Gottlieb on ESPN Last Night

[Smails]

He can be pretty polarizing, but I definitely think he won some favor with the A-10 and XU last night. He and Reese Davis had a nice little exchange when the topic of Syracuse came up. Paraphrasing

I'm sick and tired of hearing how an overrated Big East beats up on each other. It's a tired argument. This what I know about Syracuse, they played a tough schedule but didn't beat anyone. Two middle of the pack A-10 teams came into Syracuse and thumped them, yet nobody gives the a-10 credit for beating up on each other.

Something like that

[DC Muskie]

Nice. I'm sick of it as well. The BE has 400 teams and they act like it is NFC East.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Nice. I'm sick of it as well. The BE has 400 teams and they act like it is NFC East.

Haha Nice. NFC East really is amazing, and I can remember getting into some pretty big arguments over that with people on the MM board earlier this year. Two years in a row 3 teams in the playoffs??? Unheard of.

[Michigan Muskie]

It's a never-ending battle that A-10 teams cannot win. There is far too much Big 6 conference arrogance among the casual fans, so why fight it anymore? Instead, I plan to use it to my advantage and make these idiots back up their know-it-all with cash.

A neighbor of mine, and fan of Michigan State, is utterly convinced that Xavier would have struggled to place 5th in the Big Ten this year. I understand that he hasn't seen many A-10 games, but he watches an arseload of Big Ten games. I've also watched an arseload of Big Ten games and all I see is seven teams on the outside looking in and four teams that will get bumped before the second weekend with the *possible* exception of Wisconsin.

It's all about the name on the chest. He'd lay $500 on Florida straight up over Xavier in a heartbeat. I told him I can't wait for our bracket contest. His cash is as good as mine.

[xudash]

It's a never-ending battle that A-10 teams cannot win. There is far too much Big 6 conference arrogance among the casual fans, so why fight it anymore? Instead, I plan to use it to my advantage and make these idiots back up their know-it-all with cash.

A neighbor of mine, and fan of Michigan State, is utterly convinced that Xavier would have struggled to place 5th in the Big Ten this year. I understand that he hasn't seen many A-10 games, but he watches an arseload of Big Ten games. I've also watched an arseload of Big Ten games and all I see is seven teams on the outside looking in and four teams that will get bumped before the second weekend with the *possible* exception of Wisconsin.

It's all about the name on the chest. He'd lay $500 on Florida straight up over Xavier in a heartbeat. I told him I can't wait for our bracket contest. His cash is as good as mine.


Hurt him big-time MichiganM. Turn it into a wire transfer. What an arrogant, uneducated dick. Like you said, it's all about the name on the jersey with some of these tools.

Then again, that is what makes the Dance so much fun, watching some of these supposed Goliaths fall.

[Xpectations]

People's preconceived notions of conferences very often come into play. Those notions don't die, but more importantly, their conclusions are vastly overexaggerated.

Those that have a hard-on for the Big East generally define that conference by noting its top teams: Georgetown, Louisville, UConn and Marquette.

Those that don't respect the A-10 define it by noting the typical bottom teams: St. Bona, La Salle, Duquesne, Fordham.

Each definition offers evidence of why it's perfectly justifiable to view each conference in your preconceived way. That's not to suggest that the Big East isn't better than the A-10 -- it is, even this year -- but the divide is not nearly as wide as those people want to, or want you to, believe.

The extension of that argument is that playing in the Big East means playing elite teams night in and night out. Of course, they never mention that you're often playing teams like Rutgers, South Florida, St. John's, Depaul, Providence or Seton Hall.

By the same token, those people don't mention that in the A-10 you do have to play Xavier, St. Joe's, UMass, Dayton and Rhode Island, and not just the bottom dwellers.

Again, it's all about exaggerating the quality of your conference and denigrating the quality of the other conference. There are qualitative differences, but those differences are too narrow for them so they choose to define the respective conferences using opposite extremes.

Sometimes RPI is used to justify the notion. The only reason some of those teams have higher RPIs than bottom-dwelling A-10 teams is because they play and lose to higher RPI teams -- often badly, though the RPI doesn't care about that.

For example, St. John's has an above average RPI (#153) despite beating no one. Their only win in 16 games against Top-100 RPI teams was to #98 Providence (a 2-pt win at St. John's). So despite being 0-15 against teams above #98 in the RPI, they don't appear to be a very bad team -- again, simply because they lose to lots of good teams.

Now look at Seton Hall. They have a very respectable RPI of #101. They must be pretty good. Well, they're mainly "good" by RPI standards because they play, and lose (and often badly), to the legitmately good RPI teams in the Big East. Seton Hall is 2-11 against the Top-100 RPI teams (and one of those wins is also against #98 Providence). They are 15-3 against teams with RPIs > 100. Their average RPI win is #178.

Is Seton Hall honestly one of those "elite" teams that you play night in and night out in the Big East? If you buy that argument then they better be because they ended up 6 full spots from the bottom of the conference standings.

West Virginia finished above 10 of the 16 teams in the Big East. That MUST mean they are one of those elite teams you play night in and night out. Yet they are 6-8 against Top-100 RPI teams, and 15-1 against RPI > 100 opponents. Is that honestly the marks you'd expect from "elite" teams? Don't get me wrong; that's respectable, but it's hardly elite.

Again, there is no question in my mind the Big East is a better conference than the A-10 despite the gap narrowing this season. I think it's foolish to believe otherwise. But the notion many espouse that the Big East is beyond brutal and the A-10 is beyond cupcake is waaaay more foolish.

[DC Muskie]

A neighbor of mine, and fan of Michigan State, is utterly convinced that Xavier would have struggled to place 5th in the Big Ten this year. I understand that he hasn't seen many A-10 games, but he watches an arseload of Big Ten games. I've also watched an arseload of Big Ten games and all I see is seven teams on the outside looking in and four teams that will get bumped before the second weekend with the *possible* exception of Wisconsin.

You know what solves this problem? Winning in March. Win these next two weeks.

[LA Muskie]

Guys, this is simple. We would do absolutely fine in any conference in the country. The "middle" of the A-10 would get crushed. The bottom would be a laughingstock.

[Xpectations]

Guys, this is simple. We would do absolutely fine in any conference in the country. The "middle" of the A-10 would get crushed. The bottom would be a laughingstock.

I disagree. Our bottom 5 this year includes Duquesne, St. Louis and Fordham. They would certainly not compete for any major conference championship, but I don't believe they'd get crushed any more or less than mediocre teams that are already in those conferences.

Our middle, the next 5 up, includes Dayton, Richmond and Charlotte. I honestly don't see them getting "crushed" in those other conferences. Richmond beat Virginia Tech, who is #4 in the ACC. Dayton beat Louisville (at Lou) and Pittsburgh (by 25), who are #2 and #7 respectively in the Big East. Neither of those teams lost to top teams in BCS conferences. Charlotte beat Clemson, who is #3 in the ACC.

I think many people here fall into that thinking though: our middle teams will be crushed and bottom teams a laughing stock. I think they'd be about where they are in our conference -- at least much closer to that than your descriptions.