Big East Matchups Released

[Terry in Crapchester]

A little late, but better late than never.

http://www.bigeast.org/sports/m-baskbl/ ... 06aaf.html

THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS: BIG EAST MEN'S BASKETBALL MATCHUPS REFLECT COMPETITIVE BALANCE WHILE KEEPING ESTABLISHED RIVALRIES
Repeat opponents continue to take into account natural interest, geography, rivalries and television obligations



The BIG EAST announced its 2006-07 men's basketball matchups on July 14

July 14, 2006

Providence, R.I. - It may be hard for people in mid-July to be pumped up about the upcoming men's college basketball season, but Commissioner Michael Tranghese and his staff have done their best to give BIG EAST fans something to be excited about as the conference's matchups were announced on July 14.

For the second consecutive year, BIG EAST teams will play a 16-game conference schedule. Teams will meet 10 opponents once and three opponents twice (home and away). Each team will not play two opponents.

Many college basketball analysts expect the BIG EAST to be competitively balanced among the top half of the league. Any number of teams could make a run at earning the regular season or tournament title. Tranghese and his staff have attempted to reflect that competitive balance by having the perceived top half of the league competing against each other at least once, while at the same time maintaining established rivalries for repeat games that keep television partners and fans excited.

"This schedule is more balanced competitively than last year, especially at the perceived top of the conference," said Commissioner Michael Tranghese. "With the strength and depth that we've shown as a 16-team league, we were still able to produce a large number of marquee matchups without simply forcing the perceived top three or four teams to play only each other twice."

Members of the conference staff discussed with each other, television partners and with each of the league head coaches to come up with a general consensus as to which teams are among the "perceived best" entering this season.

The decisions regarding repeat opponents are based on natural interest, geography, rivalries and television contractual obligations. All teams that did not meet last season will be meeting this year. All single-game home and away matchups from last year have been flipped for this season.

Here is a list of just some of the home-and-home key contests fans can look forward to seeing during the 2006-07 BIG EAST Conference schedule:

DePaul vs. Notre Dame
Louisville vs. Marquette
Pittsburgh vs. West Virginia
Rutgers vs. Seton Hall
Syracuse vs. Connecticut
Villanova vs. Georgetown

Villanova vs. Pittsburgh and Syracuse vs. Marquette are two key matchups that will occur this season but were not on the 2005-06 schedule.

The 2006-07 campaign will be the last season for the BIG EAST to have a 16-game conference slate. The league will move to an 18-game schedule in '07-08 when each team will play every opponent once and three opponents twice.

I like it from ND's perspective in that the schedule is much more favorable this year. We get home-and-homes against DePaul, Villanova and South Florida. We also skip UConn and Pitt, usually two of the stronger teams in the conference.

Looks like it's time for Mike Brey to step up or move out. I would say that if we don't see considerable improvement over last season, it's time to seriously consider a coaching change. And I'll be at the ND-Syracuse game for sure.

[MuchoBulls]

We have ND, DePaul and Louisville as our mirror teams. We skip Georgetown and Villanova. Our bench is much deeper than last season, so that should translate into more W's and hopefully a spot in the Big East Tournament and NIT.

I am totally in favor of the Big East going to an 18 game schedule next season. I know some coaches are against it, but you should play every team at least once.

[Terry in Crapchester]

I am totally in favor of the Big East going to an 18 game schedule next season. I know some coaches are against it, but you should play every team at least once.

Agree that each team should play each other team in the conference at least once. But I would keep it at 16 games, with only one team as a home-and-home. I would set up four groups of four in the conference, with each team rotating through that group for its home-and-home opponent:

Group 1: UConn, Providence, Rutgers, Seton Hall
Group 2: Georgetown, St. John's, Syracuse, Villanova
Group 3: Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Group 4: DePaul, Marquette, Notre Dame, South Florida

That's a pretty good sorting by geography, traditional rivalries, etc. USF gets into its group on default, although they have a fairly longstanding conference rivalry with both DePaul and Marquette.

[King Crimson]

as an observer the "new" big east is a blast to watch...and i was kind of a closet ESPN watching fan of CUSA. CUSA was a fun brand of basketball.

but if i was a old-timey Big Easter mahself (went to college with big G-Town, ND, Cuse, and St. John's fans), i'd think it's just too many teams. but, again, I still bemoan the loss of the Big 8 home-homes in the move to the Big XII. Let's say you lose to KU up at Phog Allen....you know those weasel birds still have to come back to yer place. it was great sports drama.

[Terry in Crapchester]

but if i was a old-timey Big Easter mahself (went to college with big G-Town, ND, Cuse, and St. John's fans), i'd think it's just too many teams.

Slight correction on this point: by the time ND joined the Big East, the conference was already up to 13 teams including ND (West Virginia and Rutgers received full membership the same year ND joined for basketball and olympic sports). So we're not exactly a charter member of the Big East.

but, again, I still bemoan the loss of the Big 8 home-homes in the move to the Big XII. Let's say you lose to KU up at Phog Allen....you know those weasel birds still have to come back to yer place. it was great sports drama.

