A-10 vs. Big East

[JettFlight5]

The bias on this board is insane. Why is one bad season proof that Butler shouldn't have gotten invited? If we go 13-16 overall next year while in the A10 next year, I assume all of you will say that we don't deserve to be invited? I don't want head to head numbers with us and Butler. That doesn't mean ######. Butler has been to 2 final fours in the last 4 years. That's a pretty damn appealing team to me. I don't care about previous history but if you want to look at that...Butler has been to the Tourney 12 times. We've gone 8. Holy Cross has gone 12 times. San Francisco 17 times. At the end of the day, NCAA Tourney appearances mean the most and they thought that Butler was the most likely to sustain success I guess.

Do I think we should be in the BE? Yes. Do I think we should have gotten in over Butler? Probably not. Do I think that Butler having one bad year is proof that they made the wrong decision? Absolutely not.

I'll put my thoughts on this like this:

If we have the "Situation Year" next year in the A-10, there is zero chance we ever see a Big East game. This offseason may be the last realisitc shot at an invite.

[brownwolves]

The Wiz and Bay Area Bililken I really thing you've got something going here, quoting Bay Area "Georgetown would be better off in the A-10…..", .

I thinking about an even trade, The A10 St Louis Billikens for the Big East Georgetown Hoyes.

​SLU can now play in a Conference that it really belongs in and Georgetown fits right in GW VCU Richmond the East Coast teams. It also means that the Hoyes would then up traveling to Otterville in order play the feared and dreaded Brown Indians of St Bonaventure!

Iggy "Duquesne might be a solid 12th team for the Big East." Nope can't happen Bonas vs Duquesne goes back over 100 years. Its like an Ethnic Eastern European rivalry,,, one that must continued.

Go Bonnies

[Iggy]

Iggy "Duquesne might be a solid 12th team for the Big East." Nope can't happen Bonas vs Duquesne goes back over 100 years. Its like an Ethnic Eastern European rivalry,,, one that must continued.

True, but who would have ever thought that the Missouri - Kansas rivalry would have ever ended?

[Bay Area Billiken]

The bias on this board is insane. Why is one bad season proof that Butler shouldn't have gotten invited? If we go 13-16 overall next year while in the A10 next year, I assume all of you will say that we don't deserve to be invited? I don't want head to head numbers with us and Butler. That doesn't mean ######. Butler has been to 2 final fours in the last 4 years. That's a pretty damn appealing team to me. I don't care about previous history but if you want to look at that...Butler has been to the Tourney 12 times. We've gone 8. Holy Cross has gone 12 times. San Francisco 17 times. At the end of the day, NCAA Tourney appearances mean the most and they thought that Butler was the most likely to sustain success I guess.

Do I think we should be in the BE? Yes. Do I think we should have gotten in over Butler? Probably not. Do I think that Butler having one bad year is proof that they made the wrong decision? Absolutely not.

I do not doubt for a minute your loyalty to SLU.

But for the like of me, I simply do not understand posts like this. Why would anyone on our side feel the need to make the case for a competitor, or more so to counter the arguments of a longtime loyal SLU dual alumnus and fan who is trying to make the case for SLU? I am not singling you out. There are others in your shoes.

Making our case regrettably often involves "negative campaigning" against the competitor. That is politics; that is life; that's just the way it is in this day and age. Believe me, there were and still are many out there making the case against SLU. They don't need any help.

While the Generation Y'ers may think that the '80's and early '90's were the Stone Age, the fact is they weren't. Those days weren't that long ago, folks. Even mighty Georgetown was a Basketball Backwater before John Thompson II's 4th year in '75-'76.

Butler was an also-ran, at lower middler status in the MCC (now Horizon League) when much better teams populated that league, of which SLU was a member from '83-'91. That is not the Ice Age. History matters.

Butler is an abysmal 3-14 in the Big East. It is doubtful the Big East decision makers, "the Presidents," envisioned that. But at least one person out there did. ...

And you (plural, for all Generation Y'ers) have to understand, please, we have talked about SLU being in what is now the Big East since my days as a SLU undergraduate student ('78-'82). Never in a million years would any of us have ever thought Butler, of all schools, would be sitting in our seat today.

[Bay Area Billiken]

The Wiz and Bay Area Bililken I really thing you've got something going here, quoting Bay Area "Georgetown would be better off in the A-10…..", .

I thinking about an even trade, The A10 St Louis Billikens for the Big East Georgetown Hoyes.

