Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

241 - 260 of 1405 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,088 Posts
That just simply isn't true.

Xavier and UD were in the same league for 18 years. How were those 18 years for men's basketball at Dayton and Xavier? It ain't a basketball decision. Lol.


I've talked to several different people at UD. The University's desire to join the Big East is institutional-related.... not athletics related. The fan's desire is certainly men's basketball-related, but that isn't the University's.

It's about perception. And thought of in the same group, class, etc as the nation's premiere Catholic universities. It's tough to explain on a message board UD's desire to be in the Big East is much more academic and perception and branding and institutional related than it is athletics related.

Yes, UD and Xavier are two different academic institutions. UD is a research institution, Xavier is a liberal arts university. But outside of the Engineering school, they are pretty darn similar. They are going after essentially the exact same type/group of potential students. Again, it's hard to explain on a message board (or maybe I just don't feel like typing it all out at 9pm) but that's where Xavier sees a strategic advantage over a close competitor like UD. Perception. Separating themselves in a very visible, public way like a Big East affiliation. It's about admissions/perception/branding/etc.

I'm tired and that isn't a very eloquent explanation above..... but if you talk to anyone at UD - the Big East thing for them isn't about athletics. It's much, much larger than that.
First, Xavier is a fine academic institution and has a nationally relevant basketball program.

Second, all of the fellow A10 fans will have to indulge me for a few seconds as I illustrate a few UD vs. Xavier facts. Per 2016 information, UD and Xavier's incoming freshman class ACT scores were comparable- UD's were marginally higher but they are really the same. UD took 16,968 applications, admitted 58% and saw 22% enroll. Xavier took 9,309, admitted 73% and saw 16% enroll. UD is considered "more selective" and Xavier "selective". Since 2000, UD enrollment grew by roughly 10%. There are two take aways here. UD is not losing students to Xavier, in fact UD is more selective and is adding students at a greater rate than Xavier. Two, UD as an institution has done quite well as a member of the A10.

If you ask anyone at UD they will tell you that they are competing against Xavier, but more so against Marquette, St. Louis, DePaul, Loyola and Duquesne. These are the larger national Catholic universities in the Mid-West that UD considers its peers.

As far as institutions go, I would stack GW and Fordham up against any national NBE school. Davidson and Richmond are superior to Xavier and Butler in terms of liberal arts schools. UMASS, VCU and Mason have large alumni bases. UD, Duquesne and SLU stack up well against Marquette, DePaul, St. John's and Seton Hall. The NBE is not superior to the A10 in terms of academic institutions.

UD likes the NBE because of Basketball and the money that comes along with it, plus the Midwestern footprint and association with similarly sized catholic schools. The NBE is not the B10 and doesnt come close to carrying a national brand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,871 Posts
What, exactly, was so bad about Bona's OOC? We can't get any "P5" schools to play us in any setting other than a buy game. We have tried and been unable to land a spot in a decent exempt tournament. What should we do?

The OOC included solid top 100 opponents in Syracuse, Hofstra, Ohio, Buffalo, and Siena. More importantly, we actually go on the ROAD and aren't afraid of true H/H series.

Finally, why does this OOC moving target only apply to smaller schools? Can we point to "P5" schools who won't leave their home courts during most, if not all, of the OOC? Isn't the committee's job to judge the entire body of work? Three wins versus the RPI top 25 is usually cited as a pretty strong accomplishment... until it isn't. The committee speaks out of both sides of its mouth. Bona's RPI and wins over top RPI opponents don't matter, yet for some reason, SU's win over Bona is cited as a reason for their inclusion into the dance. It makes no sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,871 Posts
What, exactly, was so bad about Bona's OOC? We can't get any "P5" schools to play us in any setting other than a buy game. We have tried and been unable to land a spot in a decent exempt tournament. What should we do?

The OOC included solid top 100 opponents in Syracuse, Hofstra, Ohio, Buffalo, and Siena. More importantly, we actually go on the ROAD and aren't afraid of true H/H series.

