Pete Thamel's article hits the nail on the head

[UConnDan97]

I feel like I've walked into something that has some history between the two of you, so I'll just keep it at this: If we are considering where the two programs are today, they are very similar in terms of talent on the squad and performance. You could argue one over the other, but it will be very close. Both had a very good recruiting class last year (Houston's was a MONSTER class, by the way, shown below). But it's so close that it truly is a matter of opinion. Both are performing pretty well this year...

http://rivals.yahoo.com/connecticut/basketball/recruiting/commitments/2012/houston-80

 

[upstater]

I know. You have really bashed the non-football schools for a while. VCU has been to the NCAAs 5 times since 2004. They've beaten Duke, Kansas, Georgetown and a number of other very good programs along the way. They have a Final Four in the 64+ era. They have a young exciting coach that followed a young exciting coach that followed a young exciting coach.

Houston hasn't been to the S16 since I was born (mid-1984). They've been to the NCAAs 1 since the SWC died. They're not a great program.

I don't know why it's so hard for you to accept that basketball only schools can be really good and successful at basketball, and at times, better than their football playing peers.

Since 2000, I'd rather be Georgetown, Villanova, or Marquette than every football playing school other than UConn, Syracuse, and Louisville. Maybe Pitt.

Read Jacobs' article about the irrelevance of non-BCS schools in basketball. There are 400 mid-majors out there, and VCU, G Mason and Butler are the ones who made it. If you're born in 1984, you missed Houston's heyday. They were really something to behold back then. They also have the best college basketball team of the last 30 years with UNC '82.

During this period, Houston generated more buzz than any college basketball team since (with the possible exception of Duke '99, but that was all hype anyway).

VCU meanwhile has always been in small conferences and never showed the big school brawn that Houston once showed. That's why I rate their future as being much higher.

 

[tzznandrew]

Read Jacobs' article about the irrelevance of non-BCS schools in basketball. There are 400 mid-majors out there, and VCU, G Mason and Butler are the ones who made it. If you're born in 1984, you missed Houston's heyday. They were really something to behold back then. They also have the best college basketball team of the last 30 years with UNC '82.

During this period, Houston generated more buzz than any college basketball team since (with the possible exception of Duke '99, but that was all hype anyway).

VCU meanwhile has always been in small conferences and never showed the big school brawn that Houston once showed. That's why I rate their future as being much higher.

It seems like people are denigrating Seton Hall, PC, St. John's, Villanova, Marquette for successes in the late-70s through the 80s, and then, at the same time, suggesting that Houston will be very good because they were good in the 1980s. You may not be doing this personally. But forgive me for not being impressed with what Houston did in 1982-84. They were great teams then. But they also had Drexler and Olajuwon, and haven't had anyone like that in 25 years.

Gonzaga came out of nowhere in 1999. Have they made a Final Four? No. But they are consistently a very good team.

I didn't mention GMU because they've only done it with one coach. Butler was very good in the early 00s with a different coach. So was VCU. Xavier has been very good under many coaches.

I just think these schools will keep being good, especially if their in a league with schools like Georgetown, Marquette, and Villanova who also have a history of success.

 

[CL82]

There are a lot of things going on right now that are a drain on the program. All the bad press, much of it undeserved, hurts us with the casual fan. BS NCAA sanctions do the same. Ticket pricing and season ticket policies hurt us as well. Short term maximization strategies of over pricing and forcing long time fans to try to out bid disinterested corporations for the seats that they sat in for years hurt as well. All that has come home to roost. Add to that some of the trappings of success. Remember when it used to be a big deal to see UConn on tv? Going to the games was the way to see the team. With every game broadcast, the aging fanbase no longer needs to travel to see the games. HDTV hurts us as well. The quality on those big flatscreens makes watching from the comfort of your home a pleasure rather than a compromise. Especially when the oppponent is yawn inducing.

Things are changing and the program needs to adapt. In the short term we need butts in the seats, especially, but not exclusively, for football. That means creative marketing and reduced seat prices. All 'doable' stuff. Of course nothing replaces loyal fan support and I could agree more with Pudge call for people to show up. It's when times our tough that true fans show there true colors. We need to embrace a Calhoun-like us against the world philosophy.

 

[upstater]

It seems like people are denigrating Seton Hall, PC, St. John's, Villanova, Marquette for successes in the late-70s through the 80s, and then, at the same time, suggesting that Houston will be very good because they were good in the 1980s. You may not be doing this personally. But forgive me for not being impressed with what Houston did in 1982-84. They were great teams then. But they also had Drexler and Olajuwon, and haven't had anyone like that in 25 years.

Gonzaga came out of nowhere in 1999. Have they made a Final Four? No. But they are consistently a very good team.

I didn't mention GMU because they've only done it with one coach. Butler was very good in the early 00s with a different coach. So was VCU. Xavier has been very good under many coaches.

I just think these schools will keep being good, especially if their in a league with schools like Georgetown, Marquette, and Villanova who also have a history of success.

