PennStateHoops.com Discussion Forum

BIG EAST Tournament


#1

Big East won’t dump tourney format

...Losses by Syracuse, Villanova and Pittsburgh, which earned double-byes in the 16-team tournament at New York City's Madison Square Garden, was enough for [b]a unanimous vote when the coaches met last May to do away with the system for the 2011 tournament.[/b]

But that vote wasn’t enough to change the minds of the athletic directors and the conference board of directors as the league confirmed that the two-year old format won’t change for 2011, Big East associate commissioner Tom Odjakjian said Tuesday night.

A UNANIMOUS vote by all 16 of the BIG EAST coaches, and the AD’s won’t budge.

Wow.


#2

I am completely confused on this one…

What are they saying is unfair, and who is getting the short end of the stick here?

What I am getting from it, with a bit of assuming, is that they feel teams 5-8 shouldn’t be treated differently than teams 1-4? So they want just a single bye for all teams 1-8, and then everybody starts playing against the winners of 9-16 on Wednesday?

I don’t know - I have a hard time understanding what the problem is… why team 1 should get the same treatment as team 8… kind of makes the end of the regular season a little less meaningful when there’s nothing to play for from the top 5-7 teams who are all safely getting the bye.

And if anything - the “stats” (that they think prove something from a two year sample) last year showed that it didn’t really matter if you had to play the extra day because 3 of the 4 top seeds were upset. That doesn’t mean you should punish the top 4 teams, and it certainly doesn’t prove that the system doesn’t work… just that it’s possible to see upsets in the tournament, and that’s the whole point of a year-end tournament isn’t it?

I don’t know… it doesn’t matter to me either way I guess, but I’m just struggling to see what the problem is with this… you give the best finishing teams a reason to finish best in my opinion.


#3

err actually… on closer inspection it appears they just want a straight 16 team tournament, no byes. Which again, makes you question what the regular season is good for… what motivation does a team have to finish 4 instead of 5th in the last week of the season? Probably not much.


#4

I think the argument is that with the double bye, teams are getting rusty and losing. I mean the sample size is small, but yeah… I think I would like a straight 16 team tournament. The vote was unanimous, and it didn’t go through - damn ADs and commish :o


#5

Screw the BIG LEAST. The more non Big Least fans care and talk about the event the more panache for the league.


#6

Is the Big East the SEC of college basketball for B10 fans? Or do you just not like the Big East?


#7
[quote="tundra, post:5, topic:1311"]Screw the BIG LEAST. The more non Big Least fans care and talk about the event the more panache for the league.[/quote]

Is the Big East the SEC of college basketball for B10 fans? Or do you just not like the Big East?


PSU is an Eastern team in the BigTen12. Thus, the Big Least is our rival for fans (fannies in the BJC and TV sets) and recruits in both football and basketball. I wish them no well.

#8
[quote="tundra, post:5, topic:1311"]Screw the BIG LEAST. The more non Big Least fans care and talk about the event the more panache for the league.[/quote]

Is the Big East the SEC of college basketball for B10 fans? Or do you just not like the Big East?

I tend to agree with the “screw the big east” mentality in basketball, and I think the SEC in football is a fair comparison. Way too much hype for my liking, and even less living up to the billing than the SEC offers.

There hasn’t been a BE team in the championship game in over 6 years, yet every season we seem to get hit over the head with how fantastic the conference is. And I don’t want to hear the excuse that they beat up on each other too much or any of that garbage… A couple years ago I did a more in-depth analysis of conference performances in the tournament and it proved this point even moreso, but suffice it to say I think the big problem is just ESPN as per usual.

They used to ride the crap out of the ACC, but at least the conference put banners up during those years. This Big East hype is beyond crazy since the conference fails when it matters most of the time in recent memory… it’s obviously just a great way to expand their viewer-ship by hyping up the conference they have a huge contract with. Can’t fault them for that, but it is awfully annoying at times.


#9

Agree on the Big East hype… my pet peeve is how they would say how many BE teams made the tourney… Sure they got the most teams in, they HAVE THE MOST TEAMS!! On a percentage basis, they didn’t place any more teams than anyone else, but it was Sooooo hyped about. It’s that pack metality and the lack of common sense from most of the writers.

And people wonder why I don’t trust the media with my politics, either :wink:


#10

I should dig up some Big East OOC performances to see how accurate or inaccurate the hype is.

As for the whole championship argument (which is valid), didn’t the BE have 4 of the 8 Elite 8 teams a year ago? Or something like that… I mean if team X from the SEC or B10 is the best team in the country and they win the championship (even if 4 BE teams were in the Elite 8) does that mean team X’s conference is > the BE because they have the best team? Its a top to bottom argument that is sometimes really hard to compare since the Big East is so… BIG.


#11

[quote=“noobd, post:10, topic:1311”]I should dig up some Big East OOC performances to see how accurate or inaccurate the hype is.

As for the whole championship argument (which is valid), didn’t the BE have 4 of the 8 Elite 8 teams a year ago? Or something like that… I mean if team X from the SEC or B10 is the best team in the country and they win the championship (even if 4 BE teams were in the Elite 8) does that mean team X’s conference is > the BE because they have the best team? Its a top to bottom argument that is sometimes really hard to compare since the Big East is so… BIG.[/quote]

…or maybe the 4 of the 8 Elite 8 teams is just one good year.

Since 1999, the number of Final Four teams are: BIG EAST- 9 BIG TEN- 11


#12

[quote=“noobd, post:10, topic:1311”]I should dig up some Big East OOC performances to see how accurate or inaccurate the hype is.

As for the whole championship argument (which is valid), didn’t the BE have 4 of the 8 Elite 8 teams a year ago? Or something like that… I mean if team X from the SEC or B10 is the best team in the country and they win the championship (even if 4 BE teams were in the Elite 8) does that mean team X’s conference is > the BE because they have the best team? Its a top to bottom argument that is sometimes really hard to compare since the Big East is so… BIG.[/quote]

Agreed, it is tough to compare. But we shouldn’t just say it’s the best because it has 8 teams that are pretty good while other conferences only have 6… when some conferences it’s being compared to only have 10 or 12 teams compared to their 16.

I just think that gets ignored too often when talking about the big east. They SHOULD be putting more teams in the elite eights because they are 25 percent bigger than most conferences.


#13

Straight out of wikipedia:

In basketball, Big East teams account for 40 Final Four appearances and 10 NCAA Championships, numbers only surpassed by the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), Big Ten Conference (Big Ten) and Pac-10 Conference.[citation needed] Of the Big East's 16 full members, all but South Florida have been to the Final Four, the most of any conference,[3] though Louisville, Marquette, DePaul, Notre Dame, Rutgers, Cincinnati, and Pittsburgh made their trips before joining the Big East.

#14

[quote=“State4Life, post:13, topic:1311”]Straight out of wikipedia:

If you count Minnesota’s vacated Final Four every Big Ten team except NWestern (who, of course, hasn’t made the tourney) has been to the Final Four too. All but one of the ACC schools before expansion (Clem) made the Final Four. 3 of the 4 ACC schools not to make the final four are former Big East schools (Miami, VTech, and BC) UNC and Duke alone have 33 appearances and 9 championships.


#15

Here are the number of appearances each BCS conference has since the Big East formed in 1979 (championships in parentheses.)

This counts only schools in the conference when the appearance occurred so, for example, Louisville’s appearances while in the Metro Conf and Conference USA don’t count.

  1. ACC: 29 (10)
  2. Big Ten: 22 (5)
    3t) SEC: 16 (5)
    3t) Big East: 16 (5)
  3. Big 8/XII: 12 (1)
  4. Pac 10: 10 (2)

#16

[quote=“laoDan, post:15, topic:1311”]Here are the number of appearances each BCS conference has since the Big East formed in 1979 (championships in parentheses.)

This counts only schools in the conference when the appearance occurred so, for example, Louisville’s appearances while in the Metro Conf and Conference USA don’t count.

  1. ACC: 29 (10)
  2. Big Ten: 22 (5)
    3t) SEC: 16 (5)
    3t) Big East: 16 (5)
  3. Big 8/XII: 12 (1)
  4. Pac 10: 10 (2)[/quote]

Love it, Dan. Thanks, for the great data. I will take this thread “full circle.”…SCREW the BIG LEAST.


#17

But zomgggg the Big East has fewer appearances and the same amount of championships as the B10!!! Screw that Small 10!!! :smiley:


#18

I guess that means the old Metro Conference was the best ever - two appearances, one championship. That’s a 50% success rate.


#19

Just to expand a bit. Here’s the Final Four appearances (and championships) since the tournament went to 64 teams.

Atlantic 10: 1 (0)
ACC: 24 (8)
Big 8/Big 12/SWC: 13 (2)
Big East: 13 (4)
Big Ten: 18 (3)
Big West: 3 (1)
Colonial: 1 (0)
Conf USA: 3 (0)
Great MidWest: 1 (0)
Horizon: 1 (0)
Metro: 2 (1)
Pac 10: 9 (2)
SEC: 13 (5)
WAC: 1 (0)


#20

Good stuff guys. I think it’s pretty clear now, and i feel validated. :slight_smile: