Watson is N

Funny thing about the shell of a conference that has become the "Big East" is the blue folks down the road sure as heck think they're all pretty hot shit right now being a part of it.  But when it comes to national perception, I doubt you'd find many casual fans who see it as any more of a big deal than, say, the A-10 or C*USA these days.

IMO, it still lags behind the Mountain West and AAC in terms of quality, and is only a slight upgrade from the MVC.  Okay, okay, maybe just a little bit more than slight, but still...

Norm, if you have Netflix you can get "Requiem For The Big East" there:  http://dvd.netflix.com/Movie/70307734

It certainly is worth watching.  Really sad thing about the OG Big East too, because that is really where modern big time college hoops was born.  It's also what helped to make ESPN the behemoth it is today.

Sure, some can point back to the 1974 Notre Dame UCLA game (and I remember watching that game with the whole family, back when nationally televised college sports was a rare event)...others can say that it really began with Magic vs. Bird in the '79 NCAA final.  But for me it was the 80's Big East.  That was the best.

The new recruiting ranks came out on ESPN and Watson is up to #65

The new recruiting ranks came out on ESPN and Watson is up to #65

Morrow is now 61

The new recruiting ranks came out on ESPN and Watson is up to #65

OK, so, about 19 months ago, the name JoJo Anderson popped onto our radar and I watched some of his film and was like, meh.  So, I found some film of another kid from Texas and went, "WOW! Why don't we recruit THIS kid instead?"

http://board.huskerhoopscentral.com/topic/1375-jojo-the-show-anderson/

The "this kid" that I was talking about has since committed to Baylor and his name is King McClure.  And I still really like his film.  (See clip linked in the link.)  I never thought we'd actually get King.  I figured he was a little beyond our reach.  But, King McClure is ranked by ESPN as only the 87th best player in the class of 2015, and we now have a guard who's ranked 22 spots ahead of the kid I didn't think we had a chance at.

I'm OK with how this turned out, actually.  I think I'll take it. 

Funny thing about the shell of a conference that has become the "Big East" is the blue folks down the road sure as heck think they're all pretty hot shit right now being a part of it.  But when it comes to national perception, I doubt you'd find many casual fans who see it as any more of a big deal than, say, the A-10 or C*USA these days.

 

IMO, it still lags behind the Mountain West and AAC in terms of quality, and is only a slight upgrade from the MVC.  Okay, okay, maybe just a little bit more than slight, but still...

You can have your opinion about the MWC and AAC being ahead of the Big East...but the numbers from the 2013-2014 season do not support that idea. The Big East was 3rd in conf. RPI last year. The league has much less dead weight than any other power conference....the only team last year that looked worthless as a member of the BE was Depaul...every other school was either an NCAA tourney team, a legitimate competitor night in/night out during conference play, or a team that showed reason for optimism for the coming seasons. Top to bottom it is a high quality league where the competition among the teams is entertaining and meaningful. 

You are correct in saying that there's a perception problem with the new league. IMO this problem stems from the fact that, with Cuse Ville etc leaving the conference, the Big East is left without a lot of its programs that competed for national titles regularly. Neither Nova or CU generated much title talk last year and neither team made it far in the tournament, so the perception problem will persist until something changes in that regard. Perception does not equal reality, however. The reality is this: the Big East finished 3rd in conference RPI last year and we had 7 teams (in a conference of 10!!!)competing for tourney bids at the end of conference play, even with G'town catching some of the worst luck throughout the year and Marquette having its worst season in a very long time. Casual fans may not know/ care about the nitty gritty details but it is within them that the truth lies. The perception problems have not negatively affected recruiting or money so, IMO it is not a huge deal just yet

 

Funny thing about the shell of a conference that has become the "Big East" is the blue folks down the road sure as heck think they're all pretty hot shit right now being a part of it.  But when it comes to national perception, I doubt you'd find many casual fans who see it as any more of a big deal than, say, the A-10 or C*USA these days.

 

IMO, it still lags behind the Mountain West and AAC in terms of quality, and is only a slight upgrade from the MVC.  Okay, okay, maybe just a little bit more than slight, but still...

