|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 21, 2017 10:40:21 GMT -5
The problem isn't that Nova is carrying the conference it's that Nova is dominating the conference. Unless the rest of the conference improves we could find ourselves with the same reputation as the SEC and ACC, two teams dominate for years while the rest of the league sucks. While Villanova has clearly been dominant the last couple of years, it's untrue that the rest of the league sucks. I'll preface this also by saying that the conference is still "new" - this is only the fourth year it has existed, and I think the league has performed about as well as it can. 2014: 4 teams in the tournament as a 2 seed (Villanova), 3 (Creighton), 11 (Providence), and 12 (Xavier). 2015: 6 teams - 1 seed (Villanova), 4 (Georgetown), 6 (Providence, Xavier, Butler), and 9 (St. John's) 2016: 5 teams - 2 seed (Villanova, Xavier), 6 (Seton Hall), 9 (Butler, Providence) And in 2017, it seems almost certain again that there will be another 5 in, and Villanova is again projected to likely be a 1 seed (and if not, a 2). Given a 10 team league, I actually think the Big East's performance has been quite impressive. While it's true no team has been dominant like Villanova, it's tough to have multiple teams in 1 league that are that dominant without a bunch of other teams that are really bad (i.e., DePaul). Overall, I think the conference has actually panned out about as good as we could have possibly hoped for (ignoring Georgetown's lack of relative success, of course). Obviously, getting more teams than Villanova past the Sweet 16 would be nice, but it is still a very good body of work.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,379
|
Post by drquigley on Feb 21, 2017 10:47:15 GMT -5
The problem isn't that Nova is carrying the conference it's that Nova is dominating the conference. Unless the rest of the conference improves we could find ourselves with the same reputation as the SEC and ACC, two teams dominate for years while the rest of the league sucks. Sure it's good FOR NOW that Nova carries the BE banner but if the rest of the league doesn't improve (that means us, St. John's, DePaul, and Providence) then the BE will become a joke. Hey, dominance is when you have 2 or 3 teams reach the final four like we did in the early 80's. One team domination is not good for the league. This may appear to be true at the moment, but I would say it's only because of the injuries that have befallen Xavier and Creighton. Creighton at full strength would clearly be in the national discussion, and Xavier wouldn't be far away. As for MCI's original question, I was delighted that Nova won last year, but I don't think I could handle them winning back to back. That said, if we end up with Nova playing Duke, Kentucky, UNC, UMCP or Cuse for the national championship, I will be rooting for Nova again. Otherwise, not. I hear you and agree that Creighton would be a final four team with Watson. But Xavier and Butler not so much even without injuries. I'm just worried that the rest of the league, especially us, are really hurting the BE brand. Listening to the FS1 and CBS announcers do our games is embarrassing. Before the game even begins they are apologizing for our miserable record and keep hyping that "we have the talent to make a run". The BE was founded on the idea that the big NE and Mid Atlantic east coast city tv market was ripe for picking. Doesn't help the league that our best teams, other than Nov, are in Omaha, Cincinnati, and Indianapolis. Gotta get DC, NY, Chicago, and New England back into the mix.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 21, 2017 12:35:12 GMT -5
Doesn't help the league that our best teams, other than Nov, are in Omaha, Cincinnati, and Indianapolis. Gotta get DC, NY, Chicago, and New England back into the mix. I really don't think this is as big a problem as one might think. I mean, look at the markets some of the ACC teams are in. I really think it's more about winning basketball than the markets. Now, it's true that getting the northeastern teams to do well gives a nice jolt to the Big East Tournament, but it has done well regardless in the last few years. The most important thing is winning basketball. And that's what the conference has put forward, especially last year with Villanova winning. I would also add that the Midwestern teams (minus DePaul) are among the ones that get the best attendance, too.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,379
|
Post by drquigley on Feb 21, 2017 15:17:37 GMT -5
i agree that the league is better than most but I still worry about one or two teams dominating. As for the BE financials I just have to wonder what the FOX executives think about paying big money to broadcast games for a league that is not attracting viewers in big TV markets. But maybe I should be careful what I wish for. If more big market BE teams start improving they could leave us in the dust. BC anyone?
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,209
|
Post by hoyarooter on Feb 21, 2017 19:36:03 GMT -5
This may appear to be true at the moment, but I would say it's only because of the injuries that have befallen Xavier and Creighton. Creighton at full strength would clearly be in the national discussion, and Xavier wouldn't be far away. As for MCI's original question, I was delighted that Nova won last year, but I don't think I could handle them winning back to back. That said, if we end up with Nova playing Duke, Kentucky, UNC, UMCP or Cuse for the national championship, I will be rooting for Nova again. Otherwise, not. I hear you and agree that Creighton would be a final four team with Watson. But Xavier and Butler not so much even without injuries. I'm just worried that the rest of the league, especially us, are really hurting the BE brand. Listening to the FS1 and CBS announcers do our games is embarrassing. Before the game even begins they are apologizing for our miserable record and keep hyping that "we have the talent to make a run". The BE was founded on the idea that the big NE and Mid Atlantic east coast city tv market was ripe for picking. Doesn't help the league that our best teams, other than Nov, are in Omaha, Cincinnati, and Indianapolis. Gotta get DC, NY, Chicago, and New England back into the mix. Yep, I hear ya. I think we can agree that the biggest problem with the Big East at the moment is the stench emanating from the Hilltop. St. John's hasn't helped either, but they appear to be on the rebound. Not sure we can say the same, even if we manage to beat them again.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 22, 2017 14:29:01 GMT -5
i agree that the league is better than most but I still worry about one or two teams dominating. As for the BE financials I just have to wonder what the FOX executives think about paying big money to broadcast games for a league that is not attracting viewers in big TV markets. But maybe I should be careful what I wish for. If more big market BE teams start improving they could leave us in the dust. BC anyone? I really think the focus on markets is way overblown especially with basketball. I think the games that get a lot of viewers on TV are the ones with good matchups, not necessarily the ones from a specific region. For example, what's going to draw better in DC and Chicago, tonight's DePaul v. Georgetown game, or a game of Villanova against another top team? Probably the latter. Unlike some college football teams and maybe a handful of college basketball teams, the individual following of each school is extremely small, and thus, the fanbase of that particular school isn't going to make a huge difference regardless of region. I mean, does St. John's really boost viewership in New York? Maybe at the margins, but I really don't think it'll make a difference in the bigger scheme.
|
|