Understand what you read., 2

[Masterofreality]

Ok. So now the prevailing take from Doc is that "the Big East had been in decline for years and that a fresh start is good for SucKS. HA!

Yep, it has already begun...the demeaning of the Big East now that the Borecats are gone. Uh, the Borecats were a big part of the overrating.

There was never any of this sentiment expressed when that school across town was in the league. It was all wine and roses. Now it is that the league sucked? Typical.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20130323/COL03/303230055/Doc-Fresh-start-just-what-UC-needs-?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE%7Cp&nclick_check=1

[BMoreX]

Some people are just delusional.

[brownlavender]

Who still reads the enquirer?

[paulxu]

How much does UC pay this guy to write this stuff?

[xudash]

A career focused on pandering to the clueless.

[UCGRAD4X]

Unfortunately so many of those clueless bastards spend money on sUCs tickets (less all the time) and sUCs gear.

[Xman95]

I would agree that the BE has been overrated. But that's part of why I want to be there. In years when you're not very good, the "Big East" label gives you an extra boost. I've claimed all year that those teams didn't prove anything out of conference. They rarely do. But, because they're the BE, it's automatically assumed that 10-2 teams playing each other are simply "beating up on each other" as usual.

I really hope programs like Georgetown, Villanova, St. John's, etc. take something from Xavier's book and put together tougher non-conference schedules. It's a way to be battle-tested for the Big Dance.

[Xman95]

Who still reads the enquirer?

I'm wondering which one actually has more facts and truths:

http://www.swapalease.com/images/mediacenter/mediaCenter_Cincinnati_Enquirer.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_6u8qDmPyzQ/Tw1avmaomKI/AAAAAAAAA6A/EXmrgCQMJKE/s1600/National%2BEnquirer%2Bcover.jpg

[Masterofreality]

I would agree that the BE has been overrated. But that's part of why I want to be there. In years when you're not very good, the "Big East" label gives you an extra boost. I've claimed all year that those teams didn't prove anything out of conference. They rarely do. But, because they're the BE, it's automatically assumed that 10-2 teams playing each other are simply "beating up on each other" as usual.

I really hope programs like Georgetown, Villanova, St. John's, etc. take something from Xavier's book and put together tougher non-conference schedules. It's a way to be battle-tested for the Big Dance.

But see, here's the problem. The old Big East configuration, as I have said before, was pimped by Connecticut based ESPN and all of the Syracuse Medis College grads like Pete Thamel. The new Big East has none of those advantages. In fact, I'm anticipating that the coverage will be A10 esque to start. ESPN probably won't have any games of note except for the exempt tournaments.

Fox had better pump this new toy of theirs incessantly because there will be a lot of haters. Believe that.

[MADXSTER]

I have been wondering myself just how the local media was going to spin this to downplay Xavier. I knew it would happen. Just didn't know when and what angle they would take.

[Cheesehead]

terrible article and yes, Doc must be on UC's payroll.

[Steve A]

Doc is right. The Big East has been in decline for years. This isn't new information. Other than UConn's run a few years ago, the Big East has been overrated for quite some time. That said, Xavier's exposure in the Big East will infinitely help recruiting and is still a step up in finances and visibility.

[Xman95]

But see, here's the problem. The old Big East configuration, as I have said before, was pimped by Connecticut based ESPN and all of the Syracuse Medis College grads like Pete Thamel. The new Big East has none of those advantages. In fact, I'm anticipating that the coverage will be A10 esque to start. ESPN probably won't have any games of note except for the exempt tournaments.

Fox had better pump this new toy of theirs incessantly because there will be a lot of haters. Believe that.

True, although there will be attention initially just because people will be watching the "new" Big East. The conference MUST capitalize and play high level bball from the outset, otherwise it will risk losing that attention.

[blueballs]

But see, here's the problem. The old Big East configuration, as I have said before, was pimped by Connecticut based ESPN and all of the Syracuse Medis College grads like Pete Thamel. The new Big East has none of those advantages. In fact, I'm anticipating that the coverage will be A10 esque to start. ESPN probably won't have any games of note except for the exempt tournaments.

Fox had better pump this new toy of theirs incessantly because there will be a lot of haters. Believe that.

you're right - the day of the official announcement, there was NO mention of Xavier on the ESPN homepage or the ESPN men's bball page. Had this been an announcement last year that the Big East was adding, say, Butler, it would have been blasted all over their content.

It goes without saying that the NBE/Fox deal removes any concern for the league from ESPN's agenga.

[rove02]

I definitely saw an article on ESPN the day of the announcement with the headline mentioning X. I didn't care to read the article but it was there.

[X-man]

Just when you think that Doc can't be a bigger a**hole than he already is, he goes and takes it to a new level. Sadly, this column was soooo predictable. It just should have been written five years ago. And of course the Enquirer, with its "new look" (aka checkout line tabloid), is itself creating new lows in journalistic standards. Nothing says "sports section" like a sports page with no scores because anything past 5:00 is "late", and anything that didn't happen in the f**ing "tri-state" isn't newsworthy.

[XU-PA]

Ok. So now the prevailing take from Doc is that "the Big East had been in decline for years and that a fresh start is good for SucKS. HA!

Yep, it has already begun...the demeaning of the Big East now that the Borecats are gone. Uh, the Borecats were a big part of the overrating.

