In which I passive-aggressively defend Big East football
by Kevin Meacham on Jul 29, 2010 10:26 PM EDT
Email
PrintJust a quick response to our SBNation overlord, the esteemed Holly Anderson, who had some blood-rilin' up her sleeve tonight. In response to Head Coach Randy Edsall's Big East chat-boasting on ESPN.com this afternoon, Anderson came in with a rebuttal, entitled "With Apologies To Randy Edsall, The Big East Remains Mostly Harmless". If I had to paraphrase its sub-headline, I would do so thusly:
UConn head coach Randy Edsall's claim that the Big East is "as strong as any conference in the country" is a stupid doodiehead. The claim itself, that is. Randy Edsall's doodiehead status remains up for debate.
Anyway, I don't really want to defend Big East football, because it is what it is: an anachronistic, basketball-dominant league that is lodged firmly in the second tier of college football (if the first tier is to be understood as the Big 12, SEC and Big 10).
But I must, because the league is not nearly as bad as Anderson (or at least the facts that she uses) indicates. First, a fact-checking issue:
"The four teams in minor bowls all managed wins, though only Rutgers gained more than a four-point victory, in a 45-24 blowout of Central Florida in St. Petersburg."
This would be true, except that two of the other three bowl wins (UConn over South Carolina/USF over Northern Illinois) were decisive blowouts. Onward:
"However, the conference has been invited to fewer bowls in the past three years than any other Big Six league."
8 < 10, 11, and 12, by my math. And at least one of those eight teams (Syracuse) has to go 1-6 in the league.
When Edsall spoke so glowingly of the non-conference slates, did he mean to tout their quality in a relative or absolute sense? Every conference plays its share of cupcake games, but he perhaps should wait to preen over a tough schedule for a year when the Huskies aren't facing Texas Southern, Buffalo, and Vanderbilt.
Using last season's final rankings to determine opponent quality for next year is premature, of course. But the above-highlighted teams all have reasonable expectations for continued success this year. The point being, the entire Big East, combined, will play a currently-ranked team six (6) times in 2010. If we add in teams with the potential to perhaps climb into the polls by the time they face a Big East squad (generously: Oregon State, North Carolina, Boston College, and Washington), that number climbs to ten, barely edging out the number of games to be played against teams from below Division I-A (nine).
QUEL HORREUR!
On an unrelated note, here is the list of teams ranked in the top 25 at the end of last season that find themselves on SEC OOC schedules in 2010:
- Penn State, Clemson (2X), Georgia Tech, North Carolina, West Virginia, Oregon
Of course, all SEC teams have to play Florida and Alabama seven times each, so they can be excused for playing the same number of currently-ranked teams as the Big East despite having four more teams. The SEC will play 21 OOC games against I-AA teams or MAC/Sun Belt squads (1.75 per team); the Big East will play 17 (2 per team). Both leagues scheduled 10 BCS teams who weren't ranked at the end of last season.
And so on and so forth. I don't even really care how good each conference's schedules are. You can play these games with any conference and frankly, the Big East will always come out looking bad in these comparisons because its teams aren't brand-names.
Here's where I agree with Anderson: The Big East's best teams are not in the same class as the top-tier SEC/Big 12/Big 10 powerhouses. I don't even think Randy Edsall would argue that.
I think it's clear Edsall was trying to homer it up, to be a salesman for his league. Is it a little silly to say that the Big East is "top-to-bottom" as strong as any other league? Sure. Is it sillier to argue that eight months after Florida rocked Cincinnati's world in the Sugar Bowl and didn't call it at the morning after? Of course.
But I also think it's silly to say the Big East is not "nationally competitive" when it performed as good or better than the ACC (4/12 teams in the top 25, highest #10), Pac-10 (2/10 teams in the top 25, highest #11) and Mountain West (3/9 in the top 25, but 4/9 of the league finishing under .500).
Now, who wants to get back to debating precisely how much better Jim Calhoun is compared to Jim Boeheim? I say infinity, but I'm willing to compromise down infinity-minus-three.
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm also kind of tired of the Cincinnati-Florida game being shoved in our faces.
Brian Kelly was the MVP of that team, by far. He was the only reason the Bearcats would have had a chance to win. Well, Kelly was gone, the interim coach (along with most of the staff) was coaching with one foot out the door, and the Cincinnati players were all deflated. And then on the other side, you had an already more-talented team fired up because it was Tebow’s last game, plus Urban Meyer pulling a “win one for the Gipper” routine by retiring and then unretiring and then taking a leave of absence.
One side was as amped as they could possibly be, and the other was as down as you can possibly be. Anyone who wasn’t expecting a blowout under those conditions is really naive.
P.S. Let’s just ignore West Virginia DESTROYING Oklahoma in the 07 Fiesta Bowl, or that same team beating Georgia in the 05 Sugar Bowl.
Voodoo Five - South Florida Bulls SBN Blog
The Toughest Blog in America
by Jamie DeVriend on Jul 29, 2010 11:12 PM EDT reply actions
Nothing says “as amped as they could possibly be” like losing a shot at an undefeated season. Half my Gator friends didn’t even watch the Sugar Bowl. What was the point?
by Giant Catfish on Jul 31, 2010 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Brian Kelly...
Screwed any chance Cincy had of keeping that game competitive, but to be fair, Cincy’s defense was swiss cheese late in the season, and in my opinion likely would have lost decisively anyway.
What ticks me off about people like this woman is she never lets facts get in the way of her opinion.
