THE BIG EAST CONFERENCE

[Seahawks08]

Elite is really accurate. I'll stick with that.

Bully for you. Doesn't make it so.

Are you going to define elite and perennial contender?

[YoUDeeMan]

The Big East is a shell of the old Big East.

Nova isn't a power that will last...it just isn't. The Big East will continue to get weaker over time.

[vutomcat]

The Big East is a shell of the old Big East.

Nova isn't a power that will last...it just isn't. The Big East will continue to get weaker over time.

Maybe, but definitely not soon. Nova's recruiting class next year includes one of the top big men in the country as well as another three star 6'10 recruit. It's hard to imagine Wojo at Marqutte letting that program fail and we all know X is always a factor. So, unless Gtown, Butler, Providence and others have an unexpected down turn they should be good for the foreseeable future.

[vutomcat]

For the Big 5 fans on this thread.

Phil Martelli: Villanova deserves more national recognition



With Villanova having already earned the program’s first-ever No. 1 ranking and, despite a recent loss at Xavier, still on its way to a top seed in the NCAA Tournament, it might be easy for some to at least partially overlook the incredible season its Big 5 rival is putting together down the road.

But that doesn’t bother Phil Martelli, who on Sunday guided Saint Joseph’s to its 24th win of the season, matching the program’s most victories since Jameer Nelson became a Hawk Hill legend more than a decade ago.

If anything, the St. Joe’s coach believes Villanova head man Jay Wright deserves more national recognition for the Wildcats’ staggering recent success.

After Sunday's win over Saint Louis, Martelli was asked if this 'Nova team reminds him of the 2003-04 St. Joe’s squad that had a perfect regular season and also briefly attained a No. 1 ranking

"Here’s what everyone has missed about Jay Wright," Martelli said. "Jay Wright has done this without pros. I had three pros on that [2003-04] team. And that was a national story from when the Eagles' season ended.

“We haven’t done enough as a basketball community to recognize what Jay has done. When you start talking about, ‘Well, Kansas does it this way, Arizona this way,’ [Villanova does] it without pros. Jay has done it for years without pros. He had a first-team All-American, Scottie Reynolds, that wasn’t a pro. That’s phenomenal. It just absolutely blows my mind how good he is at what he’s doing.”

Wright, of course, has had a few players move on to the NBA, including, most recently, Darrun Hilliard. But when you consider that the Wildcats are a blistering 87-12 over the past three seasons, Martelli’s point is certainly a fair one.

St. Joe’s, meanwhile, had a strong season two years ago to make the NCAA Tournament with current New York Knicks guard Langston Galloway leading the way, before taking a big step back last year and finishing 13-18. But now, at 24-5 and 13-3 in the Atlantic 10, the Hawks are poised to perhaps win a regular-season conference title and wear light jerseys in the first round of the NCAA Tournament.

Do they deserve more national attention for such a remarkable turnaround?

“To be honest with you, I personally don’t care about any of the recognition,” Martelli said. “As long as the guys in the room, as long as the players themselves, are enjoying the experience and are pleased with what they’re doing but not satisfied. This is a really special group having a special year.”

The players certainly are enjoying it. And they don’t mind if Villanova might be stealing a few of their headlines.

“Villanova, they’re a great team,” Bembry said from the St. Joe’s locker room after he poured in 27 points in the Hawks’ 77-63 win Sunday. “They’re obviously doing a lot better than us. They were number one in the nation. They’re a good team. It was fun playing against those guys.”

“I think we get recognized,” St. Joe’s standout senior Isaiah Miles added. “Villanova’s a really good team. But I think the city’s going to know about us, especially if we make it to the NCAA Tournament.”

The city, at least the hoops fans in it, certainly knows about the longtime head coach at St. Joe’s. And they’ll hear about him even more this week as Martelli is poised to win his 400th game after picking up career victory No. 399 on Sunday.

And even Martelli, who’s generally dismissive about personal accolades, admitted that will be the kind of recognition he’d enjoy.

