Why expand?

[Bill Marsh]

The obvious point to me is that you want any new additions to "average up" the conference, not drop its average. You want any adds to be at least on par with the top 4 teams. While not trying to disparage these programs, SLU, Dayton, Richmond, VCU, etc. just do not do that.

Are you sure about that?

Here are all 14 programs ranked by average KenPom ranking from the past 2 seasons.

Code: Select all

          2013 2012 2yr-AVG
1 Gtown    13   13   13
2 SLU      18   14   16
3 Marq     27   18   22.5
4 Crei     19   34   26.5
5 VCU      16   40   28
6 Nova     43   78   60.5
7 Xavier   79   51   65
8 Dayton   67   65   66
9 Butler   45   110   77.5
10 SHall   109   57   83
11 Rich    83   105   94
12 Prov    65   124   94.5
13 SJU     104   152   128
14 DePaul  162   144   153


Two years may be a sufficient track record for you, but it's not for me. And I suspect that it won't be enough for Fox either.

[Dave]

The obvious point to me is that you want any new additions to "average up" the conference, not drop its average. You want any adds to be at least on par with the top 4 teams. While not trying to disparage these programs, SLU, Dayton, Richmond, VCU, etc. just do not do that.

Are you sure about that?

Here are all 14 programs ranked by average KenPom ranking from the past 2 seasons.

Code: Select all

          2013 2012 2yr-AVG
1 Gtown    13   13   13
2 SLU      18   14   16
3 Marq     27   18   22.5
4 Crei     19   34   26.5
5 VCU      16   40   28
6 Nova     43   78   60.5
7 Xavier   79   51   65
8 Dayton   67   65   66
9 Butler   45   110   77.5
10 SHall   109   57   83
11 Rich    83   105   94
12 Prov    65   124   94.5
13 SJU     104   152   128
14 DePaul  162   144   153


So Belmont should be our target for expansion?

[walijones]

Bill Marsh and another poster got it right.....Villanova is the only school that has won an NCAA Div.1 championship in both football and basketball.....The FBS schools vie for a "mythical" national championship, which is based on opinion. There is no NCAA national champion at that level, until next year when the playoff system arrives. You can win a couple of bucks with that discussion in your local gin mill.

PS--Villanova has won a total of 19 NCAA championships (the majority in track and cross country). I don't think the rest of the "old" Big East added together, can match that total.

[Dave]

Bill Marsh and another poster got it right.....Villanova is the only school that has won an NCAA Div.1 championship in both football and basketball.....The FBS schools vie for a "mythical" national championship, which is based on opinion. There is no NCAA national champion at that level, until next year when the playoff system arrives. You can win a couple of bucks with that discussion in your local gin mill.

PS--Villanova has won a total of 19 NCAA championships (the majority in track and cross country). I don't think the rest of the "old" Big East added together, can match that total.

Nothing can be more mythical than a 1AA championship.

[Westbrook36]

Bill Marsh and another poster got it right.....Villanova is the only school that has won an NCAA Div.1 championship in both football and basketball.....The FBS schools vie for a "mythical" national championship, which is based on opinion. There is no NCAA national champion at that level, until next year when the playoff system arrives. You can win a couple of bucks with that discussion in your local gin mill.

PS--Villanova has won a total of 19 NCAA championships (the majority in track and cross country). I don't think the rest of the "old" Big East added together, can match that total.

Nothing can be more mythical than a 1AA championship.

Is a FCS football championship a big deal?

No.

But, there is absolutely positively nothing mythical about it. They actually have a national 16 team playoff, no one is awarded or voted champion. It is actually settled on the field. Again it's not the highest level of college football, so it's not a huge deal, but it's definitely not mythical.

And why the hell is football being discussed here? Out of all the basketball conferences out there, you'd think we'd be the last to have a discussion of college football. Unless that discussion was along the lines of, "how college football destroyed old traditions and rivalries".

[Dave]

Bill Marsh and another poster got it right.....Villanova is the only school that has won an NCAA Div.1 championship in both football and basketball.....The FBS schools vie for a "mythical" national championship, which is based on opinion. There is no NCAA national champion at that level, until next year when the playoff system arrives. You can win a couple of bucks with that discussion in your local gin mill.

PS--Villanova has won a total of 19 NCAA championships (the majority in track and cross country). I don't think the rest of the "old" Big East added together, can match that total.

Nothing can be more mythical than a 1AA championship.

Is a FCS football championship a big deal?

No.

But, there is absolutely positively nothing mythical about it. They actually have a national 16 team playoff, no one is awarded or voted champion. It is actually settled on the field. Again it's not the highest level of college football, so it's not a huge deal, but it's definitely not mythical.

And why the hell is football being discussed here? Out of all the basketball conferences out there, you'd think we'd be the last to have a discussion of college football. Unless that discussion was along the lines of, "how college football destroyed old traditions and rivalries".

