Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

The home for Big East hoops

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Postby muskienick » Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:20 pm

I am not a big fan of divisions either. In fact, if the Big East were to go to 12 members, I would like to retain the round-robin nature of the Conference by having H/A's with each fellow member for a 22-game Conference schedule. I totally despised the unbalanced schedule we had to play as members of the A-10 when it had 14 members.
User avatar
muskienick
 
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:47 pm

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Postby Bill Marsh » Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:36 pm

NJRedman wrote:
Bill Marsh wrote:
UD FAN wrote:Thanks Bill +1 :D


Just telling the truth. If the Big East decides to expand, they should start with Dayton. They can put the Flyers and the Musketeers in different divisions to reduce the overlap. Can't just ignore a fan base that is top 25 in attendance year after year. There is no other candidate that is anywhere close to that.


We're not going to divisions ever. The concept of divisions in D1 BBall is dead. Every major conference has abandoned the idea and as of now only two conferences (MAC & OVC) in D1 currently have divisions for BBall. It' doesn't work and we will never go down that path.


Okay. 8-)
Bill Marsh
 
Posts: 4239
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 10:43 am

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Postby stever20 » Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:21 pm

Reading comprehension isn't your friend... I said that if VCU was private, they would be in the Big East. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with basketball, as was said on this thread earlier.

And sorry, if UConn eventually rejoins the Big East, VCU absolutely would have a very real chance of getting in, if not the absolute favorite. The Big East would no longer be all privates.
stever20
 
Posts: 13482
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 1:43 pm

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Postby billyjack » Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:32 pm

By the way, it will never happen and I don't want it to happen, but if we were to get Vanderbilt, Wake Forest and/or St Bonaventure into the Big East, we would be doing the SEC, ACC and A-10 a huge favor.
Providence
User avatar
billyjack
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4168
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Providence

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Postby JPSchmack » Mon Apr 06, 2015 3:27 pm

billyjack wrote:By the way, it will never happen and I don't want it to happen, but if we were to get Vanderbilt, Wake Forest and/or St Bonaventure into the Big East, we would be doing the SEC, ACC and A-10 a huge favor.


Well, that's just wrong comparing Bona to those two. We're not Fordham.

Bona had the same number of Top 50 wins this season as Texas.
JPSchmack
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 2:27 am

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Postby JPSchmack » Mon Apr 06, 2015 3:58 pm

Bill Marsh wrote:According to multiple media reports at the time that the new Big East, Fox was willing to increase the pot in the event that the league increased to 12 members so that each school's TV revenue would remain the same.

The Bonnie's averaged only 3900 in home attendance this year. That is simply not the kind of program that would be considered for expansion.it would receive less time for consideration than has been spent on this message board.


You all keep bringing up factors that are "Conventional wisdom" but do they really "actually matter" to the Big East’s current position? I just explained how the RPI would work with 12 teams, and this year would have gotten SHU into the field and adding UD's units for a minimum of 4 additional NCAA units (approx. $6.5 million) the Big East gets to divide up however they divide up… and you're worried about Bona's ticket revenue which none of you ever see a single dime of?

Everything in college basketball is scheduling. You think attendance will remain the same switching from Duquesne, Fordham and LaSalle on the schedule to Nova, Georgetown, and St. John's?

NJRedman wrote:You keep talking about OOC schedule but you do realize that the Bonnies would have to schedule a tougher OOC if they joined the Big East and that their OOc record could very well be worse than it was in the A10. They will have to take part in the Gavitt tip off and every program has been asked to step up their OOC scheduling.


Then you need to fire whomever set that policy right now. The A10 tried it. In the stretch of Linda Bruno’s scheduling manifesto - which Xavier & Dayton opposed and got her fired - the A10 got the lowest amount of NCAA bids as any period in their history. Yes, teams like Nova, Georgetown and Xavier should be scheduling games like that (and winning). But if you’re telling DePaul to amp up their scheduling game, it’s going to kill you.

Look at the Big 12 … the TEAMS were better last season than this season. They struggled to get 7 teams in last year, and easily got 7 in this year because their RPIs were higher.

Their RPIs were higher because TCU played the 349 OOC SOS, and went 13-0, helping everyone’s RPI.

NJRedman wrote:I don't think anyone besides our Bonnie fan would put our friends from Northern NY ahead of any of these teams, but like I said the people who make this choice only probably have about 3-5 of these schools in mind for those 2 spots. To me if FB is a non-starter the top 5 more than likely looks like this. Once again in no particular order.