Finally, why does this OOC moving target only apply to smaller schools? Can we point to "P5" schools who won't leave their home courts during most, if not all, of the OOC? Isn't the committee's job to judge the entire body of work? Three wins versus the RPI top 25 is usually cited as a pretty strong accomplishment... until it isn't. The committee speaks out of both sides of its mouth. Bona's RPI and wins over top RPI opponents don't matter, yet for some reason, SU's win over Bona is cited as a reason for their inclusion into the dance. It makes no sense.
Bill, I agree with your 2nd paragraph.. dead on, no kidding, wtf do we have to do? But I don't believe our OOC was great though. We got solid teams, beat a lot of them, but that was a 10-1 slate (in hindsight). We are against a stacked deck, so we have to win almost everything. It still shouldn't have been enough to exclude us. That's why the RPI spit out #30 for us. Because our OOC was decent (per computer), with mostly decent teams, and 8 wins.

I guess you take someone like South Carolina. The big knock on them was that their OOC sucked. And it did. It was a little worse than ours when you look at the teams they played, but they went 12-0. No they didn't hit the road except against Clemson. But our RPI profiles were very similar, we actually benefited because our A10 slate was stronger than their SEC slate. We get rid of the Hofstra (SC's top OOC win btw .. at home) and Siena losses and there's no question we're in.

I think I know what you're saying though - and after looking at the numbers - no it didn't suck, I stand corrected. It wasn't sexy. For non-P5 teams like us, wins over Buffalo and Ohio don't outweigh losses to Siena and Hofstra. Because they hate us. Fuck, Monmouth's schedule was sexy, and they won a ton of games, and it wasn't enough. Stacked deck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Reading comprehension: I said not a good look, i.e. optics for a guy representing most college basketball fans. Subtle point that not surprising a guy who roots for a program that protects felons and has no moral compass can't understand. Who is next year's disciplinary problem? Should we start a pool? Larceny, sexual assault your guys are raising the bar what's next?
Damn, what did UD ever do to Fordham to get this nastiness.

Yes, I and Flyer75 both understand Syracuse is in the Final 4. That doesn't change the fact that given their performance over the course of the regular season relative to other teams (St Bona, for example) they didn't deserve a bid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
JAF1962 -

Not going to derail this thread....

But I would urge you to actually have a discussion with someone in leadership at UD.

UD's desire to be in the Big East isn't men's basketball driven - it's institutional.

Similarly, Xavier's desire to have UD NOT in the Big East, is NOT men's basketball related, it's institutionally-driven.

Again, Xavier and UD were in the same conference for 18 years. Take a look how those 18 years were for UD. It isn't a primarily a basketball thing for either school..... it's everything else I described for the institution.

Again, you as a fan probably want to join the Big East primarily for men's basketball. Which is fine. But have a conversation with someone from the University. You might be surprised.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,088 Posts
JAF1962 -

Not going to derail this thread....

But I would urge you to actually have a discussion with someone in leadership at UD.

UD's desire to be in the Big East isn't men's basketball driven - it's institutional.

Similarly, Xavier's desire to have UD NOT in the Big East, is NOT men's basketball related, it's institutionally-driven.

Again, Xavier and UD were in the same conference for 18 years. Take a look how those 18 years were for UD. It isn't a primarily a basketball thing for either school..... it's everything else I described for the institution.

Again, you as a fan probably want to join the Big East primarily for men's basketball. Which is fine. But have a conversation with someone from the University. You might be surprised.
You should read my post again. Specifically the third paragraph and the last paragraph. UD does not compete against Xavier for students as much as you would like to believe, nor does the NBE carry the brand that many believe it has.

I'm not sure what you mean by "how those 18 years were for UD". I provided facts that suggest UD has done quite well as an institution with its A10 affiliation. Facts that would also suggest that it's done better than Xavier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Ok. You can believe what you want to believe.

I'd just recommend again having a conversation with someone actually in leadership at UD and ask why they want to join the Big East - from the University level - the primary factor isn't men's basketball.

You said anyone who thinks Xavier doesn't want UD in the Big East for any reason other than men's basketball is "delusional". And I'm just telling you, with certainty, that isn't the case. They were in the same league for 18 years - it isn't a men's basketball thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,054 Posts
Right not the A10 has 14 teams. Many have been together for a long time.
If anyone was going to construct a schedule to maximize the number of NCAA bids each year, and 14 should do better than 12, and certainly better than 10,why isn't it working each year for the A10?

… why can't the A10 get more, consistently, acting together the way JP suggests?
I
If those teams on the bottom of a league have any value in JP's equations, it's to absorb losses for the good of the teams on the top. Why would you drop them?
Your premise is highly flawed: The WAC had 16 teams from 1997-2000. Why didn’t they get 10 bids? Because San Jose State, Tulsa, UTEP, BYU, Rice, UNLV and New Mexico aren’t Duke, UNC, Louisville, Miami, Pitt, Syracuse and Notre Dame.

It’s not about the NUMBER of the teams, it’s about the ratios of what kind of programs you have in the league, and what they consistently do OOC.
For example, the WCC (10) isn’t matching the Big East (10) because they’ve only got three good teams and you’ve got eight. They went .519 OOC, not .760.

The A-10 doesn’t have enough programs we can rely on to win at a consistent clip OOC against the breakdown of teams we need.

Dayton, St. Joe’s, Davidson, St. Bona, Fordham, Duquesne hit their marks.
Richmond came close.
VCU somehow got away with it because the committee is really dumb. VCU is a damned good team, but Wichita State, VCU and San Diego State scheduled tough and didn’t win. Two of the three got bids.

But we’ve got:
Saint Louis played OOC SOS 172 and went 5-7
UMass played OOC SOS 258 and went 7-5
LaSalle played OOC SOS 108 (for some reason) and went 3-7.


I can craft a OOC SOS model for the Atlantic 10 that gives us the best chance of getting max bids. And that’s a topic we HAVE discussed at length. To death. And we’re still hamstrung by what games we can get. We don’t have the resources of other conferences to buy the games we need, get invited to the tourneys we need, or get the offers of guarantee road games we need (Oklahoma hasn’t played at an A-10 school since 1991. Doubt they sign a home & home with Dayton or VCU).

But…

Yea, I'm not sure how the narrative is being spun on this A-10 forum that the Big East is the conference that needs fixing
Let’s say my wife and I have three kids. And then I scientifically prove that the ideal number of children to have is two. I’m going to spend my time lecturing my brother to stop at two, because I can’t go back in time and un-knockup wifey that third time, and social services won’t let me kick someone out of the family.


The Big East has “openings” and opportunity for alignment. Our ship has sailed on that front. I can’t reconfigure the A-10 to maximize bids without saying “Let’s kicking some teams out of the league and replace them with…” It might be fun to talk about, but it’s a waste of breath. It will never happen.

I doubt Bona to the Big East happens either. But I guess I never know if one of the visitors here or at HOLH happens to work at Xavier, Marquette, Creighton or Georgetown, reads it and says “This guy’s right. I’m going to summarize his points and give it to my AD to read on his plane trip.” That off chance of spreading wisdom via the internet into something that comes to fruition is what makes this topic worth discussing… especially since Big East expansion rumors are NEVER going away.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,490 Posts
Your premise is highly flawed:

It’s not about the NUMBER of the teams, it’s about the ratios of what kind of programs you have in the league, and what they consistently do OOC.
It's not my premise, it's yours. Just a page or so ago, you argued that the BE should go to 12, and showed how the conference game math worked out to get 8 teams in. For it to get 8 teams, you needed all but one to be better than 10-8; and the last to be 9-9.

You can't (as you have pointed out) get to those conference results without (in your example, not mine) have 3 teams on the bottom absorbing loses. So it wasn't my premise, but yours.

