Doesn't this pretty much happen every year?
Edit: Also, I negged you for thinking the b10 can only get 3 teams in the final four. I'm pretty sure we can get 4, including Michigan.
Doesn't this pretty much happen every year?
Edit: Also, I negged you for thinking the b10 can only get 3 teams in the final four. I'm pretty sure we can get 4, including Michigan.
but going through the gauntlet of Duke, Texas and SDSU is pretty tough for Michigan to get to the final 4.
well if they do make it, at least everyone will know they belong there.
Aaand, stranger things have happen in this fantastic tournament. It would be surprising, but definitely not unheard of.
WE GON SHOCK THE WORLD!
I admire your optimism.
but that's what my bracket says. :)
Go Blue!!! (With maize, of course.)
I think our team might bring it tomorrow...who knows? We'll see. And if we can win tomorrow, the rest of the tournament should be no problem.
Watch out for Butler. Their flow is good.
It's worse than it might appear at first glance. So far, the Big Ten has held serve (that is, won when expected to win) in every game. Illinois got them a +1 (winning when not expected) yesterday.
Contrast that to the Big Least:
* -1 (a big one) for #4 Louisville losing to #13 Morehead State
* -1 for #6 Georgetown losing to #11 VCU
* -1 for #1 Pitt losing to #8 Butler
* -1 for #6 St. John's losing to #11 Gonzaga
* They get a +1 for #11 Marquette beating #6 Xavier.
Again, imagine what would happen (in the coastal media) if the Big Ten screwed the pooch like that.
The B1G is top heavy while the big east has depth but no true powerhouse, so who's to say which is the better conference. The possible matchup between ND and Purdue might be a better way to judge, or possibly an OSU Syracuse matchup in the elite eight
is really really weak with South Florida, Rutgers and DePaul. Iowa and Indiana are better than them.
First off the Big East has 16 teams, so the bottom should be weaker. Even then I'm not sure what would put Iowa and Indiana over the other three. If you're comparing out of conference schedules, the only significant victories (or near victories) are Iowa over Alabama, USF over VCU and BYU over USF in double overtime. The rest is pretty much chumpy teams or losses, which doesn't really seem to indicate that any team is definitely better
Not to be a jerk, but to say they are big, so their bottom will be weaker is a silly defense of the Big East. Yes, their bottom should be weaker, but their top should be stronger - the size argument cuts both ways. If you randomly selected 5 teams to pull out of the Big East, and then had the B10 & the BE play each other B10/ACC Challenge style, does anyone really wonder who'd win that?
You want to randomly select 5 teams and you are sure the B10 would come out on top...
Matchup wise the B10 vs BE is this..
(assuming you picked the "middle of the pack")
I dont see any guarentees on that list..
Also, Syracuse beat both MSU and UM. I get that a 1 seed lost, on a last minure bonehead foul, but this is march madness. It wouldnt suprise me in the least to see both UConn and ND make the final 4, and I wouldnt count out Syracuse considering their sweet 16 bracket is located in Newark NJ
I feel you might be singing a different tune if 3/4 of the final 4 are from the BE..
Go back to your mother's basement with all those numbers, nerd! Games aren't played by computers! Nobody could ever be better than the Big East and their 36 teams
You shut your mouth when you're talking to me
Their depth is out of its depth in this tournament.
See what I did there?
Not only did Georgetown and St. John's get beat, they got whupped. Georgetown lost to a VCU team that shouldn't have been in the tournament, and lost by almost 20. St. John's lost by 15 to a Gonzaga team that got destroyed by BYU. The Big East better hope that Notre Dame wins tomorrow. I wouldn't count on it.
Maybe that VCU team SHOULD have been in the tournament?
A #9 seed beating a #8 seed (Illinois over UNLV) is not a +1. I mean, the #9 seed wins 54% of the time.
Well, then the #8 seed is not expected to win so Michigan earns the +1?
Same goes for the 7/10 and even the 6/11.
