billiken_roy Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 here is a story at espn.com that details how they will schedule the 16 team big east starting next season. this is a disaster waiting to happen. i give it 5 years max before we have the reshuffling of teams again. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=1923446 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikens_Fanatic Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 One 16 team division is ridiculous. Conference reshufflement has messed up the ACC too. Every team in the ACC used to play each other twice, but with the additions of MIami and VT, that's not true any longer. For example, North Carolina doesn't play at Georgia Tech. Maryland does not play at Georgia Tech. Wake Forest doesn't play at North Carolina or Maryland. NC State doesn't play at Duke. Having to play Miami and Virginia Tech instead of those other teams twice is going to bring those RPIs down a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwyjibo Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Each year, each team will NOT play two members of its own conference. I guess this is an admission that conference play is meaningless as a competition (which I should make clear I do not agree with at all). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 ... and you will see the same thing going across the nation. Right after this, someone posted about the ACC not playing each other in a home-and-home. ChicagoBilliken made the same note about us when we go to the A-10. I think once you get to 11+ teams, things get shakey. The Big Ten would have 22 league games when all its members got done playing each other. I know there are some sort of quota restricitons and exempt games. You can only go so high. I blame this all on football. The ACC had to get to 12 teams so that it could do a divisional set up in football, hold a title game, and overcharge the networks for showing that game. There was nary a decent football program in the ACC with any consistency before Florida State and now they've added two nice powers in VaTech and Miami. Basketball was secondary. The Big East responed in turn. You're not going to get a couple million bucks for one basketball game short of the Final Two like you are for football. Even the A-10 has to do it above ten teams. How do you think South Florida is going to measure its basketball success from now on? My guess is that a successful season for them might be just making it to New York for the Big East tournament. They are going to get pummelled year-ina nd year-out in that conference. Only time will tell because I think what you're talking about in the start of this thread is relevant across a number of conferences. I think you're right about the Big East because history has shown 16 to be way too big to manage. Curious question: of the 16 teams in the new Big East, who is staring down the barrel of a gun as far as basketball success is concerned over the long run? Obviously my first choice is South Florida, then I think its Seton Hall, followed by West Virginia and then maybe DePaul. Maybe DePaul can hold onto the home front and compete with Chicago kids and it drops down to a secondary, non-football member like St. John's or Providence. But if DePaul has Chicago maybe St. John's has New York. What are your thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonka Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 that is SO frickin stupid!!! what's the point of being in a conference if you don't play the teams in the conference with you! unbelievable! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Ok, so I'm fairly new at the St. Louis thing, but I'm a huge college basketball fan...hailing from the Bluegrass state tends to do that to you. I wanted to comment on Billikens_Fanatic post. The statement was made that "every team in the ACC used to play each other twice, but with the additions of Miami and VT, that's not true any longer." Then he goes on to make the comment that some teams don't play each other at all. I haven't heard about that, but if that's true, that's the ACC's fault. The SEC has made the 12 team system work for years. Each team plays every team in the SEC at least once, and they play the teams in their division (east or west) twice each season. This works well and sets up the seedings great for the conference tournament. It seems with 16 teams though in the Big East that that wouldn't work. That'd be 24 conference games as compared to 18 with the 12 team conference with that same system in place. With that being said, it seems like the perfect move for the ACC. They do get the use of a conference football game (which is the only way to go... I get sick and tired of seeing SEC and Big 12 teams busting their humps the last week of the season for the right to play in a BCS bowl while a Pac-10 team gets to waltz in playing some ridiculous 2-10 team... of course that still might happen to Oklahoma this year.. HA!) Anyway, if the ACC scheduling is like Billikens_Fantatic says, that's the ACC's fault for scheduling that way... but don't play down the 12 team conference based on that. As for the 16 team thing next year... let's just hope it doesn't take as long to tweak the problems as it has taken the BCS to tweak it's problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjray Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 16 teams with a conglomeration of basketball only and football - basketball schools. Football, as the top moneymaker, always rules the roost. Agree with Roy that this is a trainwreck waiting to happen. Seems obvious that the football and basketball schools shall eventually separate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikens_Fanatic Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Yes, it is the ACC's fault. They shouldn't have taken Miami and VT, completely screwing up their own conference, the Big East, Conference USA, etc. But as always, the dollar sign prevails. Scrapping the BCS seems to be a more practical solution than massive conference realignment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Well, it already happens in football conferences with more than eight teams. But there is the conference tournament. There's the possibility of facing a conference-mate in the Tourney that a team didn't face during the conference season. Personally, I would love it if all conferences had no more than eight to ten teams and would play a true double round-robin, but the problem is that there are too many Div. I teams to fit into a reasonable number of conferences (34). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bauman Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Thank heavens we are not going into the Big East, where their press releases misspell "effect". You would think that the elite East Coast media would get it right one of three times: the conference press release; the AP pickup of the story; or the ESPN lift of the story. Things take "effect" not "affect". Sorry to be picky but the East Coast media never hesitates to take shots at us midwestern hicks. Maybe the writer of the story is a graduate of our State U. School of Journalism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted November 16, 2004 Author Share Posted November 16, 2004 i give it 3 years and a past power getting shut out of a conference tourney and scheduling leaving them off of facing a conference powerhouse and then the fingers will start pointing and there will be an uproar. the only solution actually is not to do it at all. but eventually, it will be football vs non-football schools just like cusa and the house of cards will tumble. to set the thing up in one big conference is stupid enough, but then to insist teams play each other twice on isolated instances and ignore others for no good reason other than they have no history is just asking for trouble. i had assumed they would divide into either geographic conferences or worst yet, put the basketball schools in one the football schools in the other. play you own division twice and select schools out of the other division for a couple of games. the second option would have been to just play everyone once. the fact they didnt go with either tells me that there is already trouble in paradise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted November 16, 2004 Author Share Posted November 16, 2004 thicks, i was being sarcastic. imo, this was a horrible mistake by our brethern, depaul and marquette. i am assuming they are leaving money on the table to leave cusa, and probably ponying up money to join the big least. at best they break even in some weird sort of way. now if they get the short end of scheduling, which this smells like the new guys getting shut out of the traditional rivalries, and have a somewhat off year, they will be almost guaranteeing themselves out of the ncaa's. of course they believe they will grow and prosper and win the big least and go on to national championships, but i hope they dont lose a few million dollars trying to make a million as well when in the long run they are going to come back and form the midwest papal conference they should have helped form in the first place. now if both depaul and marquette get to play their two game foes vs uconn, notre dame and syracuse, and they get to drop completely south florida and rutgers for instance, then i guess it all works out. but how much you want to bet that depaul and marquette are going to get stepchilded out of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.