There was never any of this sentiment expressed when that school across town was in the league. It was all WHINE and roses. Now it is that the league sucked? Typical.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20130323/COL03/303230055/Doc-Fresh-start-just-what-UC-needs-?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE%7Cp&nclick_check=1


Fixed that for you.

[DC Muskie]

I never really understood the concept of a conference being "overrated."

What does that mean exactly? In the past four postseason the Big East produced 4 Final Four participants, including two in 2009. In five of the past six they produced another.

In the past ten years, beginning in 2003, the Big East produced 3 national champions. That's the same as the ACC. The same as the SEC.

The Big Ten has not produced a champion since 2000. In the same four year span that the Big East was producing consecutive participants, The Big Ten only had three.

The PAC 12 last champion was in 1997. I was still in college. In ten years, they have produced 3 Final Four participants.

And yet, the Big East is in decline. The Big East is overrated. In 2011 the team that finished 6th in the league won the title. I don't understand how could happen in a league that is overrated. In that season URI finished 6th in the A10. Does anyone here think URI could have made a run and won the title that year?

Come on. Get off the "overrated" bandwagon. It makes no sense.

[MarvAlbert]

Gotta love how he mentions Georgetown's loss to Florida Gulf Coast twice in the first nine sentences. I wonder if the Big East was in decline and Georgetown wasn't that great when they beat uc by 19 just a week ago...

[Masterofreality]

The most ridiculous thing that Doc says is, that "shooting has not been highly prized in the Big East" and that, "maybe Cronin can find an offense after the shoulder pads are taken off (from being in the Big East)".

Uh, Doc. Quit using the league to absolve your little buddy from his crappy team building with a bunch of brick layers-especially those who are inside players.What you describe is the Borecats' issue, not the league. Seems to me that Louisville can shoot the ball.

It is incredible the lengths that the hacks like Doc and Koch go to to defend the yellow toothed jaundiced leprechaun. The "shoulder pads" had nothing to do with SucKS lousy offense. It's on the coach....and he's horrible and his team is unwatchable.

[UCGRAD4X]

Who is mentioning this decline apart from ESPN lackeys and exBig East wankers?

[Masterofreality]

Who is mentioning this decline apart from ESPN lackeys and exBig East wankers?

No one, but ESPN has the loudest honk.

[UCGRAD4X]

No one, but ESPN has the loudest honk.

That's kind of my point. If their honk is so loud that it starts to reverberate outside of that ring, is when I would be more concerned.

That is the nice part about moving into a new ring with a wide and (hopefully) growing honk (Fox Sports).

[brownlavender]

kind of reminds me of the whole obama presidency and how the media has treated it. If it smells like a fart and you continue calling it a rose after a while uneducated people actually start to believe that fart is really a rose. Sure the big east has been a hell of a good league but nowhere near what the media and national rankings put it at. It's been shown time and time again in the tournament that many of those teams were way overrated and ousted in the first round by supposedly lesser teams. When the media talks morons listen, hopefully the media stays on the big east side and we benefit from it even though it's not always fact just perception

[Xman95]

I never really understood the concept of a conference being "overrated."

It's not that difficult of a concept. When a conference is put on a level that it doesn't deserve, it's overrated. Now, you may disagree that the Big East is overrated, but that doesn't mean the concept is a tough one. Hell, the A10 has probably been underrated. Why? It wasn't one of the BCS conferences (even though that has nothing to do with bball), it hasn't had a lot of big name programs, it doesn't get the same media attention as conferences like the Big 10 and Big East, etc.

You point out that the Big East has produced the same number of champions since 2003 as the SEC and ACC. Yet the Big East is always considered the best conference in the land...until now. You point out, correctly, that the Pac 12 hasn't been overly successful, but they have received far more love over the years than most conferences. In part because it used to be a really good conference. So it seems the Pac 12 has probably been overrated as well.

Again, maybe you don't agree that those conferences were overrated. But the concept isn't baffling. It's similar to the way teams like Gonzaga and New Mexico seemed to be overrated this season.

[DC Muskie]

It's not that difficult of a concept. When a conference is put on a level that it doesn't deserve, it's overrated. Now, you may disagree that the Big East is overrated, but that doesn't mean the concept is a tough one. Hell, the A10 has probably been underrated. Why? It wasn't one of the BCS conferences (even though that has nothing to do with bball), it hasn't had a lot of big name programs, it doesn't get the same media attention as conferences like the Big 10 and Big East, etc.

You point out that the Big East has produced the same number of champions since 2003 as the SEC and ACC. Yet the Big East is always considered the best conference in the land...until now. You point out, correctly, that the Pac 12 hasn't been overly successful, but they have received far more love over the years than most conferences. In part because it used to be a really good conference. So it seems the Pac 12 has probably been overrated as well.

Again, maybe you don't agree that those conferences were overrated. But the concept isn't baffling. It's similar to the way teams like Gonzaga and New Mexico seemed to be overrated this season.

So teams when they lose they are overrated, but when they win, they are still overrated?

Yeah, that isn't a baffling concept. That makes total sense. Conferences are overrated because you say so.

The Big East produced Final Four participants and National Championships. They are overrated. The A10 has not produced a Final Four participant in 17 years and has had zero national champions, but is probably underrated because not enough media are covering a league that hasn't produced at a level worth the attnetion.

