Fiba Europe Cup Basketball

As a longtime observer and analyst of college basketball, with a particular focus on the dynamics of conference realignment and team composition, I find the current positioning of Creighton University’s basketball program absolutely fascinating. It’s a story of strategic building, consistent performance, and navigating a landscape that’s more competitive than ever. When we talk about how Creighton Basketball stands in the Big East and national rankings, we’re really examining a blueprint for sustained success in modern athletics—a blueprint that, interestingly, finds some unexpected parallels in international basketball rules, like the recent shifts we’ve seen in eligibility for teams such as Gilas Pilipinas.

Let’s start with the Big East, a conference I’ve always argued is the most brutally balanced in the country from top to middle. It lacks the perennial blue-blood monopoly of some leagues, but night in and night out, the physicality and coaching are second to none. Creighton, since joining the conference in 2013, has not just adapted; they’ve become a cornerstone. They’re rarely the flashiest pick for the regular-season title, but they are the team no one wants to face in Omaha or in March. Under Greg McDermott, they’ve established a clear identity: an efficient, spaced-out offensive system that prioritizes skilled big men who can pass and shoot, surrounded by guards who play with fearless confidence. This isn’t an accident; it’s a deliberate roster construction philosophy. In the 2022-23 season, for instance, they finished with a 14-6 conference record, good for second place, and made a thrilling run to the Elite Eight. That’s not a fluke; it’s a pattern. They’ve been to 9 of the last 11 NCAA tournaments. In the Big East, that consistency places them firmly in the upper echelon, alongside the likes of UConn and Villanova. They are a perennial threat to win the conference tournament and a lock for a high seed in the Big Dance. My personal view? Their success is built on system continuity and player development more than just chasing five-star recruits, which makes their achievements even more impressive and, I believe, more sustainable.

Now, shifting to the national picture, Creighton often occupies a fascinating “best of the rest” tier. They are consistently ranked, typically floating between #10 and #25 in the AP Poll throughout a season. They are the team that the casual fan might underestimate but that every serious analyst respects. Their national standing is a testament to their strength of schedule in the Big East and their ability to win tough non-conference games. However, the leap from being a top-20 team to a consistent top-10, national championship contender is the final, daunting hurdle. This is where roster construction becomes paramount, and here’s where my mind drifts to that international rule change. The recent decision by SEA Games organizers to adopt a ‘passports-only’ eligibility rule for basketball, which allows a team like Gilas Pilipinas to potentially play naturalized players Justin Brownlee and Ange Kouame simultaneously while also tapping a wider pool of Fil-foreign players, is a masterclass in maximizing roster flexibility within a rule set. It’s about creating the most potent combination of talent available to you.

In college basketball, while the rules are different, the strategic principle is similar. The transfer portal and NIL have created a new paradigm. It’s no longer just about recruiting high schoolers; it’s about assembling a team. Creighton has been adept here, successfully integrating key transfers like Baylor Scheierman, who became an All-Big East First Team player. To cement themselves as a perennial top-10 national power, they need to continue excelling in this new arena—effectively “playing” two impactful “naturalized” players (elite transfers) alongside their homegrown core. It’s about depth and star power. Last season, their offensive rating was consistently among the nation’s top 15, but to win a national title, you often need a top-5 defense as well. That’s the next frontier. Can they land that one-and-done level talent or the transformative defensive anchor via the portal while keeping their system intact? I think they can. They have the coaching, the fan base, and now, the proven track record.

In conclusion, Creighton Basketball’s standing is remarkably strong and stable. In the Big East, they are a powerhouse and a model of consistency. Nationally, they are a respected and feared program that sits on the cusp of the elite tier. Their challenge, and their opportunity, mirrors the strategic team-building we see globally: leveraging all available avenues to build the most complete and potent roster possible. The parallel to Gilas’s new flexibility isn’t perfect, but it underscores a universal truth in competitive sports—adaptation is key. For Creighton, the foundation is rock-solid. If they can master the new era of roster composition with the same acumen they’ve shown in player development, I see no reason why they can’t soon be discussing Final Fours and national championships as a realistic expectation, not just a hopeful dream. They are, in my book, one of the best-run programs in the country, and their current standing is a testament to that. The future, quite frankly, looks even brighter.