Nova is legit.
The rest are a joke. 10 team league. 6 make it in. Only Nova left.
What a joke.
The rest are a joke. 10 team league. 6 make it in. Only Nova left.
What a joke.
Big East is a sham!
- Thread starter RUfanSinceAnderson
- Start date
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
That league is the most overrated league in the history of sports. It’s the little east. Those teams cant bang
The Big East is a good league and that's it. The lunatic fan base in that league still think they're the Big East of 10 years ago - which it is not and likely won't ever be.
Last two tournaments the Big East very underwhelming. Never bought into the Big East being any better than any of the other power conferences except for the Pac12.
Wait until Butler plays Creighton in the BE Finals 1 year and there'll be 4,000 fans watching the game. The BE desperately needs for St Johns and Georgetown to become top 25 squads again.
Bah. 4-2 in first round. Then Seton Hall lost by 4, Xavier lost by whatever it was, like 5, Butler lost by 3 this weekend. None were beaten substantially.
People make way too much of conference strength from tournament results with such a small sample size in games that could have gone one way or the other.
People make way too much of conference strength from tournament results with such a small sample size in games that could have gone one way or the other.
Big East is just over .500 in the NCAA tournament since its current set up (2014) with 1 National Championship. Big 10 has a winning percentage of .600 over the same period, but without a National Championship.
While Xavier did implode today, I was very wary of Florida State after Xavier absolutely embarrassed them in the Sweet 16 of last year's tournament on their way to the Elite 8. In the post game comments, FSU didn't hide that fact.
in fairness the Big 10 regular season champ got beat by the 10th place ACC team but yes I do agree that the Big East is generally overrated...what they do good is schedule strong and win OOC early so you cannot knock them there but in the tourney not so good besides Nova
Do you have the avg seed beaten/lost-to for each conference?
I find it interesting how the old BE schools have handled the new new new BE.
Nova, SHU, and Providence are all consistently much better than they were when we were in the conference.
Georgetown finally started playing in the regular season like they did in the tournament and JT3 got the boot. Maybe McClung will restore their glory.
St. John's hired Mullin so they'll continue to have their on games where they take down top 5 teams and off games where they lose to NAIA schools. If they hire a real coach and keep Mullin's talent on board, watch out in year 1.
I've tried to explain how crazy or insane the old Big East was because it was the deepest league ever for basketball...
If you rewind the 2009 Villanova team and record/roster vs the current day Villanova team, I'm not sure the 2009 team isn't better than the one that is playing now or the champs of 2 years ago...
The differences in talent to me are startling...the 2009 Nova team made the Final Four BUT finished 4th in standings in Big East and no Big East Tournament title...they beat Pitt in Elite 8, which was a mild upset at the time.
Fast forward to now and there's no Louisville with Pitino, Cuse Notre Dame...the current Big East is nowhere near what it was....Nova is essentially unchallenged physically and skill wise most nights...it's impossible to see anyone else challenging them anytime soon.
Xavier had a tremendous season, but fans get fooled by metrics, KenPom, RPI etc...just watch the TV and possession to possession, Florida State challenged Xavier for 40 minutes...not 28...not 32...not 35-36....they made them work for 40 minutes and eventually Xavier caved in....
I have no idea how West Virginia will stop Mikal Bridges, whose Villanovas difference maker, but rest.assured they will be challenged end to end, for 40 minutes...it's a lot different playing 18 games in the B1G, B12, SEC and ACC, night in and out.
I'm pretty certain the Nova team in 2009 is right there with this years roster...those teams back then were battle tested...not quite the same thing in 2017-18....
If you rewind the 2009 Villanova team and record/roster vs the current day Villanova team, I'm not sure the 2009 team isn't better than the one that is playing now or the champs of 2 years ago...
The differences in talent to me are startling...the 2009 Nova team made the Final Four BUT finished 4th in standings in Big East and no Big East Tournament title...they beat Pitt in Elite 8, which was a mild upset at the time.
Fast forward to now and there's no Louisville with Pitino, Cuse Notre Dame...the current Big East is nowhere near what it was....Nova is essentially unchallenged physically and skill wise most nights...it's impossible to see anyone else challenging them anytime soon.
Xavier had a tremendous season, but fans get fooled by metrics, KenPom, RPI etc...just watch the TV and possession to possession, Florida State challenged Xavier for 40 minutes...not 28...not 32...not 35-36....they made them work for 40 minutes and eventually Xavier caved in....
I have no idea how West Virginia will stop Mikal Bridges, whose Villanovas difference maker, but rest.assured they will be challenged end to end, for 40 minutes...it's a lot different playing 18 games in the B1G, B12, SEC and ACC, night in and out.
I'm pretty certain the Nova team in 2009 is right there with this years roster...those teams back then were battle tested...not quite the same thing in 2017-18....
Under
Underwhelming? Great championship game that went into OT. What tournament where you watching?