As to the OOC, somehow it was managed to get 6 A10 teams a number of years ago. If this league is worth anything, they ought to be worth the ability to get that done consistently. It doesn't just have to do with scheduling Oklahoma for a H/H. It can be done. It's been done before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,088 Posts
Ok. You can believe what you want to believe.

I'd just recommend again having a conversation with someone actually in leadership at UD and ask why they want to join the Big East - from the University level - the primary factor isn't men's basketball.

You said anyone who thinks Xavier doesn't want UD in the Big East for any reason other than men's basketball is "delusional". And I'm just telling you, with certainty, that isn't the case. They were in the same league for 18 years - it isn't a men's basketball thing.
Oh I believe that there are many reasons why Xavier would not want UD in the NBE. I said that it was delusional to argue that that from an institutional standpoint UD is at a competitive disadvantage to Xavier because Xavier is a member of the NBE. The NBE schools do not have that persona. I also understand why UD as an institution would like to be in the NBE. I believe that I posted that twice. The NBE is a collection of private catholic schools that are more similarly aligned with Dayton in terms of scope and size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,054 Posts
It's not my premise, it's yours.
I know what my premise is. You’re not making any sense. You saying two relatively true things (the Big East gets 5 bids with 10; The A-10 gets fewer bids with 14) and then asking “why doesn’t IT work for the A-10?” as if there’s some kind of connection between the two. There isn’t. The connection between ALL CONFERENCES + IDEAL SIZE = MAX BIDS is the faulty premise.

Forget the A-10 for second.

Let’s say you had Four Decent Free Agent Schools in lower leagues, and all of them went 8-4 OOC every single year against an average 175 OOC SOS.

You have the 10-team Big East, getting five bids.
You have the 10-team West Coast, getting 1, 2 or 3 bids depending on the season.

Each conferences adds two of those Decent Free Agent Schools.

The Big East is going to get a sixth team in, easy. Because Decent Free Agents are going to be about 4-14 (8-28 total) and the other 10 schools will be 110-80 instead of 90-90. The top of the league will “replace” wins in the double-round robin with wins over Decent Free Agents 2-3 times. the 6th place team is replacing a split at best with original members with WINS over the Decent Free Agents.

The West Coast Conference is NOT getting six. Probably not five. Probably not Four.
Maybe it guarantees them a second, maybe they get a third more often.

Because while 5-6-7-8 avoid two losses to Gonzaga, BYU, or SMC; and go 3-0 against Decent Free Agents (say, Grand Canyon & Denver) and become two games better, so their RPIs go up 40 places… THEY ARE STILL MORE THAN 50 RPI SPOTS FROM THE BUBBLE.


That’s the difference:

The strength of Creighton & Marquette OOC + the extra Big East Conference wins over bad teams - the Big East losses absorbed to NCAA teams = NCAA resume.

The weakness of Pepperdine, Santa Clara, USF, LMU, Pacific, Portland, San Diego + extra wins over Grand Canyon & Denver - WCC losses to Gonzaga, BYU, SMC = CBI Resume.



Does this make sense to you? You saying "JP's Conference Alignment JuJu Elixir" is A THING that can be applied to everyone, nationally with the same results. Doesn't work like that. It's not a ED pill that makes any conference Ron Jeremy. It's more like a custom health plan for each league to make each conference the healthiest it can be."

The Big East has absolutely the easiest path to max efficiency. All they need to do is take two or three unsung programs that are doing okay as is, take their TV markets, sell them BET tickets, beat them because they're worse than the current Big East and count their money.

It's a hell of a lot harder for conferences below them, and it's nearly impossible to ADMINISTRATE an already big conference like the A-10 or C-USA into better basketball efficiency.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
198 Posts
JP, as the committee has proven yet again, brand matters more than metrics. How else could you explain Syracuse getting in over SBU? If the NBE ever expands, it will be to elevate the brand, not game the rpi.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,915 Posts
JP, as the committee has proven yet again, brand matters more than metrics. How else could you explain Syracuse getting in over SBU? If the NBE ever expands, it will be to elevate the brand, not game the rpi.
Probably some truth to this but I think the BE gets more respect than the A10 in that regard. It wasn't an issue this year as all 5 BE teams that got in were safely in and no other BE team was even on the bubble.