Good point. The unfortunate part of a conference getting bigger, certainly in basketball, is that you lose the home-and-home matchups against at least some of the schools in your conference.

[MuchoBulls]

Terry,

I think the only issue you might have with having only 1 opponent to play twice is that long standing rivalries would disappear.

Say UConn and Syracuse play each other twice. A program like St. John's would be bent out of shape at not getting either program on their schedule for 2 games.

Some of the older rivalries in the conference should stay with 2 games a season.

Now take USF. We have played teams like Louisville, Cincinnati DePaul, and Marquette a good deal. Those are the teams we should be playing twice. Maybe you set Louisville and Marquette in one year and then rotate them out the following year for DePaul Cincinnati. This way USF could stil get a different team to maybe create a potential rivalry with.

[King Crimson]

but if i was a old-timey Big Easter mahself (went to college with big G-Town, ND, Cuse, and St. John's fans), i'd think it's just too many teams.

Slight correction on this point: by the time ND joined the Big East, the conference was already up to 13 teams including ND (West Virginia and Rutgers received full membership the same year ND joined for basketball and olympic sports). So we're not exactly a charter member of the Big East.

.

i know, and point taken. in fact, i sort of spoke well of a friend *in absentia * who is from NYC and Catholic and has partaken equally in being a SJU and ND fan when it suits him. even though, as an Oklahoma absolutist, i like to give him the business about it (as Eddie Haskell would say). pick a team, and go wit' it.

but i spoke well of him here by including both. when we were in college together, ND was not in the Big East, though he was a Big East guy. and, I too, outside Oklahoma hoops also sort of cut my teeth on college hoops in the early-mid 80's on Big East and Sun Belt hoops on ESPN.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Terry,

I think the only issue you might have with having only 1 opponent to play twice is that long standing rivalries would disappear.

Say UConn and Syracuse play each other twice. A program like St. John's would be bent out of shape at not getting either program on their schedule for 2 games.

Some of the older rivalries in the conference should stay with 2 games a season.

That creates a special problem for ND.

Since joining the Big East, we've developed some pretty decent conference rivalries with Pitt (I daresay that Pitt is the only school that would make a Top 10 list for ND rivals in both football and basketball), UConn, Syracuse and Georgetown. If you go back a little farther than that, however, the biggest traditional rivals that we have in the current Big East are DePaul and Marquette, going back to the days when all three schools were independent and used to play each other twice a season every season.

So who would ND get as their home-and-home rivals? Besides, in the current format, I think you'd almost have to rotate the home-and-home series, especially since you're not playing every team every year. But after next season, that's probably a moot argument.

[MuchoBulls]

ND could get DePaul and Marquette each year and then have UConn, Syracuse, and Georgetown rotate in as the third home and home.

It's going to be difficult to schedule for just about every team, but I am sure that Tranghese and Co. will make it work.

The new tv deal will work wonders.

[Terry in Crapchester]

One thing the Big East should do is let every team into conference tourney play. I suppose there is something to be said for the idea that you have to play your way in to the Big East tourney, but conference tourneys exist largely to showcase the conference in question. The best way to do that is to let all your teams qualify. As strong as the Big East is right now, not letting all your teams into the conference tourney could be costing 1 or 2 teams a post-season tournament bid.

My suggestion would be to go with the single bye/double bye format, like this:

First round: 9 vs. 16, 12 vs. 13, 11 vs. 14, 10 vs. 15 (1-8 seeds have byes).
Second round: 8 vs. 9-16 winner, 5 vs. 12-13 winner, 6 vs. 11-14 winner, 7 vs. 10-15 winner (1-4 seeds have byes).
Quarterfinals: 1 vs. 8-9-16 winner, 4 vs. 5-12-13 winner, 3 vs. 6-11-14 winner, 2 vs. 7-10-15 winner.
Semifinals: 1-8-9-16 winner vs. 4-5-12-13 winner, 3-6-11-14 winner vs. 2-7-10-15 winner.

The problem is that you'd need an extra day for the tourney, and with MSG being home to both the Knicks and the Rangers, that could be tough. But if you have to, play the first round at campus sites for the higher-seeded teams. Also, the Big East should have their final on Sunday, not Saturday, but playing at MSG might make that difficult if not impossible.

[MuchoBulls]

I disagree with letting every team in. The teams who finish 1-4 should be rewarded with the first round bye. It won't cost teams trying to get into the NCAA Tournament since they would more than likely be the 7-10 seeds, so they'll be playing on Day 1 anyways. Those teams who are left out of the Big East tournament would more than likely make the NIT, provided they are above .500.

[Terry in Crapchester]

I disagree with letting every team in. The teams who finish 1-4 should be rewarded with the first round bye.

My proposal would give 1-4 seeds first and second round byes, and 5-8 seeds first round byes.

It won't cost teams trying to get into the NCAA Tournament since they would more than likely be the 7-10 seeds, so they'll be playing on Day 1 anyways. Those teams who are left out of the Big East tournament would more than likely make the NIT, provided they are above .500.

I agree that it won't cost the conference any NCAA bids, but it could cost a 13 or 14 seed a NIT bid.