Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22
  1. #1

    Big East overrated?

    1. #1 Pitt gets a huge scare against #16 East Tenn State Univ.
    2. #3 Villanova (playing in Philadelphia) down by 10 at halftime against American
    3. #6 WVU losing to #11 Dayton

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by houstondukie View Post
    1. #1 Pitt gets a huge scare against #16 East Tenn State Univ.
    2. #3 Villanova (playing in Philadelphia) down by 10 at halftime against American
    3. #6 WVU losing to #11 Dayton
    Do not question the authority of the uberconference.

  3. #3
    Isn't the WVU loss part of the Duke curse? Beat Duke and bad things happen to you.

  4. #4
    If BC or FSU loses tonight, will the ACC be overrated?

  5. #5

    let's see what happens

    a little premature to be having this discussion. I don't think we can start having this conversation until, at the very least, after this weekend is over.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    ... especially since Clemson did it again...

  7. #7
    Clemson lost as a 7 vs. a 10, but Maryland won as a 10 vs. a 7 so that is basically a wash and the ACC has as many wins as they should have according to seed. The Big East had their 1st loss and it was a 6 vs. an 11. Of course all of their teams were higher seeds in the 1st round so the best they could do is what was expected.

    It's too early to say overrated, wins are wins afterall. Pitt or 'Nova could go on to win the whole thing and their 1st round struggles will just be character builders. They could also both bow out in the 2nd round! It was curious to see them struggle so much against lesser teams though. Maybe a sign of things to come?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wentzville, MO

    Big East is kind of like the Big Ten (11)...

    Extremely overrated EVERY year

  9. #9
    Bob Huggins' teams have never impressed me. I'm no expert, but I remember even back at Cincinnati, he'd get a couple rounds in and face a team that didn't have half the talent but was disciplined and played well as a team. That team would stay in it and pressure his bearcats and they'd fold like a cheap suit down the stretch. They always looked like a VERY talented playground team to me, making lots of fancy moves and trick shots, but lacking substance and REAL teamwork. As long as they could get out on the break and run and flip alley oops of the backboard and throw behind-the-back passes for dunks on the break, they won, but if you forced them to play half court offense and defense, they just wilted.

    I just looked it up, and Bob's teams were a 1-4 seed 8 times between 1993 and 2004 with Cincinnati. His teams went to two elite eights and bowed out in the second round the other six times. So his teams exactly met their seeding expectation 1/4 of the time and failed to meet it the other 3/4. In 2001, he made it to the sweet 16 as a 5 seed, so he met/slightly exceeded his seed expectations there. The interesting thing is that before that period and right at the beginning of it, he made the final four as a 4 seed in 1992 and the elite eight as a 2 seed in 1993. So, in his first two tourneys, he actually did the best. I wonder if that indicates that the talent took over and he didn't coach as much after he got better players. Ironic. He got better talent and they became uncoachable and they did worse.

    Huggins said the other day that once you got to the tournament, coaches weren't all that important. The tournament is about players, he said. I just nodded my head and said to myself that that was why his teams bowed out early so often.

    I guess that's why I wouldn't jump to conclusions about an over-rated Big East based on the results of any team that Bob Huggins coaches.
    LET'S GO DUKE!

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by bjornolf View Post
    The interesting thing is that before that period and right at the beginning of it, he made the final four as a 4 seed in 1992 and the elite eight as a 2 seed in 1993. So, in his first two tourneys, he actually did the best. I wonder if that indicates that the talent took over and he didn't coach as much after he got better players. Ironic. He got better talent and they became uncoachable and they did worse.
    Either that or Nick Van Exel graduated.

  11. #11
    I was never a Huggy fan, PO'd when WV brought him in, but now I'm on the fence. I really liked Beilein's gimmick of the zone and everyone shooting threes, but Huggins has really developed these guys in a strong man D and great rebounding team. He did what I think was a pretty good job coaching a team with three freshmen as it's base. Ebanks has become a great defensive player and a manimal on the boards for skinny 6'9" dude. And Huggy better than anything else is a recruiter - he has 4 players coming in next year that are going to be really fun to watch as they develop.

    We were picked to finish 9th, finished 6th, beat Pitt in the BE tournament. It was not a bad year although we HAVE become used to being Sweet16.
    ~rthomas

  12. #12
    Well, look at what I posted. If he holds to form, as that talent "develops", they'll become uncoachable playground trick players that flame out in the second round. The more talent he recruits, the less he seems to coach. It's like he's one of those NFL coaches that doesn't want to offend the talented players. We'll see. Hopefully it'll be different this time.
    LET'S GO DUKE!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Lompoc, West Carolina
    I don't think they are over rated. They are neck and neck in talent with the ACC. My bracket projections included first round wins by all entrants from Big East, ACC and Pac 10. So far, it's only been broken by West Va and Clemson.

    The Clemson pick was an example of being a conference "homer". I never felt too comfortable about picking the tigers. They were really on a slide and I'd be certain Terrance Ogelsby is not the most likely to succeed today. The 'Neers, on the other hand, did come in on somewhat of a roll, doing well in the BE tournament. There's a best explanation of what happened to them today...


    THE DUKE CURSE

    moowaahahahaha

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Lompoc, West Carolina
    Ughh...I did pick Boston College over USC.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Red Lion, PA
    I think we need to take a look at the ACC. BC is getting smacked around by USC late in the game, Clemson looked lost against Michigan, and Wake and FSU have yet to play!

  16. #16
    BC lost to a 10 seed and Wake Forest is getting pounded by Cleveland St. 18-10... maybe the ACC is overrated.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Ashburn, VA
    27-12 - ouch...

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by obsesseddukefan View Post
    Big East is kind of like the Big Ten (11)... Extremely overrated EVERY year
    Not sure how you can say that, since 3 of the NCAA champs over the past 10 years have come from the Big East, the same as the ACC. Furthermore, the ACC and Big East have produced essentially the equal percentage of champions since each conference's respective inception in 1953 and 1979, respectively. The ACC has produced the champion 10 times over 55 years (18%) vs. the Big East's 5 times over 29 years (17%). The Big 10 has been over rated recently, I agree, but they have produced as many champs as the ACC has since the tournament started. The only other conference that can compare to the Big East and ACC in recent history has been the SEC.

    As for this year, I think the OP has jumped the gun a bit on his assessment, considering the Big East has lost 1 team (with all played) to the ACC's 2 thus far (with 2 more to go, one of which is currently down.) Sure the Pitt and Nova games were closer than they should have been for their seeds, but the 'Cuse came back in a big way for their second half (I'll cut them some slack with a post BE Tourney letdown), and the close Marquette game isn't a surprise in a 6 vs. 11 matchup which area often close. WVU's loss isn't a shocker considering the year Dayton has had and their RPI. UConn and L'Ville manhandled their teams (which they should have).

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    If BC or FSU loses tonight, will the ACC be overrated?
    Since they both lost, I think the answer is "Yes".

  20. #20
    I am sick of hearing about the Big East like everyone else but I don't think anyone can say that they are overrated at this point. If they lay some eggs in the second round, then we can talk. I don't like WVU or Bob Huggins (however, his dad was a gem) and they did not deserve a #6 seed. Dayton at #11 was far better than anyone gave them credit for or anticipated.

    I don't think that a few mediocre performances and a #6 losing to a #11 necessarily translates into an overrated conference. But I do hope for worse results for the Big East in round 2.

Similar Threads

  1. Opening Round Bye...Overrated?
    By captmojo in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-14-2009, 12:20 PM
  2. Duke gets one nod for being overrated
    By vango in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-26-2008, 07:23 AM
  3. Was The ACC Overrated ?
    By NYC Duke Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-26-2007, 05:29 PM
  4. ACC overrated?
    By Bay Area Duke Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-22-2007, 11:42 AM
  5. Was the ACC overrated this year?
    By patentgeek in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-19-2007, 08:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •