When a lower-ranked team wins, the media often calls it an upset. This has happened quite often eacrly in the Big East season, so much that the world “upset” has lost its meaning.
The volatile Big East is so topsy-turvy that West Virginia, after losing four of their five starters and almost 80 percent of their scoring, has been one of the better teams in the conference. The Mountaineers were predicted to finish 12th out of 16th in the Big East by the Voice. But they are 13-3 overall, and opened up their Big East season by beating then nationally-ranked Connecticut.
Or, take the Hoyas. Picked the preseason #2 by Big East coaches, Georgetown’s own have underperformed, notably losing to three teams so far this season that they were thought to be better than, and all on their home court: Villanova, Oregon, and Oral Roberts. Forget March, this is January Madness.
It seems like the Big East gets turned on its head every year. Three Januarys ago, in JT III’s first season, Georgetown was responsible for this confusion. To open its season, the Hoyas surprised Pittsburgh and Villanova on the road and nearly beat UConn. Why can’t the league just stick to its natural pecking order?
The answer is simple: the pecking order is created by prognosticators in October. But the hierarchy then gets re-worked every week by the national polls, by bracketology, by the league’s standings.
The madness was in full form last Saturday, when Marquette hosted West Virginia. By then, the West Virginia Mountaineers had begun gaining respect, earning a #21 ranking in the ESPN/USA Today Coaches Poll. Marquette, along with Georgetown and Pitt, was predicted to be the cream of the conference this year. But, for the first time this season, they dropped out of the rankings, helping make room for West Virginia. Suddenly, the Golden Eagles became a stealthy, scrappy underdog against the Mountaineers, the Big East flavor of the week. The Golden Eagles routed WV, winning 81-63. After the game ended, the ESPN.com headline read that Marquette “upset” West Virginia.
A similar thing happened to Georgetown on Jan. 6. Earlier in the season, Georgetown was thought to be one of the best teams in the nation, and Notre Dame was predicted to be one of the worst teams in the conference. But the Hoyas had dropped out of the Top 25 well before January 6th and the Irish had recently joined. So, after the Hoyas made the Irish look famished, the media called it an “upset”.
Did Marquette and Georgetown deserve to drop out of the Top 25? Probably, because the only thing that really matters in the polls is wins and losses, not the content of the game—how the team is playing, how they match up against an opponent. If a team loses three straight, their ranking is going to fall big time, no matter what. But is this the right way to judge a team?
Even if the 31 coaches who vote in the ESPN/USA Today poll did watch Marquette lose those two games, the content of the games isn’t important in picking the Top 25. These hot and cold streaks don’t always reflect how good a team is. The polls don’t show the nuances of teams—like that Dominic James is a great player but is slumping. Even more important, they don’t account for the way two teams match up against each other. Georgetown doesn’t match up very well against Villanova, whose big men are able make Roy Hibbert a non-factor.
“Upset” should be used only when a team that is relatively better than another team gets beaten. A team is more than the number n front of its name. These matchups must be viewed on a game-to-game basis, and any team can beat any other in this conference. It appears there is no longer such a thing as an “upset” in the Big East