Don't forget the NIT title. It matches up better with the 1AA FCS title. Could be reworded: What team has won both the NIT and the 1AA FCS titles, AND an NCAA hoops title?

[Bill Marsh]

Bill Marsh and another poster got it right.....Villanova is the only school that has won an NCAA Div.1 championship in both football and basketball.....The FBS schools vie for a "mythical" national championship, which is based on opinion. There is no NCAA national champion at that level, until next year when the playoff system arrives. You can win a couple of bucks with that discussion in your local gin mill.

PS--Villanova has won a total of 19 NCAA championships (the majority in track and cross country). I don't think the rest of the "old" Big East added together, can match that total.

Nothing can be more mythical than a 1AA championship.

Sure there can.

Championships can by definition only be won on the field of competition. Titles are awarded; championships are earned. That's why the college football championship has from time immemorial been labeled "mythical". Everyone knows that it's not a true championship. Winning a vote only matters in politics, not in athletic competition.

A 1AA championship is absolutely a true championship for that division.

Getting back to college basketball, I think that this concept of championships becomes most interesting when we hear claims of multiple national championships from certain schools. They assume that an NCAA title = a national championship. Hat is true enough in the modern era, but it wasn't always so.

Indiana claims to be a blue blood program because they have won 5 NCAA championships. Well back in 1940 when they won their first tournament, the NIT was an even more prestigious tournament. The 2 previous years, the NIT champ had been recognized as national champion by the Helms Foundation. The Foundation couldn't settle on either of the 2 tournament champions in 1940 and recognized USC, who had been eliminated in the first round of the NCAA tournament. Hardly a vote of confidence inIndiana. In 1953 when Indiana won its 2nd NCAA tournament, they finished the season ranked #1 in the polls while NIT champ Seron Hall was ranked #2. How can we possibly have a true champion when #1 and #2 not only never met, they never even competed in the same tournament? IMO, Indiana has only 3 undisputed NCs, not 5.

Kentucky is another interesting case. All time great program because they won 8 NCs, right? In 1949, Kentucky won the NCAA tournament, but they also competed in the NIT where they lost to Loyola (Chi) in their first game. If the team that established itself as the best team in the NCAA field competes in the NIT, doesn't that mean that San Francisco, the NIT winner, has earned the right to be considered national champs? But everyone refers to Kentucky as an 8 time national champion and no one refers to USF as a 3 time NC (1949 NIT + 2 NCAA titles),

In an even more complicated situation, NCAA champ Utah, like Kentucky in the previous example, also competed in the NIT that tear where they lost to Kentucky in the first round. So, shouldn't NIT champ St. John's have been recognized as NC. But it was war time and the Red Cross sponsored a charity game between the NIT and NCAA champs to raise money for the war effort. The game was billed as the national championship game. But hasn't that already been decided in the NIT? To throw a wrench into the works, Utah won the Red Cross game, thereby undermining St. John's claim. Today, we regard the tournament winner as NC regardless of any losses they may have had outside the tournament - especially in an exhibition game. And wouldn't any recognition of Utah mean they had the opportunity for double elimination when St. John's didn't? The Helms Foundation eschewed any attempt to resolve the conflict and settled on Army as its champion, a very popular and patriotic choice during war time. But despite its undefeated record, making it a legitimate choice, army had chosen not to compete in either postseason tournament and therefore had not entered championship competition. So, St. John's is never recognized as a past national champion while Army is even though they never competed for it and Utah has an NCAA championship to its credit and all that goes with that.

Personally I don't believe that the tournaments before 1955 legitimately determined the national champion, given that the best teams were split between the 2 tournaments. - except of course for 1950 when unranked CCNY won both tournaments in the same season.

[walijones]

Great stuff Bill. The NIT certainly was > than the NCAA for many years. And even in the late 60's and early 70's, some teams opted for the NIT over the NCAA (Marquette??).

[Bill Marsh]

Great stuff Bill. The NIT certainly was > than the NCAA for many years. And even in the late 60's and early 70's, some teams opted for the NIT over the NCAA (Marquette??).

Yes, Marquette was certainly capable of making a deep run in the 1970 NCAA tournament if they had chosen to go there. Maybe could have won it all.

Then there's the upset factor. In a conference like the ACC which sent it's conference tournament winner at a time when almost everyone else sent their regular season champ. That's fine today when the regular season champ gets a 2nd shot in the NCAA's, but back then it meant that a top team was eliminated as a result of playing games that no one else had to play.

A classic example was 1970 when South Carolina was ranked #3 in the country but was upset by #19 NC State in double OT. That South Carolina team had been undefeated in conference play up to that championship game loss. So, the #3 team in the country didn't even get a chance to compete for the NC! That's the same year that #8 Marquette declined their invitation in favor of the NIT. Some big pieces were missing from that tournament.

[Dave]

All good stuff Bill. But in the modern era, I'm going to give the nod in 1994 to Nolan Richardson's Razorbacks over Nova's NIT team.

2009 football is more of a toss up though. Alabama or Villanova. Too close to call.