 

You can have your opinion about the MWC and AAC being ahead of the Big East...but the numbers from the 2013-2014 season do not support that idea. The Big East was 3rd in conf. RPI last year. The league has much less dead weight than any other power conference....the only team last year that looked worthless as a member of the BE was Depaul...every other school was either an NCAA tourney team, a legitimate competitor night in/night out during conference play, or a team that showed reason for optimism for the coming seasons. Top to bottom it is a high quality league where the competition among the teams is entertaining and meaningful. 

 

You are correct in saying that there's a perception problem with the new league. IMO this problem stems from the fact that, with Cuse Ville etc leaving the conference, the Big East is left without a lot of its programs that competed for national titles regularly. Neither Nova or CU generated much title talk last year and neither team made it far in the tournament, so the perception problem will persist until something changes in that regard. Perception does not equal reality, however. The reality is this: the Big East finished 3rd in conference RPI last year and we had 7 teams (in a conference of 10!!!)competing for tourney bids at the end of conference play, even with G'town catching some of the worst luck throughout the year and Marquette having its worst season in a very long time. Casual fans may not know/ care about the nitty gritty details but it is within them that the truth lies. The perception problems have not negatively affected recruiting or money so, IMO it is not a huge deal just yet

 

You are correct.  I can have my opinion of the Big East.  It is an upper end mid major.  Not a power league in any way, shape or form. 

 

Funny thing about the shell of a conference that has become the "Big East" is the blue folks down the road sure as heck think they're all pretty hot shit right now being a part of it.  But when it comes to national perception, I doubt you'd find many casual fans who see it as any more of a big deal than, say, the A-10 or C*USA these days.

 

IMO, it still lags behind the Mountain West and AAC in terms of quality, and is only a slight upgrade from the MVC.  Okay, okay, maybe just a little bit more than slight, but still...

 

You can have your opinion about the MWC and AAC being ahead of the Big East...but the numbers from the 2013-2014 season do not support that idea. The Big East was 3rd in conf. RPI last year. The league has much less dead weight than any other power conference....the only team last year that looked worthless as a member of the BE was Depaul...every other school was either an NCAA tourney team, a legitimate competitor night in/night out during conference play, or a team that showed reason for optimism for the coming seasons. Top to bottom it is a high quality league where the competition among the teams is entertaining and meaningful. 

 

You are correct in saying that there's a perception problem with the new league. IMO this problem stems from the fact that, with Cuse Ville etc leaving the conference, the Big East is left without a lot of its programs that competed for national titles regularly. Neither Nova or CU generated much title talk last year and neither team made it far in the tournament, so the perception problem will persist until something changes in that regard. Perception does not equal reality, however. The reality is this: the Big East finished 3rd in conference RPI last year and we had 7 teams (in a conference of 10!!!)competing for tourney bids at the end of conference play, even with G'town catching some of the worst luck throughout the year and Marquette having its worst season in a very long time. Casual fans may not know/ care about the nitty gritty details but it is within them that the truth lies. The perception problems have not negatively affected recruiting or money so, IMO it is not a huge deal just yet

 

You had 7 teams OUT OF 10 (in your words) fighting for an NCAA big......but the reality of it is that ONLY 3 TEAMS OUT OF 10 MADE THE NCAA tournament.  Providence...lost 1st round, CU, lost 2nd RD, Nova, lost 2nd round.  THIS is why people see the Big East (by name only) as more of a mid-major.  Jays fans can keep telling themselves that they are in a power conference, but that conference lost its mojo as soon as it was started.  (See ESPN 30 for 30 on the Big East). 

Don't get me wrong, its a step up from the Valley, but its not ever going to be seen as one of the major conference powers anymore.  Not when you lose Louisville, UCONN , Pitt, Syracuse, etc....Those are the "Big Boys" of the Big East.

 

...

 

...

bleujay, you've been a respectable poster over here and I think that we all appreciate that, but let me make a few counterpoints to your argument here...

First, you say that the Big East finished as the 3rd highest rated league in the country last year according to RPI, and that's great but lets be honest here, the RPI can be gamed and mid major conferences can frequently jump into the top 5 RPI.  Hell, the MVC did it not that long ago, getting up to 3rd or 2nd at one point in a season, can't remember which, must have been 2006...and I frequently see posters over on the Underground refer to the MVC as "that crap conference" now, not more than a year or so separated from that very league.  We've also seen the A-10, Mountain West and Big West all take turns on the top 5 RPI carousel.  But that in and of itself doesn't mean that any of them are "power" leagues.  Remember 2006?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/23/sports/ncaabasketball/23colleges.ready.html?pagewanted=print&_r=0

How Deep Is the Valley?

