Casual Investigation! Is The Big East Damned to Eternal Suckiness?
by Hire Esherick on Mar 22, 2011 9:07 AM EDT
in Casual Investigation
Email
PrintGeorgetown's early departure from the NCAA Tournament has put a wet blanket on what was supposed to be a joyous run through March, but it hasn't stopped THE GLOBAL PHENOMENON from continuing its award-winning Casual Investigation series. Today, we're tackling a topic that has been talked about ad nauseam among those who think they know stuff about college hoops (i.e. we, the united kingdom of bloggers): the state of the Big East in the wake of its poor performance in the Tournament in the past few seasons.
Feel Free to Create One of These for EVERY DAMN BIG EAST TEAM
via 2.bp.blogspot.com
The best thing about SB Nation is that there are a lot of other writers a lot less depressed than I currently am to fully cover the state of the Big East, so I'm, leaning on them a bit to tell the tale. Here is the story, so far. As you know by now and have heard Charles Barkley tell you, the Big East received a record number 11 bids to the NCAA Tournament and fell flat on its face after the first week of action, with only two teams advancing to the Sweet Sixteen. This can only lead one of two conclusions: the Big East either sucks or is unlucky. SBN Blogs The Smoking Musket and The UConn Blog have opposing views on the unfolding crisis and went to battle on the topic.
(More After the Jump)
The Smoking Musket thinks there is something wrong with a conference that can't crown a national champion or produce NBA stars. They list two main problems plaguing the conference:
While the Big East features depth and a host of good teams, it's this [(1)] lack of star talent that keeps it from making the leap from regular season darling to postseason domination. When combined with the [(2)] officiating issues, this has stunted the growth of the Big East greatly over the past decade. What could be a dominant conference has left fans wanting and critics ranting.
The UConn Blog, disagrees, and thinks the conference is fine and that using national champions over a six year window is myopic:
The problem isn't the Big East, the problem is that the format is designed not to reward the absolute best team, but rather one of the six or eight best teams that happens to get a lucky draw and avoids making a dumb mistake the longest. It's incredibly exciting, but it means measuring outcomes based off of tourney performance is a fools errand.
Naturally, having flown over Switzerland once, I can see both points of view. I agree with The Smoking Musket; Big East officiating is horrendous and does not prepare teams for the way other conference officials call games, namely in a consistent manner across a season. But this is not a main reason the conference has flopped recently, and frankly, is an easy excuse. I have always contended that officials should be region specific, rather than conference specific. Currently, officials tend to only 1-2 conferences per season, which might have made sense when the Big East was for schools in the northeast and the ACC was for schools on the Atlantic Coast. With the dawn of super conferences, there is no reason to jet refs all over the country just to keep crap officials making crap calls for the same teams. Let other conferences like the Big Ten, CAA, A10 and Patriot League suffer the wrath of Satan, errr, John Cahill. It will be less travel for the officials and smooth out the differences in officiating across conferences.
I also agree with The UConn Blog. NCAA Tournament success is just one of many measures of a successful conference, team and program. So much of NCAA Tournament is based on draw, match-ups and luck. This isn't a defense of Georgetown, they plain sucked in the Tournament this year, but some other Big East teams lost heartbreakers and got unlucky bounces, crap fouls, and garbage draws.
The Big East will be alright. It is the best basketball conference because it is not the flashiest or star-packed. Its teams play the best basketball and the conference still has the greatest number of quality teams. And I'm okay with that.
40 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Barkley
“The Big East has the best coaches in college basketball and the least amount of talent.”
Casually.
the talent is more thinly spread.
Easy to be the big dog when you’re Kansas and there is ONE other program worth a damn within 100s of miles.
High fives only on three pointers.
by TheYellofAllYells on Mar 22, 2011 9:33 AM EDT up reply actions
True
How many schools now recruit out of Philly? Villanova, UConn, Pitt, Syracuse, Georgetown, Seton Hall, Rutgers, Temple, (assorted other schools)
by More like Awesome Freeman on Mar 22, 2011 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I would add..
North Carolina, Kansas and Duke that recruit Philly.
It's a great day to be great - Greg Jennings
I'm on a drug. It's called Charlie Sheen. - Charlie Sheen
by Esteban d' Amur on Mar 22, 2011 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Meh,
Save your congrats until and if he’s putting up 20 and 10 each night.
It's a great day to be great - Greg Jennings
I'm on a drug. It's called Charlie Sheen. - Charlie Sheen
by Esteban d' Amur on Mar 22, 2011 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions
Esteban!
