March 21, 201115 yr How about calling the Big East the most even conference in America. I think Barkley hit the nail on the head. Solid players/teams, excellent coaches, and I would add they play very hard. But they really don't/didn't have a team on the same level as Kansas, OSU, or Duke. The way I look at it is this, UK who lost 6 games in the SEC and was awareded a 4 seed absolutely man handled Notre Dame and Louisvile.
March 21, 201115 yr Top to bottom Big East is the best conference. Best teams in basketball in the Big East? No. Succinctly put, and probably correct. I would have debated on Villanova and probably replaced them with Colorado, but would have put the other 10 teams in the tourney. Lots of factors came together to get 11 BE teams in. First, there were 68 slots instead of 65. More importantly, many of the traditional power conferences were down. Even after the selections were announced, were many folks seriously talking about BE teams as national champions? Most of what I heard centered on OSU, Kansas, and Duke. Has the BE underperformed? Yes, they have. Were they the premier conference in the nation this season? Yes, they were.
March 21, 201115 yr How about calling the Big East the most even conference in America. I think Barkley hit the nail on the head. Solid players/teams, excellent coaches, and I would add they play very hard. But they really don't/didn't have a team on the same level as Kansas, OSU, or Duke. That I can agree with. Outside of Kemba, who is not a projected lottery pick, there just isn't the elite talent level that you usually see in the league. It has been a league dominated by solid 4 year players over the last two seasons, and in a one and done format you are in trouble eventually unless you have that one NBA guy that you can give the ball to and say go take care of it. Right now it is just a very deep, high quality league that produces great regular season action because of the coaching, depth of quality and balance. UConn was always going to be the most dangerous team in a tournament format because of Kemba, but they weren't going to win 14 games in conference play because they are young and it is such a grind...
March 21, 201115 yr Has the BE underperformed? Yes, they have. Were they the premier conference in the nation this season? Yes, they were. :thumb:
March 21, 201115 yr That I can agree with. Outside of Kemba, who is not a projected lottery pick, there just isn't the elite talent level that you usually see in the league. It has been a league dominated by solid 4 year players over the last two seasons, and in a one and done format you are in trouble eventually unless you have that one NBA guy that you can give the ball to and say go take care of it. Right now it is just a very deep, high quality league that produces great regular season action because of the coaching, depth of quality and balance. UConn was always going to be the most dangerous team in a tournament format because of Kemba, but they weren't going to win 14 games in conference play because they are young and it is such a grind... GT, I think if people listen to Barkley that is exactly what he was saying. It's not the Big East fault that the national media made them out to be something they were not. I think you are spot on.
March 21, 201115 yr Record vs BCS teams in non-league play Big East 29-16 (.644) Big 12: 25-20 (.555) ACC: 24-27 (.470) Big 10: 17-20 (.459) Pac 10: 12-19 (.387) SEC: 19-24 (.441)
March 21, 201115 yr Record vs BCS teams in non-league play Big East 29-16 (.644) Big 12: 25-20 (.555) ACC: 24-27 (.470) Big 10: 17-20 (.459) Pac 10: 12-19 (.387) SEC: 19-24 (.441) And all these stats mean squat when they don't produce when it counts.
March 21, 201115 yr And all these stats mean squat when they don't produce when it counts. They mean it was clearly the best conference in the country despite the results of a single elimination post season tournament. Who was the best conference? The ACC? :lol:
March 21, 201115 yr And all these stats mean squat when they don't produce when it counts. Or when you don't say WHO you played OOC.
March 21, 201115 yr Record vs BCS teams in non-league play Big East 29-16 (.644) Big 12: 25-20 (.555) ACC: 24-27 (.470) Big 10: 17-20 (.459) Pac 10: 12-19 (.387) SEC: 19-24 (.441) I think what that tells you is that the bottom half of the Big East is better than the bottom half of those other conferences. Take the SEC as an example. Good teams: Florida, Georgia, UK, Vandy. Mediocre teams: Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi St. Bad teams: Auburn, South Carolina, LSU, Ole Miss, Arkansas Big East. Good teams: UConn, Louisville, ND, Pitt, Syracuse, Marquette. Mediocre teams: Villinova, Georgetown, UC, St. Johns, WVU. Bad teams: Providence, Seton Hall, South Florida, Rutgers, DePaul. Like I said very even conference with several good teams and no great ones.
March 21, 201115 yr They mean it was clearly the best conference in the country despite the results of a single elimination post season tournament. Who was the best conference? The ACC? :lol: I'm sure you can find me quoted as saying the Big East was the best conference because of quantity and not any GREAT teams. And I also believe you can find me quoted as saying none of the Big East teams will make the Final Four and right now that looks like a safe bet. And yes, the ACC has performed 10 times better than the Big East in the tournament. Virginia Tech should have been in instead of Nova.
March 21, 201115 yr KenPom Non Conference SOS: Pitt - 217 ND - 208 Cuse - 194 UofL - 277 St John's - 77 WVU - 14 UC - 327 G'town - 34 UConn - 165 Marq - 247 Nova - 162 Seton Hall - 93 Rutgers - 293 Providence - 329 USF - 127 DePaul - 325
March 21, 201115 yr I think what that tells you is that the bottom half of the Big East is better than the bottom half of those other conferences. Take the SEC as an example. Good teams: Florida, Georgia, UK, Vandy. Mediocre teams: Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi St. Bad teams: Auburn, South Carolina, LSU, Ole Miss, Arkansas Big East. Good teams: UConn, Louisville, ND, Pitt, Syracuse, Marquette. Mediocre teams: Villinova, Georgetown, UC, St. Johns, WVU. Bad teams: Providence, Seton Hall, South Florida, Rutgers, DePaul. Like I said very even conference with several good teams and no great ones. Agreed, and what I have said all along. And even at the bottom there not as bad as the record would indicate outside of DePaul who was starting over. Providence was tough at home, Rutgers is going to be really good under Mick Rice and Seton Hall had NCAA Tournament talent. There was never a night off, and a few teams found that out the hard way...
March 21, 201115 yr I'm sure you can find me quoted as saying the Big East was the best conference because of quantity and not any GREAT teams. And I also believe you can find me quoted as saying none of the Big East teams will make the Final Four and right now that looks like a safe bet. And yes, the ACC has performed 10 times better than the Big East in the tournament. Virginia Tech should have been in instead of Nova. What does a schizophrenic VT team have to do with Duke and UNC being elite? Nothing. Nova had a much better resume, so they got in comfortably even with a late season nose dive...
March 21, 201115 yr 26 regular season/non-conference wins over NCAA field UConn beat: Texas, Kentucky, Michigan St West Virginia beat: Purdue, Vandy, Oakland Syracuse beat: Michigan St, Michigan St John's beat: Duke Pitt beat: Texas Notre Dame beat: Wisconsin, Gonzaga, Georgia Louisville beat: Butler, UNLV Cincinnati beat: Xavier Georgetown beat: Missouri, ODU, Wofford, Utah State, Memphis Villanova beat: UCLA, Temple, Bucknell, Boston U. Marquette beat: Bucknell
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.