Although it would be interesting to see what the committee would do if say instead of SBU on that bubble it were teams like Butler, 'Cuse, Michigan and Vandy fighting for 3 spots.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,054 Posts
JP, as the committee has proven yet again, brand matters more than metrics. How else could you explain Syracuse getting in over SBU? If the NBE ever expands, it will be to elevate the brand, not game the rpi.
Yeah, I can see that. And that's why I think adding more/getting more bids is better for that brand. Getting 5 bids (of 10) isn't viewed with the same regard as the Pac-12 is getting 7 (of 12) and the ACC is getting Nine (of 15).

Even though it might be more money per school than some other conferences, everyone's spooging over how the ACC had six Sweet 16 teams.


Don't you think it would help perception to simple have more Big East teams on the bracket, period?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
198 Posts
Yeah, I can see that. And that's why I think adding more/getting more bids is better for that brand. Getting 5 bids (of 10) isn't viewed with the same regard as the Pac-12 is getting 7 (of 12) and the ACC is getting Nine (of 15).

Even though it might be more money per school than some other conferences, everyone's spooging over how the ACC had six Sweet 16 teams.


Don't you think it would help perception to simple have more Big East teams on the bracket, period?
The focus should be on elevating the quality of play and the tournament bids/results will take care of themselves. That doesn't happen by adding bottom feeders.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,054 Posts
The focus should be on elevating the quality of play and the tournament bids/results will take care of themselves. That doesn't happen by adding bottom feeders.
That's not true at all.

You're acting like Creighton & Marquette were the No. 98 and 102 best teams in the country because that's where their RPIs are...

They beat SEVEN Top 60 RPI teams combined. The difference between their resumes as St. Bonaventure's was that they lost 7 more games against top 20 of the RPI.

Marquette & Creighton were tied for 41st in Top 50 wins, with NCAA teams like UConn, Kentucky, VCU, Providence, Pitt, Vandy and FFO teams Bonaventure, St. Mary’s.

Creighton was tied for 16th in the nation in MOST LOSSES vs the Top 50 with 9.
Marquette was tied for 23rd in the nation in MOST LOSSES vs the Top 50 with 8.

Obviously, if Marquette & Creighton win more against Seton Hall, Providence & Butler they can get into the NCAA Tournament…

But if they did each win two more games against Hall, Providence & Butler... Providence and Butler fall.


The reason Creighton & Marquette weren't in the discussion despite holding the marquee wins they needed to get an at-large:

Marquette was 107th in WIN PERCENTAGE
Creighton was 139th in WIN PERCENTAGE


It's a pretty simple concept, with an unbalanced schedule, you give your projected 6th, 7th, 8th teams the extra games against the new, lesser teams; bumping up everyone's win percentages & RPIs. (That puts Butler into the top 50, BTW).

Now they have the same number of Top 50 opportunities as before, because Butler's 48 instead 56, Creighton & Marquette have RPIs in the 60s, Top 50 wins, and will get bids as the 6th and 7th teams based on the strength of the Big East.

No one is going to notice that the new guys aren't as good as current 10, because people only scrutinize the bubble dwellers and no one looks at your 12th place team.

Once in the dance, Marquette can beat a 7 seed, because we saw them beat Wisconsin earlier. Creighton can beat a 6 seed, because we saw them beat Seton Hall.


The "Other" power conferences have schools like that already in the league, because they were added for football/TV purposes. Look at the SEC (a league the Big East dominated). They have 2 NCAA teams, you have five. They have 5 NIT teams, you had 2 that are probably better than their NIT teams. One of their NIT teams made the dance. Because they beat the tar out of the bottom six of their league.
 
241 - 260 of 1405 Posts
Top