What if??? Big East

[thatdude]

And here comes the Marquette defense.

Step right up.

Save yourself your time and let kshoe make your case for you.

Easy friend, just a little joke. I have no interest in picking a fight.

[BigMouthBilliken]

Easy friend, just a little joke. I have no interest in picking a fight.

What about picking your nose?

[thatdude]

What about picking your nose?

One thing I've learned, you can pick your friends and you can pick your nose, but don't pick your friend's nose.

[jbizzle09]

So only really old dudes can speak about any of this stuff? Is this also why BAB insists that coaching staffs should read message boards so they can get insight from people who know more than them? (I.E. really old dudes).

Heck, I am a month from turning 39, close to the same age as kshoe, but I assume I am not old enough to talk about certain things on this board and I should instead just defer to my 'elders.'

[Old guy]

Since according to bizzle I am old enough to say something, I will do so. I do not believe that we will ever find out what really happened that kept us out of Big East, that was indeed a bad break for us. Period.

I know hope springs eternal, but I really do not see anything that indicates we may be offered a spot in the Big East, not next year.

[Bay Area Billiken]

So only really old dudes can speak about any of this stuff? Is this also why BAB insists that coaching staffs should read message boards so they can get insight from people who know more than them? (I.E. really old dudes).

Heck, I am a month from turning 39, close to the same age as kshoe, but I assume I am not old enough to talk about certain things on this board and I should instead just defer to my 'elders.'

BAB above said in this thread that some in high places read this board, not that the coaches should read this board, and BAB was not referring to coaches. However, now that you mention it ... If I said the coaches should read this Board in some other context, then so be it, they should.

Just today I cited the 3 Words of the '14-'15 season: Heaves, Yanks & Waivers. None of them make any sense.

There are posters who stay off this public board to avoid these silly battles. But for me, bring it on Big Guys! This is sport for me, should I take the time to engage.

But just try to remember, we are ultimately on the same side. I see no benefit in our own people making the case for the outside SLU detractors. There are plenty of SLU detractors out there. Let them make their own cases. Let's not help them, ok?

[Bobby Metzinger]

26.

I remember the dissolution of CUSA quite well and nothing that went down could have gone any other way. Of course Marquette and Depaul took the offer and who could blame them. We dumped Xavier when the Great Midwest was formed so why should they not take an offer to join a vastly superior conference in the Big East. The reason the BE wanted 2 basketball only teams was obvious as it balanced the powers with the football schools and Marquette was just coming off a final 4 so they were an obvious choice. Depaul was an obvious choice at the time because they were in Chicago and had recently had success.

The Pat Kennedy years really made people forget Joey Meyer lol...

[Bay Area Billiken]

Since according to bizzle I am old enough to say something, I will do so. I do not believe that we will ever find out what really happened that kept us out of Big East, that was indeed a bad break for us. Period.

I know hope springs eternal, but I really do not see anything that indicates we may be offered a spot in the Big East, not next year.

I think there is plenty of enough smoke for there to be some fire. In fact there's more than just smoke. And that's not one of kshoe's conspiracy accusations involving black helicopters, or otherwise.

But I agree that nothing is in the hopper in the near future re the Big East. Someone who appears to be in the know on the Dayton Board mentioned 2018.

[Bay Area Billiken]

One thing I've learned, you can pick your friends and you can pick your nose, but don't pick your friend's nose.

And "friends" who have certain "friends" don't need enemies.

[Bay Area Billiken]

26.

I remember the dissolution of CUSA quite well and nothing that went down could have gone any other way. Of course Marquette and Depaul took the offer and who could blame them. We dumped Xavier when the Great Midwest was formed so why should they not take an offer to join a vastly superior conference in the Big East. The reason the BE wanted 2 basketball only teams was obvious as it balanced the powers with the football schools and Marquette was just coming off a final 4 so they were an obvious choice. Depaul was an obvious choice at the time because they were in Chicago and had recently had success.

Before the ultimate result, back in '04, we heard that DePaul, Marquette, SLU and Charlotte were a four team block that would stay together, the all for one, one for all, we're all in this together type of thing. That didn't last too long. Marquette and DePaul were picked for the Big East, SLU and Charlotte went to the A10, and I thought SLU had been parked in the A10, awaiting the eventual schism of the Big East, which finally came in late '12, about 8 years later.