More coverage for Temple! Stop talking about Connecticut...they are overrated!

[brownlavender]

being overrated is a conference getting 8 teams in when 3 of those teams have losing conference records. and when 5 of those teams lose in the first game. again the media perception is everything, if they want you to look good they will no matter what your record. put a little spin on something and the sheep will flock

[DC Muskie]

being overrated is a conference getting 8 teams in when 3 of those teams have losing conference records. and when 5 of those teams lose in the first game. again the media perception is everything, if they want you to look good they will no matter what your record. put a little spin on something and the sheep will flock

So like in 2011 when we lost to the overrated Marquette? Oh wait, the Big East still won the title that year.

Yeah, the media was way off. More attention needed to be given to the A10.

Are we now going to be overrated with our new media exposure? I thought more media exposure was a good thing. Only when it's not, because really it just shows you that the conference is overrated.

Seriously, "overrated" is like screaming"ballhog" on the playground.

[brownlavender]

having one or two good teams in a conference does not make it a great conference. what about vcu and butler in the final four? what about butler's back to back national title games. was that becasuse they were in a great conference? absolutely not. overrated is when media hypes up a league like espn has done with the big east the last five years. were they a damn good league? sure they were. but were they good enough to desereve the amount of bids they have got the last 3 or four years?. absolutely not. when you have teams like uc that play sister mary of the poor in then their non conference schedule then go 7-10 in conference and then claim how tough it is then lose again in the first round. that's being overrated as a conference when there was many other teams with winning conferecne records and ten times tougher non conference records but because of the perception of the big east they get in. and by the way media exposure is a great thing that was my point, even though it may not be desereved if the media preaches it then it must be gospel because the media rules peoples minds these days. so i'm all for the big east perception to stay how it is even if it isn't deserved

[DC Muskie]

So the media is now responsible for the number of bids a conference receives? I didn't realize that.

Again I'll go back to the tournament two years ago. We got killed by a team that went 9-9 in the Big East. They were arguably the last team from that conference to receive a bid. Using your argument, they shouldn't have been in, because the league was overrated. And yet, unlike Butler and VCU that year, we lost in the first round. Another team that finished with the same record in the Big East won the entire thing.

It's pretty hard to change the minds of the masses who are clearly steered like sheep to think that the Big East is a great conference when a team who wins the national championship was the 9th seed in their conference tournament. You have to recognize that fact.

Maybe, just maybe, people are correct in thinking that the Big East isn't overrated, since you know, they won the title, and by a team who couldn't finish in the top half of their conference during the season, and the media is simply reflecting the fact that the Big East was pretty darn good that year, simply by the fact that UConn won the title while losing nine games in conference.

[brownlavender]

teams go on runs in the tournement it happens, anybody can beat anybody. vcu was the last team in and went to the final four. the overrated part comes in when just by league perception they get 8 or 9 teams in. hell if the a 10 got 10 teams in i'm pretty sure we could get one in the final four. it's just a matter of percentages. it's never been my arguement that the big east isn't a good or great league but to get what they have got the past 4 or 5 years in the tournamnet has been ridiculous as proven by there overall record. sure there's usually one or two really strong teams that make a run but that's not the arguement here. were talking overall performance by the teams that got it. most of there teams have been ousted in the first round every year leaving there really good teams in the tournament. so to say they are not overrated because they have one or two good teams make runs makes no sense when you look at the big picture. put that many teams in out of the big 10 or acc and you would get the same overall results.

[UCGRAD4X]

But the odds of getting a team on a run applies to teams leaving earlier than they should with the number of teams in.

[DC Muskie]

So we are underrated since we have never reached the Final Four, let alone win a national championship?

Teams lose in the tournaments. Are you suggesting that all of the Big East teams should win all of their games, simply because they got a higher number of teams in the tournament?

You really can't argue a conference is overrated, since the term of overrated can never be defined, when a team that finished 9th wins the title. That's beyond going on a "run," that's just dominance. UConn finished that season on an eleven game win streak. That simply doesn't "just happen."

The A10 got five teams in this season. Let's see if we can go on one of these runs that "just happens," and produce our first Final Four team in 17 years.

And since it's about numbers, how on one hand do you argue that the Big East was overrated, since a number of their teams got knocked out, and yet a Big East team was left standing? Did the rest of the teams in other conferences use all of their energies dispatching the teams that finished higher than UConn that by the time they played the Huskies they were spent?

In last years tournament, the Big Ten sent half of their members to the dance and produced one Final Four participant. The Big 12 sent 40% of their conference and produced the same. The A10 sent the same number of teams as the Big 12 did and did not produce a Final Four participant. So I guess even though a number of teams lost early, they were still able to have a team in the final weekend of the tournament.

Look I understand you and others won't get off this "overrated" idea, even though you can't really argue it well. Basically it's like porn, you know it when you see it. It's a stupid argument because at the end of the day if someone from your conference wins the title, that conference will be viewed as really good. As it should be. Even you admit the Big East is good. So I'm not sure how you can argue that is overrated when the evidence points out that only one team, from one conference gets to win the title. And that conference in 2011 was the Big East.

[Kahns Krazy]

My primary argument for the Big East being overrated stems from the use of the RPI to rank teams. The Big East has notoriously scheduled cupcakes non-conference.

