You can take Temple off brackets now

[tzznandrew]

ACC, Big East, SEC, Pac 12, Big 10, Big 12, MWC are clearly better. The MVC will not be as strong at the top with UConn and Memphis likely Top 20 programs, but is much deeper without as much of the conference sub 100.

So I think your "gotcha" revolves around an argument that the AAC will be better than the A10 and the WCC. If you are having that argument at all, you have already lost.

ACC, B1G, BXII - okay.
SEC - Kentucky and Florida are top teams, and Mizzou is good. That's been it recently. In fact, last year they had 3 teams in the tournament (Florida, Missouri, Mississippi). Hardly a powerhouse, and certainly one our conference can do better than.
Pac12 - They had five teams last year. Arizona and UCLA are traditionally very good, but none of their schools were seeded higher than 6th! Come on, this conference has not been good.
Big East - Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette made the tournament last year. Creighton and Butler too--but not from playing Georgetown, Nova, Marquette, etc. Let's see how they do as a conference before we say their definitively better than the AAC.
MWC - The MWC got five teams in. Impressive for sure. Two things on this. First, let's see how long they continue their success, and second, if that group of misfits can make schools like Boise, New Mexico, San Diego State, and Colorado State competitive, why can't the American, with UConn, Memphis, and Cincy (better historically than all those schools) do the same for the lower end teams?
Missouri Valley - Okay, this is absurd. In last years Sagarin, this is what they had for ratings: 13, 70, 73, 85, 91, 126, 146, 162, 209. They lose 16 going into next year and replace it with 163. Now, the current American (minus Louisville and Rutgers) looked like this: 34, 35, 42, 49, 128, 136, 183, 185. Not great, for sure. But those lower tier teams will have much better SOS because they will be playing more than just 34 (Memphis). Even not counting the increases those lower school will get from SOS (and general improvement, as SMU is no longer the 183rd best team), the average American team last year was ranked 99, and the average MVC team 108. I expect that to expand greatly.

Make no mistake, our conference is terrible. But it is not as bad as you are making it, and clearly a top 10 conference no matter how much you hope your hyperbole will prove otherwise.

 

[mcs333]

The AAC will be above ave. this year. We have 4 teams that should make the tour. and hopefully another will step up,SMU. If 40 to 50% of your teams make the tourn., your conf. Is doing well. The last few years the ACC had only 33% of their teams making the tour. most years. The SEC and PAC 12 would love to get 40% of their teams into the tour.. The AAC will be just fine and with a round robin, there will be many great games and I believe we will have a top 20 RPI and the league the 4 or 5th best RPI..

 

[upstater]

The AAC will be above ave. this year. We have 4 teams that should make the tour. and hopefully another will step up,SMU. If 40 to 50% of your teams make the tourn., your conf. Is doing well. The last few years the ACC had only 33% of their teams making the tour. most years. The SEC and PAC 12 would love to get 40% of their teams into the tour.. The AAC will be just fine and with a round robin, there will be many great games and I believe we will have a top 20 RPI and the league the 4 or 5th best RPI..

Good point about the round robin. In the old BE, we only played some of these top teams twice. The thing that bugs me a bit is why not stick to 10 teams for the AAC? They really don't need Tulsa or Tulane for either bball or football. Stick to 10. Play everyone in football and in bball (2x).

 

[mcs333]

I agree but since FB rules they will go to 12 so that they can have a FB conf. championship game.

 

[Huskybass]

[quote"nelsonmuntz, post: 747809, member: 833"]Right, and you are one of those that will grab some little piece of a post completely unrelated to the main point, and start an argument over that irrelevancy. There are quite a few of you on this board that do that.

My point is that I don't care about arguing whether the AAC will be the 8th or 11th best conference. It just doesn't matter. And you are mad because I won't argue about it. You are the one who is full of it.[/quote]
We are all stupider for having read this post.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

ACC, B1G, BXII - okay.
SEC - Kentucky and Florida are top teams, and Mizzou is good. That's been it recently. In fact, last year they had 3 teams in the tournament (Florida, Missouri, Mississippi). Hardly a powerhouse, and certainly one our conference can do better than.
Pac12 - They had five teams last year. Arizona and UCLA are traditionally very good, but none of their schools were seeded higher than 6th! Come on, this conference has not been good.
Big East - Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette made the tournament last year. Creighton and Butler too--but not from playing Georgetown, Nova, Marquette, etc. Let's see how they do as a conference before we say their definitively better than the AAC.
MWC - The MWC got five teams in. Impressive for sure. Two things on this. First, let's see how long they continue their success, and second, if that group of misfits can make schools like Boise, New Mexico, San Diego State, and Colorado State competitive, why can't the American, with UConn, Memphis, and Cincy (better historically than all those schools) do the same for the lower end teams?
Missouri Valley - Okay, this is absurd. In last years Sagarin, this is what they had for ratings: 13, 70, 73, 85, 91, 126, 146, 162, 209. They lose 16 going into next year and replace it with 163. Now, the current American (minus Louisville and Rutgers) looked like this: 34, 35, 42, 49, 128, 136, 183, 185. Not great, for sure. But those lower tier teams will have much better SOS because they will be playing more than just 34 (Memphis). Even not counting the increases those lower school will get from SOS (and general improvement, as SMU is no longer the 183rd best team), the average American team last year was ranked 99, and the average MVC team 108. I expect that to expand greatly.

