Nice seeing them get destroyed.
Nova
- Thread starter shields
- Start date
No BE teams in the Sweet Sixteen?
When was the last time that happened?
When was the last time that happened?
Michigan destroyed them and now Purdue. Also I think RU winning 7 games in the conference was impressive.
2013-14 - 2-seed Nova and 3 -seed Creighton made it out of the Round of 64. Nova got beaten by 12 by 7-seed UConn, and Creighton got beaten by 30 by 6-seed Baylor.
The big east deserved 0 teams in the NCAA as someone said earlier. PSU Nebraska Indiana heck even RU would have showed up better against the teams that the big eastern athletic conference got totally showmaned against
We really dodged a bullet when we didn't hire Wright.
Will be one step above the Horizon League.
May have a team that's good but as a league in 10 years they will be irrelevant.
Think Gonzaga in the WCAC.
I said before the tournament that the Big East did not deserve 4 teams and I still believe that. This year there was no comparison between the strength of the Big 10 and the Big East. Michigan and Purdue both destroyed Villanova and Michigan beat them at the Pavilion. RU won 7 games in the Big 10 which I think is quite remarkable. It is an amazing league.
When the football teams left the big east, I thought the big east bb conference would slowly fade away to near AAC, or old Atlantic 10 status.... the thought being that the fb/bb conferences would have an advantage on selection day, and in recruiting and remaining relevant
after the repeated success of Nova, I pretty much decided I was wrong, that somehow this one team would keep the big east relevant, and as long as there was the one powerhouse, a few other teams would do enough to get NCAA bids
is it now possible that the decline has begun for the big east, the one I thought would happen more readily?.....
not really sure of that, but what happens with Nova over the next couple of years
will help determine.
after the repeated success of Nova, I pretty much decided I was wrong, that somehow this one team would keep the big east relevant, and as long as there was the one powerhouse, a few other teams would do enough to get NCAA bids
is it now possible that the decline has begun for the big east, the one I thought would happen more readily?.....
not really sure of that, but what happens with Nova over the next couple of years
will help determine.
Last edited:
I really like your humor and miss having the Wright NCAA Championships with a Rutgers banner.
The Villanova loss to Purdue wasn't just a beatdown, it was a total annihilation. And it wasn't just that Edwards was making 3's from everywhere. It was obvious that Purdue was physically dominant and manhandled Villanova. But for the final 5 minutes or so when Villanova got hot and made some 3's , it would have been at least a 30-35 point loss. If not worse.
What's happening to the Big East now is that it is very hard to maintain dominance and relevance in a basketball only league . Other so-called "minor sports" just do not replace the dollars and exposure that exists in a league that includes big time college football.
What's happening to the Big East now is that it is very hard to maintain dominance and relevance in a basketball only league . Other so-called "minor sports" just do not replace the dollars and exposure that exists in a league that includes big time college football.
I think long term, the dollars issue becomes a compounding factor for the league. Less money makes it harder for league teams to keep up with teams from other leagues, or recover from mistakes like hiring the wrong coach.
This year's performance in the NCAAs cost the Big East about $14 million over the next six years, compared to 2 years ago when they had one Sweet 16 and one Elite 8 team. That is $14 million the league is never getting back. A similar performance next year would cost them another $14 million.
A dominant team like Villanova or Gonzaga can probably roll with the revenue loss. But for teams struggling with success and finances, the revenue loss can push them across the line. Each team in the Big East that crosses the line means less success and revenue for the league, which will pull other teams closer to the line and eventually across the line.
(Of course, the converse is also true. If there are multiple teams that show consistent success, they generate revenue that pulls the league upward. Over the next few years, we'll see which direction the Big East goes.)
From ‘15 to ‘18 the B10 had a slightly better winning percentage than the BE (37-25 vs 29-22), while the BE had 2 championships including 1 over a B10 opponent.
The BE lost a great deal at the top last offseason with Nova guys going to the NBA and Xavier losing Mack to Louisville.
I don’t think anyone has ever suggested that the BE is better than the B10, but for people to talk about the BE like it’s some crappy 1 bid league is absurd and a poor look, unless you are going for the basketball ignorant look.
The BE lost a great deal at the top last offseason with Nova guys going to the NBA and Xavier losing Mack to Louisville.
I don’t think anyone has ever suggested that the BE is better than the B10, but for people to talk about the BE like it’s some crappy 1 bid league is absurd and a poor look, unless you are going for the basketball ignorant look.
Purdue was my sleeper Final 4 pick and I have them going to the finals vs Duke. They play type of game that does well in tournament and have the elite guard you need to go far. The south regional is pretty weak with UVA & Tennessee at 1&2
Time for the big ten to get more tourney spots than the BE. The leagues strength was obvious this year. Any other year and we may have had 17-18 wins.
The Big Ten got 8 and the Big East got 4. By my math, yep, the Big Ten got more.
Down year for BE and a down year for Villanova. But I suspect both will rebound in the near future. We will get our chance to prove how good we are versus BE teams with SHU at home next year - and I hope we do prove we are that good.
The original poster who suggested it's a 1 bid league is way over the top...it doesn't benefit college basketball or the NCAA to have a bad Big East. It just requires fair accountability for the performance of the leader of the league or flagship that Nova is.
There are other leagues and programs that could warrant an at large bid down the road vs thinking it's a given that beating Villanova is suddenly an automatic ticket punched to the NCAAS.
If you look at it objectively, I don't think the Pac 12 is as bad as its been made out to be, but to ignore the Purdue Nova game as an aberration or fluke, would be false.
Many Big East fans from Nova and beyond acknowledge that this wasn't a good year for the league and Nova getting crunched in the Round of 32, is an item to watch out for. To ignore it would be probably worse than acknowledging it.
Purdue looked terrific last night. Their big guy (Haarms) has improved a lot , especially on defense. When Purdue's offense is clicking they are a legit Final 4 team. I don't recall his having had much impact in games against Rutgers. Frankly the beatdown Villanova experienced wasn't a whole lot worse than what Rutgers experienced against Purdue.
Calculated from here: https://m.herosports.com/ncaa-tourn...t-earned-conference-2017-basketball-fund-a7a7 , and a Washington Post article projecting NCAA distributions into the future.
Look at how the B10 performed in the NCAA tournament from 2006 to 2008. It was putrid, but they bounced back. The BE will be fine.