A-10 vs. Big East

[Clock_Tower]

There have been three posts in the last 8 that suggest Butler's one season in the A-10 wasn't all that. Do people realize they were a 6 seed in the NCAA tourney that year? Any SLU historians out there want to report how many time SLU has been a 6 seed or better in the modern NCAA tourney? The aswer is 1. So to put it in perspective, Butler's one season in the A-10 ranks above all but one of SLU's for the past 30 years.

Again, I'm not here to put SLU down as everyone here knows how much I love the Billikens. But this should be a board for honest discourse and when people can't understand why a team that went to two national championship games in the last 5 years was added before a program that has never been to the sweet 16, I have to wonder about their state of mind.

I also think its silly that every time a thread about the BE starts, the same poster(s) have to rehash the decisions from a year ago. It is past history and has nothing to do with things going forward. Its water under the bridge. Maybe we can start up some MVC and Blake Ahearn debates while we are at it.

Shoe. Then start being honest yourself. Yes, butler was a 6 seed last year but they were a weak 6 seed and did not earn a 6 seed based upon their on the court efforts last year but was given a 6 seed bc of their prior success, coach, name..

[MusicCityBilliken]

I hate Butler, but can see why they got into the Big East (as much as I don't like it, they did well). They were competitive once in 3 games with SLU last year, so you can probably see why SLU fans discounted them. I did.

I know you're a big-time Billikens fan. It's just odd that some of our best fans go out of their way to defend the enemy.

+1000

[JettFlight5]

"Defend the enemy"????

First of all, I'm not exactly sure why Butler is our enemy. We played them three times last year, but other than that there is no precedence for a rivalry with them. Their success in the tournament probably helped for the national media to take schools like SLU more seriously. Additionally, KShoe is not going "out of his way." If nobody had started attacking Butler's position in the Big East, then this would never be a discussion topic.

I don't think the board exists for all of us to be unabashed and unrelenting Billiken homers. Sure, there is that aspect to it and always will be, but I prefer a forum where people are willing to look objectively at some of these issues.

I can think of about 4 million reasons for SLU fans not to like Butler.

The only reason, KShoe, that I said "defending the enemy" was post #70. This board was created so we can have these discussions rationally.

[Bizziken]

The entire argument over whether Butler or Creighton deserved to get in the New Big East over us is completely subjective. Sure, you can use facts to bolster your opinion, but the entire matter rests on what the Big East brass, rightly or wrongly, weighed when making their decision. If they felt recent history was an important metric (or not), then that is their prerogative.

There is a distinction between acknowledging why Butler or Creighton got in the Big East and agreeing with/rooting for it...I think 99.99% of our fans want in the Big East...and a supermajority feel we had a good case to make for entry.

[Littlebill]

Shoe. Then start being honest yourself. Yes, butler was a 6 seed last year but they were a weak 6 seed and did not earn a 6 seed based upon their on the court efforts last year but was given a 6 seed bc of their prior success, coach, name..

How did they not earn a 6 seed? So many big wins in the early part of the season.

[MB73]

MB. See my last post which I guess I was typing when you just posted this. As an additional response, though, it is really unfair/incorrect to compare schools like Butler and VCU to college basketball royalty programs like Duke, Syracuse and North Carolina. And keep in mind, schools like UCLA, Kentucky, North Carolina, Michigan have had numerous outstanding coaches/teams over the years, do have the resources (financial and otherwise) to remain at high levels, are large public universities in populous and talent rich states, do have the conference schedules and TV packages to remain at this level but that Syracuse is really just Jim Boheim. The old Big East schools (Syracuse, UConn, GTown) are in a much more difficult position to remain at such high levels. Duke has really been Coach K University these past 25 years as well but they are in a much better conference than Syracuse. I am not worried about Duke -- they will just throw $$$$ money to the next great young coach and be set for another 15 to 25 years.

Agree. There is no comparison.

That is what I am saying.

Mid majors have a great run, then the recruits get leery, the coach leaves for the big dog schools, and the new coach they hire is a ???