​SLU can now play in a Conference that it really belongs in and Georgetown fits right in GW VCU Richmond the East Coast teams. It also means that the Hoyes would then up traveling to Otterville in order play the feared and dreaded Brown Indians of St Bonaventure!

Iggy "Duquesne might be a solid 12th team for the Big East." Nope can't happen Bonas vs Duquesne goes back over 100 years. Its like an Ethnic Eastern European rivalry,,, one that must continued.

Go Bonnies

You are wrong in quoting me. BAB never said Georgetown would be better off in the A10. And one suspects Wiz was making a statistical point.

Don't fret, the Hoyas are not coming to Olean anytime soon.

And you should well know that your Bonnies belong in the MAAC, where they can play their natural rivals and fellow Little 3 members Canisius and Niagara, as well as Siena, home and home. And instead of being CBI material, your Bonnies would still have a shot at the Big Dance.

Just ask Butler. You spend a few years in the MAAC Little Pond, and the Big East "Presidents" might be asking for the Area Code for Olean too.

By the way, in case you need it for your next visit to Chaifetz Arena, Otterville is in the 618.

[Bay Area Billiken]

I'll put my thoughts on this like this:

If we have the "Situation Year" next year in the A-10, there is zero chance we ever see a Big East game. This offseason may be the last realisitc shot at an invite.

Let's hope not, but your point is well taken.

There seems to be a lot riding on the next month.

[slufan13]

I do not doubt for a minute your loyalty to SLU.

But for the like of me, I simply do not understand posts like this. Why would anyone on our side feel the need to make the case for a competitor, or more so to counter the arguments of a longtime loyal SLU dual alumnus and fan who is trying to make the case for SLU? I am not singling you out. There are others in your shoes.

Making our case regrettably often involves "negative campaigning" against the competitor. That is politics; that is life; that's just the way it is in this day and age. Believe me, there were and still are many out there making the case against SLU. They don't need any help.

While the Generation Y'ers may think that the '80's and early '90's were the Stone Age, the fact is they weren't. Those days weren't that long ago, folks. Even mighty Georgetown was a Basketball Backwater before John Thompson II's 4th year in '75-'76.

Butler was an also-ran, at lower middler status in the MCC (now Horizon League) when much better teams populated that league, of which SLU was a member from '83-'91. That is not the Ice Age. History matters.

Butler is an abysmal 3-14 in the Big East. It is doubtful the Big East decision makers, "the Presidents," envisioned that. But at least one person out there did. ...

And you (plural, for all Generation Y'ers) have to understand, please, we have talked about SLU being in what is now the Big East since my days as a SLU undergraduate student ('78-'82). Never in a million years would any of us have ever thought Butler, of all schools, would be sitting in our seat today.

Honesty. My post capped off a long and annoying Friday at work. I don't even know if I believe half of what I wrote. Hopefully soon we'll be in the Big East and selling out Chaifetz every night and Butler is battling it out with DePaul for last place.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Honesty. My post capped off a long and annoying Friday at work. I don't even know if I believe half of what I wrote. Hopefully soon we'll be in the Big East and selling out Chaifetz every night and Butler is battling it out with DePaul for last place.

Absolutely! That's the SLU Spirit.

Let's Go Bills!!!

[kshoe]

BAB, god bless you but if its no longer ok for people on this board to rightly point out how illogical it is of you or anyone else to say that butler didn't deserve a BE invite because of their history in the 80s while you completely ignore the fact they went to back to back title games then this board has lost all purpose.

Maybe Steve can set up a separate board for posters that only want to hear positive things and completely ignore reality. We could have threads about how the refs are always against SLU, how all of our recruits are the best ever and how whatever rating methodology ranks SLU highest is the best. It will be great!

[Bay Area Billiken]

BAB, god bless you but if its no longer ok for people on this board to rightly point out how illogical it is of you or anyone else to say that butler didn't deserve a BE invite because of their history in the 80s while you completely ignore the fact they went to back to back title games then this board has lost all purpose.

Maybe Steve can set up a separate board for posters that only want to hear positive things and completely ignore reality. We could have threads about how the refs are always against SLU, how all of our recruits are the best ever and how whatever rating methodology ranks SLU highest is the best. It will be great!

There is more to the story of Butler's 2 Final game appearances, especially the 2nd. That is what I have tried to point out.

That is what you are ignoring. And you are ignoring Butler's history, its "entire body of work." Why? The naysayers and turf protectors hold SLU's history against it, repeatedly. I don't have to cite their points. You can easily find them. Do you see a double standard? I certainly do.

Check out Butler's NCAA Tournament history before all the good teams left its league. Start in 1991 and go back from there, you can stop in 1983, when SLU joined the MCC, or you can keep going back further. Hint: It's not a pretty picture for Butler. And please 1983 to 1991 happened. Butler and SLU were in the same league.

When were you born? You see there was a world happening before you came into it. There was a world happening before I entered it too, just a bit farther back than you.

Someone on this board actually tried to claim that my citation to SLU's 19-11 all-time head to head record against Butler is also not relevant. Please.

And what could be more relevant than last season, '12-'13, the one year in the apparent "modern era," when Butler and SLU were even in the same league? And what happened then? SLU won the A10 Regular Season and A10 Tournament Championships. Butler finished as the 5th seed going into the A10 Tournament and was eliminated by SLU in the A10 semifinals, its only year in the A10. Not only that, but SLU defeated Butler 3 times, home, away, and neutral. Do you know how hard it is to beat a team 3 times?

While you're at it, check out Creighton's Sweet 16 history, another of those bullet points held against SLU. Creighton last made that hallowed Sweet 16 in 1974. Does that count, but the '80's and '90's don't count against Butler? Explain that one, please.

All I've tried to do, over objection from our own, is point out the positives re SLU and refute the attacks on SLU that are still happening. Then I feel compelled to respond to the exaltation of Butler and Creighton. Look you can go over to that holylandofhoops site and read all the oracles from on high about how the Big East allegedly made the right decision in taking Butler and Creighton over SLU. That Butler has fallen flat on its face (3-14 in Big East games) has no relevance either, correct? Give me a break, and then give me another break. Of course, Butler's woeful season is relevant because it confirms exactly what I've been saying and predicted. It's not going to get any better for Butler in the Big East either. Ask DePaul. Look at the entire Butler history, not 2 isolated years when it was the only fish in the little pond.

I will never understand the Barney Fife mentality, as in shoot ourselves in the foot. Why, I ask? Why make the case for the opponents? Let them make it themselves.

As for the A10, if SLU is to stay in it, something must be done about the officiating, and I'm pretty sure you know that too. And the TV revenue needs to be significantly improved. The old TV access problem has been solved. So the A10 is getting there. There is no reason to stop at least the officiating from being improved. TV revenue is a product of the marketplace and perception.

As for your separate board idea, such is likely stated in jest, as such is unneeded. But as you go through life, never discount the power of positive thinking.

[cheeseman]

The fewer teams the BE gets into the tourney, the better. Strengthens the argument for expansion, as more teams adds more opportunities for tourney $.

Interesting point

[cheeseman]

Whine is the wrong term. It is amazing how that term gets thrown around. Rather, this is the relevant quote to follow:

"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it," attributed to George Santayana. If something went wrong last year, then let's not repeat it this year.

What is disturbing is how the Big East decision is defended by SLU elements, especially one or some fellow SLU Law School alumni. I'd like to know how many of them are Marquette undergrads. Some of these people are leading the charge against SLU in the message board world.

SLU has a whole lot going for it. First, there's the TV market size, being cognizant that Fox is bankrolling this new Big East:

http://www.stationindex.com/tv/tv-markets

Note: St. Louis 21, Indianapolis 24, Cincinnati 34, Richmond-Petersburg 58, Dayton 64, Wichita-Hutchinson 69, Omaha 76. For point of reference, Des Moines-Ames is 71, and Springfield, MO is 74.

Of course, the self-appointed experts counter by saying that little St. Louis U. really does not bring that St. Louis market. Hogwash. Look at that recent Dan Caesar article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, which noted that SLU TV rankings had actually bested Mizzou on 2 recent occasions. Mizzou, of course, is a much larger school.

Second, is the endowment- where SLU's endowment is very strong in comparison to most of the competition.

SLU is considered a "lock" for the 11th spot. We keep reading that the issue is #12. But I say hey, look at Dayton. Of course, Xavier is protecting its turf and doesn't want Dayton, and Georgetown doesn't want a 7-5 Midwest-East Coast mix.

Thus, again, in the immortal words of Roseanne Roseannadanna: "It's always something. If it ain't one thing it's another."

Whine or not. And I say not.

So your point is that since they can not find a suitable #12 then they will not expand - if you use that logic then if saw a $50 bill on the street but you needed $100 you would not pick up the $50. I do see the point that 12 would be better for scheduling but you can always devise a schedule that accomodates 11 if having the 11th team brings value. Dayton may make sense but if X does not want them for whatever the reason then the BE needs to just start moving forward. I am concerned that we may slip some next year and then even we look not suitable thus giving them a chance to put it off longer.

