AAC basketball post UConn? | Page 3 | The Boneyard

AAC basketball post UConn?

wheelerdog said:
The AAC's biggest issue is that the bottom 4 or 5 teams continually drag the conference down.
Expand ...
Substitute any conference name for AAC in that sentence and you've stated a universal truth. By definition, half the members of every cohort (except the students in Lake Wobegon) are below average. Applies not only to the AAC but also to the ACC, B1G, Pac 12, Big XII, SEC, and even the exalted New Big East. It doesn't matter if you're talking about hoops, football, tiddlywinks, fencing, ladies' chess, or whatever. In the hen-house, it's called a pecking order.
 
hank970 said:
Substitute any conference name for AAC in that sentence and you've stated a universal truth. By definition, half the members of every cohort (except the students in Lake Wobegon) are below average. Applies not only to the AAC but also to the ACC, B1G, Pac 12, Big XII, SEC, and even the exalted New Big East. It doesn't matter if you're talking about hoops, football, tiddlywinks, fencing, ladies' chess, or whatever. In the hen-house, it's called a pecking order.
Expand ...
Your statement is true, when speaking of the small cohort, only.

But, in fact, the issue is seldom that the lower half of your conference is below the median for the conference (small cohort). But it is where they rank in the large cohort, all of the D-1 teams.

That large cohort consideration is where the numbers become meaningful for conference strength.

Once upon a time the Big East (old) landed 50% of its teams in the Tournament. Large cohort spoke to the overall strength of that league, that year. Small cohort still would have landed 50% below the median.
 
prankster said:
Your statement is true, when speaking of the small cohort, only.

But, in fact, the issue is seldom that the lower half of your conference is below the median for the conference (small cohort). But it is where they rank in the large cohort, all of the D-1 teams.

That large cohort consideration is where the numbers become meaningful for conference strength.

Once upon a time the Big East (old) landed 50% of its teams in the Tournament. Large cohort spoke to the overall strength of that league, that year. Small cohort still would have landed 50% below the median.
Expand ...
True, but then I was responding to a post which stated that, "The AAC's biggest issue is that the bottom 4 or 5 teams continually drag the conference down." The more overarching title of the thread notwithstanding, that particular post referred only to a small cohort, not the AAC's strength relative to the larger cohort of other conferences.

The overall strength of a conference may confer an advantage to its front-runner if in-conference competition is more rigorous and better prepares it for the NCAA tournament. Were Houston's NCAA bid and performance in the tournament adversely impacted because some of its conference mates supposedly dragged the AAC down? I doubt it. Could the AAC improve its overall standing relative to other conferences? Absolutely. And how about the New Big East? Has it reached some pinnacle of performance that's the envy of college sports? Hardly.

UConn is perhaps in a good place as regards hoops. In football, it's at the bottom of the pecking order with little to no hope of ever climbing out. Meanwhile, three of its former AAC conference mates were ranked in the top 25 last year.
 
hank970 said:
True, but then I was responding to a post which stated that, "The AAC's biggest issue is that the bottom 4 or 5 teams continually drag the conference down." The more overarching title of the thread notwithstanding, that particular post referred only to a small cohort, not the AAC's strength relative to the larger cohort of other conferences.

The overall strength of a conference may confer an advantage to its front-runner if in-conference competition is more rigorous and better prepares it for the NCAA tournament. Were Houston's NCAA bid and performance in the tournament adversely impacted because some of its conference mates supposedly dragged the AAC down? I doubt it. Could the AAC improve its overall standing relative to other conferences? Absolutely. And how about the New Big East? Has it reached some pinnacle of performance that's the envy of college sports? Hardly.

UConn is perhaps in a good place as regards hoops. In football, it's at the bottom of the pecking order with little to no hope of ever climbing out. Meanwhile, three of its former AAC conference mates were ranked in the top 25 last year.
Expand ...
I don’t think you are realizing the way the bottom of the AAC drags the metrics down of the conference. You cannot put every league in that same boat. Having teams ranked in the 200s kills your computer rankings. That’s what the post you were responding to was talking about. Bad teams with terrible out of league schedules will do that. It’s an AAC problem not a big 12 or big East problem
 
