How is that false? There is an epic class of freshmen out there this year - how many are in the BE? The BE has one top 50 kid coming in next year outside of us.
Because you just arbitrarily pick and choose cutoffs to spin your argument, that's why it's false. We already had this exact discussion where you talked about Alex Costanza being the only other top 50 recruit in the Big East outside UConn.
So you think the BE is knocking it out of the park on the recruiting front? And you expect them to recruit like the rest of the P4?
I was not doing a side by side comparison with Gonzaga. Or the NBE and WCC More of an example of the relationship between top teams and the rest of their conferences. There is one major national player. One borderline one and them a bunch of mediocre to bad ones. On a relative basis it fair to say we are better than Gonzaga, though it is close and could change year to year, St John’s is better than St Mary’s. But that wasn’t the point.
The point is they never actually won. MSU in 2000 was the last. They do have a few recent runner-ups.
Ok, sure. Now would you say the Big Ten is in trouble and their basketball programs can no longer be competitive with other conferences?
No, but they haven't won in any player's lifetime (I think). Luckily, they are flush with cash, and they'll be winning as soon as were irrelevant.
I really think that Hurley's template is as close to perfect as it gets. He blends a group of returners that are drive the system/culture, splashes the portal with strong multi year availability transfers to fill in gaps at key spots (PG & Center). Then brings in a high end freshman OAD to keep the talent level up, along with 1-2 more developmental kids to be the next class of returners. The only issue I have right now is that it would be nice to have 1-2 twitchy athletes out there at any given point (Ajx/Steph) to be sparkplugs.
Nobody was saying they're in trouble. I was merely pointing out that claiming someone is trying does not mean they will succeed.
The challenge for even a top tier team is that just getting to the NC is going to require going through at least 3 plus teams to get there. The top 4 seeds in any region are going to be very good.
Everyone “arbitrarily” sets cutoffs. The NCAA does it. What is the cutoff for a quad 1 win? If you beat a team ranked 78 on the road it’s a quad 2 win but is that team really any different than the #75, which would be q1? Probably not. But somebody set a limit that is pretty arbitrary. They even gave it a name to make it sound less arbitrary. Calling it a quad implies it is in the top 25% which seems less arbitrary than it in fact it is.
Moderately arbitrary - if you look at the HS ranking and generally what the cutoff is in terms of where the most pros and difference making talent comes from, it's typically top 50ish, likely closer to 40.
It doesn't guarantee you'll succeed, but when they've been successful in the past and are continuing to invest in basketball there's no reason to think they won't succeed again. Which is what the comment I was replying to was about why there's reason to think the Big East can be successful again
I very clearly did not say any of that. I think they're doing fine with HS recruiting and will continue to load up from the portal like they have been
Everything in this sport is about money and no matter how you break down the argument it connects to money in some way.
This season is also an outlier with how many absurdly talented freshman there are. There are 3 guys that people for months argued which should go #1 pick.
Gonzaga lost to a horrendous Portland team tonight
I agree. A couple of signature non conference games after the conference schedule begins, instead of all of those games in November and December. And more of them, because I think the Big East is regretfully on the way down and will never be what it once was. UConn will own the league like Gonzaga in the WCC. I hope that we eventually can join the ACC or the Big 12.
Explain how “money” resulted in UM and UConn swapping #2 and #3 rankings in the AP and Coaches polls.
It does not change the week they had. Beating two top 10 teams, one of them on the road, trumps what we had done up that week. Now, things change, right? More information comes in. We trounced two teams. If we make it 3 dominant victories in a row, two of them on the road and one of them against a top 25 team, then you are building a better argument to return to 2. But it does not matter: Those teams might have peaked early. We are peaking at the right time. And remember, we have institutional memory regarding winning titles. Arizona does not. Michigan does not, at least not in the lifetime of their current players.
Would be interesting if we put a solid whooping on StJ if they would put us back at 2.
Michigan has more money to pay players and Michigan has more money as a member of the Big Ten, both allowing to schedule a stronger schedule to include withing league play. We all agree they have a stronger schedule as late and their performance in that time, backed by money, has been stronger than ours and led to the move up over us.
So, a bad loss gets forgotten? I mean, it's a vote for the season you've had, not what you did in the week
I can now appreciate your point. Feel free to be this direct and complete in expressing your thoughts —or at least a bit less nebulous than “$$$$$$$”— in the future
Will do. I was having a bad brain day when I responded so I can understand now how I left it nebulous.
?
