Anti-Big East Bias

[ChelseaFriar]

On the other side of it, John Gasaway of ESPN insider tweeted that Creighton is a major conference team last night, so that was nice to see in print (he was tweeting how bad ASU was on defense against major conference teams--- Kentucky, Purdue and now Creighton). I don't think that ESPN can dispute the high major status of the BE. Since they don't have a TV contract with us, they aren't going to do us any favors!

They are stating the obvious. It shouldn't be a compliment that they are calling the B.E a major conference... its a FACT

Had the same thought. Do they need to point out that fellow 6 seed Maryland is also a Major Conference team? What they were saying is what people say about Gonazaga: they play in a crappy conference but they are a high major team.

[xusandy]

While it is true that good D1 bball schools with football programs will probably always have a few more $$ on average to splash on bball than the Big East, it's also true that the quality of locker rooms, first class travel, dorm rooms, coaching, potential paths to the pro level, competition throughout the season, media coverage, and anything else I can imagine that impacts a 17 or 18 year old's college decision, are just as good at a Big East program as at a Football 5 bball program. Well, there is "tradition" or "mystique", and it is true that Kentucky, North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, and maybe one or two others can play that card while recruiting, while none of our schools can quite compete with that (though IMHO Nova and St. John's come close.)

In addition, the Big East enjoys two pretty clear advantages in recruiting over almost all Football 5 schools: (1) high quality academics in a "values oriented" framework (which really does appeal to many of those parents who still have an influence on their teenage superstars during recruiting), and (2) the prospect of being a BMOC (Big Man On Campus) is clearly much better for a bball player on a campus that does not field a big-time football team. I touted those 2 advantages on this board soon after the current Big East came together, and I have re-posted several times since that "our" way of doing D1 college bball will eventually and inevitably lead to more and more top tier recruits choosing to attend a Big East school.

The proof is already visible, my friends; our teams are almost all seeing improved recruiting results, and 70% of our teams just made the dance -- more than any other conference. So Gottlieb's inability (or obstinate refusal?) to see us as a true high major conference is just plain not supported by our still-short history together, and it's a confirmation of his total lack of understanding of a key force that drives top tier college basketball today.

[jfan]

ACC: 12
B1G: 8
Pac12: 7
Big12: 7
SEC: 5
Big East: 2

That's the number of teams that made the 2nd weekend of the tournament by conference. Fair or not, this is our last hurdle in terms of on-court performance. Gottlieb's just plays the devil's advocate role in lots of issues, though.

I appreciate that sweet 16 appearances are nice, but they can't be the only metric to gauge the success or status of a conference. How many of the above conferences have won a NC since we formed 4 years ago. That is the ultimate goal, but should be just one metric of analysis. RPI, sweet 16 teams, overall teams in the tournament, and national championships among other things should all be used to measure the overall success of a conference. By all the metrics, we are not a "high mid-major" below the football 5 conferences in status or overall performance. Gottleib is just wrong.

The thing is to a lot of folks- tournament performance is what matters. So stuff like RPI, teams in tourney, etc. are nice- but really to casual fans meaningless. It's how you do in the tourney that matters. That's why Nova winning the tourney last year was so critical. To act like going 2-8 in the rd of 32 is meaningless isn't acknowledging reality.

I'm not sure what you are talking about. Who said it was meaningless. What is your point! Is the only measurement of success how many teams make the S16? I'm not talking about casual fans, but was speaking to Gottleib's position that we are a high mid-major! As I stated, there are lots of ways to measure conference success. Most "experts" have us as a high major. Apparently not you because we haven't had many S16 appearances.

[stever20]

to me the #1 thing by a large margin is how you perform in the tourney. It's what everyone remembers.

Like it or not-
rd 2- Big East is 2-8 since formation
rd 3- Big East is 1-1 since formation

until both of those numbers change, the Big East won't be viewed as highly as it should.

I mean look at the elite 8 teams....
ACC 7
Big 10 5
SEC 4
Pac 12 3
Big 12 2
Big East 1

The tourney is the last thing that is really holding the conference back. If Big East can have a year with 4-5 sweet 16 teams- the perception changes really quickly.

I mean think about it-
Recruiting- check
attendance- check
money- check
conf. tourney- check
regular season performances- check

[kayako]

By all the metrics, we are not a "high mid-major" below the football 5 conferences in status or overall performance. Gottleib is just wrong.

Yeah, I agree with you. I don't like some arbitrary bar of x amount of teams in round XX = power conference nonsense. But it is true that our teams haven't performed well in the tournaments, so I just find ourselves in "removing all doubts" to outsiders situation right now. It's gonna happen eventually, so I'm not overly concerned with the sweet 16 talk.