This is correct. The seven beats the ten a lot, and even the six losing to the eleven is only a mild upset.
It works every time.
This is a shortsighted statement, considering two BE teams play each other to get to S16. Possibly could have 2 got more teams in if this didn't happen. Not great showing, but still the best conference, with Pitt, Lou only big upsets, and still the most fun to watch.
Didn't expect much from GU or St. John's, and their early departure is no surprise, as they were over seeded and overrated, with GU really struggling and St. Johns a fairly good team on the rise, but with a bunch of holes. But overall I think the BE is the deepest conference, with a great many styles of play, some translating to the tourney and some not so much, and I love to watch their regular season and tourney due to a their laundry list of teams that really compete at a solid or very high level.
Agreed. I never thought is was a superpower, as each and every team has its flaws this year, which is obvious from this tourney. For me, it's more of a top to bottom thing, and an athletes thing. The B10 has a couple really good teams, while the BE has a bunch of really solid teams.
They're "deep" because there are 16 teams. It sounds to me as if you're trying to justify all the hours you wasted watching basketball games involving teams from a second-rate conference.
"Styles of play" "translate" to the tourney like this: two teams play each other, and one wins.
No, they are deep because they have 11 solid teams, out of 16. Also, for me, the BE's brand of basketball is far more aesthetically pleasing than the B10's. More good teams and more fun. Hence, not a waste of time, for me.
I negged because the implication that Big Ten basketball isn't worth my time was too strong.
We will have to see. Graduating 9 seniors you would think they should be there not on the rise.
Both Georgetown and St. John's had significant injuries either late in the regular season or in the conference tourney....no excuses, just data.
I tend to think the pac 10 games are the most fun to watch, followed closely by the high level ACC games. I guess its all just a matter of opinion. I do think the b10 is just as good as the Big East from top to bottom though. The Big East has 16 teams. 11/16 and 7/11 are almost the same fraction (.68 vs .63) so both conference got about the same chunk of teams into the tourney. Also, your point about Conn playing Cincy is valid, although it also guarantees that one of the two makes the S16. So it works both ways. Either way, I don't think the Big East is this unstoppable force that the talking heads at ESPN make it out to be. Teams at the top of good conferences are solid and can beat teams at the top of other good conferences, independent of where they are from.
Top Big East teams lost to lower rated teams like VCU and Morehead State.
Big Ten > Big East and the computer shows it. Human thinks that Big East are tough because there are 16 teams but there are no dominant team like OSU. I would say OSU, Wisconsin and Purdue would finish 1-2-3 in the Big East IMO.
I don't care what the computer says, I think the BE is a more exciting and more talented conference as a whole, and if M is not playing, I take them over the B10 games every time. Also, Purdue and Wiscy are middle to slightly upper BE teams. OSU this year, probably 1 or 2.
but human does.
Big East is not a more talented conference than Big 10. Big 10 is better than Big East, period. This is not a homer in me talking. Yes, OSU, Wisconsin and Purdue would finish top 3 in Big East. If you combine both Big 10 and Big East, Michigan would finish 7th-8th IMO.
Hey, it's just my opinion. Like M last year with Marquette, I think that teams like Purdue and even more so Wiscy would have a hard time with the multitude of styles in the BE, namely the many teams with a run and gun mentality. I think Wiscy is largely successful in the B10 year in and year out because the B10 plays one style: slow. And they can build a team with that in mind. Slow is a very good style for the tourney also, but I still think the individual talent in the BE trumps the B10 and the BE is a more interesting and competitive and parody filled conference.
Also, computers lie. They lie their ass off.
CRACKED Magazine is parody-filled. So is Bored of the Rings. If you're saying that most of the teams in the Big East play a parody of basketball, I don't think I can go so far as to agree with you. But the Big Ten is better.