Before Wade and Crean on the one hand, and Soderberg on the other, SLU more than held its own with Marquette. Spoon was over .500 vs. Deane. The two played home and home in the later year of the MCC, in the Great Midwest, and in C-USA.

Also the previous SLU AD Doug Woolard had left SLU for South Florida, which also received the Big East invite with its Football team.

SLU didn't screw Xavier when the Great Midwest was formed. SLU was along in the back of the truck for the ride in that one. That truck was largely driven by DePaul. it wasn't driven by SLU.

The last time SLU really led anyone in forming a new league was when SLU left the Missouri Valley in '74 to go to the new Metro, with the first Metro Commissioner being the SLU AD, Larry Albus.

We have been talking about SLU being in a Catholic Conference, I called it the Vatican Conference, much like the current Big East, ever since I was a SLU undergraduate over 3 decades ago. That's how long this discussion has occurred. SLU was in the Metro then and largely non-competitive with the likes of Louisville, Cincinnati, Memphis, Florida State, Virginia Tech. The one Metro team we could beat was Tulane.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Stated by a SLU official? You have a link to that statement or was this just something somebody told you at a fan fest pre-game after you asked them if Marquette was anti-SLU and they wanted to appease you by saying something like "Marquette isn't our friend." Doesn't mean Marquette has a vendetta against SLU the way you make it sound.

As for complimenting Creighton and Butler, well that is just reality. I guess I'd be bashing SLU if I pointed out that Duke is also better than SLU but some things should be self-evident. Creighton averages 17k per game and is the only show in town. That is huge! Butler went to back to back national title games. I can't tell you how huge that is! Now they are back in the top 25.

This board is great most of the time because people are allowed to give honest opinions about basketball, not because they blindly say wacky things like "SLU is better than Butler because we were better than them in the late 80s."

It's none of your business, young man. And there's no way in the world I would provide you with a link, nor say anything more. You do not have subpoena power. But nice try.

Further, don't assume things you know nothing about. I don't have such power to force alleged appeasement. That's a new piece of your speculation from the Wonderful World of Fantasy. Again, nice try.

You are clueless about this. But keep talking and keep posting your drivel because it discredits you more. The sad thing is you run people off, and good knowledgeable posters and fans avoid posting because they don't want to put up with your rubbish.

Now go back to your usual activities and/or spot some of your black helicopters.

[kshoe]

Before the ultimate result, back in '04, we heard that DePaul, Marquette, SLU and Charlotte were a four team block that would stay together, the all for one, one for all, we're all in this together type of thing. That didn't last too long. Marquette and DePaul were picked for the Big East, SLU and Charlotte went to the A10, and I thought SLU had been parked in the A10, awaiting the eventual schism of the Big East, which finally came in late '12, about 8 years later.

We heard that these four schools hired a consultant to try to find the best deal for the four of us. No team ever came out and said "we are all sticking together." That was just message board speculation. Once it became obvious that the BE only wanted 2 of the 4, our goose was cooked as Depaul and Marquette were able to ffer better basketball and better geography given that Notre Dame was already in the conference.

Before Wade and Crean on the one hand, and Soderberg on the other, SLU more than held its own with Marquette. Spoon was over .500 vs. Deane. The two played home and home in the later year of the MCC, in the Great Midwest, and in C-USA.

Irrelevant. Just because we were .500 with Marquette for a window of time doesn't mean we were somehow a better program than a team that had just gone to the Final 4 and devoted very significant resources to its basketball program. The BE clearly made the right choice in picking Marquette over SLU, if that is what it came down to.

Also the previous SLU AD Doug Woolard had left SLU for South Florida, which also received the Big East invite with its Football team.

What does that have to do with anything?

SLU didn't screw Xavier when the Great Midwest was formed. SLU was along in the back of the truck for the ride in that one. That truck was largely driven by DePaul. it wasn't driven by SLU.

And similarly, Marquette didn't drive the truck back in 2004. They were as desperate as us to get out of CUSA and when an offer for the BE came, they took it. Nobody can blame them for it.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Irrelevant. Just because we were .500 with Marquette for a window of time doesn't mean we were somehow a better program than a team that had just gone to the Final 4 and devoted very significant resources to its basketball program. The BE clearly made the right choice in picking Marquette over SLU, if that is what it came down to.