Look at Providence. Their best non-conference win is against powerhouse Bryant, which I was lead to believe was a furnace manufacturer. Still, they managed to put up an 8-4 record in non conference play largely on the backs of the bottom 100 teams in basketball. UC does the same thing. They all do it. The Big East wound up with a non-conference record of something like 150-30. Then, all the way through conference play, every team gets the benefit of that league record compounded by the RPI formula. That flawed system is used to determine the quality of the wins when in reality, those wins are all biased.

You ask how a conference can be overrated? Quite simply, it's when the rating system is flawed.

[DC Muskie]

So every conference is overrated then?

[X-band '01]

You think of a furnace, I just think of a former coach of Alabama.

[Steve A]

So like in 2011 when we lost to the overrated Marquette? Oh wait, the Big East still won the title that year.

Yeah, the media was way off. More attention needed to be given to the A10.

Are we now going to be overrated with our new media exposure? I thought more media exposure was a good thing. Only when it's not, because really it just shows you that the conference is overrated.

Seriously, "overrated" is like screaming"ballhog" on the playground.

Actually, the 2011 tournament is a perfect example of how overrated the Big East has been. As stated several times, they load up with cupcakes, play each other, and then have overinflated RPIs and therefore, drastically higher seeds than they deserve.

The Big East got 11 teams in the tournament that year. Yes, UConn went on a run and Marquette beat Xavier. Beyond those two schools, not one of the other NINE Big East teams beat a non Big East team seeded better than 11th, despite getting favorable draws they didn't deserve.

5th seed West Virginia lost to Kentucky (they did beat a 12 seed)
3rd seed Syracuse beat a 14 seed, then lost to Marquette
UC beat an 11, and then lost to UConn.
4th seeded Louisville lost to 13th seeded Morehead St.
6th seeded Georgetown lost to 11th seeded VCU
2nd seeded Notre Dame lost to 10th seeded Florida St.
Top seed Pitt lost to 8th seed Butler
6th seed St. John's lost to 11th seed Gonzaga

This was not the only year this kinds of things happened.

[Xman95]

You really can't argue a conference is overrated

Yes, actually you can. And many people have.

[Xman95]

By the way, I think the MWC was the top rated conference in the country based on RPI. And, as we all know, the RPI is a tool used for rating teams and helping to determine who gets into the tourney. A lot of people put stock into that system and felt the MWC was the best conference out there.

As of now, there's only one team from that conference that is still alive. Not one of those teams won a game as a lower seed. That doesn't seem like something that should happen to teams from the best conference out there. It would make sense that one could claim the MWC was overrated.

[Juice]

By the way, I think the MWC was the top rated conference in the country based on RPI. And, as we all know, the RPI is a tool used for rating teams and helping to determine who gets into the tourney. A lot of people put stock into that system and felt the MWC was the best conference out there.

As of now, there's only one team from that conference that is still alive. Not one of those teams won a game as a lower seed. That doesn't seem like something that should happen to teams from the best conference out there. It would make sense that one could claim the MWC was overrated.

I think they were #2 in the Sagarin Ratings. Computer numbers did have them high. They also did get over 50% of their teams in the tournament but did nothing with the opportunities.

[paulxu]

I assume all you guys who understand this overrated conference stuff are just killing it in your brackets.

Mine, on the other hand, sucks big time.

[Kahns Krazy]

So every conference is overrated then?

Every conference that plays a disproportionate number of non-conference games against the weakest teams in the country is, yes. The more disproportionate, the more the overrating.

[DC Muskie]

Actually, the 2011 tournament is a perfect example of how overrated the Big East has been. As stated several times, they load up with cupcakes, play each other, and then have overinflated RPIs and therefore, drastically higher seeds than they deserve.

The Big East got 11 teams in the tournament that year. Yes, UConn went on a run and Marquette beat Xavier. Beyond those two schools, not one of the other NINE Big East teams beat a non Big East team seeded better than 11th, despite getting favorable draws they didn't deserve.

5th seed West Virginia lost to Kentucky (they did beat a 12 seed)
3rd seed Syracuse beat a 14 seed, then lost to Marquette
UC beat an 11, and then lost to UConn.
4th seeded Louisville lost to 13th seeded Morehead St.
6th seeded Georgetown lost to 11th seeded VCU
2nd seeded Notre Dame lost to 10th seeded Florida St.
Top seed Pitt lost to 8th seed Butler
6th seed St. John's lost to 11th seed Gonzaga

This was not the only year this kinds of things happened.

This is hilarious. The 2011 season is the perfect example of how overrated the Big East despite the fact, that you know, a 9th place Big East team won the tournament, because other Big East teams lost.

It's incredible that other Big East teams lost in the tournament! What a theory you have created.

UC lost to the team that WON THE NATIONAL TITLE! In fact all teams lost to others who ended up losing to UConn who WON THE TITLE.

Despite the fact Marquette beat us, they also beat another higher seed...oh wait it was Syracuse that conference is overrated!

Seriously guys, quit trying...you look really stupid.

[DC Muskie]

Yes, actually you can. And many people have.

And many people are simply wrong.

I could argue in theory that the world is flat. That's wrong argument to have, because evidence proves that is in correct.

The Big East wasn't overrrated, simply because you hated the coverage they received. The Big East won titles and sent teams to the Final Four.

Any else you got, or are you going to keep pressing the same stupid "arguments?"