When the power team coaches leave, they are replaced by big name up and comers like Stevens and Smart and the Wichita State guy (though Stevens went NBA).

So recruits looking at a mid major that is on a roll realize the coach might be gone well before their 4 yrs are over.

Whereas if they are looking at KY, Duke, Cuse, for the most part they know if the coach goes they'll get a top notch big name replacement and the alumni and money and tradition and TV and better competition will continue. No worries.

What happens when the Wichita State coach leaves for a dream job? Say K or Williams or Boehein retire... IMO WSU falters, and IMO recruits looking at them now are wondering, go to WSU or go to a power conference school?

[kshoe]

How did they not earn a 6 seed? So many big wins in the early part of the season.

They beat Marquette and #9 UNC in Hawaii, #1 Indiana and #8 Gonzaga. They won their first round NCAA game and went to the wire with the #3 seed. Yup, they didn't deserve a 6 seed!

[Littlebill]

They beat Marquette and #9 UNC in Hawaii, #1 Indiana and #8 Gonzaga. They won their first round NCAA game and went to the wire with the #3 seed. Yup, they didn't deserve a 6 seed!

Exactly. It's just ridiculous to say otherwise

[hsmith19]

Those national championship games and the one season in the A10 (which I agree was very good) were under Stevens, who everyone knew likely wouldn't be around much longer when Butler was added to the Big East. Of course, that brings to mind the "once Majerus' recruits are gone" argument with respect to us. Seems like awfully bad timing for us all around. Butler's terrible their first year in, Majerus' last big recruiting class graduates, and we're still on the outside hoping for expansion.

[JettFlight5]

Those national championship games and the one season in the A10 (which I agree was very good) were under Stevens, who everyone knew likely wouldn't be around much longer when Butler was added to the Big East. Of course, that brings to mind the "once Majerus' recruits are gone" argument with respect to us. Seems like awfully bad timing for us all around. Butler's terrible their first year in, Majerus' last big recruiting class graduates, and we're still on the outside hoping for expansion.

Therein lies the problem.

I think there's a good chance this is a moot point and they don't expand at all. Any scenario that keeps SLU in the A-10 should be considered a worst-case scenario.

[hsmith19]

Agree. There is no comparison.

That is what I am saying.

Mid majors have a great run, then the recruits get leery, the coach leaves for the big dog schools, and the new coach they hire is a ???

When the power team coaches leave, they are replaced by big name up and comers like Stevens and Smart and the Wichita State guy (though Stevens went NBA).

So recruits looking at a mid major that is on a roll realize the coach might be gone well before their 4 yrs are over.

Whereas if they are looking at KY, Duke, Cuse, for the most part they know if the coach goes they'll get a top notch big name replacement and the alumni and money and tradition and TV and better competition will continue. No worries.

What happens when the Wichita State coach leaves for a dream job? Say K or Williams or Boehein retire... IMO WSU falters, and IMO recruits looking at them now are wondering, go to WSU or go to a power conference school?

Under what possible definition can you call Butler a "mid-major?" Two national championship games in the past and a Big East membership in the present. Unless you define mid-major based entirely on a completely different sport, there's nothing mid-major about them. They're just having a really bad season in a major conference.

[JettFlight5]

Under what possible definition can you call Butler a "mid-major?" Two national championship games in the past and a Big East membership in the present. Unless you define mid-major based entirely on a completely different sport, there's nothing mid-major about them. They're just having a really bad season in a major conference.

The media defintion of mid-major involves a completely different sport.

[kshoe]

Those national championship games and the one season in the A10 (which I agree was very good) were under Stevens, who everyone knew likely wouldn't be around much longer when Butler was added to the Big East. Of course, that brings to mind the "once Majerus' recruits are gone" argument with respect to us. Seems like awfully bad timing for us all around. Butler's terrible their first year in, Majerus' last big recruiting class graduates, and we're still on the outside hoping for expansion.

I totally disagree with the idea that everyone knew Stevens would leave when they joined the big east. He turned just about every college job that became available including ucla in 2013. His jump to the nba was viewed as a complete surprise by most.