Could the Missouri Valley Conference land more teams in the N.C.A.A. tournament than the Pacific-10 and the Big 12? Early projections look that way. The Missouri Valley ranks No. 5 in the simulated overall conference Ratings Percentage Index, ahead of the Pac-10 and the Big 12. The R.P.I. is used to help determine at-large bids to the N.C.A.A. tournament.

Five Missouri Valley teams are in the top 33 of the R.P.I.: Creighton, Wichita State, Northern Iowa, Southern Illinois and Missouri State. Collegerpi.com projects all but Missouri State making the tournament. 

"This is all about rights," said Missouri State Coach Barry Hinson, whose team is 12-5. "We don't need anyone saying, 'We're not a B.C.S. conference or in a large-market area.' If the A.C.C. or Big Ten had five teams in the top 30 of the R.P.I., they'd get five teams in."

Teams in the Missouri Valley have had strong out-of-conference showings in the past only to gobble up one another during the conference schedule. With five high-level R.P.I. teams and no so-called R.P.I. poison teams - only Evansville is ranked worse than 200 - the Missouri Valley could be in a strong position in March. Conference teams have beaten Iowa, Indiana, DePaul, Xavier and Nebraska this season. 

"The perception is that we're one of these little leagues," Hinson said. "And we're not."

Secondly, 7 teams competing for tourney bids doesn't mean much of anything other than there was a bit of parity in the league.  The Big Ten was kind of like that too last year where 11 out of 12 teams had pretty legit shots at making the NCAA tournament at one point or another during league play and as many as 9 or 10 still in contention for dance tickets in the last couple of weeks.

Third, you tend to gloss over the losses that the old conference suffered in the last couple years.  "Cuse, 'Ville and others" makes it sound better than the reality.  The Big East lost Syracuse, Pitt, Notre Dame, Louisville and UConn among others but those are huge losses.  Perennial top-30 programs and multi-national-championship-winning programs are not replaced by Butler, Xavier and Creighton (with all due respect) along with the middle of the pack of the old Big East.  IT IS JUST NOT THE SAME.  Don't take that as necessarily a slight when being lumped in with the AAC and A-10, those are very good leagues, but lets not try to make the new Big East out to be something it is not.  And what it is not is a "power" league.  There are 5 of those, and we all know which ones they are.

Finally, the Big East as it is constituted has only existed for one year, and the accomplishments (as it were) of that first year are commendable, but it stands to be seen whether they can be sustained.  Keep in mind that just as it has been with Nebraska's move to the Big Ten, Creighton's move to the Big East hasn't changed in any way what you are.  Just as I am sure you still view Nebraska as a school that seems to play hoops out of contractual obligation, most people around the country perceives Creighton to be that small college that had the McDermott kid on their team.  For better or for worse, it is what it is.

For the sake of argument, here's some stats below. I am curious to see how many of these were automatic bids and how many were at-large bids (semantics, however).

Bleujay, your blue goggles are for your other message board...

Spin Creighton's new league however you want, but the newBigEast is nothing more than a glorified midmajor...It is a step up from the MVC, but that's an indictment of the Missouri Valley, not a testament to the quality of the newBigEast. The only thing "BigEast" about the newBigEast is the name.

This season was the first Sweet 16 without a "BigEast" team since 1992-1993...

Requiem For The BigEast

49r,

I'm sorry if I don't have a large enough sample size for the new Big East in regards to conference RPI...they've existed for one year and they finished 3rd in conference RPI. You go back and look at the previous 3rd place finishers...I guarantee the overwhelming majority of them are in the "power five". Sure there is no 'direct' evidence that the conference can continue to stay in the realm of CBB relevancy, but they have the tv contracts/exposure, coaching talents, and recruiting to do so. Go ahead and look at the recruiting numbers. Even with the losses of those huge programs you keep bringing up, the recruiting has by and large held steady. Marquette is about to receive a commit from a top 10 player; Nova grabbed a top 25 kid just the other day. In the end, recruiting = players in the NBA = exposure and increased prestige. And I did not intend to "gloss over" the losses that the BE has endured the past few years. Louisville and Syracuse (UCONN as well) are the first names people recognize when talking big east basketball. The etc was supposed to cover the rest (pitt, nd etc)