Jbirdp5 said:
I don’t think you are realizing the way the bottom of the AAC drags the metrics down of the conference. You cannot put every league in that same boat. Having teams ranked in the 200s kills your computer rankings. That’s what the post you were responding to was talking about. Bad teams with terrible out of league schedules will do that. It’s an AAC problem not a big 12 or big East problem
Expand ...
But that is a result of a metric that is by design intended to raise some leagues and lower others. Any formula that puts lots of weight on strength of schedule makes bad teams look better than they are. See the Big 10 last season. Or DePaul any season. And it starts with pre season rankings/opinions. So a Big East bottom feeder can gets ranked higher than an awful A10 team not because it is less awful but because it loses to better teams, or at least teams that people thought were better in October.
 
freescooter said:
I love the way the Big East cheer squad argues facts.
Me: The New Big East has failed to perform in the NCAA tournament.
Cheer Squad: you’re mean.OH And MSG
Me: Villanova has won or shared the league title virtually every year
Cheer Squad: MSG. And you’re mean.
And so it goes.
Expand ...
You mean since 2013 right not the OBE.

So out of six years, they only won a natty twice. Wow, talk about your slackers.
 
.-.
Waquoit said:
Bringing 3 titles and winning a 4th doesn't earn respect? Bringing what little juice this pathetic league ever had doesn't earn respect? Look at those drooling over a semi-final loss. We won the damn thing. Putz.
Expand ...
Yeah everybody should have knelt and kissed our sneakers. Instead mostly they kicked our assets. How much respect did you show any of them. Temple who won NITs when it was way more prestigious than the NCAA. Much tougher fields too. Cincinatti with 2 NCAA titles of its own. So this is all about the league not showing any respect...we down graded every other program and we are now a perfect New Big East member. Got an NCAA bid. Got over seeded because of the league and got our butts kicked by a worse seed in the first round.
 
freescooter said:
But that is a result of a metric that is by design intended to raise some leagues and lower others. Any formula that puts lots of weight on strength of schedule makes bad teams look better than they are. See the Big 10 last season. Or DePaul any season. And it starts with pre season rankings/opinions. So a Big East bottom feeder can gets ranked higher than an awful A10 team not because it is less awful but because it loses to better teams, or at least teams that people thought were better in October.
Expand ...
Last season can’t be used to judge because the lack of out of conference games was too small to give a valid sample size. Gaming the numbers is a real thing that definitely happens and you are correct there can be teams that’ll and leagues that use it to their advantage. However there are many metrics, recruiting rankings, eye test etc and the bottom of the AAC is horrible no matter what prism you choose to look at it. You accuse people of looking at the big East with rose colored glasses and your optics are so far the other way you are even less realistic. Moving to the big East was a step up in competition a step up in relevance and more meaningful for the fans.
 
freescooter said:
Yeah everybody should have knelt and kissed our sneakers. Instead mostly they kicked our assets. How much respect did you show any of them. Temple who won NITs when it was way more prestigious than the NCAA. Much tougher fields too. Cincinatti with 2 NCAA titles of its own. So this is all about the league not showing any respect...we down graded every other program and we are now a perfect New Big East member. Got an NCAA bid. Got over seeded because of the league and got our butts kicked by a worse seed in the first round.
Expand ...
Will someone please fix this broken record?
 
CL82 said:
You mean since 2013 right not the OBE.

So out of six years, they only won a natty twice. Wow, talk about your slackers.
Expand ...
No I’ve been perfectly clear that Villanova is in its own class. Far far above the rest of the mediocrity that is the zNew Big East. I love how Houston goes to the final four but it doesnt mean the AAC is at least improving while Villanova’s success prove the NBE is a power league... Villanova is really good. They regularly outperform the league. Just as Gonzaga does its league. The NBE is probably overall deeper than the WCC or the A10 but frankly Providence St John’s seton hall DePaul and Georgetown are pretty much interchangeable with the upper echelon of those leagues.
 
freescooter said:
No I’ve been perfectly clear that Villanova is in its own class. Far far above the rest of the mediocrity that is the zNew Big East. I love how Houston goes to the final four but it doesnt mean the AAC is at least improving while Villanova’s success prove the NBE is a power league... Villanova is really good. They regularly outperform the league. Just as Gonzaga does its league. The NBE is probably overall deeper than the WCC or the A10 but frankly Providence St John’s seton hall DePaul and Georgetown are pretty much interchangeable with the upper echelon of those leagues.
Expand ...
No your absolutely right; it is amazing how bad a league is if you disregard its national championships.
 