*parity. No matter what the late night spelling, the Big East is a more interesting, and, I feel, better conference. But this is a blog of a team in the B10, and I know we have to attack other conferences because we always feel persecuted by the media, so I will fade back into the woodwork and agree to disagree. But when I watch basketball I value excitement and competitiveness over tourney wins. I also like future NBA stars.
Yes, I have been on this blog for three years as a Big East troll. Well done.
Time to implement the master troll plan. Whatever that is.
Obviously, not a troll is obviously not. You are entitled to your opinion without being a troll.
Sir, I admire your patience.
Are you Rich Rodriguez?
your opinion but it's teams who slow it down like Wisco that tend to dictate tempo. Teams who play them typically can't do much about increasing the number of possessions and playing and play a run and gun game. They don't turn it over (= fewer transition opportunities) and they play good transition D when they miss shots. As you say, it's a good tourney style of play. In my opinion one of the reasons why it's effective in march is because they don't have to adjust to someone else's style of play, no matter what the conferenc . Granted it's not all that pretty at times.
Taking the 3 teams that finished ahead of Michigan in the Big10 this year, that means Michigan would have to be better than one of these teams: Pitt, Notre Dame, UConn, St. Johns, Syracuse(who we lost to), in order to be 8th in your hypothetical conference combo. That's not to mention Louisville, West Virginia, Cincy and Georgetown, all of whom could have an argument for being better than Michigan. Would you like to re-think your stance?
1-6 Michigan wasn't better than those teams. But 10-4 Michigan would beat any Big East team on a neutral court. That's just my epinion.
I'd take Ohio State against any team in the Big East any time. Wisconsin and Purdue would be as good as anyone in that conference as well.
Nothing beats the Big East Tournament. Maybe the Regional finals and Final Four. But that is it in terms of excitement.
Basketball the way it used to be back in the 80s.
They possibly could have two more teams if they didn't play each other, but they could also have two less. At this point, it looks like they need to play each other to move on. I think having two out of the four move on is as good as they would do if they didn't play each other. They way that conference looks, 1-3 would be the next most likely.
Overrated! *Clap* *Clap* *Clapclapclap*
Weird conference. UCONN somehow lost 9 conference games, and they may be the best team. Terrific backcourt, including one of the five best overall players in college basketball (Kemba Walker).
The Big East's reputation was built on beating out of conference schools during the non-conference portion of the season. The tournament is predictable, but i don't think Virginia Tech, Boston College, Harvard, Colorado, etc. deserved to make the tournament over the teams from the Big East that did.
ND (decent resume)
UCONN (Very Good)
I'm stopping here. UCONN looks like the best team of the bunch. They won the BE tourney and have looked solid thus far. ND earned their rep (not a 2-seed!). Most other teams dragged in a lot of preseason hype or benefitted from the overall conference hype.
This rep was largely built over the last few years, not merely this year.
yeah.. because in college basketball, all the good players play for 4 years.. :rolleyes:
Who cares about the last few years? The Big Least hasn't been to a bball championship game since 2004. 2004!!!!
My point being that the BE is considered one of the best conferences year in and year out because they have proved it in the non-conference and otherwise over the last few years. Hence, the respect and media love. Also, they put a ton of players in the NBA, so people assume they have a bunch of talent, and they do, more than any other conference.
oooh, nothing else.
Forgive us for NC State and Georgia Tech turning out to be not very good, and your need to qualify how we beat Michigan by only three.
After tomorrow, there may be just as many teams from the Colonial Athletic Association as the Big East in the Sweet16.
In the last 20 years, how many different schools of the so highly rated Big East have made the Final Four?
How many different schools from the Big Ten?
How's that for dominance and depth...
By my count, in the last 20 tournaments (beginning with 1991), the Big Ten has had 7 teams in the final four, with 15 total appearances and one national championship (marked with asterisk):
Michigan: 1992, 1993
Indiana, 1992, 2002
Minnesota: 1997 (I had completely forgotten they got there, if I ever knew it)
MSU: 1999, 2000*, 2001, 2005, 2009, 2010 (credit where credit is due)
OSU: 1999, 2007
Purdue and Iowa both made their most recent Final Four appearance in 1980. Penn State 1954, Northwestern never, of course.
