Welcome to The Holy Land of Hoops

trust me i'm not saying its a huge market but there is a soccer market
and soccer doesn't need the 3 million a school deal. Remember the A-10 gets just 350,000/school for bball now if the new soccer conference could get 50 to 100 thousand a year for soccer you just turned soccer to breaking even and turning a profit for a lot of these schools.

The key thing is that it doesn't have to challenge football just hit a niche like the MLS has. FX will need filler sports in the fall soccer fits the bill nicely and soccer happens not just on Sat. I've left out laccross which will become fall filler (and a $eparate deal).

BillEsq wrote:

Jet915 wrote:

Eight Legger wrote:Since 2003, Creighton has 4 NCAA tournament appearances and one win.

Since 2003, Richmond has 3 NCAA tournament appearances, 2 wins and a Sweet 16.

I'm not sure it's fair to say that Creighton has been better than UR in the past decade.

True, but if you go back 15 years, Creighton has 8 appearances while UR still has 3.

LOL my 5 years are better than your 10 years my 8 year KENPOM is better than your 6 year Sagrin... are you guys seriously listening to yourselves... we will all crap ourselves when they pick Northeastern saying they want the Boston Market

Decent computer numbers are nice for comparing programs and conferences. The stronger a predictor ranking is the more valuable a comparison it is. What is wrong with discussing them to compare the strengths of programs?

They will pick who they pick, for now can't we enjoy the bickering of merits? Once teams are chosen it won't matter anymore, we'll be confrence mates or not. I won't care one bit who I argued for at that point.

Bostonspider wrote:I was looking at 10 versus 12 and, In reality the difference in inventory is not that large. With 10 teams, you play an 18 game schedule for a total of 90 league games. With 12 teams, you play a 16 game schedule for a total of 96 league games. Only a 6.7% difference. It's way you do get to have true round robin schedule which is great.

True round robins are dead in sports... out in all professional and all major college bball tv is king love it or hate it you can't deny it. Seriously look at a schedule in any league and try to rationalize it.

That said OOC needs to be considered 12 teams means more OOC games and Fox owns rights to PAC which has 12 teams sounds like a nice west coast east coast challenge that fox alone would have rights too. Plus if you add in more teams located in fox regions you get to play games on regionals not picked up by Fs1, that gives you what every network loves in house advertisement of their other stations...

if thats the case i'll take Richmond they have done well in a conference that in recent history has been better plus have a sweet 16 plus are penalized in most computer polls due to the style of offense they play - Computer's don't appreciate the nuances of the Princeton offense.

Bostonspider wrote:I was looking at 10 versus 12 and, In reality the difference in inventory is not that large. With 10 teams, you play an 18 game schedule for a total of 90 league games. With 12 teams, you play a 16 game schedule for a total of 96 league games. Only a 6.7% difference. It's way you do get to have true round robin schedule which is great.

I doubt you would play a 16 game schedule, there is no need for divisions with 12 teams, most likely it will be somewhat unbalanced to a 18 game schedule.

Bostonspider wrote:I was looking at 10 versus 12 and, In reality the difference in inventory is not that large. With 10 teams, you play an 18 game schedule for a total of 90 league games. With 12 teams, you play a 16 game schedule for a total of 96 league games. Only a 6.7% difference. It's way you do get to have true round robin schedule which is great.

12 team conferences can and do play 18 game schedules. The ACC, B1G, and P12 come to mind.

I think the UR sports info department had a stat last week that the Spiders have won more A-10 games in the past 6 years than all but two teams in the league (my guess is X and Temple were the top two).

I agree it's like splitting hairs at a certain point comparing pros and cons of various programs. But I think it's a little silly to go back more than a decade and use that as an indicator of anticipated future success. I'm fine with looking at historical performances to show great achievements or accomplishments; we have a great history of pulling upsets in the NCAAs in the 1980s and 1990s. But I wouldn't trot those games from 20 years ago out as evidence that we deserve to be in this league.

There are good cases to be made for each team under consideration, and it seems that all but one of us will end up in this league. If that happens, it should be a great league.

Edrick wrote:I suppose its moderately more likely they'd like Richmond simply for recruiting.

St. Louis has better high school basketball than Richmond. If recruiting inroads and market size are what we're looking at, SLU is a better choice than UR.
If it's money and prestige, UR is better than SLU.

Think about these recruiting grounds:
Chicago
Indianapolis
New York
D.C.
Philly
St. Louis

...probably the best coverage of any conference in the best cities for high school level hoops.

???

The question was Richmond or Creighton. St Louis has nothing to do with the question

And anyway you are wrong anyway, that cooridor extending o Washington is among the best in the country for basketball recruiting. St Louis doesn't compare

Yes. Virginia and North Carolina are loaded with great players to don't end up at ACC schools.