[DC Muskie]

Every conference that plays a disproportionate number of non-conference games against the weakest teams in the country is, yes. The more disproportionate, the more the overrating.

What does it matter if at the end of the day you send teams to the Final Four and win national titles?

Why hasn't the A10 done this? Why couldn't Xavier beat Marquette in 2011 when it's obvious to some on here that they only entered the tournament based on a flawed system that really didn't reflect their actual value?

How many conferences play the system like this? So really I have to ask again, is every conference overrated?

So many questions that people who believe conferences are "overrated" can't seem to answer.

[Steve A]

What does it matter if at the end of the day you send teams to the Final Four and win national titles?

Why hasn't the A10 done this? Why couldn't Xavier beat Marquette in 2011 when it's obvious to some on here that they only entered the tournament based on a flawed system that really didn't reflect their actual value?

How many conferences play the system like this? So really I have to ask again, is every conference overrated?

So many questions that people who believe conferences are "overrated" can't seem to answer.

No, not every conference is overrated. Overrated does not mean bad.

Overrated means consistently overranked, and eventually... overseeded, providing (hypothetically) easier routes through the NCAA tournament than a team deserves.

[Steve A]

This is hilarious. The 2011 season is the perfect example of how overrated the Big East despite the fact, that you know, a 9th place Big East team won the tournament, because other Big East teams lost.

It's incredible that other Big East teams lost in the tournament! What a theory you have created.

UC lost to the team that WON THE NATIONAL TITLE! In fact all teams lost to others who ended up losing to UConn who WON THE TITLE.

Despite the fact Marquette beat us, they also beat another higher seed...oh wait it was Syracuse that conference is overrated!

Seriously guys, quit trying...you look really stupid.

UCONN got hot, they won the Big East tournament.

Seriously, you don't think pretty much every team in that conference got a seed they didn't deserve. Go back and look at the OOC schedules from that season, it's frankly absurd. Again, UConn was the only team that really did anything but beat other Big East teams.

Once again, overrated does not equal bad. It's been a great conference and I'm thrilled Xavier is in it. But it's been overrated for a very long time.

And frankly, the coverage they received means nothing to me.

[DC Muskie]

No, not every conference is overrated. Overrated does not mean bad.

Overrated means consistently overranked, and eventually... overseeded, providing (hypothetically) easier routes through the NCAA tournament than a team deserves.

This makes no sense. If you are overseeded, doesn't that lend itself to those teams being beaten by underseeded teams?

Don't upsets happen in the tournament? Or would you rather see a tournament where chalk prevails?

How can overseeded teams, the teams who you don't think deserve their rankings have an easier path to the tournament, when they have to play underseeded teams, who you would presume to be better?

This is another place where "overrated" falls short.

What else you got?

[DC Muskie]

UCONN got hot, they won the Big East tournament.

Seriously, you don't think pretty much every team in that conference got a seed they didn't deserve. Go back and look at the OOC schedules from that season, it's frankly absurd. Again, UConn was the only team that really did anything but beat other Big East teams.

Once again, overrated does not equal bad. It's been a great conference and I'm thrilled Xavier is in it. But it's been overrated for a very long time.

And frankly, the coverage they received means nothing to me.

I'm going to let you in on a little secret here.

Every team that wins the title could be described as "getting hot."

What seeds do you think Big East teams should have received?

UConn beat people in OOC and struggled in conference then won the conference tournament and the national title. And yet their conference is consistently "overrated."

We lost to a team that year who got the last bid from the conference. That team ended up going to the Sweet 16. I don't think Xavier fans have much ground to stand on talking about how overrated other conferences are when we lose like we did to a team that we did, while at the same time another team from that conference wins the national title.

I can guarantee you Xavier fans will no longer think the Big East is overrated now that we are in it. Another example of how stupid the "overrated" argument really is.

[danaandvictory]

DC Muskie is overrated.

[X-man]

I'm going to let you in on a little secret here.

Every team that wins the title could be described as "getting hot."

What seeds do you think Big East teams should have received?

UConn beat people in OOC and struggled in conference then won the conference tournament and the national title. And yet their conference is consistently "overrated."

We lost to a team that year who got the last bid from the conference. That team ended up going to the Sweet 16. I don't think Xavier fans have much ground to stand on talking about how overrated other conferences are when we lose like we did to a team that we did, while at the same time another team from that conference wins the national title.

I can guarantee you Xavier fans will no longer think the Big East is overrated now that we are in it. Another example of how stupid the "overrated" argument really is.

I'm a Xavier fan...been a season ticketholder since about 1989. And I still think the Big Least is over-rated. Apparently others do as well. The Big Least has played the "RPI game" for years, and done so effectively enough that its teams are consistently "over-seeded" in the Dance. There are good teams in the Big Least clearly but as a league, they get too many teams into the Dance every year and they get seeds higher than they deserve on average.

[Steve A]

I'm a Xavier fan...been a season ticketholder since about 1989. And I still think the Big Least is over-rated. Apparently others do as well. The Big Least has played the "RPI game" for years, and done so effectively enough that its teams are consistently "over-seeded" in the Dance. There are good teams in the Big Least clearly but as a league, they get too many teams into the Dance every year and they get seeds higher than they deserve on average.

X-Man - Stop letting facts get in the way of a good argument. You should resort to name calling and repeating yourself to make your point.