You and I somehow survived drowning in our whiskey over the first weekend. I hope Ochefu suffers for his betrayal!
I marched on Leavey to keep the Pub open in the 90's.
by Cuse Swallows on Mar 22, 2011 9:44 PM EDT up reply actions
I must say
this regional refereeing idea has merit, although I would wager that the reason Cahill doesn’t ref for the A-10 is because they don’t want him
by More like Awesome Freeman on Mar 22, 2011 9:33 AM EDT reply actions
Cahill's schedule
http://statsheet.com/mcb/referees/john-cahill/schedule
Cahill was mostly Big East and ACC but he also did a smattering of Big Ten, SEC, and A-10.
The moral of the story, of course: send him to the Patriot League.
That's too close
I’m sure there are some Alaskan rec leagues that could use a horrible ref
by rochesterhoya07 on Mar 22, 2011 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions
There is one solution to the problem as far as Georgetown goes:
BRING BACK KEVIN BROADUS.
Broadus and Kirby working together will solve the talent issue and help JT3 on the bench. I may make this my mission in life.
#mylifewillbeafailure
Casually.
what is broadus doing? why not bring him back?
WHY ARE WE THE ONLY ONES WHO SEE THE OBVIOUS??!?!?!?
by thejerseytornado on Mar 22, 2011 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions
does JT3
want to stay away from Broadus due to the Binghamton controversy? Trying to keep a squeaky clean image of the school he is representing?
Perhaps!
athletic dept wouldnt
Good talk.
Casual Hoya
by Hire Esherick on Mar 22, 2011 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
binghamton had to pay him more than his remaining contract
in their settlement. secondary violations only + not even against him. A quiet hire as an assistant coach to rebuild his image + give us another powerful recruiter. Put a clause in his contract that a single secondary violation will result in immediate firing, and be done.
it’s too f*cking perfect.
by thejerseytornado on Mar 22, 2011 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions
There is no "quiet hire"
Under Broadus’ watch, one player beat someone else into a coma and one other was arrested for selling crack cocaine.
There are other great assistants.
you can quietly hire broadus at this point.
anyone who brings up those incidents can get pointed to the settlement and told to drop it. Broadus can talk about not preparing for being a head coach + the type of support @ G’town yadda yadda yadda and it can work.
question is whether or not broadus/jt3 are interested. i doubt it. i also doubt g’town’s gonna throw the money @ another expensive assistant. A new practice facility would, probably, help just as much.
by thejerseytornado on Mar 22, 2011 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions
There's no way there could be a "quiet hire"
The Broadus Binghamton stuff was all over the NYT, largely reported by ‘Cuse grad Pete Thamel, who also was the guy who wrote the diploma mill piece a few years ago which was largely focused on Egerson and Georgetown. There is no way GU rehiring Broadus wouldn’t become become a big NYT story—there is nothing “quiet” about that.
What are these assertions!?
by DHB Enterprises on Mar 22, 2011 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions
i disagree.
Thamel’s hit pieces on binghamton are done + editors know that going after g’town again and broadus again would go over badly.
a halfway decent PR effort could get that hire done and done without much (any?) flak. Really, you’re going to go after a guy who had to wait a couple years before returning to his old job because he was one of dozens of coaches who recruited players from a diploma mill over 5 years ago and was exonerated in the binghamton fiasco? Really? And it’ll be a white guy going after a black coach @ the home of hoya paranoia?
i honestly believe that it would be very easy to make any attack piece on hiring broadus look like a personal vendetta instead of a legit critique. And, if anything, could easily by used as good PR (man, they’re out to get me, you know why? cuz they know I’m good). Look at Calipari, or Kelvin Sampson getting the Indiana job or what will eventually happen to Pearl, etc.
a new practice facility would be better, tho.
by thejerseytornado on Mar 22, 2011 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions
lets see how kirby does in broadus’ old role. landing adams was a great get in such a short period of time.
Good talk.
Casual Hoya
by Hire Esherick on Mar 22, 2011 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Just curious
Why do the editors “know” that going after Georgetown and Broadus would go over badly?
I don’t like the idea of a hire that requires a “halfway decent PR effort,” or any PR effort, for that matter.
What are these assertions!?
by DHB Enterprises on Mar 22, 2011 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions
everything has a PR push
there’s an office for that. Going after Broadus will be rehash old wounds, ones that are no longer valid and easily dismissed as in his past. Readers love second chances—especially if they’re humbling.
There’s no news there. The only reason for it would be a vendetta.