Ignore WVU downing OK and GA. Ignore Rutgers pounding KState a couple of years ago, UConn downing South Carolina…South Florida winning at Auburn…USF destroying Florida State…Rutgers embarrassing Maryland, Syracuse beating Northwestern (remember, Northwestern later knocked off undefeated Iowa), Cincy winning at Oregon State, Pitt beating North Carolina…the list goes on and on…this is all off the top of my head…the Big East acquits itself very well vs other BCS conference teams…we win some and lose some…but that’s how it should be. Furthermore, almost everytime a Big East team meets with a non-BCS conference opponent, they win big. Let’s also throw in Syracuse, Pitt and UConn all posting recent wins over Notre Dame. “Mostly harmless”…that’s not at all what the facts say…
Rutgers embarrassed Maryland.
Seriously? Is that a bragging point? Rutgers pounding Kansas State? Syracuse beating NORTHWESTERN?!?!?!
The fact that you have to delve back 4+ years to find some of those results is even more telling. Don’t worry, though, that roundball game will be back in a few short months.
by Giant Catfish on Jul 31, 2010 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Not that I'd like to draw attention to sexist pigs...
but Ms. Anderson knows more about football than you ever will.
by Giant Catfish on Jul 31, 2010 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions
lighten up Francis
It’s a joke. Kinda like Notre Dame and Michigan still being relevant in college football.
by fcmonk on Jul 31, 2010 8:25 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Really Francis (lighten up)
Except that in reality, Notre Dame and Michigan are no longer relevant in college football.
Hmm
So in summary….this post was essentially let’s ignore the historical and recent success of the Big East and repeat SEC/Big 12(?) talking points (I refuse to include the Big 10(?) as you do….because well the Big 10(?) sucks, and is rather boring.) West Virginia should have won the title in 07, they would have demolished OSU in the title game, Louisville minus a very good college running back in Michael Bush, was a field goal away from a perfect season, and possibly a national title game spot against OSU in which they probably do the same thing Florida did to them. Thats back to back years the BE had two teams with a legitimate chance of winning the title, not to mention WVU beating UGA in 06 (the SEC champion), last year would be the exception with reference to recent history, not the rule. Not to mention the fact that the BE only has eight football schools, which is a huge handicap within itself.
by asmith1022_2006 on Jul 31, 2010 2:48 AM EDT reply actions
ESPN
Kevin,
Didn’t know if you saw this already, but you’ve been linked to from ESPN
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigeast
July 30th, 12:00 pm entry – “a mild defense of Big East Football”
Who Doesn't Like Icecreamcake?
The case for Michigan relevancy
I am by far not a Michigan fan, but in their defense, they are still a relevant, quality program that is currently on their heels. Remember, it was just three years ago that they beat up on Florida on New Year’s day. to say they are not relevant is wrong, they are just down. Notre Dame on the other hand is not relevant. Other than Charlie Weis’ first year, they haven’t factored into any serious bowl line ups for twenty years. That is a program that is not relevant anymore. Maybe Kelly turns it around, maybe he doesn’t. That will take time to tell.
As far as the Big East being as competitive as the other BCS conferences, Their top couple of teams, I believe will be as competitive as anyone, but that only covers Pitt, UConn, West Va. Cincy, maybe. Rutgers is kinda on the cusp, but the rest? it is a pretty big drop off after the first four.
The case for Michigan irrelevancy
Michigan is clearly on their heels. However, they have only won 8 games in the 2 years Rich Rodriguez has been head coach. Considering how pourous their defense was last year, exceeding that 4 win total this year is going to be difficult. Throw in games against Ohio State and Wisconsin to end the season, and it would’t be shocking to see Rodriguez packing his things by then (especially considering there is a new AD in town). At least ND has made the coaching change already (and will probably beat Michigan this year).
P.S. Sadly for you, Penn State appears to be intent on joining ND and Michigan as irrelevant programs as well; with Darryl Clark gone, they have no one to play QB this year, and from what I hear, top recruits have been reluctant to sign on the dotted line with Joe Pa becoming more senile each passing day (and the fact he no longer makes visits to homes of recruits).
Cuse thoughts
There’s some truth to both sides. The Big East scheduling stinks this year. Rutgers and Syracuse both fail miserably with scheduling. USF and Pitt both look solid, but the Big East really could benefit more if Pitt went with someone like Indiana at a neutral site. On paper the win looks better than a win over New Hampshire, even if Indiana is a last place team.
WVU has an OK schedule but for the Big East’s sake it would have been better to maybe get a home game with someone like Ole Miss(since their schedule sucks badly).
UConn would be OK since Temple improved, but really its a no-win situation for the Big East’s sake there. Beating them isn’t a BCS team. Perhaps replace them with a mid-upper level team like Northwestern. Vanderbilt is so weak it really does nothing for the image of the Big East. Use that as a tune up game rather than Texas Southern. For the Big East’s sake I would try for a game with Boston College(neutral at Foxboro sound interesting?!).
Rutgers needs a total make over with their scheduling. For the Big East’s sake they should have gone with @South Carolina or @Tennessee instead of Army and home against Texas AM.
It will remain to be seen if Syracuse will improve, but we don’t like having Colgate on the schedule. I would have rather seen someone like Purdue come to the Dome in place of that game for the sake of the Big East.
If anyone cares to look, all of the teams I would put into the schedule have very bad schedules themselves that are loaded with 1AA teams or non BCS teams.
Also, every game I mentioned there was a winnable game for the Big East. Every game that I mentioned was realistic as best as I could rattle off the top of my head and by looking at schedule strength and current games this year. The teams going against the Big East could all benefit by playing a better, BCS, Big East team. I also didn’t include any Pac 10 teams because it’s harder to schedule them since they only have 3 opening’s a season since they play 9 conference games.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