Xavier beat by Florida State last year by 30 in the round of 32. They shit the bed last night, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t ever challenged...
The days of having 3 or 4 upper classman who are NBA prospects on the same team are gone and now there is a lot more parity. There is no Power 5 like football, and the number one seeds are very good but not great teams. The difference in cinferences might be more about getting hot at the right time versus talent level. The BIG could have had 4 teams in sweet sixteen or zero teams. The ACC is the top basketball conference imo, but in a given year could be the 4th best conference.
B1G was off this year and have only 1 team remaining (Purdue barely got by Butler). In that respect, it makes RU's last place finish look even worse. But, if we had only pulled out the Purdue game, who knows what might have happened in our conference tourny. But I'm not throwing rocks at the Big East right now. Nova could easily win it all again, as much as I hate writing that. Think WVU gives them a very good game. Rooting for Loyola.
Forgot about Michigan. Thx. They just keep winning. Maybe they are destined to win it all.
Fans shouldn't be so critical about the Big East if Villanova wins the national championship.They got more NCAA bids than other power conferences except for the ACC which should concern Delaney, the head of the B1G Conference.
I agree with the sentiment but didn't the Big-12 get as many or more bids than the BE? I think they have 4 or 5 left in the sweet 16.
Nova has won the conference 4 of the last 5 years since UConn, Louisville, Cuse and Pitt left (with a 2nd place finish this year). With the same coach for 12 years prior, Nova won the conference only once (and that was a tie) in 2005; and they averaged a 6th place finish over those 12 years. IMHO, that speaks volumes about the overall strength of the new Big East. It also proves your point that it's Nova and then everyone else.
Butler also reached the Sweet 16 last year I believe. The ncaa tournament is a crap shoot as Umbc proved. Any team can be beat in a 1 loss and done scenario unless anyone here really believes Umbc was/is a better team than Virginia? The Big East is rated on how they do statistically vs the other power conferences. Villanova’s dominance the past 5 years is more to do with changes Jay Wright made in his recruiting philosophy and player development. There was a very good article written by espn(?) recently that explained it very well.
Interesting if you look geographically - the Big East is half Midwest and half northeast.
Maybe an arrangement can be made with the Big Ten to rotate tourneys between Chicago and MSG
Maybe an arrangement can be made with the Big Ten to rotate tourneys between Chicago and MSG
I've been thinking this for a while.Interesting if you look geographically - the Big East is half Midwest and half northeast.
Maybe an arrangement can be made with the Big Ten to rotate tourneys between Chicago and MSG
This is the deal Delany needs to make with the Big East.
Maybe also do some kind of in-season deal with local rivalries as well (RU-SHU, Wisc-Marquette, NW-Depaul, Nebraska-Creighton, tOSU-Xavier, PSU-Nova, Maryland-Georgetown. Obviously some teams would be left out.
It is yet again a sham when you factor in they had not 1 but 2 # 1 seeds--almost unheard of...give BE credit, they have manipulated the system well...I had picked only Nova to advance to the Sweet 16...only Butler won a game as a higher-digit seed (Xavier did it last year)...
if I'm shoe, I'd want a refund of all that they have done and only have 1 NCAA win for it...and our last place B1G team punked them...let's see if Powell can keep his composure being the focal point of the team next season...
if I'm shoe, I'd want a refund of all that they have done and only have 1 NCAA win for it...and our last place B1G team punked them...let's see if Powell can keep his composure being the focal point of the team next season...
Rutgers hasn’t had a winning record since 2006. Please. Rutgers couldn’t win in the Big East, AAC, and now the Big 10. Get a clue.
Rutgers fans really need to stop criticizing teams that get NCAA bids like Seton Hall and place greater attention on Rutgers failure to even have a winning season.This embarrassment has gone on for 12 straight seasons .There must be accountability and a sense of urgency to change the status quo which for some fans means 5-7 years in a rebuild mode.Winning matters if fans expect relevance in college basketball.
If you hadn’t noticed status quo changed. New AD and coach going into 3rd year. Neither are doing things the way their predisesors did.
I have commended Hobbs and Pikiell for their actions since being hired.What matters in sports, however,is the results happening now not in some future time period which might never happen.Rutgers has been mired at the bottom of the B1G since joining the league which impacts recruiting,attendance and donor support.Status quo at Rutgers is far bigger than just hiring a head coach and a athletic director.Its changing the perception of the program with the people that matter and the only way that will happen is by winning now.Every consecutive losing season makes the rebuild harder to achieve.
If you can't see the changes that Hobbs has been making isn't turning RU in the right direction, I don't know what to tell you. Also encouraging to see the changes in bball the past two years. Would I have liked Hobbs to fix everything during his first day on the job, sure I would but I'm happy with what he has accomplished thus far.
Big Ten champ does not even make it to the sweet 16 and you call the Big East overrated . Look in the mirror your conference sucks.