[JettFlight5]

I totally disagree with the idea that everyone knew Stevens would leave when they joined the big east. He turned just about every college job that became available including ucla in 2013. His jump to the nba was viewed as a complete surprise by most.

This one I'll agree with you.

No one saw the Celtics calling.

[kshoe]

Back to the original point of this thread: bubble team St. John's just blew a 6 point lead at Marquette with only a few seconds left and is now heading to OT. Go Marquette!

[JettFlight5]

Back to the original point of this thread: bubble team St. John's just blew a 6 point lead at Marquette with only a few seconds left and is now heading to OT. Go Marquette!

I never thought I would see this on Billikens.com. But it makes sense.

[TaLBErt]

Back to the original point of this thread: bubble team St. John's just blew a 6 point lead at Marquette with only a few seconds left and is now heading to OT. Go Marquette!

You make me fu¢king sick. Go St. Johns. I don't want Marquette to ever win another game.

[Bay Area Billiken]

There have been three posts in the last 8 that suggest Butler's one season in the A-10 wasn't all that. Do people realize they were a 6 seed in the NCAA tourney that year? Any SLU historians out there want to report how many time SLU has been a 6 seed or better in the modern NCAA tourney? The answer is 1. So to put it in perspective, Butler's one season in the A-10 ranks above all but one of SLU's for the past 30 years.

Again, I'm not here to put SLU down as everyone here knows how much I love the Billikens. But this should be a board for honest discourse and when people can't understand why a team that went to two national championship games in the last 5 years was added before a program that has never been to the sweet 16, I have to wonder about their state of mind.

I also think its silly that every time a thread about the BE starts, the same poster(s) have to rehash the decisions from a year ago. It is past history and has nothing to do with things going forward. Its water under the bridge. Maybe we can start up some MVC and Blake Ahearn debates while we are at it.

First, your arguments are not enhanced by your hyperbole wondering about the state of someone's mind. When I see something like that in an opposition brief, that usually means the opponent has nothing substantive to say. And before you go off on another rant about a thread allegedly being hijacked, you are the one that started this thread, that you entitled "A-10 vs. Big East."

Butler was the 5 seed in last year's A10 Tournament, and was eliminated by SLU in the A10 semifinals.

How that Butler resume translated into a 6 seed in the NCAA Tournament had to have been based on recent past (not then present) reputation and certainly not on the NCAA Committee's "eye test," unless the Committee was wearing blinders. Anyone could see that Butler team was not that good.

By contrast, LaSalle was the 4 seed in the A10 Tournament, above Butler, yet was relegated by the NCAA into the Play-In Game in Dayton, which it won, was made a 13 seed, and won two more NCAA games on the way to the Sweet 16. SLU was a 4 Seed in last year's NCAA Tournament.

Oregon was a later NCAA admitted underseeded 12 seed for "slotting" purposes, which translated means to fill seats in San Jose

Seedings mean virtually nothing in this discussion, and certainly mean nothing re Butler. And so you know, SLU was a 7 seed in 1994. You might think that is the Ice Age, but I along with many others, including Scott Highmark and Erwin Claggett, would no doubt beg to differ.

SLU has 2 Sweet 16 appearances, albeit in the '50's, one of them an Elite 8 appearance. But with all due respect, how are those any different than Creighton's last Sweet 16 appearance in 1974 when yours truly was in 8th Grade?

History is raised because you are ignoring it. You cite one form of what you consider history, Butler's 2 final game appearances, but you fail to acknowledge the much bigger picture and the "entire body" of Butler's work, none the least of which was Butler being the only fish in a small pond for a long time. That's how Butler accumulated those NCAA appearances. Although the Valley was stronger than the Horizon, Creighton in large measure did the same thing, just didn't get as far in the NCAA once it reached it.

During those times, SLU was in stronger leagues than both Butler and Creighton. SLU was in the Metro, Great Midwest, and C-USA with Cincinnati and Memphis, add Louisville to SLU's time in the Metro and C-USA, and add Marquette and a much stronger then DePaul to SLU's time in the Great Midwest and C-USA. When SLU and Butler were in the same league, the MCC (now Horizon) from '83 to '91, Butler was a non-factor, a lower middler, a team we SLU fans expected to beat. SLU is 19-11 all-time vs. Butler.

As for last year's decisions re the Big East, based upon what I've been told and read, and although I still do not have all the dots completely connected, I'm pretty sure SLU was in serious consideration for that 10th spot that went to Creighton. I also believe, that there was much more that went into that decision than Creighton's NCAA Tournament history, and much of it involved SLU. Whatever happened last year is still relevant now vis-a-vis SLU.

It has to be considered a known fact, as it was reported by Bernie Miklasz in the STL P-D, on the Saturday morning of SLU's NCAA 2nd Round game with Oregon, that Xavier President Father Graham was in San Jose during last year's NCAA Tournament, where SLU was playing. Bernie was courtside seated next to Tom Timmerman for SLU's 2 NCAA games in San Jose.

Butler was in the new Big East irrespective, even though I contend it should not have been. #10 came down to SLU and Creighton.

This discussion is highly relevant because the issues that were raised last year re SLU very well could be about to happen again. One of the initial leaks early after the C7 break off had SLU and Dayton joining the Big East for '14-'15. Then there was the well publicized meeting at last year's A10 Tournament in Brooklyn, in which Butler and Xavier reportedly walked out ...

[JettFlight5]

First, your arguments are not enhanced by your hyperbole wondering about the state of someone's mind. When I see something like that in an opposition brief, that usually means the opponent has nothing substantive to say. And before you go off on another rant about a thread allegedly being hijacked, you are the one that started this thread.

Butler was the 5 seed in last year's A10 Tournament, and was eliminated by SLU in the A10 semifinals.

How that Butler resume translated into a 6 seed in the NCAA Tournament had to have been based on recent past (not then present) reputation and certainly not on the NCAA Committee's "eye test," unless the Committee was wearing blinders. Anyone could see that Butler team was not that good.

By contrast, LaSalle was the 4 seed in the A10 Tournament, above Butler, yet was relegated by the NCAA into the Play-In Game in Dayton, which it won, was made a 13 seed, and won two more NCAA games on the way to the Sweet 16. SLU was a 4 Seed in last year's NCAA Tournament.

Oregon was a later NCAA admitted underseeded 12 seed for "slotting" purposes, which translated means to fill seats in San Jose

Seedings mean virtually nothing in this discussion, and certainly mean nothing re Butler. And so you know, SLU was a 7 seed in 1994. You might think that is the Ice Age, but I along with many others, including Scott Highmark and Erwin Claggett, would no doubt beg to differ.

SLU has 2 Sweet 16 appearances, albeit in the '50's, one of them an Elite 8 appearance. But with all due respect, how are those any different than Creighton's last Sweet 16 appearance in 1974 when yours truly was in 8th Grade?

History is raised because you are ignoring it. You cite one form of what you consider history, Butler's 2 final game appearances, but you fail to acknowledge the much bigger picture and the "entire body" of Butler's work, none the least of which was Butler being the only fish in a small pond for a long time. That's how Butler accumulated those NCAA appearances. Although the Valley was stronger than the Horizon, Creighton in large measure did the same thing, just didn't get as far in the NCAA once it reached it.

During those times, SLU was in stronger leagues than both Butler and Creighton. SLU was in the Metro, Great Midwest, and C-USA with Cincinnati and Memphis, add Louisville to SLU's time in the Metro and C-USA, and add Marquette and a much stronger then DePaul to SLU's time in the Great Midwest and C-USA. When SLU and Butler were in the same league, the MCC (now Horizon) from '83 to '91, Butler was a non-factor, a lower middler, a team we SLU fans expected to beat. SLU is 19-11 all-time vs. Butler.

As for last year's decisions re the Big East, based upon what I've been told and read, and although I still do not have all the dots completely connected, I'm pretty sure SLU was in serious consideration for that 10th spot that went to Creighton. I also believe, that there was much more that went into that decision than Creighton's NCAA Tournament history, and much of it involved SLU. Whatever happened last year is still relevant now vis-a-vis SLU.