Georgetown and Marquette were by no means "middle of the pack" BE members in 2013. They both contended for the season/ tournament title annually. It is amazing what one season can do to a program's reputation amongst other fan bases. Gtown and Quette were both 2 seeds in 2012 or 2013!! Both are bringing in stellar recruiting classes. Nova, okay sure they had a couple of bad years before the split, but it is evident that the program has regained plenty of its previous stature and they still continue to recruit at a very high level.

What are you saying that the move to the Big East hasn't changed what we are? I don't think we're on the same page. I want you to think about that and then come back to me. TV, recruiting, locale, prestige of conference, all of these things have now changed for Creighton and the move has placed the trajectory of our program onto a completely different path than the one we were on in 2012.

I understand that the league has fundamentally changed. The old BE was a basketball behemoth. I think, by and large, most of you are too focused on what the league lost as opposed to what remains. Top to bottom, the league remains very strong. It is admittedly lacking in the "perennial title contenders" category. But we also have a very small "do nothing" group of schools. The Georgia Penn States and Virginia Tech's of the world. You are right, there is a lot of parity and going forward I believe that will be the defining quality of the league, as it has been in the past. 

 

For the sake of argument, here's some stats below. I am curious to see how many of these were automatic bids and how many were at-large bids (semantics, however).

 

BIG EAST

NCAA since 2000:

----------------

Butler: 9

Creighton: 9

DePaul: 2

Georgetown: 8

Marquette: 10

Providence: 3

St. John's: 3

Seton Hall: 3

Villanova: 9

Xavier: 12

================

Total: 68

Average: 6.8

 

Sweet 16 since 2000:

--------------------

Butler: 3

Creighton: 0

DePaul: 0

Georgetown: 3

Marquette: 4

Providence: 0

St. John's: 0

Seton Hall: 1

Villanova: 4

Xavier: 5

====================

Total: 20

Average: 2

 

 

BIG TEN

NCAA since 2000:

----------------

Illinois: 11

Indiana: 9

Iowa: 3

Maryland: 8

Michigan: 5

Michigan State: 15

Minnesota: 4

Nebraska: 1

Northwestern: 0

Ohio State: 10

Penn State: 2

Purdue: 8

Rutgers: 0

Wisconsin: 15

================

Total: 91

Average: 6.5

 

Sweet 16 since 2000:

--------------------

Illinois: 4

Indiana: 3

Iowa: 0

Maryland: 3

Michigan: 2

Michigan State: 10

Minnesota: 0

Nebraska: 0

Northwestern: 0

Ohio State: 5

Penn State: 1

Purdue: 3

Rutgers: 0

Wisconsin: 7

====================

Total: 38

Average: 2.7

 

This is a good statistic to go by. The B1G's average number of sweet sixteens is higher, but again, top to bottom, the league has a very high proportion of quality programs

 

 

For the sake of argument, here's some stats below. I am curious to see how many of these were automatic bids and how many were at-large bids (semantics, however).

 

BIG EAST

NCAA since 2000:

----------------

Butler: 9

Creighton: 9

DePaul: 2

Georgetown: 8

Marquette: 10

Providence: 3

St. John's: 3

Seton Hall: 3

Villanova: 9

Xavier: 12

================

Total: 68

Average: 6.8

 

Sweet 16 since 2000:

--------------------

Butler: 3

Creighton: 0

DePaul: 0

Georgetown: 3

Marquette: 4

Providence: 0

St. John's: 0

Seton Hall: 1

Villanova: 4

Xavier: 5

====================

Total: 20

Average: 2

 

 

BIG TEN

NCAA since 2000:

----------------

Illinois: 11

Indiana: 9

Iowa: 3

Maryland: 8

Michigan: 5

Michigan State: 15

Minnesota: 4

Nebraska: 1

Northwestern: 0

Ohio State: 10

Penn State: 2

Purdue: 8

Rutgers: 0

Wisconsin: 15

================

Total: 91

Average: 6.5

 