The comparison of these other teams to Houston is not a good one for me. It's a big school in a big city and it has shown to be capable of great things. if you noticed, I consistently singled out Georgetown as the one school that has a record and history of success, a school that is unlike PC, SH and St. John's. The problem is that I believe that these schools are all about to be hit hard by the ACC. The ACC is about to suck all the east coast talent away from these schools. Until now, there was a reason for the Maurice Harkless's of the world to go to SJU, because they could prove themselves against the best. But now, as the ACC is about to lock down college basketball, the next Maurice Harkless is better off at Boston college, or Pitt, or Wake Forest, or Virginia Tech.

 

[UConnDan97]

The comparison of these other teams to Houston is not a good one for me. It's a big school in a big city and it has shown to be capable of great things. if you noticed, I consistently singled out Georgetown as the one school that has a record and history of success, a school that is unlike PC, SH and St. John's. The problem is that I believe that these schools are all about to be hit hard by the ACC. The ACC is about to suck all the east coast talent away from these schools. Until now, there was a reason for the Maurice Harkless's of the world to go to SJU, because they could prove themselves against the best. But now, as the ACC is about to lock down college basketball, the next Maurice Harkless is better off at Boston college, or Pitt, or Wake Forest, or Virginia Tech.

I agree with this point with the exception of St. John's. St. John's is a Steve Lavin successful year away from being a player again in NYC. For whatever reason, that school has always had part of the NYC psyche attached to it. Obviously, the Big East had a large amount to do with that, but the city looks fondly upon St. John's. I would lump them in there with GTown.

However, I think you are spot on with the Providence and Seton Hall analysis. They are really going to struggle going forward without the brand name of "Big East" on their jerseys...

 

[upstater]

I agree with this point with the exception of St. John's. St. John's is a Steve Lavin successful year away from being a player again in NYC. For whatever reason, that school has always had part of the NYC psyche attached to it. Obviously, the Big East had a large amount to do with that, but the city looks fondly upon St. John's. I would lump them in there with GTown.

However, I think you are spot on with the Providence and Seton Hall analysis. They are really going to struggle going forward without the brand name of "Big East" on their jerseys...

I know NYC has better ball than Philly, but the best Philly ballers never go to St. Joe's or even Temple. And Temple was as good as you can get in the A10. I see St. John's in a similar fashion. That school is in a big struggle funding wise and academically. G'town is a great school, and has a national rep with or without bball. It has certain in-built advantages over all those other schools except for Villanova (which has a kind of mind-meld with the mainline).

 

[UConnDan97]

I know NYC has better ball than Philly, but the best Philly ballers never go to St. Joe's or even Temple. And Temple was as good as you can get in the A10. I see St. John's in a similar fashion. That school is in a big struggle funding wise and academically. G'town is a great school, and has a national rep with or without bball. It has certain in-built advantages over all those other schools except for Villanova (which has a kind of mind-meld with the mainline).

True about the Philly analysis, but unlike Philly, St. John's doesn't have at least two other teams in the city drawing attention away from them (Temple, Nova, St. Joe's). And again, St. John's is still viewed positively in the city, and again likely due to such a long history in the Big East. Lavin is a very good basketball coach, and don't be shocked if they are back to being vintage St. John's in a couple of years (especially after not having to play UConn, Cuse, Pitt, ND, Ville, Cincy)...

 

[upstater]

True about the Philly analysis, but unlike Philly, St. John's doesn't have at least two other teams in the city drawing attention away from them (Temple, Nova, St. Joe's). And again, St. John's is still viewed positively in the city, and again likely due to such a long history in the Big East. Lavin is a very good basketball coach, and don't be shocked if they are back to being vintage St. John's in a couple of years (especially after not having to play UConn, Cuse, Pitt, ND, Ville, Cincy)...

Could be. I'm dubious, but it's possible. This would hurt UConn bigtime. I think UConn and Ollie will be working NYC and LA for a long time.

 

[mattp]

Nope. Cincy-Memphis-Temple is a better core than the A10. Our bottom feeders would be better than the A10s as well.

I never said they weren't, but that's not really the point. I'm not just talking about bball and I'm not just talking about quality of teams, because you also have to consider that a couple of the top A10 teams will migrate to this Catholic 7 conference. We have 20 varsity teams, and it makes zero sense to send most of them to Tulane, Houston, or Memphis. If you want to make a conference of 4, that's fine and it would be a good conference, but otherwise we're going to have to add a lot of filler and that will mean a lot of travel. None of the options are great, and if we're going to be a in a lousy conference I'd rather it be local. Tulane sucks and URI sucks, but I'd rather play URI

 

[UConnDan97]

Could be. I'm dubious, but it's possible. This would hurt UConn bigtime. I think UConn and Ollie will be working NYC and LA for a long time.

Thankfully, I still think that we are option number one in NYC, despite the C-7 split. Our name is more powerful, and we can still schedule the big boys in the OOC, regardless of conference situation. The future is still bright in the Big Apple for UConn...