[XU '11]

The best way to look at over-/under-rated performances in the tourney is by comparing the teams performance to the overall average number of wins that teams with that seed get (ESPN has been calling this "PASE"). Here's what the Big East looked like in 2011:

#1-seed (Expected 3.32) - Pitt (1 win)
#2 (2.41) - Notre Dame (1)
#3 (1.78) - UConn (6), Syracuse (1)
#4 (1.53) - Louisville (0)
#5 (1.15) - West Virginia (1)
#6 (1.28) - Cincinnati (1), Georgetown (0), St Johns (0)
#9 (0.58) - Villanova (0)
#11 (0.50) - Marquette (2)

Total Expected Wins - 16.89
Actual wins - 13

So despite a national championship run, the league still underperformed on the whole. That's how you can make the argument.

[Steve A]

The best way to look at over-/under-rated performances in the tourney is by comparing the teams performance to the overall average number of wins that teams with that seed get (ESPN has been calling this "PASE"). Here's what the Big East looked like in 2011:

#1-seed (Expected 3.32) - Pitt (1 win)
#2 (2.41) - Notre Dame (1)
#3 (1.78) - UConn (6), Syracuse (1)
#4 (1.53) - Louisville (0)
#5 (1.15) - West Virginia (1)
#6 (1.28) - Cincinnati (1), Georgetown (0), St Johns (0)
#9 (0.58) - Villanova (0)
#11 (0.50) - Marquette (2)

Total Expected Wins - 16.89
Actual wins - 13

So despite a national championship run, the league still underperformed on the whole. That's how you can make the argument.

Excellent stat XU, you can also factor in that 2 of the 13 wins were against other Big East schools so they were games in which a Big East team HAD to win.

[paulxu]

The way you make the argument is to compare the BE performance in the tournament with other conferences' performances.

I'm guessing they may fair pretty well, at least compared to the B1G over the last 10 years.

[paulxu]

In fact, conference perfomance (and team performance) for all the NCAA's going back to 1985 has been organized by the Post.

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/sports/apps/live-updating-mens-ncaa-basketball-bracket/

Overall confernce winning % in the tournament since then:

ACC 66
BE 61
B1G 60
SEC 60
Big 12 59
Pac 12 57
A10 50

[GoMuskies]

In fact, conference perfomance (and team performance) for all the NCAA's going back to 1985 has been organized by the Post.

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/sports/apps/live-updating-mens-ncaa-basketball-bracket/

Overall confernce winning % in the tournament since then:

FGCU 100
ACC 66
BE 61
B1G 60
SEC 60
Big 12 59
Pac 12 57
A10 50

Wow, pretty amazing.

[paulxu]

I assume there is a correlation between FGCU's wins and the attractiveness of the coach's wife.

[Masterofreality]

In fact, conference perfomance (and team performance) for all the NCAA's going back to 1985 has been organized by the Post.

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/sports/apps/live-updating-mens-ncaa-basketball-bracket/

Overall confernce winning % in the tournament since then:

ACC 66
BE 61
B1G 60
SEC 60
Big 12 59
Pac 12 57
A10 50

Flaw in that list above is the favorable seedings that some leagues have gotten from playing the RPI game. Sure you have to play the games, but having a 1st round game vs a SWAC team is a lot different than playing a game against a 3rd place team in the Big 10.

[bleedXblue]

We've all known for years the BE was over rated. Now, it was still a very good league, but not deserving of all the praise that was lauded upon them.

Its just total bullshit that Doc comes out with this article now.....after UC is getting the heave ho.

He's lost a huge amount of credibility with me.........which doesn't mean much

[X-man]

We've all known for years the BE was over rated. Now, it was still a very good league, but not deserving of all the praise that was lauded upon them.

Its just total bullshit that Doc comes out with this article now.....after UC is getting the heave ho.

He's lost a huge amount of credibility with me.........which doesn't mean much

Wow, I didn't realize that he still had any credibility with anyone other than USucks fans. And even they don't like him very much.

[DC Muskie]

I'm a Xavier fan...been a season ticketholder since about 1989. And I still think the Big Least is over-rated. Apparently others do as well. The Big Least has played the "RPI game" for years, and done so effectively enough that its teams are consistently "over-seeded" in the Dance. There are good teams in the Big Least clearly but as a league, they get too many teams into the Dance every year and they get seeds higher than they deserve on average.

The "RPI Game" line that so many Xavier fans use is like a little secret that only Xavier fans can see. I'm wondering why other conferences haven't played this "RPI Game" since it's so simple to see through.

Xavier has been playing their own version of the "RPI Game" as well in order to secure at large bids. I'm not sure why it okay for us, but not for other teams.


X-Man - Stop letting facts get in the way of a good argument. You should resort to name calling and repeating yourself to make your point.

Steve, the repeated argument comes from people who keep saying, "The Big East is overrated."

When presented with facts, such as winning national titles, you and others continue to point out "Well they are still overrated despite the fact they produce national titles." It's obvious that you and others think national titles are meaningless in your quest to justify your idea of what "overrated" is.

So continue to repeat the idea that the Big East is overrated, because...well...because you and others think they are.