Sweet 16 since 2000:

--------------------

Illinois: 4

Indiana: 3

Iowa: 0

Maryland: 3

Michigan: 2

Michigan State: 10

Minnesota: 0

Nebraska: 0

Northwestern: 0

Ohio State: 5

Penn State: 1

Purdue: 3

Rutgers: 0

Wisconsin: 7

====================

Total: 38

Average: 2.7

 

This is a good statistic to go by. The B1G's average number of sweet sixteens is higher, but again, top to bottom, the league has a very high proportion of quality programs

 

Actually, paying only attention to these stats and given the 10 vs. 14 team ratio they are statistically indistinguishable for these years given range.

Yet, that view ignores the theory that being in a tough conference and playing contenders night after night toughens and prepares a team for the NCAA tournament run (since the BE is obviously less powerful than prior to restructuring)...as the conference has substantially changed. Several years of time will tell...I suspect the BE will regularly be in the top 5 or 6 conferences as time goes on. 

No matter what your view...Georgetown, Marquette, Villanova, Xavier and Butler are a substantial step up for this independent Omahan's viewing! Hell, I may even go to a blue game that does not involve NU!

Congratulations on the upgrades jay fans...time will tell how far up this move takes you.

I am one Husker that hopes you win every future game you play except the two you play against NU!

I'd like to focus on the TV exposure that seems to be a MAJOR misconception.  The original Big East MADE the upstart ESPN. The new Big East is trying to gain exposure now with the fledgling Fox Sports1, which may or may be a good deal long-term. Point being, it's basically a do-over.  Hopefully it works out for Crayton & the others in the new Big East, but in the short-term it's been a horrible TV contract as nearly no one actually watches basketball on Fox Sports1 (think lower #'s than ESPNU, which is the bottom of the barrel on the ESPN over-air platform). By the way, I'm not attempting to disparage the new league, I honestly hope it stays afloat.

I do find it very interesting that all 3 Div. 1 programs have moved into better basketball leagues in the past few years with the Huskers in the Big Ten, the Mavericks in the Summit League & the Bluejays in the new Big East. An eastern move for all 3, how it pans out for each of the 3, we shall see.  The Huskers have obviously made the B1G move and UNO seems to be pleased with their place in the Summit for the time being (I personally believe the Mavs might fit all right in the MVC).  As the last to make a move east, it appears the Jays that have the biggest 'rise or fall' moment of the 3 Div. 1 programs. It'll be fun to watch a lot of big-time in the state of Nebraska in the coming years.

I personally believe the Mavs might fit all right in the MVC

The MVC should only wish they were this farsighted!

It would be a bold great move that will not happen.

 

I personally believe the Mavs might fit all right in the MVC

 

The MVC should only wish they were this farsighted!

It would be a bold great move that will not happen.

 

I think the Mavs would fit in a lot better than IL-Chicago.

Long-term, the MVC will wish they'd taken a run at Omaha before the Mavericks make it work on a bigger stage (which they will eventually).

But mostly I'm happiest that Watson is going to come play for us.

But mostly I'm happiest that Watson is going to come play for us.

Yeah, no doubt. Back to the topic at hand!

The former Big East teams cannot help but take a step back in recruiting and otherwise.  Players simply will not take the new big east as seriously as the former league.  Thus the the stats from the past mean nothing.  It is a good solid league that is a notch below the power conferences.  Not all that close. 

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury: What we have here is a prime example of thread hijacking. Any time Creighton is mentioned in this forum for whatever reason, the immediate topic gets sidetracked into some boring comparison of the two state institutions and the original reason for the thread is dropped like a flagon of boiling kool aid. But that's ok because we have to somehow fill in all these slow hours we have on our hands today anyway. And now back to the topic at hand, i.e. do you think Watson will stay up long enough to see Ameer get his 200th rushing yard?

+1 for injecting the little used "flagon" into the thread, jimmy

When did we get a jury up in here?!?

Flagon for dear ol' Nebraska U!

And I thank you gentlemen for the tintinnabulation of your endorsements for my flagon use. Unfortunately the flagon has been replaced by the thimble in my present reality. So I shall raise a thimble to you also, good sirs. And to Mr Watson too, just to keep the thread on course.