“It would be pretty cool because 400, with it being 25 wins this year, that combination would be special,” said Martelli, who's in his 21st season as SJU's head coach. “I’d think a lot about my family and what they sacrificed but also what we’ve gotten for being a part of this. I would think about these assistant coaches who have worked so hard. I would think about all of those loyal people who send a text, send an email, drop a note, come up to you at a restaurant.

“I’m not gonna say it’s meaningless. It’s not meaningless. It’s a significant number.”

And Martelli hopes he can get it on Wednesday when the Hawks take on a St. Bonaventure team that handed them a rare loss earlier in February.

So do his players.

“That’s definitely something that will be special to be a part of,” Bembry said. “He’s a great coach. He’s done a great job and is a big reason why we’ve been so much better.”




Tags:

[89Hen]

Bully for you. Doesn't make it so.

Are you going to define elite and perennial contender?

The first is a sniff test, the second is bullshit. I've already said that people who talk about "contending" can pound sand.

[vutomcat]

Are you going to define elite and perennial contender?

The first is a sniff test, the second is bullshit. I've already said that people who talk about "contending" can pound sand.

Your team isn't a contender.

[89Hen]

The first is a sniff test, the second is bullshit. I've already said that people who talk about "contending" can pound sand.

Your team isn't a contender.

Correct, but that has little to do with this thread.

[vutomcat]

It's March and the madness will be starting very soon. In preparation, Bovada has updated their book for the 2016 Men's Basketball National Champion with Kansas being the current favorite at 5/1.

Jay Wright's Villanova squad has slightly improved from 16/1 in early February to its current position at 14/1 and is behind Xavier's 12/1 posting for the best odds from the BIG EAST.

Elsewhere through the conference, Providence is at 66/1, Butler is at 200/1, and Georgetown & Marquette are 500/1. Surprisingly, Seton Hall is not listed.


12/16 odds Current Odds


Kansas Jayhawks 12/1 5/1
Michigan State Spartans 12/1 5/1
North Carolina Tar Heels 6/1 9/1
Kentucky Wildcats 20/1 10/1
Oklahoma Sooners 15/2 12/1
Xavier Musketeers 20/1 12/1
Villanova Wildcats 16/1 14/1
Virginia Cavaliers 25/1 14/1
Duke Blue Devils 14/1 20/1
Maryland Terrapins 11/1 20/1
Iowa Hawkeyes 12/1 25/1
Wisconsin Badgers 200/1 25/1
Miami-Florida Hurricanes 28/1 28/1
Arizona Wildcats 33/1 33/1

[vutomcat]

Nova rolls over Georgetown in front of another sellout crowd at the Wells Fargo Center. Another Big East Championship for the Cats.

The other four likely NCAA tournament bound teams win as well- Providence, Xavier, Butler and Seton Hall.

Conference tournament starts Wednesday.

[vutomcat]

BIG EAST
VS. THE CONFERENCES

Conference Record

America East 3-0
American 5-1
ACC 5-4
Atlantic Sun 2-1
Atlantic 10 7-2
Big Sky 1-0
Big South 1-2
Big Ten 10-7
Big 12 0-2
Big West 0-1
CAA 2-0
Conference USA 4-0
Horizon 3-0
Ivy 5-0
MAAC 3-1
Mid-American 3-0
MEAC 3-0
Missouri Valley 6-1
Mountain West 1-0
Northeast 6-0
Ohio Valley 0-1
Pac-12 4-2
Patriot 0-0
SEC 7-3
Southern 3-0
Southland 0-1
SWAC 3-0
Summit 4-0
Sun Belt 1-1
West Coast 0-0
WAC 2-0
Independents 0-

[GannonFan]

BIG EAST
VS. THE CONFERENCES

Conference Record


ACC 5-4

Picked this one out to show the completely inability to use these records in any meaningful statistical way. Of the 9 games played between the Big East and ACC, 6 of them were played by 12/9/15, so almost exactly 3 months ago. Of the 9 games, 7 of the games included games against teams at or near the bottom in each conference (bottom being defined as FSU and down in the ACC - FSU is in 11th place in a 15 team ACC - and Georgetown and down in the Big East - G'town is 8th in a 10 team Big East). So, of the 9 games, only 2 of the games actually included good teams from both conferences - the Butler/Miami matchup that happened on Nov 22 (4 days before Thanksgiving) where Miami won by 10 and the nova/UVA game on Dec 19th where UVA won by 11. So even though the ACC was 2-0 in the games of importance between the two conferences, and winning both games by double digits, you'd be silly to try to draw a statistically valid trend from just two games that happened at the very start of the NCAA year and you'd be even sillier to draw any conclusions from the wider data that includes games against the dregs in both conferences. I can assume that all the other data is statistically meaningless as well until proven otherwise. I mean, the Phillies are sitting at 5-3 and in 5th place in the Grapefruit League standings, should I start looking for playoff tickets and a Red October?

[vutomcat]

BIG EAST
VS. THE CONFERENCES

Conference Record


ACC 5-4

Picked this one out to show the completely inability to use these records in any meaningful statistical way. Of the 9 games played between the Big East and ACC, 6 of them were played by 12/9/15, so almost exactly 3 months ago. Of the 9 games, 7 of the games included games against teams at or near the bottom in each conference (bottom being defined as FSU and down in the ACC - FSU is in 11th place in a 15 team ACC - and Georgetown and down in the Big East - G'town is 8th in a 10 team Big East). So, of the 9 games, only 2 of the games actually included good teams from both conferences - the Butler/Miami matchup that happened on Nov 22 (4 days before Thanksgiving) where Miami won by 10 and the nova/UVA game on Dec 19th where UVA won by 11. So even though the ACC was 2-0 in the games of importance between the two conferences, and winning both games by double digits, you'd be silly to try to draw a statistically valid trend from just two games that happened at the very start of the NCAA year and you'd be even sillier to draw any conclusions from the wider data that includes games against the dregs in both conferences. I can assume that all the other data is statistically meaningless as well until proven otherwise. I mean, the Phillies are sitting at 5-3 and in 5th place in the Grapefruit League standings, should I start looking for playoff tickets and a Red October?

Eh. You can look behind the numbers as you did for the ACC games which is ok and a fair analysis. But, the results overall show the Big East was very competitive out of conference this year. They will receive better seeds in the tournament because of those results, so they are meaningful in that way. They certainly mean more than the "eye test" that Bilas always refers to. Am I the only one who is growing tired of him?

Playoff tickets can wait though.

[GannonFan]

Picked this one out to show the completely inability to use these records in any meaningful statistical way. Of the 9 games played between the Big East and ACC, 6 of them were played by 12/9/15, so almost exactly 3 months ago. Of the 9 games, 7 of the games included games against teams at or near the bottom in each conference (bottom being defined as FSU and down in the ACC - FSU is in 11th place in a 15 team ACC - and Georgetown and down in the Big East - G'town is 8th in a 10 team Big East). So, of the 9 games, only 2 of the games actually included good teams from both conferences - the Butler/Miami matchup that happened on Nov 22 (4 days before Thanksgiving) where Miami won by 10 and the nova/UVA game on Dec 19th where UVA won by 11. So even though the ACC was 2-0 in the games of importance between the two conferences, and winning both games by double digits, you'd be silly to try to draw a statistically valid trend from just two games that happened at the very start of the NCAA year and you'd be even sillier to draw any conclusions from the wider data that includes games against the dregs in both conferences. I can assume that all the other data is statistically meaningless as well until proven otherwise. I mean, the Phillies are sitting at 5-3 and in 5th place in the Grapefruit League standings, should I start looking for playoff tickets and a Red October?

Eh. You can look behind the numbers as you did for the ACC games which is ok and a fair analysis. But, the results overall show the Big East was very competitive out of conference this year. They will receive better seeds in the tournament because of those results, so they are meaningful in that way. They certainly mean more than the "eye test" that Bilas always refers to. Am I the only one who is growing tired of him?

Playoff tickets can wait though.

Your first sentence and your second sentence don't really go well together (not counting Eh as a sentence). What shows for the ACC shows for everything else - outside of setup conference versus conference showdowns (like the Big 10/ACC challenge) you have very little times when a top team from one conference is playing another top team from another conference. Therefore, you can't draw any conclusions from those games, not even taking into account that they are virtually pre-season games by the time you get to March. Sure, they are used come tourney time when evaluating who makes the tourney and what seeds they get, that part is certainly correct, but after that they don't mean boo. That's why you've seen in the past two years the new Big East get teams into the tourney, and often get some really good seeds, and then crash and burn early in the tournament. They get there based on games and records from many months ago against the bottom teams from other conferences that don't really amount to much, and they are exposed in the crucible that is the NCAA tourney, where you can't hide from good teams (barring the chance to play a #12 seed or worse in the later rounds due to an upset somewhere). And yes, Jay Bilas is not a particularly good commentator.

[vutomcat]

Eh. You can look behind the numbers as you did for the ACC games which is ok and a fair analysis. But, the results overall show the Big East was very competitive out of conference this year. They will receive better seeds in the tournament because of those results, so they are meaningful in that way. They certainly mean more than the "eye test" that Bilas always refers to. Am I the only one who is growing tired of him?

Playoff tickets can wait though.

Your first sentence and your second sentence don't really go well together (not counting Eh as a sentence). What shows for the ACC shows for everything else - outside of setup conference versus conference showdowns (like the Big 10/ACC challenge) you have very little times when a top team from one conference is playing another top team from another conference. Therefore, you can't draw any conclusions from those games, not even taking into account that they are virtually pre-season games by the time you get to March. Sure, they are used come tourney time when evaluating who makes the tourney and what seeds they get, that part is certainly correct, but after that they don't mean boo. That's why you've seen in the past two years the new Big East get teams into the tourney, and often get some really good seeds, and then crash and burn early in the tournament. They get there based on games and records from many months ago against the bottom teams from other conferences that don't really amount to much, and they are exposed in the crucible that is the NCAA tourney, where you can't hide from good teams (barring the chance to play a #12 seed or worse in the later rounds due to an upset somewhere). And yes, Jay Bilas is not a particularly good commentator.

Eh. Might be a record. You agreed with me twice in one post. Naturally, the rest of your post is hogwash and Big East bashing. Would you rather have them lose those games? You are really misrepresenting the facts here too. You know all of those OOC wins didn't come from the bottom of conferences. Arizona, Syracuse, Wisconsin, Alabama, Wisconsin, Cincinatti, Dayton, St. Joe's, USC, Temple Wichita State and Purdue are all probable tourney teams and are certainly not "bottom of their conference" teams.

But, carry on. I am the one that is biased, right?

[tribe_pride]

VU - I don't think anyone has argued that the Big East has bad teams except for maybe St. Johns and Depaul. I think everyone agrees that the Big East has consistently had pretty good teams throughout. The problem has been the paucity of top teams in the conference the past few years since getting picked off and split. Nova has been there but without someone else to prepare them for NCAA tournament play, they have fizzled out early over the past few years. Since Xavier was better this year, I think they will get out of the opening weekend for the first time in years (and am happy because I really like them) and will be more prepared for NCAA tournament action this year. But how many more will? Xavier has the opportunity but I don't see anyone else.

[GannonFan]

Your first sentence and your second sentence don't really go well together (not counting Eh as a sentence). What shows for the ACC shows for everything else - outside of setup conference versus conference showdowns (like the Big 10/ACC challenge) you have very little times when a top team from one conference is playing another top team from another conference. Therefore, you can't draw any conclusions from those games, not even taking into account that they are virtually pre-season games by the time you get to March. Sure, they are used come tourney time when evaluating who makes the tourney and what seeds they get, that part is certainly correct, but after that they don't mean boo. That's why you've seen in the past two years the new Big East get teams into the tourney, and often get some really good seeds, and then crash and burn early in the tournament. They get there based on games and records from many months ago against the bottom teams from other conferences that don't really amount to much, and they are exposed in the crucible that is the NCAA tourney, where you can't hide from good teams (barring the chance to play a #12 seed or worse in the later rounds due to an upset somewhere). And yes, Jay Bilas is not a particularly good commentator.

Eh. Might be a record. You agreed with me twice in one post. Naturally, the rest of your post is hogwash and Big East bashing. Would you rather have them lose those games? You are really misrepresenting the facts here too. You know all of those OOC wins didn't come from the bottom of conferences. Arizona, Syracuse, Wisconsin, Alabama, Wisconsin, Cincinatti, Dayton, St. Joe's, USC, Temple Wichita State and Purdue are all probable tourney teams and are certainly not "bottom of their conference" teams.

But, carry on. I am the one that is biased, right?

Well, Wichita State is on many lists not making the tourney, same as Alabama. Just because you list Wisconsin twice doesn't make the list any bigger, btw. Cincinnati and St Joes and Syracuse are all bubble teams too. Just take the play against the ACC as a measure - of the 9 games you have listed being played, only 2 of them (or 22%) were games of real note that didn't include one or two bottom of the conference teams playing in them. A similar pattern is found in the other games as well. Sure you can pull a few good ones out, but they are few and far between.

Of course they shouldn't lose those games, no one is even suggesting that so I'm not sure why you are. And like I said, they will use those games to slot and seed teams once the tournament comes. But after that, they are useless games - the real measure comes when the top teams have to play each other in March - can't avoid each other, and everyone is peaking at the same time at a time when it actually matters. The March record has not been kind to the new Big East of late, and it doesn't seem to look any better this year.

[GannonFan]

VU - I don't think anyone has argued that the Big East has bad teams except for maybe St. Johns and Depaul. I think everyone agrees that the Big East has consistently had pretty good teams throughout. The problem has been the paucity of top teams in the conference the past few years since getting picked off and split. Nova has been there but without someone else to prepare them for NCAA tournament play, they have fizzled out early over the past few years. Since Xavier was better this year, I think they will get out of the opening weekend for the first time in years (and am happy because I really like them) and will be more prepared for NCAA tournament action this year. But how many more will? Xavier has the opportunity but I don't see anyone else.

[vutomcat]

VU - I don't think anyone has argued that the Big East has bad teams except for maybe St. Johns and Depaul. I think everyone agrees that the Big East has consistently had pretty good teams throughout. The problem has been the paucity of top teams in the conference the past few years since getting picked off and split. Nova has been there but without someone else to prepare them for NCAA tournament play, they have fizzled out early over the past few years. Since Xavier was better this year, I think they will get out of the opening weekend for the first time in years (and am happy because I really like them) and will be more prepared for NCAA tournament action this year. But how many more will? Xavier has the opportunity but I don't see anyone else.

I don't believe that you can conclude that Nova's early losses the last two years is directly attributable to SOS in the BE. UConn won the whole thing, NC State was a bad matchup and they caught Nova on a bad shooting night and won by the slimmest of margins. But, we have gone back and forth on it long enough. I understand how someone could come to your conclusion. We will both be rooting for the same team next week to give some pride back to the Phila region.

[tribe_pride]

VU - I don't think anyone has argued that the Big East has bad teams except for maybe St. Johns and Depaul. I think everyone agrees that the Big East has consistently had pretty good teams throughout. The problem has been the paucity of top teams in the conference the past few years since getting picked off and split. Nova has been there but without someone else to prepare them for NCAA tournament play, they have fizzled out early over the past few years. Since Xavier was better this year, I think they will get out of the opening weekend for the first time in years (and am happy because I really like them) and will be more prepared for NCAA tournament action this year. But how many more will? Xavier has the opportunity but I don't see anyone else.

I don't believe that you can conclude that Nova's early losses the last two years is directly attributable to SOS in the BE. UConn won the whole thing, NC State was a bad matchup and they caught Nova on a bad shooting night and won by the slimmest of margins. But, we have gone back and forth on it long enough. I understand how someone could come to your conclusion. We will both be rooting for the same team next week to give some pride back to the Phila region.

Agree to disagree.

Only thing I'll bring up is that in 2014, UConn was in a different conference than Nova when they won the whole thing (year that you guys lost to Mason in the round of 64). Last year was NC State in the round of 32.

Go Nova!

[vutomcat]

I don't believe that you can conclude that Nova's early losses the last two years is directly attributable to SOS in the BE. UConn won the whole thing, NC State was a bad matchup and they caught Nova on a bad shooting night and won by the slimmest of margins. But, we have gone back and forth on it long enough. I understand how someone could come to your conclusion. We will both be rooting for the same team next week to give some pride back to the Phila region.

Agree to disagree.

Only thing I'll bring up is that in 2014, UConn was in a different conference than Nova when they won the whole thing (year that you guys lost to Mason in the round of 64). Last year was NC State in the round of 32.

Go Nova!

Im with you. But the year UConn won the whole thing (2014) they beat Nova in the second round. The George Mason loss was in 2011.

Let's hope this year is more like 2009 than 2011.

[GannonFan]

Agree to disagree.

Only thing I'll bring up is that in 2014, UConn was in a different conference than Nova when they won the whole thing (year that you guys lost to Mason in the round of 64). Last year was NC State in the round of 32.

Go Nova!

Im with you. But the year UConn won the whole thing (2014) they beat Nova in the second round. The George Mason loss was in 2011.

Let's hope this year is more like 2009 than 2011.

... or 2013, or 2014, or 2015.

[tribe_pride]

Agree to disagree.

Only thing I'll bring up is that in 2014, UConn was in a different conference than Nova when they won the whole thing (year that you guys lost to Mason in the round of 64). Last year was NC State in the round of 32.

Go Nova!

Im with you. But the year UConn won the whole thing (2014) they beat Nova in the second round. The George Mason loss was in 2011.

Let's hope this year is more like 2009 than 2011.

Whoops. Didn't understand what your reference was to UConn (and looked at something else and saw Mason but as you said that was 2011). Still was looking at the conference as a whole in the tourney not doing well and preparing in the past. Is a little better this year on top so hopefully that will help come tournament time.

[vutomcat]

Im with you. But the year UConn won the whole thing (2014) they beat Nova in the second round. The George Mason loss was in 2011.

Let's hope this year is more like 2009 than 2011.

... or 2013, or 2014, or 2015.

Well, if you are going to start counting all of the years, here they are.

NCAA Tournament champions

1985

NCAA Tournament Final Four

1939, 1971*, 1985, 2009

NCAA Tournament Elite Eight

1939, 1949, 1962, 1970, 1971*, 1978, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1988, 2006, 2009

NCAA Tournament Sweet Sixteen

1951, 1955, 1962, 1964, 1970, 1971*, 1972, 1978, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1988, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009

[89Hen]

... or 2013, or 2014, or 2015.

Well, if you are going to start counting all of the years, here they are.

NCAA Tournament champions

1985

NCAA Tournament Final Four

1939, 1971*, 1985, 2009

NCAA Tournament Elite Eight

1939, 1949, 1962, 1970, 1971*, 1978, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1988, 2006, 2009

NCAA Tournament Sweet Sixteen

1951, 1955, 1962, 1964, 1970, 1971*, 1972, 1978, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1988, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009

That was not a smart post.

[tribe_pride]

... or 2013, or 2014, or 2015.

Well, if you are going to start counting all of the years, here they are.

NCAA Tournament champions

1985

NCAA Tournament Final Four

1939, 1971*, 1985, 2009

NCAA Tournament Elite Eight

1939, 1949, 1962, 1970, 1971*, 1978, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1988, 2006, 2009

NCAA Tournament Sweet Sixteen

1951, 1955, 1962, 1964, 1970, 1971*, 1972, 1978, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1988, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009

You just made it worse. He wasn't trying to say that Nova was a bad basketball school. He has been trying to say that it has not done well in the Tournament recently and your post backs that up.