The best way to look at over-/under-rated performances in the tourney is by comparing the teams performance to the overall average number of wins that teams with that seed get (ESPN has been calling this "PASE"). Here's what the Big East looked like in 2011:

#1-seed (Expected 3.32) - Pitt (1 win)
#2 (2.41) - Notre Dame (1)
#3 (1.78) - UConn (6), Syracuse (1)
#4 (1.53) - Louisville (0)
#5 (1.15) - West Virginia (1)
#6 (1.28) - Cincinnati (1), Georgetown (0), St Johns (0)
#9 (0.58) - Villanova (0)
#11 (0.50) - Marquette (2)

Total Expected Wins - 16.89
Actual wins - 13

So despite a national championship run, the league still underperformed on the whole. That's how you can make the argument.

So they lost 3 games they were expected to win and that somehow means they are overrated? And Steve thinks this is fantastic argument?

The Big East won the national title, but overall the conference under performed.

Ignore the biggest prize everyone...the Big East didn't win three games they should have! Look at the "facts!"

I had to highlight the last part because it's such a priceless line in this entire thing.


Excellent stat XU, you can also factor in that 2 of the 13 wins were against other Big East schools so they were games in which a Big East team HAD to win.

And this is a bad thing? Marquette who beat us, beat Syracuse, so now the Big East is punished as overrated since one team beat another? And that team who won, beat higher seeds to do it?

Okey Dookey!

I understand I'm not going to change people's minds on this. There are many of you who have spent your entire life being pissed at a perception that the Big East has had, that you don't think was deserved.

But the Big East has won. They have produced. There are always teams in every conference who you might think are not seeded properly. But there is a committee made up of people who don't all reside in the Big East conference who put this tournament together.

Upsets happen. Chalk happens. "Overrated" is just a term that Xavier fans use towards a conference they are now giddy about joining, to discredit what overall has been an excellent basketball conference.

I never understood it, and I never will. Feel better if you want, but at the end of the day the evidence proves that the Big East is not, nor has it ever been "overrated." I point to the last ten years and the Final Fours, and national championships they produced.

[DC Muskie]

Flaw in that list above is the favorable seedings that some leagues have gotten from playing the RPI game. Sure you have to play the games, but having a 1st round game vs a SWAC team is a lot different than playing a game against a 3rd place team in the Big 10.

This is what I was talking about. The Big East teams are overrated when they win, and overrated when they lose.

They beat teams they are supposed to beat, but when they lose Xavier fans point the finger and shout "OVERRATED!"



We've all known for years the BE was over rated. Now, it was still a very good league, but not deserving of all the praise that was lauded upon them.

Yes, WE have all known that. They deserved proper praise, not over the top praise that comes from winning.

[MHettel]

Someday I fully expect to be walking down the street and run into DC Muskie, arguing with a fire hydrant.

[ammtd34]

So they lost 3 games they were expected to win and that somehow means they are overrated? And Steve thinks this is fantastic argument?


I agree with you on this one.

To counter the, "A Big East team had to win since they played each other" argument, one also had to lose. It's impossible to determine whether or not the team that lost those games would have beaten a different opponent, but if they had, they would have made up that 3 game gap.

[DC Muskie]

Someday I fully expect to be walking down the street and run into DC Muskie, arguing with a fire hydrant.

It depends on what the fire hydrant was arguing...

If the fire hydrant thinks that Xavier should be independent, or that no one will televise our games if Fox fails, or suggesting that since professional sports have divisions, so should college basketball, or if said fire hydrant thinks the Big East is overrated because some of their teams lost in the tournament, then yes I will argue with a fire hydrant.

I would just repeat everything I said to you.

[Masterofreality]

This is what I was talking about. The Big East teams are overrated when they win, and overrated when they lose.

They beat teams they are supposed to beat, but when they lose Xavier fans point the finger and shout "OVERRATED!"

Yes, WE have all known that. They deserved proper praise, not over the top praise that comes from winning.

West Virginia, Pitt and Notre Dame were most assuredly NOT overrated when Xavier beat them. :laugh:

[Smails]

I can't wait until this argument takes the inevitable turn: "Only people who live in Cincinnati and the midwest think that way"

#ghostsoffiveguysspast

[DC Muskie]

I agree with you on this one.

To counter the, "A Big East team had to win since they played each other" argument, one also had to lose. It's impossible to determine whether or not the team that lost those games would have beaten a different opponent, but if they had, they would have made up that 3 game gap.

Right.

Also, was the A10 underrated because Richmond went to the Sweet 16 that year, while Xavier was overseeded with a 6th? Did Temple do what was expected of them by beating a lower seed, while beating a higher seed? What's the proper conclusion to the A10 value that tournament?

[DC Muskie]

I can't wait until this argument takes the inevitable turn: "Only people who live in Cincinnati and the midwest think that way"

I'm thisclose to telling all of you how incredibly white all of you are when it comes to describing things as "overrated."

Be patient.

[nuts4xu]

The Big East was a great basketball conference, in fact one of the best, before they expanded to 16 schools. They continued to be a great basketball conference with 16 teams, but the league was too big for its own good. From the time they expanded to 16 schools, there was no way the conference could sustain itself and was putting off the inevitable.

Now that is has been shuffled and down to 10 (perhaps 12 teams), it will be important to pay the RPI game a little differently. All of the schools will need to examine how they play the RPI game and ensure the OOC part of the schedule is planned accordingly. I think this is something all of the successful basketball leagues should understand. We have been doing it for years, while some of our A-10 partners didn't always see the value of playing tough non con schedules.