.-.
freescooter said:
No I’ve been perfectly clear that Villanova is in its own class. Far far above the rest of the mediocrity that is the zNew Big East. I love how Houston goes to the final four but it doesnt mean the AAC is at least improving while Villanova’s success prove the NBE is a power league... Villanova is really good. They regularly outperform the league. Just as Gonzaga does its league. The NBE is probably overall deeper than the WCC or the A10 but frankly Providence St John’s seton hall DePaul and Georgetown are pretty much interchangeable with the upper echelon of those leagues.
Expand ...
I think you answered your own question saying the middle to bottom of our league is interchangeable with the top of the leagues your comparing it to.
 
The rumor is the AAC is adding
Boise State/ SanDiego State
plus
UNLV
Pretty much destroys the MW, I’m not sure what it does to the AAC
It can’t be good news for the Eastern Teams as the weight shifts further West.
It’s is probably a good football move as there no one even close in G5 status and that has finical implications however it doesn’t solve a couple of your big
basketball problems.
Apparently the NCAA is dragging their feet on a waiver for the team qty required for a championship game.
I understand Air Force was was considered but Navy shot them down
( pun intended)
 
CL82 said:
No your absolutely right; it is amazing how bad a league is if you disregard its national championships.
Expand ...
Right. The Big East has 1 more than the American. And another Final Four team. So pretty close. Using your logic. the WCC must be pretty good too. Gonzaga has been to lots of final fours. Let me say this one more time. Villanova is really good. The rest of the league is pretty average. Villanova won 2 titles. The rest of the league has had 2 teams get to the 2nd weekend. Villanova=good. Rest of league=not that good. Clear?
 
freescooter said:
Right. The Big East has 1 more than the American. And another Final Four team. So pretty close. Using your logic. the WCC must be pretty good too. Gonzaga has been to lots of final fours. Let me say this one more time. Villanova is really good. The rest of the league is pretty average. Villanova won 2 titles. The rest of the league has had 2 teams get to the 2nd weekend. Villanova=good. Rest of league=not that good. Clear?
Expand ...
LOL, refresh my memory which team won a national championship in the American? What conference are they now?
 
Last edited:
Waquoit said:
Bringing 3 titles and winning a 4th doesn't earn respect? Bringing what little juice this pathetic league ever had doesn't earn respect? Look at those drooling over a semi-final loss. We won the damn thing. Putz.
Expand ...
In the AAC, we had very little success, other than the 2014 NC. We didn’t even win the league title or tournament that year.
 
.-.
uconnfan68 said:
In the AAC, we had very little success, other than the 2014 NC. We didn’t even win the league title or tournament that year.
Expand ...
Because it was such a dog league. We started thriving again the second it was known we were leaving.
 
Waquoit said:
The part of the UConn fanbase that buys tickets and attends games never accepted the AAC. That was evident by all of the empty seats in the lower bowl at Gampel during every AAC game. The move back to the Big East was an unquestioned positive for the fans who put their money where their mouth is. The seats will still be sold for top dollar but in the Big East, people will be sitting in them.
Expand ...
The move from the AAC to Big East was an example of Ronald Regan’s old adage “people vote with their feet“
In our case the one money making athletic endeavor became a money loser because large numbers of fans deserted the program. Rightfully or wrongfully longing for the Old Big East by Joining the new Big East is a dream.
Add to that a AAC media deal that was less than stellar.
We had expenses far beyond the typical AAC team. We were buoyed by getting a huge share of the old Big East’s treasury which was running out.
The decision was made to return the men’s BB team to the Black as the Big East has the best contract around.
P5 media deals are essentially a football contract. If the new AAC media deal was 12/15million a year we would still be in that league.
The Big problem with leaving the AAC is really not BB it’s football.
By separating football from a conference and going independent you set in process the means to either downgrade or dropping the sport.
You also forgo any possibility of a future P5 deal barring a football miracle. By divorcing the two you can blame football for your financial woes.
Football revenue will Plummet.
BB fans may.be happy but from a University perspective it’s the equivalent of a White Flag
What the Big East schools have in common is they have no illusions of a P5 conference just add UConn to the list.
Teams of the AAC still have a slim hope. The real argument is not what league is better , it’s about maximizing the bottom line.
 
