made the NCAAs. (might've been 0 of 6).

Also, you cannot dismiss Ken Pomeroy putting us as the 2nd best conference, ahead of the ACC. Ken Pom is basically the most trusted name in projections like this. Repeat, do not dismiss Ken Pom.

Also, repeating from above... 100% of Big East teams finishing at .500 or better made the NCAAs during the 9-team years in the 64 team tourney. 100%...! 100%...!

Also, 50% of teams 2-games under made the NCAAs...! 50%...! Half...! Half...!!!

The Big East was also much larger in the past and the top 10 teams were probably rated much higher than the current 10 teams. You're comparing apples to oranges due to a completely different makeup of the conference today vs. previous years.

Back when the Big East was a 9 team conference, they had years when as many as 7 of the 9 teams made the NCAA tournament. Fewer teams actually works in a conference's favor IMO.

fewer teams is higher risk/reward. If you have fewer teams and 1-2 are off early unexpectedly, it's not good.

(10-28-2013 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  not really....
Metro= AAC
Big 8/SWC=Big 12

also- A10 back then was a 1 bid conference. Not so much now.

Independents- even back in 1990- they were vanishing. There were 19, but only 1, Notre Dame, made the tourney.

the new teams may be traditional rivals, but they aren't Syracuse, UConn, Pitt, BC either. Also, the old teams aren't at the same level as they used to be(Georgetown, Villanova, St John's, Providence, Seton Hall- all 5 of whom made final 4's in the last half of the period you're referring to). St John's, Providence, Seton Hall aren't remotely close to where they were in the 80's, and really neither is Georgetown(just because of the insane level they were in the 80's). Only Nova is close.

The AAC absolutely does not equal the old Metro. Check the membership. An argument can be made for CUSA, but now there's a new CUSA.

The Big 8 + SWC = Big XII means that there were once 2 conferences where now there are one. Then loss of 4 teams from the Big XII also negates this as transferable - especially with the addition of West Virginia.

What level the new Big East teams will achieve remains to be seen. They are certainly collectively at a higher level than these same teams were at coming into the old Big East in 1979.

The AAC is definitely better than the Metro was during the period when VCU was in the Metro. Louisville was, at best, a top 15 team at that point and probably closer to top 20. Tulane was also decent back then, but the conference was no way as deep as the AAC is this year with Louisville, UConn and Memphis ranked and Louisville basically a top 5 team.

The Metro I think a lot of ways is remembered a lot better than they really were. I mean, 1 year, they didn't have a team make the tourney even! Had 2 years where 4 teams made it, but then several others with 2 or 1. In the last 10 years of the league, they averaged 2.4 bids per year. The other 10, 2 bids per year. So not like they were really remarkable. So yes, I definitely would put the AAC in the exact same boat as the Metro- if anything, I'd put the AAC as better than the old Metro.

(10-28-2013 04:44 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  not really....
Metro= AAC
Big 8/SWC=Big 12

also- A10 back then was a 1 bid conference. Not so much now.

Independents- even back in 1990- they were vanishing. There were 19, but only 1, Notre Dame, made the tourney.

the new teams may be traditional rivals, but they aren't Syracuse, UConn, Pitt, BC either. Also, the old teams aren't at the same level as they used to be(Georgetown, Villanova, St John's, Providence, Seton Hall- all 5 of whom made final 4's in the last half of the period you're referring to). St John's, Providence, Seton Hall aren't remotely close to where they were in the 80's, and really neither is Georgetown(just because of the insane level they were in the 80's). Only Nova is close.

The AAC absolutely does not equal the old Metro. Check the membership. An argument can be made for CUSA, but now there's a new CUSA.

The Big 8 + SWC = Big XII means that there were once 2 conferences where now there are one. Then loss of 4 teams from the Big XII also negates this as transferable - especially with the addition of West Virginia.

What level the new Big East teams will achieve remains to be seen. They are certainly collectively at a higher level than these same teams were at coming into the old Big East in 1979.

maybe 79, but by the period of 83, the Big East was already at a higher level than they're at now. I mean, Georgetown had a final 4, and in '82 not only did the Hoyas make the final game, but BC and Villanova made regional finals.

(10-28-2013 05:14 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 04:44 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  not really....
Metro= AAC
Big 8/SWC=Big 12

also- A10 back then was a 1 bid conference. Not so much now.

Independents- even back in 1990- they were vanishing. There were 19, but only 1, Notre Dame, made the tourney.

the new teams may be traditional rivals, but they aren't Syracuse, UConn, Pitt, BC either. Also, the old teams aren't at the same level as they used to be(Georgetown, Villanova, St John's, Providence, Seton Hall- all 5 of whom made final 4's in the last half of the period you're referring to). St John's, Providence, Seton Hall aren't remotely close to where they were in the 80's, and really neither is Georgetown(just because of the insane level they were in the 80's). Only Nova is close.

The AAC absolutely does not equal the old Metro. Check the membership. An argument can be made for CUSA, but now there's a new CUSA.

The Big 8 + SWC = Big XII means that there were once 2 conferences where now there are one. Then loss of 4 teams from the Big XII also negates this as transferable - especially with the addition of West Virginia.

What level the new Big East teams will achieve remains to be seen. They are certainly collectively at a higher level than these same teams were at coming into the old Big East in 1979.

maybe 79, but by the period of 83, the Big East was already at a higher level than they're at now. I mean, Georgetown had a final 4, and in '82 not only did the Hoyas make the final game, but BC and Villanova made regional finals.

My point is that you're saying what the new BE teams are and are not. What they've been up to this point is irrelevant - just as what the Big East teams were prior to '79-'80 was irrelevant as to what they became.