Response: Wholly Relevant; Like any data in these discussions, sample size. How big or small is the sample to be? Statistics can be skewed in favor of the proponent, like the new rip on SLU for lack of Sweet 16's, when Creighton last made the Sweet 16 in 1974, when I was 13 years old

What does that have to do with anything?

Re USF-FL- one guess. It shouldn't take more than one.

And similarly, Marquette didn't drive the truck back in 2004. They were as desperate as us to get out of CUSA and when an offer for the BE came, they took it. Nobody can blame them for it.

Response: That all for one, one for all stuff didn't last too long in '04, did it? But the real issue with Marquette came in late '12- early '13.

You were set straight re SLU and Xavier since you brought up Xavier from the Great Midwest formation days. There was no way Cincinnati would agree to be in the Great Midwest with Xavier. SLU was not driving that truck whatsoever. Dayton was in the same boat in the next conference shakeup, Great Midwest to C-USA, when Dayton was left behind. In fact, SLU later continued to play Dayton once SLU moved into C-USA. None of these schools have axes to grind with SLU.

[Bay Area Billiken]

So only really old dudes can speak about any of this stuff? Is this also why BAB insists that coaching staffs should read message boards so they can get insight from people who know more than them? (I.E. really old dudes).

Heck, I am a month from turning 39, close to the same age as kshoe, but I assume I am not old enough to talk about certain things on this board and I should instead just defer to my 'elders.'

You can give your opinions, as can anyone else. You have good opinions.

But there is a way of stating one's opinion without resorting to personal attacks, and I am specifically not talking about you, jbizzle in regard to the latter.

[kshoe]

Irrelevant. Just because we were .500 with Marquette for a window of time doesn't mean we were somehow a better program than a team that had just gone to the Final 4 and devoted very significant resources to its basketball program. The BE clearly made the right choice in picking Marquette over SLU, if that is what it came down to.

Response: Wholly Relevant; Like any data in these discussions, sample size. How big or small is the sample to be? Statistics can be skewed in favor of the proponent, like the new rip on SLU for lack of Sweet 16's, when Creighton last made the Sweet 16 in 1974, when I was 13 years old

What does that have to do with anything?

Re USF-FL- one guess. It shouldn't take more than one.

And similarly, Marquette didn't drive the truck back in 2004. They were as desperate as us to get out of CUSA and when an offer for the BE came, they took it. Nobody can blame them for it.

Response: That all for one, one for all stuff didn't last too long in '04, did it? But the real issue with Marquette came in late '12- early '13.

You were set straight re SLU and Xavier since you brought up Xavier from the Great Midwest formation days. There was no way Cincinnati would agree to be in the Great Midwest with Xavier. SLU was not driving that truck whatsoever. Dayton was in the same boat in the next conference shakeup, Great Midwest to C-USA, when Dayton was left behind. In fact, SLU later continued to play Dayton once SLU moved into C-USA. None of these schools have axes to grind with SLU.

I'm about to give up but I'll take one more stab at it.

SLU doesn't have any Sweet 16s and that is a big deal. Creighton doesn't have any either and that is also a big deal but you know what they do have that we don't; 17k fans per game and a history of bringing 4k to conference tournaments. You "proving" that Creighton and SLU are equally bad at getting to the Sweet 16 doesn't prove that we belong in the BE more than them.

I honestly don't understand what Doug Woolard going to South Florida has to do with our inclusion in the Big East. South Florida was invited because they play football, its that simple.

The all for one stuff never existed besides in the minds of MBMs in 2004. The Marquette purposely kept SLU out of the BE because they are afraid we will recruit the Illinois region is pretty out there too. It would have some credence if Creighton and Butler weren't better candidates for the BE, but the truth is they were. Admitting the truth is the first step to recovery.

I'm done with this thread. I'll count on Cowboy, Box and One and JBizzle to keep it grounded in some semblance of reality going forward

You can give your opinions, as can anyone else. You have good opinions.

But there is a way of stating one's opinion without resorting to personal attacks, and I am specifically not talking about you, jbizzle in regard to the latter.

Is teasing you about black helicopters really a "personal attack"

[hsmith19]

Since ABAS appears to be laying down on the job, I will go ahead and leave this here:

[Bay Area Billiken]

Your point about Creighton's fan support is a valid one. However, what else is there to do in Omaha? Further, SLU's fan support is not chopped liver, and again we are talking about sample sizes. How far back do we go? SLU was drawing 17,000 per game during the heyday of Spoonball. SLU had a massive turnout in Columbus for the '12 NCAA Tournament.