[cheeseman]

The bias on this board is insane. Why is one bad season proof that Butler shouldn't have gotten invited? If we go 13-16 overall next year while in the A10 next year, I assume all of you will say that we don't deserve to be invited? I don't want head to head numbers with us and Butler. That doesn't mean ######. Butler has been to 2 final fours in the last 4 years. That's a pretty damn appealing team to me. I don't care about previous history but if you want to look at that...Butler has been to the Tourney 12 times. We've gone 8. Holy Cross has gone 12 times. San Francisco 17 times. At the end of the day, NCAA Tourney appearances mean the most and they thought that Butler was the most likely to sustain success I guess.

Do I think we should be in the BE? Yes. Do I think we should have gotten in over Butler? Probably not. Do I think that Butler having one bad year is proof that they made the wrong decision? Absolutely not.

Actually their last year when in the A10 was nothing to write home about so actually 2 years have been weak. I understand your point and I worry also about next year and the year after. I guess if JC plays his freshmen alot next year we can write it off as growing pains and hope they grow up as sophomores.

[MB73]

MB73 2 yrs ago wrote many times that Butler and VCU would collapse at some point soon, especially when their coaches bolted for dream jobs, and that recruiting would slip before they left because recruits would know that it is unlikely that Stevens and Shaka would stay 4 more years.

The usual dweebs mocked me.

So now Butler has es-ploded.

Soon, even though he insists he will stay, Shaka will dump on VCU and they will be a mess. This is the cycle for most all mid majors... Some can keep it going but they are the exception.

[Clock_Tower]

The really odd thing about Butler is how little their Final Four appearance have seemed to have helped them. Bay Area makes some really great points. Shoe, nobody is taking away the back to back Finals appearances from Butler. It's just that the year after they were the NCAA runner-ups for the second time, Butler did NOT reload. Instead, Butler went 22-15 while still in the Horizon and not only did not make the NCAA Tourney but also did not make the NIT -- making only the CBI. The year after (last year), Butler of course was good but not great, but again did not appear to have a new/young group of talent. Then, Brad Stevens leaves and we see this year just how much he had left the cupboard bare. This year, Butler had been horrible, and even worse for them, there does not appear to be a youth movement in place in that Butler was not exactly playing Frosh and Sophs all year (like Archie Miller is doing with UD) so next year does not look much better for them. Add to that, more graduations and now transfers and Butler is looking like another UNLV -- on pace to irrelevant again to college basketball.

[MB73]

The really odd thing about Butler is how little their Final Four appearance have seemed to have helped them. Bay Area makes some really great points. Shoe, nobody is taking away the back to back Finals appearances from Butler. It's just that the year after they were the NCAA runner-ups for the second time, Butler did NOT reload. Instead, Butler went 22-15 while still in the Horizon and not only did not make the NCAA Tourney but also did not make the NIT -- making only the CBI. The year after (last year), Butler of course was good but not great, but again did not appear to have a new/young group of talent. Then, Brad Stevens leaves and we see this year just how much he had left the cupboard bare. This year, Butler had been horrible, and even worse for them, there does not appear to be a youth movement in place in that Butler was not exactly playing Frosh and Sophs all year (like Archie Miller is doing with UD) so next year does not look much better for them. Add to that, more graduations and now transfers and Butler is looking like another UNLV -- on pace to irrelevant again to college basketball.

Exactly.

A mid major like that, recruits are told by competitors that Stevens and Shaka will soon leave and then, what? Difficult to get a new coach even close to the same impact as Stevens and Shaka. So the team's success does not continue.

Whereas a recruit will still go to the power schools with the stronger competition and TV packages and deep pockets and tradition and alumni network so even if the coach leaves (Boehein, K, Williams, etc), hell... they will get a top notch new young up and coming star head coach to replace him so the kids are not worried.

[Clock_Tower]

MB73 wrote many times that Butler and VCU would collapse at some point, especially when their coaches bolted for dream jobs, and that recruiting would slip before they left because recruits would know that it is unlikely that Stevens and Shaka would stay 4 more years.

The usual dweebs mocked me.

So now Butler has es-ploded.

Soon, even though he insists he will stay, Shaka will dump on VCU and they will be a mess. This is the cycle for most all mid majors... Some can keep it going but they are the exception.