(10-28-2013 10:11 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 05:14 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 04:44 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  not really....
Metro= AAC
Big 8/SWC=Big 12

also- A10 back then was a 1 bid conference. Not so much now.

Independents- even back in 1990- they were vanishing. There were 19, but only 1, Notre Dame, made the tourney.

the new teams may be traditional rivals, but they aren't Syracuse, UConn, Pitt, BC either. Also, the old teams aren't at the same level as they used to be(Georgetown, Villanova, St John's, Providence, Seton Hall- all 5 of whom made final 4's in the last half of the period you're referring to). St John's, Providence, Seton Hall aren't remotely close to where they were in the 80's, and really neither is Georgetown(just because of the insane level they were in the 80's). Only Nova is close.

The AAC absolutely does not equal the old Metro. Check the membership. An argument can be made for CUSA, but now there's a new CUSA.

The Big 8 + SWC = Big XII means that there were once 2 conferences where now there are one. Then loss of 4 teams from the Big XII also negates this as transferable - especially with the addition of West Virginia.

What level the new Big East teams will achieve remains to be seen. They are certainly collectively at a higher level than these same teams were at coming into the old Big East in 1979.

maybe 79, but by the period of 83, the Big East was already at a higher level than they're at now. I mean, Georgetown had a final 4, and in '82 not only did the Hoyas make the final game, but BC and Villanova made regional finals.

My point is that you're saying what the new BE teams are and are not. What they've been up to this point is irrelevant - just as what the Big East teams were prior to '79-'80 was irrelevant as to what they became.

it's a lot different world now than what '79-'80 was. My point is you can't use the statistics from 83-91 about .500 teams etc. and just extrapolate that to now. That's totally irrelevant as well. We have no idea how the committee will view us To just blindly say because of what happened 20-30 years ago that's how it's going to happen now- that's foolish.

No, you made a definitive claim that a .500 team or less cannot make then NCAAs, and tossed some numbers and records around. I simply reminded you that, in fact, there are pathways to earning NCAA bids in a 10-team conference while being under .500... just as we did years ago before football schools came on the scene.

Plus, I'm not sure how much the landscape has really changed in the last 22 years, something you have a tendency to repeat. Our schools' student bodies were just a small today as they were 22 years ago. Giant state football schools still roamed the earth back then too, with just as much clout.

Very few teams sub .500 make the tourney. Slightly more at .500 make the tourney. But you can't take the numbers you were spouting out as the absolute truth.

To say the football schools have the exact same clout today as they did 22 years ago- that's a joke. They've been getting more and more and more.

1990-next year
ACC 8-15 +7
B10 10-14 +4
B8/12 8-10 +2
P10/12 10-12 +2
SEC 10-14 +4
BE 9-10 +1
SWC 9-0 -9
Metro 8-0 -8
AAC 0-10 +10
WAC/MWC 9-11 +2
81 teams in the conferences back then
96 now. Add the 13 from the A10 and it's 109.

so it's about 35% more teams in the top conferences than we had back in the day.

(10-28-2013 05:14 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 04:44 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-28-2013 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  not really....
Metro= AAC
Big 8/SWC=Big 12

also- A10 back then was a 1 bid conference. Not so much now.

Independents- even back in 1990- they were vanishing. There were 19, but only 1, Notre Dame, made the tourney.

the new teams may be traditional rivals, but they aren't Syracuse, UConn, Pitt, BC either. Also, the old teams aren't at the same level as they used to be(Georgetown, Villanova, St John's, Providence, Seton Hall- all 5 of whom made final 4's in the last half of the period you're referring to). St John's, Providence, Seton Hall aren't remotely close to where they were in the 80's, and really neither is Georgetown(just because of the insane level they were in the 80's). Only Nova is close.

The AAC absolutely does not equal the old Metro. Check the membership. An argument can be made for CUSA, but now there's a new CUSA.

The Big 8 + SWC = Big XII means that there were once 2 conferences where now there are one. Then loss of 4 teams from the Big XII also negates this as transferable - especially with the addition of West Virginia.

What level the new Big East teams will achieve remains to be seen. They are certainly collectively at a higher level than these same teams were at coming into the old Big East in 1979.

maybe 79, but by the period of 83, the Big East was already at a higher level than they're at now. I mean, Georgetown had a final 4, and in '82 not only did the Hoyas make the final game, but BC and Villanova made regional finals.

I agree. But that's because the Big East landed Patrick Ewing and Chris Mullin after the league was formed. That's not who they were going in. Who knows what this version of the Gig East will be by its 3rd season? The C7 have been recruiting like mad, much better than they have in years. St. John's is no longer the program of the past decade. Rushed Jordan May be to this St. John's program what Mullin was to the one 30 years ago. Providence, another dormant franchise, is primed to take off. Kris Dunn is their 5-star who might lead the program out of the wilderness.

We won't know what this program will become by looking in the rear view mirror and then eliminating programs like Butler just because they've been going through changes. We can only tell where they're going by looking ahead.

The Georgetown program that was so dominant in the '80's had only been to one Final Four in their history before Patrick Ewing and that was 38 years befor the Big east was formed. St. John's had only been to one Final Four, 27 years earlier. Villanova had been to one fairly recently, but it had been vacated. Syracuse had been to one recently, but it was the only one in school history and it was under a different coach, not under the unproven young Jim Boeheim. Seton Hall, BC, and UConn had never had success atthe Final Four level.

If we were applying your standards to the original Big East, there would have been no reason for optimism. Let's relax and see what develops.