Last edited:
AZHuskiePop said:
The move from the AAC to Big East was an example of Ronald Regan’s old adage “people vote with their feet“
In our case the one money making athletic endeavor became a money loser because large numbers of fans deserted the program. Rightfully or wrongfully longing for the Old Big East by Joining the new Big East is a dream.
Add to that a AAC media deal that was less than stellar.
We had expenses far beyond the typical AAC team. We were buoyed by getting a huge share of the old Big East’s treasury which was running out.
The decision was made to return the men’s BB team to the Black as the Big East has the best contract around.
P5 media deals are essentially a football contract. If the new AAC media deal was 12/15million a year we would still be in that league.
The Big problem with leaving the AAC is really not BB it’s football.
By separating football from a conference and going independent you set in process the means to either downgrade or dropping the sport.
You also forgo any possibility of a future P5 deal barring a football miracle. By divorcing the two you can blame football for your financial woes.
Football revenue will Plummet.
BB fans may.be happy but from a University perspective it’s the equivalent of a White Flag
What the Big East schools have in common is they have no illusions of a P5 conference just add UConn to the list.
Teams of the AAC still have a slim hope. The real argument is not what league is better , it’s about maximizing the bottom line.
Expand ...
If people don't want to go to the games, nobody is going to stop them.
 
.-.
We will be better off financially as an Independent. AAC football wasn’t helping us at all. We will have a more interesting schedule and more fans in the seats in the future. Aside from that, recruiting appears better as an Indy. If Randy starts winning some games we might see ourselves in a pretty solid situation all things considered.
 
Hoophound said:
We will be better off financially as an Independent. AAC football wasn’t helping us at all. We will have a more interesting schedule and more fans in the seats in the future. Aside from that, recruiting appears better as an Indy. If Randy starts winning some games we might see ourselves in a pretty solid situation all things considered.
Expand ...
"The Lord helps those who help themselves," or so the old saying goes.
You can't blame UConn's football woes on anyone or anything but yourselves. Other teams in the AAC appear to be prospering.
Time will tell whether independence resucitates UConn football. I'm betting it won't. It isn't in your DNA.
 
uconnfan68 said:
In the AAC, we had very little success, other than the 2014 NC. We didn’t even win the league title or tournament that year.
Expand ...
We won the league tourney in 2016 which is more important than regular season . As the AAC plays an unbalanced schedule which frequently allows lesser teams a better regular season.
We actually won more AAC tourney games than anyone from 2014-2017 .
So in a four year period we won a NC and a tourney title
but in the eyes of 5he BY it should have been 3 NC in 4 years.
In 2010 we were 7-11
2011. 9-9
2012. 8-10
2013. 10-8
34-38 in four years
We weren’t exactly killing it in the Big East ya the Big East was great but we never had the depth of quality of players we had either.
AAC
2014. 12-6
2015. 10-8
2016. 11-7
2017. 9-9
42-30 in the AAC
2012 once in a lifetime HOF coach retired and we were relegated to an unknown league with a prediction of doom
Side note
In 2010
Dyson
Kemba
Sticks
Edwards
Oriakhi
Jamal Coombs-McDaniel
Majok
Wow I forgot how badly they underperformed .
when you consider they started 3 seniors plus Kemba that’s worse than 2012 who at least was younger.
 
freescooter said:
Exactly Pal. This league is the A-10 with Villanova. Or the WCC plus Gonzaga.

The original Big East was a power conference. Had multiple national champions. Twice in the last 10 years of existence it had multiple Final Four teams. 3 different teams won titles. 6 different teams went to the Final Four. Six. This league hasn’t gotten 6 teams past the 1st weekend. It has nothing to do with football. Nothing to do with computer rankings. It had to do with actual production when production counts. This New Big East is like Duke in 1999. They put up a banner for “winning” the KenPom or some other geekish national championship. We put up a banner for winning the game. Sad to say this, but the New Big East fans sound more like Dukies than UConn fans. “The computers say we’re #5 conference.” Sad. Just sad.
Expand ...
You start off connecting on all 4s with your "Pal," and finish up with, "Sad. Just sad."

The wide swing has a dubious vibe to it, as though you're happy to be unhappy, and happier still to have someone to share the misery with.
 
Last edited:
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,214
Messages
4,557,499
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom