It’s easy to suggest that other conferences should stop their bottom team(s) but quite another when it’s suggested for your own conference as I did with DePaul. I figured you would be defensive on the suggestion.rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑4 years agoI don't want to go too far down this rabbit hole, but I did want to address this statement. I do think there is a large difference between DePaul and Fordham.
I don't endorse DePaul's play in the last decade plus, but for a pretty strong conference like the Big East has been, it's kind of nice to know there is a cupcake at the bottom (although that cupcake has fared pretty well against PC). Using KenPom for quick reference, in the past 5 years, there have been 5 teams with a KenPom higher than 100, so essentially one per season.
That is very different than a team like Fordham. If my KenPom math was correct, there have been 44 A10 teams over 5 years which have had a KenPom higher than 100, or essentially nine per season. So finding ways to get teams more consistently in the Top 100 for the A10 is a much more important task, which is why people talk about a school like Fordham who has never had a Top 100 KenPom in the history of his metric (1997) and has only had one Top 200 season since 2009.
DePaul is well below the other 9 of 11 BE teams, and St Johns isn’t too hot either but the gave the NYC market.
I don’t expect the BE to jettison DePaul any more than I expect the A10 to jettison Fordham - it just doesn’t happen that Conference get rid of the bottom teams. But it gets a ton of discussion every year.