But what about the TV market size, St. Louis 21, Omaha 76, especially with Fox bankrolling this league? For comparison purposes, Springfield, MO is 74, that's right, Springfield, MO is a bigger TV market than Creighton's Omaha.

Do you really think Marquette played no role in this? Really? Please. There was that nice little leak that the C7 could not decide on the 10th member, that #1 Georgetown acquiesced to #2 Marquette, and let Marquette make the choice, with Georgetown supposedly getting to pick an East Coast school in the first expansion.

What about geography? Omaha, Nebraska is a whole extra hour of flight time on a plane west of St. Louis, 2 hours extra round trip.

What about endowment? SLU could buy Marquette with its endowment and still have a larger endowment than Creighton. Butler and Xavier? Veritable ants, neither with fan support better or significantly greater than SLU.

[kmbilliken]

I disagree. Endowments show the financial weight behind the school.

In a case like D-3 WashU or the Ivy League, I see your point. But I think it's different for SLU in being compared to these other "like minded institutions."

And even more stark are the TV market size differences, especially when it is considered that Fox is bankrolling the new Big East. Frankly, I'm surprised Fox allowed Creighton of Omaha to be picked over SLU.

Don't you think Creighton gets more viewers in Omaha than SLU in St. Louis even though it's a smaller market? Creighton would also be a better national draw.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Don't you think Creighton gets more viewers in Omaha than SLU in St. Louis even though it's a smaller market? Creighton would also be a better national draw.

In terms of actual numbers, in a good SLU year, No. This is the same Dayton argument. Actual numbers should trump per capita.

And I do not agree Creighton is a better national draw. How many people in California even know where Creighton is located?

Creighton was good last year, with McDermott the Younger. But Creighton is 4-13 in Big East play this year, in 9th Place out of 10, 1 game ahead of its patron, Marquette. How fitting.

Most know where St. Louis is.

[willie]

BAB. Give it up. From a basketball stand point we don't have a better resume than Creighton or Butler. We also don't have a national profile. We do have a good TV profile if they expand. If they expand we should and will be the first team in.

[Bay Area Billiken]

What matters is that Saint Louis University does not give it up.

[jbizzle09]

In terms of actual numbers, in a good SLU year, No. This is the same Dayton argument. Actual numbers should trump per capita.

And I do not agree Creighton is a better national draw. How many people in California even know where Creighton is located?

Creighton was good last year, with McDermott the Younger. But Creighton is 4-13 in Big East play this year, in 9th Place out of 10, 1 game ahead of its patron, Marquette. How fitting.

Most know where St. Louis is.

This is kind of a silly argument you are making. Sure, most know where St. Louis is because the damn city is in the university name. I also figure that most people know where the University of San Francisco is located, but that doesn't mean it has much of a national profile. While casual fans have heard of Gonzaga, VCU, Marquette and Villanova, most would be hard pressed to tell you where those schools are located. That doesn't mean they have don't have a national profile...it just means many fans don't pay attention or even care where those schools call home. They just know the names because the teams are generally in the tournament.

[Bay Area Billiken]

This is kind of a silly argument you are making. Sure, most know where St. Louis is because the damn city is in the university name. I also figure that most people know where the University of San Francisco is located, but that doesn't mean it has much of a national profile. While casual fans have heard of Gonzaga, VCU, Marquette and Villanova, most would be hard pressed to tell you where those schools are located. That doesn't mean they have don't have a national profile...it just means many fans don't pay attention or even care where those schools call home. They just know the names because the teams are generally in the tournament.

Silly? You are making my point for me re St. Louis. Thank you.

Have you folks back there forgotten that Saint Louis University was selected to the last 3 NCAA Tournaments, was a 4 seed in '13, a 5 seed in '14 and was ranked as high as 8th in the entire country in 1 poll and 10th in the other?

USF doesn't have a national profile, you say. Have you ever heard of Bill Russell? K.C. Jones? Have you ever heard of Phil Smith? Have you ever heard of Bill Cartwright?

Gonzaga was a nobody when all 4 of those guys were playing in 2 different eras for the USF Dons. Gonzaga has never won the NCAA or NIT. USF (the University of San Francisco) has 1 NIT title and two back to back NCAA titles. Also USF was a national power in the late '70's and early '80's. Gonzaga played for much of that time in the Big Sky Conference, only joining the WCC in '79. When I moved to California in '85, Gonzaga was nothing more than a West Coast middler.

Again, we are talking sample sizes, and it appears we are also talking generational divides.

[VeniceMenace]

What happened is pretty well known.

I have been told by a SLU Official that Marquette sees SLU as a threat, as the two schools compete for the same Illinois (Chicagoland) students and athletes.

As I have noted before on this Board, Marquette passed SLU in the US News & World Report College Rankings after Marquette was admitted into the Big East, and SLU was parked in the A10.

The admission of Marquette into the Big East from C-USA for '05 put Marquette in the position to decide SLU's conference fate 8 years later.

Some Marquette apologists will no doubt appear to defend their Alma Mater, perhaps some Marquette Undergrad/SLU Law types. But there is no defense for the indefensible.

And in advance, save it on the Sweet 16. Creighton of Omaha has not been to the Sweet 16 since 1974, and played for almost the last 4 decades in the mid-major Valley. Please spare us.

You may be on to something here ... notice that Marquette and Creighton have very close ties:

http://marquettewire.org/2010/09/14/tribune/tribune-news/lannon-tdz1-az2-je3/

[jbizzle09]

Silly? You are making my point for me re St. Louis. Thank you.

Have you folks back there forgotten that Saint Louis University was selected to the last 3 NCAA Tournaments, was a 4 seed in '13, a 5 seed in '14 and was ranked as high as 8th in the entire country in 1 poll and 10th in the other?

USF doesn't have a national profile, you say. Have you ever heard of Bill Russell? K.C. Jones? Have you ever heard of Phil Smith? Have you ever heard of Bill Cartwright?

Gonzaga was a nobody when all 4 of those guys were playing in 2 different eras for the USF Dons. Gonzaga has never won the NCAA or NIT. USF (the University of San Francisco) has 1 NIT title and two back to back NCAA titles. Also USF was a national power in the late '70's and early '80's. Gonzaga played for much of that time in the Big Sky Conference, only joining the WCC in '79. When I moved to California in '85, Gonzaga was nothing more than a West Coast middler.

Again, we are talking sample sizes, and it appears we are also talking generational divides.

LaSalle, Holy Cross, Wyoming and UTEP all have national titles to their credit. Are you making the case that they have national profiles and are well-known to casual fans because of those titles, as you seem to be making with USF? Maybe you see it as a generational divide, but if a team hasn't been relevant in 30-odd years, which is the case with USF, then they cease to be a nationally renowned program. It makes for a nice history lesson to go back and talk about the Hall of Famers who went to a program and how they won a national title when there were far fewer schools playing, but it doesn't really mean much when talking about today's top programs.

It isn't just casual fans that don't care about USF's national titles from 60 years ago. I don't see ESPN, CBS or any of the other networks scheduling USF games because of their history. But I see Gonzaga getting on TV on a regular basis. Why? While Gonzaga has been going to the tournament year in and year out for nearly 20 years straight, USF hasn't received an NCAA berth since 1998, and before than, 1982. Gonzaga has been in the AP rankings every year since 2001-02; USF was last ranked 33 years ago. While Gonzaga plays in front of packed houses on national TV, USF is lucky to draw 1500 fans and is happy if they get regional coverage.

Look, I get what you are trying to do by bringing up accomplishments from decades ago. You want these things to be seen as highly relevant in the eyes of others because you see them as such. Back to SLU and the Big East, in your mind, you think SLU's NIT title in 1948 and its head-to-head record against Butler in the 70s and 80s should have been taken into account when SLU was up for membership in the Big East. Since SLU was passed over on the initial go round, then there must be something more nefarious at play, because Easy Ed and a recent return to relevance should have been enough to trump back to back title game appearances and regular trips to the tourney.

With this, I am done. This is now the third time since 2013 we've gone round and round on this topic and it's the same tired ass argument. It's just tiring having to go over the reasons why Butler, Xavier and Creighton were picked over SLU to join the Big East while at the same time defending myself as a SLU fan because I'm not toeing the line. If I say you win, BAB, will that end this?