IF broadus got into shadiness again, there’d be news there. He’d be on the list of people journalists would cover more aggressively than others (also on said list: calipari, sampson, knight, etc.). BUT UNTIL THEN, there’s nothing the NYT can really do.
by thejerseytornado on Mar 23, 2011 9:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Here the deal
If Jim Harrick/Kelvin Sampsons, etc.. always pops up somewhere coaching and giving multiple 2nd chances, bring Broadus back into the mix (at a reduced rate), as JerseyTornado stated, place something in his contract about getting the AXE if he breathes wrong, and let’s take it from there!
Big East
Two years ago the conference had 1/2 the elite 8 teams and 1/2 the final four teams. This year the conference had a lot of very good teams, but no really great teams. During the regular season, the BE went 34-19 against other tourney teams. By comparison, the ACC went 19-29. The conference had one bad weekend.
It's a great day to be great - Greg Jennings
I'm on a drug. It's called Charlie Sheen. - Charlie Sheen
by Esteban d' Amur on Mar 22, 2011 10:01 AM EDT reply actions
agreed
I kept feeling all season that there was a great divide between top 4 teams or so and the rest. Not one was really chasing on the elite teams heals. To the Big East teams that desrved a ranking of 15-25 just started kind of filling up the poll. We were the best confrence this year. It doesn’t directly follow that we would do great in the tourney. The other confrences were week in the 3-8th places. But their top 1 or 2 were pretty good.
That is being talked about
in the Terps page….
The ACC being superior over the BE!
Sigh....
3 months of basketball don’t count! One weekend does!
It's a great day to be great - Greg Jennings
I'm on a drug. It's called Charlie Sheen. - Charlie Sheen
by Esteban d' Amur on Mar 22, 2011 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions
for leading preseason #1 pick pitt to the top of the regular season standings but finishing short of the quarterfinals in both of his post-season tournaments?
Good talk.
Casual Hoya
by Hire Esherick on Mar 22, 2011 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions
This will all be fixed
When the basketball titan that is TCU starts competing.
More than one of the "powerhouse"
teams will lay an egg or two in Dallas, but they are going to make DePaul look good.
It's a great day to be great - Greg Jennings
I'm on a drug. It's called Charlie Sheen. - Charlie Sheen
by Esteban d' Amur on Mar 22, 2011 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Coaches, Recruiting, Size/Scheduling
The Big East does have a lot of big name coaches……..many who have been at their programs for a while. This definitely helps the visibility of these teams in voters’ minds for ranking, based on the underlying assumption that they will produce high quality teams. Recruiting is intensely competitive, particularly for local talent, and relatively few one and dones (to some extent, a function of coaches). I would say not only are there not a lot of stars, there are also not a lot of truly heady ballplayers providing on-court leadership that could help a team go deep in the tournament (again, perhaps a function of coaches who want to control the game rather than turning it over to their team). The size of the conference results in uneven scheduling – making it really hard to assess how good teams are by how they finish in the Big East standings. Especially when many are bunched at or just over .500 in the conference. Some teams play DePaul twice, others play Pitt twice. While not great, the conference is deep with decent teams – making it hard to have a break during the regular season and the conference tournament, with so many games, is a beast. Contriubtes to end of year fatigue. Also, many of the out of conference wins come early in the year……………..when perhaps experienced coaching is worth more than talent as teams work to establish themselves.
Having said all of that, the Big East is still the best conference top to bottom and should have gotten 11 teams into the tournament – but the seedings were too high for many of these teams vs. teams that actually won other conferences.
With paranoia,
I generally agree...
but most of the out of conference wins come early in the year, because that is when those games are played. However, St. John’s ass kicking of Duke was pretty late in the year.
It's a great day to be great - Greg Jennings
I'm on a drug. It's called Charlie Sheen. - Charlie Sheen
by Esteban d' Amur on Mar 22, 2011 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions
whatever the BE did in the tournament
can any of the other conferences point to a single instance where they should have had a team in the dance instead of one from the BE? Everyone had bodies of work that meant they weren’t even questionable coming into Selection Sunday (Marquette was eventually a lock). It was the VCUs and UABs of this world who just squeaked in, denying the VT/BC/Colorados. Despite their run-in, even Nova was never in serious danger of missing the dance, based on work across the previous 3-4 months.
There is no reason we should or should not get a certain number of teams into next year’s tourney, based on performances this year. If 11, or 12, or 6 or 7 teams have the right resumes, then they are the ones that should be in.
Seeding is a different matter, as noted by hoyaparanoia. But all 11 should have been there (and Maryland should still have missed the NIT, Gary.)
KBE
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