Yes, but the teams like Butler, X, Gonzaga and VCU have shown the ability to reload with new coaches/new talent. Shaka isn't the first good coach for VCU. What has helped each of these programs is that they have not had the bright lights and really tough conference games each year which have allowed them to continue their NCAA Tourney appearance streaks in "down" years by either dominating their bad conferences or by winning their conference tournaments with mediocre teams of their own. This continuance for years has rightly earned their programs and new coaches with national praise, admiration, respect which in turned helped the new coach continue high level recruiting which in turn continued the wins and the NCAA Tourney streak. Teams like Butler no longer can be the big fish of the little pond (Horizon) and will have to rebuild the hard way -- without the momentum of a winning program. Just ask DePaul how easy that is.

IMO, if Butler were still in the Horizon, their new coach would be continuing the "Butler way". Instead, he appears in over his head as the doormat of the new Big East with no hope in sight. In contrast, as long as VCU remains in the A10, they should be just fine if/when Shaka moves on to greener pastures. As to X, Mack is not the greatest coach but he is still there (unlike Stevens), X is doing well even though not dominating, X has been good enough in the past for years such that local Cincy kids have long wanted to play for X dating back over 25 years and Cincinnati does produce good basketball players each year to help provide X with a good local base of talent.

[Clock_Tower]

Exactly.

A mid major like that, recruits are told by competitors that Stevens and Shaka will soon leave and then, what? Difficult to get a new coach even close to the same impact as Stevens and Shaka. So the team's success does not continue.

Whereas a recruit will still go to the power schools with the stronger competition and TV packages and deep pockets and tradition and alumni network so even if the coach leaves (Boehein, K, Williams, etc), hell... they will get a top notch new young up and coming star head coach to replace him so the kids are not worried.

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.

[Bay Area Billiken]

So your point is that since they can not find a suitable #12 then they will not expand - if you use that logic then if saw a $50 bill on the street but you needed $100 you would not pick up the $50. I do see the point that 12 would be better for scheduling but you can always devise a schedule that accomodates 11 if having the 11th team brings value. Dayton may make sense but if X does not want them for whatever the reason then the BE needs to just start moving forward. I am concerned that we may slip some next year and then even we look not suitable thus giving them a chance to put it off longer.

There is some talk at holylandofhoops, that new Big East board, that the Big East could take SLU and stop at 11, noting the old Big East for a long time had 9, the Big Ten for years had 11. But then someone over there counters, saying why should the Big East teams have to give up 2 non-conference games to play alleged "mid-major SLU." Of course, SLU by definition is not a mid-major, but that doesn't seem to stop them.

After all, they are already giving up 2 non-conference games a year to play mid-major Butler, 3-14 in Big East play. Cymbal strike, please.

And then some old Eastern Block interest raises the East Coast/Midwest split, as SLU would give the Big East 6 Midwestern schools. That's one of the reasons Georgetown is said to want an Eastern school as #12, with Richmond having been mentioned. But 12 teams means no Round Robin, which means no annual visit from Georgetown to 6 schools.

There are several key reasons for the Big East to go to 11, starting with SLU's NCAA units going into the A10 coffers, as opposed to the Big East's, and with SLU being in St. Louis, the 21st highest media market, with Fox bankrolling that new Big East. Plus, SLU is a like minded institution to the new Big East schools. SLU fits that league like a glove.

Although an odd number of teams may not be optimal for scheduling, it is certainly doable, and it is not unprecedented, as noted above.

[kshoe]

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.

[JettFlight5]

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.

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.

[JMM28]

Butler deserved being in the Big East for their basketball success over the past decade.

Creighton deserved it for their commitment to all their athletic programs as well as their success over the past decade or so.

SLU only made a serious commitment to basketball in that 05-07 range and that took until 2011 to manifest into on court results.

Butler and Creighton also had success under multiple head coaches.

[JettFlight5]

With the Big East, it's also about plausible deniability.

If you leave Butler in the A10 and take SLU and the schools have the opposite records (Butler 25-5, SLU 13-16), the Big East gets ripped for taking the "flavor of the month" instead of the established program.

[kshoe]

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.

It's not defending the enemy, its just being honest. Fro example, someone could selectively argue that SLU is a better program than Kentucky because we made the dance last year and they didn't and we are about equal this season. Of course the argument is ridiculous but if a Billiken fan posted that argument that SLU is better on this board and somebody countered it with reality, they would be labeled as "defending the enemy"

[NH]

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.

"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.