Make no mistake, our conference is terrible. But it is not as bad as you are making it, and clearly a top 10 conference no matter how much you hope your hyperbole will prove otherwise.

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2013/conferencerpi

Last year's RPI. Do what you will with this information, but UCF, Houston, USF, Tulane, SMU and Tulsa were outside the top 100. That is over half the league. ECU had its best season in its recent history to get to 67. Most of these teams were playing each other last year, and it didn't seem to rescue their RPI's then. UConn isn't going to help their RPI's as much as they will hurt UConn's.

Look up the MVC or MWC. They don't have half their league outside the Top 100.

I was the biggest Big East homer on this board for both football and basketball, but this league is a complete lost cause.

 

[tzznandrew]

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2013/conferencerpi

Last year's RPI. Do what you will with this information, but UCF, Houston, USF, Tulane, SMU and Tulsa were outside the top 100. That is over half the league. ECU had its best season in its recent history to get to 67. Most of these teams were playing each other last year, and it didn't seem to rescue their RPI's then. UConn isn't going to help their RPI's as much as they will hurt UConn's.

Look up the MVC or MWC. They don't have half their league outside the Top 100.

I was the biggest Big East homer on this board for both football and basketball, but this league is a complete lost cause.

They're also going to replace playing the worst teams in their conference with UConn-Cincy-Temple, and for this year, Louisville.

They've all improved their recruiting, and their all dropping the worst teams (aside from themselves, teams like Rice [323] and Marshall [207]) from their schedule. We'll still have sub-100 schools, but I doubt we have over half of them (and I'm leavig Tulane, Tulsa, and ECU out since they're not in our conference this year).

 

[upstater]

Reading some of these posts, we're lead to believe that you can hire a Hall-of-Fame coach, sign 2 of the top 5 players in the nation, a bunch of other top 100s, and still suck.

Yes, I expect UConn, Memphis and SMU to be top 25 next year, and Cincy will likely be there too.

I don't know what Temple and Houston's problem is. One of them has a good coach but not that great talent, the other is reeling in top talent and doing nothing with it.

Meanwhile, UCF has gone all Calipari (i.e. shelling it out like Shapiro) and is landing more talent than everybody else.

With those 7 teams and perhaps a mediocre USF, that's a decent conference.

The bottom will likely be very bad, though Tulsa at least has some history of basketball.

 

[tzznandrew]

Reading some of these posts, we're lead to believe that you can hire a Hall-of-Fame coach, sign 2 of the top 5 players in the nation, a bunch of other top 100s, and still suck.

Yes, I expect UConn, Memphis and SMU to be top 25 next year, and Cincy will likely be there too.

I don't know what Temple and Houston's problem is. One of them has a good coach but not that great talent, the other is reeling in top talent and doing nothing with it.

Meanwhile, UCF has gone all Calipari (i.e. shelling it out like Shapiro) and is landing more talent than everybody else.

With those 7 teams and perhaps a mediocre USF, that's a decent conference.

The bottom will likely be very bad, though Tulsa at least has some history of basketball.

This is sort of my point: there will be good teams in the league. It will be better than a mid-major. It will not be better than the B1G or the ACC, but in some years, it will be better than many of those other conferences (Pac, SEC, BXII, BE, MWC). Most years, though, it will not. Regardless, suggesting it is not a Top 10 conference is assinine.

 

[metsfan2323]

Lets just sit back and watch to see which league puts more teams into the tournament, the AAC or the new Big East. My money is on the AAC.

Nelson would prefer that we close down football so we can be in a basketball league that is no better than the AAC, and he continues to offer this foolish opinion knowing full well that the school is doing everything it can do to get into the B1G.

Add to that the fact that UCONN is making more money in the AAC than it would in the Big East when you take into account the severance fees, plus we are better off having our games on ESPN vs Fox.

Nelson should be mocked or better yet ignored.

 

[ctchamps]

Lets just sit back and watch to see which league puts more teams into the tournament, the AAC or the new Big East. My money is on the AAC.

Nelson would prefer that we close down football so we can be in a basketball league that is no better than the AAC, and he continues to offer this opinion knowing full well that the school is doing everything it can do get into the B1G.

Nelson should be mocked or ignored.

and I didn't even bring up the fact that UCONN is making more money in the AAC than it would in the Big East when you take into account the severance fees, plus we are better off having our games on ESPN vs Fox.

You are correct that Nelson wants UConn to forget football altogether and join the Catholic schools of the BE. But that is a lateral move at best and most likely will prove to be worse than the AAC mid and long term. Furthermore, that move would mean there is absolutely no hope of UConn going to another conference. Giving up football and joining the Catholic schools would guarantee that outcome. Staying in the AAC, being a top ten basketball program for men and women and upgrading the football team offer a chance. And as slim as the chance might be, you work on it. As KO would say "we take the stairs and not the escalator".