Big East Conference Realignment v2018

[_lh]

DudeAnon must have been on the expansion committee for the A10 when they "wisely" chose to add in Fordham and LaSalle when they added in XU and UD. The A10 did not need to add more than 2 teams but decided back in 94/95 to not just add in XU and UD but to invite LaSalle and Fordham. The A10 has been stuck with LaSalle and Fordham ever since with neither program ever carrying their weight.

It is much easier to add teams than to get rid of them. WSU, UD and VCU will always come when called but if you rush to add schools like that and they suck or continue to suck (in the case of UD) then you are stuck with them.

[Xudash]

I am sensing a lot of insecurity from my fellow Xavier fans. They believe we have successfully shed the "mid-major" label and want nothing to do with former associates. Well, labels are transient. The Big East is considered a power conference currently, but that is not a guaranteed status. We should be proactive and add programs with a high-potential for success and growth now while the brand is strong.

You have poor senses.

Beyond that, you are getting pounded from every corner here. Your ideas are simply terrible.

[Hall2012]

Maybe so, but what they discovered was that "mid-major" is really a label for conferences and not programs. Each of those three was simply being held back, much like I imagine WSU, UD and VCU are experiencing. Don't be afraid of competition Hall2012.

Who's afraid of competition? We have good competition. My fear is the risk of watering down the league - which is exactly why the C7 split. We didn't want to be forced to play Tulane, ECU, Tulsa, etc. every year. Now the schools you mention are obviously ahead of them, but their success is in the league isn't guaranteed (especially so with Dayton and VCU who are struggling under new coaches). If there was a guarantee that they'd pull their weight and at least maintain (really increase for it to be a positive return on investment) our 70% tournament rate, then sure. But it's more likely to just be more mouths to feed.

[Westbrook#36]

Look, Nova is top dog. But I don't think they are stratospheres away from Xavier. Jay Wright ain't the pope, he has his flaws. In my opinion, its tournament play and recruiting. Don't be so sensitive.

This is rich, lol. There is very clear separation between Nova and X, don't be so sensitive. Tournament records since the start of the reconfigured BE; Wright 9-3(1NC), Mack 6-4(1E8). So if tourney play is a flaw for JW what's it for CM? Yeah Jay has a flaw in recruiting, the way the 3 place finisher in the Miss America pageant has a flaw with attractiveness. I think you might still be suffering from a concussion from a severe beating 3 weeks ago.

[Hall2012]

Since last realignment:

Tier 1: Villanova - Obvious. 8 trophies and counting since realignment ( 4 BE regular season, 2 BET, 1 NCAA Regional, 1 NCAA Championship)
Tier 2: Seton Hall, Providence - Only other schools to actually win something since realignment (1 BET each)
Tier 3: Xavier, Butler - Consistently strong and consistently in the tournament
Tier 4: Creighton, Marquette - Up and down, both appear on an upward trajectory
Tier 5: Georgetown, St. John's, DePaul - Have had their moments but struggling generate momentum

This is an awful tier list. Priority for rankings should be 1) Tournament success (the real one), 2) Regular season success, 3) Fan support.

Nova, Xavier, Butler, Creighton, Providence, Seton Hall, Marquette, Georgetown, St. John's, DePaul. Its not hard to see that pretty clearly.

Well, that's the thing about rankings - they're subjective. I think yours is an awful list. To me, in sports you play to win. Success is measured in championships. In trophies. If you get really far in a tournament before you lose, well... maybe the run was fun, but ultimately you lost - just like the teams that lost in the first round.

So to me, priority should be: 1. NCAA Tournament/Regional Championships, 2. Conference Championships, 3. regular season success, 4. NCAA Tournament wins

[milksteak]

Since last realignment:

Tier 1: Villanova - Obvious. 8 trophies and counting since realignment ( 4 BE regular season, 2 BET, 1 NCAA Regional, 1 NCAA Championship)
Tier 2: Seton Hall, Providence - Only other schools to actually win something since realignment (1 BET each)
Tier 3: Xavier, Butler - Consistently strong and consistently in the tournament
Tier 4: Creighton, Marquette - Up and down, both appear on an upward trajectory
Tier 5: Georgetown, St. John's, DePaul - Have had their moments but struggling generate momentum

This is an awful tier list. Priority for rankings should be 1) Tournament success (the real one), 2) Regular season success, 3) Fan support.

Nova, Xavier, Butler, Creighton, Providence, Seton Hall, Marquette, Georgetown, St. John's, DePaul. Its not hard to see that pretty clearly.

So to me, priority should be: 1. NCAA Tournament/Regional Championships, 2. Conference Championships, 3. regular season success, 4. NCAA Tournament wins

Oh wow. This might be HLOH’s worst post ever...which is saying a lot for a forum frequented by Stever.

[scoscox]

Well we have won 2 pre season tournaments since realignment, so technically we have more trophies than prov or shu. You’re going through a lot of mental gymnastics to discredit what butler and Xavier have done. Winning in the NCAA tournament makes the conference a lot of money not to mention legitimacy.

[DanofXav76]

Look, Nova is top dog. But I don't think they are stratospheres away from Xavier. Jay Wright ain't the pope, he has his flaws. In my opinion, its tournament play and recruiting. Don't be so sensitive.

This is rich, lol. There is very clear separation between Nova and X, don't be so sensitive. Tournament records since the start of the reconfigured BE; Wright 9-3(1NC), Mack 6-4(1E8). So if tourney play is a flaw for JW what's it for CM? Yeah Jay has a flaw in recruiting, the way the 3 place finisher in the Miss America pageant has a flaw with attractiveness. I think you might still be suffering from a concussion from a severe beating 3 weeks ago.

Ouch!! The Truth can be painful at times.

[DudeAnon]

So to me, priority should be: 1. NCAA Tournament/Regional Championships, 2. Conference Championships, 3. regular season success, 4. NCAA Tournament wins

Oh wow. This might be HLOH’s worst post ever...which is saying a lot for a forum frequented by Stever.

+ 1, it takes a special level of cognitive dissonance to honestly believe that NCAA tournament wins are the least important metric lol.

[Hall2012]

This is an awful tier list. Priority for rankings should be 1) Tournament success (the real one), 2) Regular season success, 3) Fan support.

Nova, Xavier, Butler, Creighton, Providence, Seton Hall, Marquette, Georgetown, St. John's, DePaul. Its not hard to see that pretty clearly.

So to me, priority should be: 1. NCAA Tournament/Regional Championships, 2. Conference Championships, 3. regular season success, 4. NCAA Tournament wins

Oh wow. This might be HLOH’s worst post ever...which is saying a lot for a forum frequented by Stever.

Trashing someone's opinion without offering a rebuttal is kind of weak, wouldn't you say? I'm simply trying to spark some debate. Is it really that outrageous to say that championships is a key measure of success in sports?