It will be interesting to see how ESPN treats the Big East after all of these years of slobbing their nob. Does anyone know if the Big East will continue to partner with the Big 12 for "Big Monday"? With the Big East now hitching their wagons to Fox, my guess is ESPN will neglect the BE much more than ever before.

I don't know how over rated the BE has been in the past. They seem to play tough conference schedules that should prepare them for the NCAA Tourney. They win a fare share, and lose a bunch too. At this point in time, I don't really see much of a need to figure it out either. F**k the old big East, they are dead as fried chicken.

Just like the Solo Cup Company, and Hostess, and Oldsmobile....the old Big East no longer exists. I don't care about stuff that no longer exists.

[GoMuskies]

Does anyone know if the Big East will continue to partner with the Big 12 for "Big Monday"?

That would probably really piss Fox off since Fox has the rights to all Big East games.

[DC Muskie]

The Big East was a great basketball conference, in fact one of the best, before they expanded to 16 schools. They continued to be a great basketball conference with 16 teams, but the league was too big for its own good. From the time they expanded to 16 schools, there was no way the conference could sustain itself and was putting off the inevitable.

Now that is has been shuffled and down to 10 (perhaps 12 teams), it will be important to pay the RPI game a little differently. All of the schools will need to examine how they play the RPI game and ensure the OOC part of the schedule is planned accordingly. I think this is something all of the successful basketball leagues should understand. We have been doing it for years, while some of our A-10 partners didn't always see the value of playing tough non con schedules.

It will be interesting to see how ESPN treats the Big East after all of these years of slobbing their nob. Does anyone know if the Big East will continue to partner with the Big 12 for "Big Monday"? With the Big East now hitching their wagons to Fox, my guess is ESPN will neglect the BE much more than ever before.

I don't know how over rated the BE has been in the past. They seem to play tough conference schedules that should prepare them for the NCAA Tourney. They win a fare share, and lose a bunch too. At this point in time, I don't really see much of a need to figure it out either. F**k the old big East, they are dead as fried chicken.

Just like the Solo Cup Company, and Hostess, and Oldsmobile....the old Big East no longer exists. I don't care about stuff that no longer exists.

Well said nuts. Reps.

[Masterofreality]

The Big East was a great basketball conference, in fact one of the best, before they expanded with SucKS.

Fixed that for you.

As to Big Monday, ESPN has already announced that the ACC will be taking the Big East time slot. Fox also has big control over the Big 12 now, so they'll probably be off too.

I'm sure ESPN will fill the second Monday game with their little stepchild- the Cute Zags.

[paulxu]

I'm sure ESPN will fill the second Monday game with their little stepchild- the Cute Zags.

Were you listening? I was in the car for about 15 minutes last hour. They spent about 10 minutes just absolutely ripping the hell out of Georgetown.
They hosed them from curb to curb. Overrated, underperforming, yady, yady....

Then they built Gonzaga up, reviewing how many times they lost in the NCAA's to one/two seeds(until this year).

For a break in the hate/love fest they went to Buzz who basically told them to pound sand and he wasn't going to get into a dialogue about UCLA.
You rater guys would have loved the first part.

[X-man]

[QUOTE=DC Muskie;389362]The "RPI Game" line that so many Xavier fans use is like a little secret that only Xavier fans can see. I'm wondering why other conferences haven't played this "RPI Game" since it's so simple to see through.Xavier has been playing their own version of the "RPI Game" as well in order to secure at large bids. I'm not sure why it okay for us, but not for other teams.

In fact the A10 began playing the "RPI game" several years ago with its conference scheduling strategy that divided the league into tiers (of strength) and asked schools to schedule wins if they were in the lower tiers. This scheduling philosophy, I understand, came about at least in part because of an "RPI game" exercise that I put together showing how a league that collectively schedules wins through buying games can move the average RPI up 50-80 slots using fairly realistic assumptions. I was asked by Xavier's athletic people to provide the exercise for use in scheduling strategies, and the rethinking of conference scheduling philosophy followed. How big a role my exercise played in this, I do not know.

At that time, there was no adjustment for where games were played, so playing "the RPI game" required lots of "buy" games. Because of this, leagues like the Big Least made sure that home-and-home scheduling was not part of the deal. This, of course, is why it was also difficult then for most leagues outside those with fat TV deals to pull off the full Big Least strategy. Thankfully the RPI formula was changed to take into account where games are played, reducing the Big Least's ability to simply buy better RPI's.

[GoMuskies]

Losing to Wichita State and Florida Gulf Coast aren't exactly the same thing.

But that loss on Saturday WAS a disaster for the Zags program.

[wkrq59]

Get accustomed to the local bashing of the Big East now by the Enquirer's UC-ronin apologist Bill Koch and by Doc. So far it's been four snide slaps in the face by each since the announcement was made. I was very much afraid that for both Butler and XU these first couple of years the "Becareful what you wish for because you might get it" will be an oft repeated caveat. However, after watching the games of the weekend I'm convinced that Xavier and Butler are both a couple of bigs away from being way up in the mix. One thing is for certain--shoulder pads, thigh pads, elbow pads and face masks might be a good idea for league games which are more like rugby than basketball. Damn, I've never seen so many fouls. Remember, 77-66 and 76-53. Go Muskies

[waggy]

Solo Cup Co. is dead? Damn.