Again, Gottlieb is a troll.

[BEhomer]

DG has always bashed BE even before realignment. This was back when we used to have multiple 1 seeds and putting teams in final 4 constantly. so I'm not really surprised he is down on BE. Even if we put 4 teams in the final 4, he'll still come up with something.

[billyjack]

Some things...

1. Dan Dakich... thinner resume' than Jim Baron... so Dakich is like one of the biggest self-promoters in college hoops. When he came on the scene as a know-it-all several years ago, he himself and ESPN acted like the guy was a prize, but he sounded like a dimwit, and i didn't know who the f-ck he was. How could I not know such an accomplished guy as Dakich? Captain at Indiana? Actually coached Indiana? 10 year coach in Div-1...? Wow!

So i looked up the guy...

ok,

- Captain of the Indiana Hoosiers... guy was like the 11th guy on the bench, a member of Bobby Knight's last Hoosier team to miss the NCAA's, in 85... averaged 3 pts a game... ok... so i don't remember him playing cuz he really did suck.

- Coached Indiana... on an interim basis he replaced the scandal-plagued Kelvin Sampson team in 2008, went 3-4, and was let go for Tom Crean...

- coached 10 years of Division-1... yeah, 10 years at Bowling Green in the freakin MAC, and made zero (0) NCAA's... BGSU made 2 NIT's, both times bounced in the 1st round, both double-digit blowouts vs BYU and Butler.

So listening to an ESPN telecast with Dan Dakich is a waste of time and he's a f-ckin idiot... might as well take hoops advice from Keno Davis or Jim Baron, except Baron actually is more accomplished as a coach and player. Seriously, the average college hoops fan was scratching their heads about Dakich the first time they heard him behind the mike, like "who the f-ck is this guy..."?

[alduflux]

Here is ESPN's graphic before the Butler vs Indiana game

Looking back it is funny they mentioned the Butler loss at Indiana State and not the Arizona win. With IU they don't mention the loss at Fort Wayne. In retrospect, the Fort Wayne loss said more about what kind of team IU was and the Arizona win said more about Butler then the Indiana State loss did.

[Bill Marsh]

While it is true that good D1 bball schools with football programs will probably always have a few more $$ on average to splash on bball than the Big East, it's also true that the quality of locker rooms, first class travel, dorm rooms, coaching, potential paths to the pro level, competition throughout the season, media coverage, and anything else I can imagine that impacts a 17 or 18 year old's college decision, are just as good at a Big East program as at a Football 5 bball program. Well, there is "tradition" or "mystique", and it is true that Kentucky, North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, and maybe one or two others can play that card while recruiting, while none of our schools can quite compete with that (though IMHO Nova and St. John's come close.)

In addition, the Big East enjoys two pretty clear advantages in recruiting over almost all Football 5 schools: (1) high quality academics in a "values oriented" framework (which really does appeal to many of those parents who still have an influence on their teenage superstars during recruiting), and (2) the prospect of being a BMOC (Big Man On Campus) is clearly much better for a bball player on a campus that does not field a big-time football team. I touted those 2 advantages on this board soon after the current Big East came together, and I have re-posted several times since that "our" way of doing D1 college bball will eventually and inevitably lead to more and more top tier recruits choosing to attend a Big East school.

I think you make really good points in this post. In support of what you're saying, let me offer the following:

1. Even among the P5 football schools, the best basketball programs are a basketball-first schools where football has historically sucked - Kentucky, Duke, Indiana, North Carolina, Kansas, etc.

2. If football were such a big asset, then you'd think the best football schools would also be able to put top basketball programs on the court. A few do, but most don't. Start with Texas because they have more money than God. Nothing special about their basketball program and at many points in their history, it's been downright poor. Alabama - a zero in basketball. USC - no history of top basketball. Go down the list - Penn State, Nebraska, Miami, etc.

3. It comes down to culture. Football schools have their culture. Basketball schools have ours. I was in Rhide Island yesterday to complete a business transaction. I mentioned that the Friars were back in the tournament again and how about that? The response was, "My father took me to my first Friars game when I was 5. Friday nights were always Friar basketball. I went to URI, but I still root for PC." It's why Procidence can sell out the Dunk despite being a school with only 4000 undergrads. It's why Creighton and Marquette can do the same. It's why all the BE schools can sell tickets regardless of enrollment.

[RedStorm]

Of course Gottleib is being dishonest. And I doubt it was his personal idea.

That the comment comes on the heels of the conference getting 7 of its 10 teams into the tourney isn't a coincidence.

ESPN is a competitor of Fox. The ACC is threatened by the BE and many of its teams are locked in recruiting battles with various BE teams. None of this sneaky propaganda should shock anyone here.