And you know, I totally believe “That’s crazy, it’ll never happen.” And I went thru all the reasons it would never happen, and after each asked “Wait, why?” WHY are those factors in conference expansion/realignment important, and do they actually apply here?” And that was when I became convinced it was the SMARTEST THING TO DO.

You need the best overall program: Why? You’re not replacing Temple, Xavier, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, Missouri, like all the other conferences who expanded. There’s a ton of great programs already, they just beat each other up and teams like Seton Hall can’t get into the Dance at 6-12. At 8-10 does Hall get in? Yeah, probably. Provided those two wins came in late February.

You need big TV markets: Your markets are huge, but the ratings aren’t (Which is on FS1, not the BE). I know just being in a big market isn’t enough, because Fordham, Duquesne and LaSalle are terrible TV draws. In fact, the only big market teams that aren’t historically terrible are: The Big East, UCLA, Temple, Cincinnati, UNLV and Ohio State. Two of those others don’t have major pro sports in the markets!

And I know you already realize this because Duquesne and Detroit aren’t on your list. So why is Saint Louis? They don’t BRING that market, they exist in the market but no one really cares. And by the time Jim Crews is fired, they will move into your “hell no” category.


All the conventional wisdom factors are a lot like RBI for baseball players. An elite hitter is gonna have a lot, so it’s an indicator a guy might be an elite hitter.
But having a ton of RBI doesn’t necessarily mean you’re an elite hitter, and you can still be an elite hitter while not having a ton of RBI depending on circumstance. I look at the Big East lineup and say “you’ve got tons of power already. With Bona setting the table for you, you’d drive in more runs.”
JPSchmack
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 2:27 am

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Postby cm5yz6 » Mon Apr 06, 2015 4:11 pm

JPSchmack wrote:
billyjack wrote:By the way, it will never happen and I don't want it to happen, but if we were to get Vanderbilt, Wake Forest and/or St Bonaventure into the Big East, we would be doing the SEC, ACC and A-10 a huge favor.


Well, that's just wrong comparing Bona to those two. We're not Fordham.

Bona had the same number of Top 50 wins this season as Texas.


Actually, those are good, if not favorable comparisons for StB. Besides your 1970 F4 run, the program has been relatively irrelevant in the tournament. Vanderbilt has twice as many Sweet 16s (though no Final Four) and Wake has 6 Elite 8s and a Final 4 (to StB's 1 and 1 - again 1970).

Regardless, though your argument is fruitless as StB doesn't stand a foreseeable chance of being added to the Big East, I am very much enjoying your campaign. It's nice to read something new on these expansion discussions.
cm5yz6
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 8:41 am

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Postby NJRedman » Mon Apr 06, 2015 4:24 pm

JPSchmack wrote:
Bill Marsh wrote:According to multiple media reports at the time that the new Big East, Fox was willing to increase the pot in the event that the league increased to 12 members so that each school's TV revenue would remain the same.

The Bonnie's averaged only 3900 in home attendance this year. That is simply not the kind of program that would be considered for expansion.it would receive less time for consideration than has been spent on this message board.


You all keep bringing up factors that are "Conventional wisdom" but do they really "actually matter" to the Big East’s current position? I just explained how the RPI would work with 12 teams, and this year would have gotten SHU into the field and adding UD's units for a minimum of 4 additional NCAA units (approx. $6.5 million) the Big East gets to divide up however they divide up… and you're worried about Bona's ticket revenue which none of you ever see a single dime of?

Everything in college basketball is scheduling. You think attendance will remain the same switching from Duquesne, Fordham and LaSalle on the schedule to Nova, Georgetown, and St. John's?

NJRedman wrote:You keep talking about OOC schedule but you do realize that the Bonnies would have to schedule a tougher OOC if they joined the Big East and that their OOc record could very well be worse than it was in the A10. They will have to take part in the Gavitt tip off and every program has been asked to step up their OOC scheduling.


Then you need to fire whomever set that policy right now. The A10 tried it. In the stretch of Linda Bruno’s scheduling manifesto - which Xavier & Dayton opposed and got her fired - the A10 got the lowest amount of NCAA bids as any period in their history. Yes, teams like Nova, Georgetown and Xavier should be scheduling games like that (and winning). But if you’re telling DePaul to amp up their scheduling game, it’s going to kill you.

Look at the Big 12 … the TEAMS were better last season than this season. They struggled to get 7 teams in last year, and easily got 7 in this year because their RPIs were higher.

Their RPIs were higher because TCU played the 349 OOC SOS, and went 13-0, helping everyone’s RPI.

NJRedman wrote:I don't think anyone besides our Bonnie fan would put our friends from Northern NY ahead of any of these teams, but like I said the people who make this choice only probably have about 3-5 of these schools in mind for those 2 spots. To me if FB is a non-starter the top 5 more than likely looks like this. Once again in no particular order.