It has to be considered a known fact, as it was reported by Bernie Miklasz in the STL P-D, on the Saturday morning of SLU's NCAA 2nd Round game with Oregon, that Xavier President Father Graham was in San Jose during last year's NCAA Tournament, where SLU was playing. Bernie was courtside seated next to Tom Timmerman for SLU's 2 NCAA games in San Jose.

Butler was in the new Big East irrespective, even though I contend it should not have been. #10 came down to SLU and Creighton.

This discussion is highly relevant because the issues that were raised last year re SLU very well could be about to happen again. One of the initial leaks early after the C7 break off had SLU and Dayton joining the Big East for '14-'15. Then there was the well publicized meeting at last year's A10 Tournament in Brooklyn, in which Butler and Xavier reportedly walked out ...

The infamous meeting....

[TaLBErt]

SLU didn't get into the Big East because we are not a big time program. The administration has shown time and time again that we are not willing to do what it takes to be a consistent top tier program. Quite frankly I don't see this changing ever. The fans telling me to sit down when I'm cheering, the way "the situation" was handled, the lack of "cool"spirt wear, NEVER making the sweet 16, NOTHING about us is big time. If we don't make the sweet 16 this year we WILL NOT ever get into the Big East. Why the hell didn't I just go to Marquette like my dad told me to?!

Edit: Never mind me. I'm overly emotional with all the Marquette turds in my face today.

[kshoe]

First, your arguments are not enhanced by your hyperbole wondering about the state of someone's mind. When I see something like that in an opposition brief, that usually means the opponent has nothing substantive to say. And before you go off on another rant about a thread allegedly being hijacked, you are the one that started this thread, that you entitled "A-10 vs. Big East."

Butler was the 5 seed in last year's A10 Tournament, and was eliminated by SLU in the A10 semifinals.

How that Butler resume translated into a 6 seed in the NCAA Tournament had to have been based on recent past (not then present) reputation and certainly not on the NCAA Committee's "eye test," unless the Committee was wearing blinders. Anyone could see that Butler team was not that good.

By contrast, LaSalle was the 4 seed in the A10 Tournament, above Butler, yet was relegated by the NCAA into the Play-In Game in Dayton, which it won, was made a 13 seed, and won two more NCAA games on the way to the Sweet 16. SLU was a 4 Seed in last year's NCAA Tournament.

Oregon was a later NCAA admitted underseeded 12 seed for "slotting" purposes, which translated means to fill seats in San Jose

Seedings mean virtually nothing in this discussion, and certainly mean nothing re Butler. And so you know, SLU was a 7 seed in 1994. You might think that is the Ice Age, but I along with many others, including Scott Highmark and Erwin Claggett, would no doubt beg to differ.

SLU has 2 Sweet 16 appearances, albeit in the '50's, one of them an Elite 8 appearance. But with all due respect, how are those any different than Creighton's last Sweet 16 appearance in 1974 when yours truly was in 8th Grade?

History is raised because you are ignoring it. You cite one form of what you consider history, Butler's 2 final game appearances, but you fail to acknowledge the much bigger picture and the "entire body" of Butler's work, none the least of which was Butler being the only fish in a small pond for a long time. That's how Butler accumulated those NCAA appearances. Although the Valley was stronger than the Horizon, Creighton in large measure did the same thing, just didn't get as far in the NCAA once it reached it.

During those times, SLU was in stronger leagues than both Butler and Creighton. SLU was in the Metro, Great Midwest, and C-USA with Cincinnati and Memphis, add Louisville to SLU's time in the Metro and C-USA, and add Marquette and a much stronger then DePaul to SLU's time in the Great Midwest and C-USA. When SLU and Butler were in the same league, the MCC (now Horizon) from '83 to '91, Butler was a non-factor, a lower middler, a team we SLU fans expected to beat. SLU is 19-11 all-time vs. Butler.

In many threads, including this one, you have pointed out that the RPI is the key determinant for seeding, have you not? Do you realize that Butler had an RPI of 22 last year on selection Sunday? That translates into a 6 seed, right? So you and Clock need to stop with the conspiracy crap that somehow Butler didn't deserve the 6 seed and it was based on reputation. It was based on RPI!

You do understand that the committee looks at a full season right and not just the order of finish in conference when determining its seed, right? Your comments about LaSalle mae me wonder if you understand how it works.

I was at the NCAA tourney game in 1994 when we were a 7 seed and lost to Joe Smith and Maryland. I don't need a lesson on SLU's history, thank you very much. But if you want an objective view on whether Butler's 6 seed plus one NCAA victory season from last year qualifies as a better season then SLU's 7 seed and first round loss, then yes it does. And doesn't it speak volume that Butler's 2012-13 season which you characterize as just good is better than all but one of SLU's 30+ past seasons?

We have never been in the Sweet 16 in the modern tournament structure. Counting periods when there were only 16 teams in the tourney doesn't count. Hell, last year I saw tickers on ESPN and CBS saying we we one win away from our first Sweet 16 appearance. I guess they forget to check with you first on that one!

[JettFlight5]

Back to the original point of this thread: bubble team St. John's just blew a 6 point lead at Marquette with only a few seconds left and is now heading to OT. Go Marquette!

Marquette found a couple creative ways to lose that game. Buzz, meet NIT.

[Clock_Tower]

They beat Marquette and #9 UNC in Hawaii, #1 Indiana and #8 Gonzaga. They won their first round NCAA game and went to the wire with the #3 seed. Yup, they didn't deserve a 6 seed!

Yup. Every team that wins a Tourney game is deserving of their seed. Typical Kshoe argument.

[Bay Area Billiken]

In many threads, including this one, you have pointed out that the RPI is the key determinant for seeding, have you not? Do you realize that Butler had an RPI of 22 last year on selection Sunday? That translates into a 6 seed, right? So you and Clock need to stop with the conspiracy crap that somehow Butler didn't deserve the 6 seed and it was based on reputation. It was based on RPI!

You do understand that the committee looks at a full season right and not just the order of finish in conference when determining its seed, right? Your comments about LaSalle mae me wonder if you understand how it works.

I was at the NCAA tourney game in 1994 when we were a 7 seed and lost to Joe Smith and Maryland. I don't need a lesson on SLU's history, thank you very much. But if you want an objective view on whether Butler's 6 seed plus one NCAA victory season from last year qualifies as a better season then SLU's 7 seed and first round loss, then yes it does. And doesn't it speak volume that Butler's 2012-13 season which you characterize as just good is better than all but one of SLU's 30+ past seasons?

We have never been in the Sweet 16 in the modern tournament structure. Counting periods when there were only 16 teams in the tourney doesn't count. Hell, last year I saw tickers on ESPN and CBS saying we we one win away from our first Sweet 16 appearance. I guess they forget to check with you first on that one!

In the words of the late President Ronald Reagan, "Now there you go again." Do you remember him, or is he ancient history in your eyes too?

Suffice it to say, I "understand how it works." Do you?

Re-read my post wherein I said, "Seedings mean virtually nothing in this discussion." I don't care where Butler was seeded last year. Yes, the RPI is a key factor in seeding. So what?

So what counts? The '50's don't count, the 60's don't count, the 70's don't count (save and except for Creighton's last Sweet 16 appearance in 1974), in your world the '80's don't count, in your world the '90's don't count. It looks like the only thing that does count is Butler's 2 final game appearances, right? Your point is made. Got it.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Marquette found a couple creative ways to lose that game. Buzz, meet NIT.

Irrespective of Big East NCAA bids, it is always refreshing to see our "Jesuit Brethren" from Marquette lose, especially at home.

Are those fellow SLU Law School Alumni, whose loyalties lie with Marquette, aware of this latest tragic loss?

I doubt the Johnnies get in anyway absent winning the Big East Tournament.

But it will be a very interesting Selection Sunday this year.