Also, to be fair, both Michigan and Minnesota later had their appearances vacated.
The Big East has had 6 of its current members join the conference, but only four while they were members of the Big East, with 9 total appearances and 3 national championships.
Syracuse: 1996, 2003*
UConn: 1999*, 2004*, 2009
Marquette: 2003 (prior to joining conference)
Louisville: 2005 (prior to joining conference)
I think I'd give the Big East credit for all six, because the comparison is about the current depth of the conference, measured by the current members' recent success. If you want to say they only have four, you could also say the Big Ten only has five because Minnesota and Michigan had to vacate appearances.
Even if you give the Big East full credit, they still have only 6 out of 16 teams, and 9 appearances, while the Big Ten has 7 of 11 teams, and 15 appearances. Of course, the Big East gets the nod with 3 championships by two different teams.
Apparently, I need to get out more.
for the clarification.
Certainly three championships to one is advantage Big East. But 15 total Final Four appearances by 11 Big Ten teams to 9 Final Four appearances by 16 current Big East teams has their number.
If depth is based on historic teams' tournament successes, I'd say we're on top.
Let's just beat Duke and call it a good day.
Ah, yes, trying to make sense of the NCAA tournament. It's a lost cause each and every year, especially before the tournament isn't even over. The whole thing doesn't make sense. That's what makes it so great.
I have always felt that the BE benefitted from all their teams beating each other up as the season progressed. It is kind of like a positive feedback loop - everyone keeps getting "big time" wins over each other, and so the collective view of the conference improves despite the zero-sum nature of the actual games.
Still, the BE is a good bball conference, but just a little overrated.
UConn and Cinci played last night, as you pointed out, and Marquette and Syracuse play tonight. Two guaranteed in but two guaranteed out.
I might as well be reading any other football message board about the Big Ten during the bowl season every year.
Except ESPN doesn't go out of its way every year to talk about how awesome the Big Ten is at football every year. If you are going to talk about how great your conference is all year, you better show up when tournament time comes around and you aren't just playing yourself anymore.
Exactly. When ESPN has exclusive TV rights to SEC football and Big East basketball, they slobber all over them. "Who are the best teams in the country, Mr. Bilas?" "I don't see any teams that are playing better than UConn and Pitt at this point, Rece." "Just a reminder, ESPN is televising that game at seven eastern time tonight. Purdue and Ohio State? We don't have any information that that game is happening."
To be fair.....ESPN televises Big10 basketball almost as much as B-East bball. I live on the east coast and it seems like every other night there was a Big10 game on TV that I was able to watch out here.
They do show quite a few, but the BTN takes up most of the games and at least one or two marquee games per week. The Big East's games are always shown on the Big East Network (which is owned by ESPN IIRC), so they never have an issue of missing out on a game. ESPN can show good Big Ten games, but Wisconssin-OSU in Madison was on the BTN this year, for example.
The Big East sucks big donkey dongs. It might be the third best conference in the nation.
Well I only see 2. OSU and Wisky. ND has a clear road though!
As much as I want to defend the BE, when the crown jewels of Pitt and ND are taken out in the "3rd round", it's just a massive disappointing for this conference which was anointed as "the best".
At least Pitt showed up. ND pretty much was hammered the whole game by FSU. Never thought I'd see an ACC team dominate which wasn't named Duke or UNC.
As weak as the BE has looked in this tournament, 2 teams stand out. Marquette and UConn are damn dangerous teams that are red-hot. You dont' want any part of them, especially Kemba.
Looked even WORSE today. Good god, Barkley was killing them and rightfully so. They never deserved 11 teams, 7 teams...maybe.
The only two teams left are the ones that were supposed to make an early exit due to fatigue, so much for that.