And you know, I totally believe “That’s crazy, it’ll never happen.” And I went thru all the reasons it would never happen, and after each asked “Wait, why?” WHY are those factors in conference expansion/realignment important, and do they actually apply here?” And that was when I became convinced it was the SMARTEST THING TO DO.

You need the best overall program: Why? You’re not replacing Temple, Xavier, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, Missouri, like all the other conferences who expanded. There’s a ton of great programs already, they just beat each other up and teams like Seton Hall can’t get into the Dance at 6-12. At 8-10 does Hall get in? Yeah, probably. Provided those two wins came in late February.

You need big TV markets: Your markets are huge, but the ratings aren’t (Which is on FS1, not the BE). I know just being in a big market isn’t enough, because Fordham, Duquesne and LaSalle are terrible TV draws. In fact, the only big market teams that aren’t historically terrible are: The Big East, UCLA, Temple, Cincinnati, UNLV and Ohio State. Two of those others don’t have major pro sports in the markets!

And I know you already realize this because Duquesne and Detroit aren’t on your list. So why is Saint Louis? They don’t BRING that market, they exist in the market but no one really cares. And by the time Jim Crews is fired, they will move into your “hell no” category.


All the conventional wisdom factors are a lot like RBI for baseball players. An elite hitter is gonna have a lot, so it’s an indicator a guy might be an elite hitter.
But having a ton of RBI doesn’t necessarily mean you’re an elite hitter, and you can still be an elite hitter while not having a ton of RBI depending on circumstance. I look at the Big East lineup and say “you’ve got tons of power already. With Bona setting the table for you, you’d drive in more runs.”


You can keep beating that drum but no one is going to dance to your tune.

You say we need people to tune in but 3,500 fans per game tells me no one is going to tune in to see the Bonnie's play. It's cool, you're enthusiastic about your program. No one can knock you for that, but your arguments fall on deaf ears. You say the A10 tried to schedule harder because their commish said to do so and that commish was fired. What do you think will happen to our commish if she were to advocate adding the Bonnie's? What does your school bring to the table if they are the worst team in the league? That's a very good possibility. You can't say OOC wins since we don't know if you can even do that at a higher level. Don't try abd say you won't schedule a tough OOC. That's not an option. This is a power conference, not a mid-major. You know why we had the #2 RPI this year? Because even our bad teams played and beat big time opponents. What do you bring the table? At least Saint Louis brings a big time market. They don't need to capture every viewer in the market. Just getting in makes our TV partners more money.

You don't want to hear this but your school brings us nothing. We would give you everything and get nothing back in return. If we wanted nothing back we could invite any # of schools from Boston like Holy Cross or BU. This is a partnership, you need to elevate the conference just by your presence in the league. The Bonnie's don't don't do that, they don't bring anything of value.
User avatar
NJRedman
 
Posts: 2961
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:40 am

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Postby Gopher+RamFan » Mon Apr 06, 2015 5:03 pm

cm5yz6 wrote:
JPSchmack wrote:
Well, that's just wrong comparing Bona to those two. We're not Fordham.

Bona had the same number of Top 50 wins this season as Texas.


Actually, those are good, if not favorable comparisons for StB. Besides your 1970 F4 run, the program has been relatively irrelevant in the tournament. Vanderbilt has twice as many Sweet 16s (though no Final Four) and Wake has 6 Elite 8s and a Final 4 (to StB's 1 and 1 - again 1970).

Regardless, though your argument is fruitless as StB doesn't stand a foreseeable chance of being added to the Big East, I am very much enjoying your campaign. It's nice to read something new on these expansion discussions.


If I remember right, SBU had 1 Top 50 win. A home buzzer beater against VCU who was without leading scorer Treveon Graham and PG Briante Weber. If you guys take SBU please take Fordham too, thanks.
Gopher+RamFan
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:18 pm

Re: Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

Postby Xudash » Mon Apr 06, 2015 7:02 pm

JPSchmack,

I'm stepping back into this to let you know how much I appreciate your contributions here. I've always found you to be a very reasonable and reasoned poster.

SBU has a proud tradition. In more recent times, SBU seemed to accomplish a lot given its overall resources and positioning as compared to the A10's top teams over the years.

At the very least, your primary argument/position should force anyone interested in this to shed additional light on the expansion decision criteria discussion. If the President's arrive at a point where they seriously want to consider expansion, what criteria will they come to rely upon to help them arrive at a decision for that?

Will one, if not the most important criterion involve television? I would think that would be the case, given the BE's relationship with Fox. Then what with that? New major market to expand in from within over time? Existing market where fan passion is already clearly pronounced? Obviously, it's not this linear, any market considered has to be assessed based on the program that resides there.

What's the next big CONFERENCE revenue driver? Well, that would be NCAA Units, which brings us to your argument. Do the President's go for two more stellar programs - whatever that may mean at the time - if available, raising the competitive bar even further? Do they attempt something along the lines of your proposal: bring in two grateful programs that may find it difficult based on their recent historical performance to compete in league play, yet are solid enough to tackle appropriately positioned OOC schedules for the good of the conference?

With those two strategic conference-centric drivers in play, perhaps it's time to begin looking at the programs specifically. What are the specific PROGRAM DRIVERS to consider? I submit the following:

1. Administrative Alignment and Full Support - a school's leadership must understand the basketball program to be a mission critical asset for the university.

2. Strong, state-of-the-art facilities - make the investments to position a coach for success and build/own it big enough to think in terms of 10k'ish average home attendance, with amenities.

3. Administrative talent - from the President to the AD to the HC and his staff; have the right people in place that get it (i.e. please fire DePaul's AD yesterday).

4. A sustained and sustainable resume - NCAA runs on a consistent basis, conference championships, rankings, NBA players, et al.

5. Strong tradition and brand that comes with having #4 and the rest of the above.

6. Respected university academically (especially if you want in the Big East).

There certainly was discussion when the Big East was coming together through the C7 that Fox would honor the dollars either at the 10 or 12 composition number. The C7 grabbed Xavier. They grabbed Butler. They then grabbed Creighton. BTW, Creighton belongs in the Big East. I can't even begin to see how that's debateable. If capacity for 12 was indeed in play, that didn't happen for good reasons. The train apparently was going to leave the station with 10 or 12, after there was some speculation about stopping at 9, and it left with 10, period.

Nothing has changed after only two years to cause the Presidents to reconsider, especially after the year the Big East just had overall. Fox is in it for the long haul. Our MSG deal looks solid, especially after how the conference tournament worked out this year. And there are 10 MORE YEARS TO GO on the existing Fox agreement.

Let's wrap this up with a little math, since there are those out there who would love for the Big East to fail, or at least love to believe that Fox will break the existing agreement due to losses.
There are 8 mandatory TV timeouts in televised college basketball games (during a 40 minute game, there are 8 mandatory television timeouts coming at the first stoppage under the 16, 12, 8, and 4 minute mark of each half). It gets a little assumptive here, but let's go with 3 TO's taken by each team otherwise over the course of a 40 minute game; no OT's assumed all season. That's 14 total timeouts.

In one game this year where 14 timeouts were actually taken, total commercial time ran a little over 19 minutes during the first and second half, and that commercial time didn't include the 15 minute halftime and time spent on feature stories going in and out of commercials and other stoppages in play. Let's just (perhaps conservatively) round it to 20 minutes of commercial time, and I'll assume only 60 second spots for sake of simplicity, because all this is about approximating needed ad rate averages anyway.

Assuming no sell-offs of games to other networks - not a reality, but I'm not trying to go that deep - we would appear to have the following figures roughly in play:

10 - Big East teams.

29 - Regular season games for Xavier, excluding the ESPN early season deal in Anaheim; using Xavier's schedule as a proxy for all 10 BE teams.

Total regular season game inventory = 290.

Total BE Tournament games = 9.

Total game inventory = 299.

Total minutes inventory per year = 5,980.

Total minutes inventory per life of Fox Agreement = 71,760.

Average B/E Value of ad over life of Agreement = call it $7,000 per minute. That's the average they need to break even . That's the average they need to do that over 12 years. And the ads are "national" in coverage. I love Mad Men, but I'm not in advertising. Perhaps a few of you New York guys can polish this up a little if it needs it. Beyond this simple view of things exists the fact that Fox didn't start FoxSports1 for the Big East. We represent one of a growing number of properties that will continue to grow overtime.

Fox may not catch ESPN just like the Big East will most likely never rise to the level of its former self when it had the football schools in it, but none of that need define success for Fox or the Big East.

Time. It's back to that. And the Presidents know they have an abundance of it, especially having come off such a successful year with positive trends in recruiting and other conference accomplishments abounding.

Expansion isn't making it onto the Presidents' agenda any time soon. You've already read it, but perhaps its worth sharing our direction again: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/12/sports/ncaabasketball/big-east-firmly-takes-root-in-its-second-season.html?_r=0
XAVIER
Xudash
 
Posts: 2536
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 9:25 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Big East basketball message board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests