Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

[stever20]

2 years, and 54 pages in this thread, and not a whole lot has changed from this article about possible candidates:

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basket ... -henderson

I dunno. SLU has since absolutely gone into the tank. And Dayton has 2 NCAA appearances since then, including an elite 8 run. 2 huge changes. Just do not think the Big East can add a SLU until SLU gets back to being at least competitive.

[Bill Marsh]

2 years, and 54 pages in this thread, and not a whole lot has changed from this article about possible candidates:

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basket ... -henderson

Interesting. Thanks for the link.

Apparently expansion is inevitable. At least DeCourcy seems to think so. Has nothing changed?

One thing that we know has changed is that St Louis' bubble has burst. DeCourcy reports average home attendance as 7700 and says that it was higher in the past. It was significantly better . . . almost 20 years ago. And it's headed in the wrong direction. This year it was barely 7,000. According to DeCourcy, the Billikens bring the St Louis market. The question is, how much of that market does it bring?

If this was the pecking order of candidates a year and a half ago, I hope the thinking of the decision makers at the Big East has changed. According to DeCourcy's article, Richmond is #2. If that's the case, there's no point in expanding. Just stay at 10. As DeCourcy points out, it's tough to expand with a program that's #2 in their own city. But apparently #1 in Richmond is unacceptable because it's VCU, large, public, and with lots of resources - just what the C7 has been trying to get away from. He implies that the C7 weren't able to compete with that kind of school back in the old Big East days and won't be able to do so now. Really? What does that say about the ability of the membership to compete against national competition outside the conference right now? Not exactly a vote of confidence.

The article does an excellent job of explaining that every remaining candidate for expansion has a down side and is therefore a compromise. I'm more optimistic than he is and would make the compromises necessary to go with the candidates with the big up side rather than to settle for the safe choices that represent mediocrity.

[ta111]

Yes, alot has changed since that article two years ago, particularly the direction the programs are headed in. Would the BE rather have a top 25 type program with alot of NCAA tourney success or a program that is unlikely to get that type of success for several years?

[Gopher+RamFan]

2 years, and 54 pages in this thread, and not a whole lot has changed from this article about possible candidates:

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basket ... -henderson

Interesting. Thanks for the link.

Apparently expansion is inevitable. At least DeCourcy seems to think so. Has nothing changed?

One thing that we know has changed is that St Louis' bubble has burst. DeCourcy reports average home attendance as 7700 and says that it was higher in the past. It was significantly better . . . almost 20 years ago. And it's headed in the wrong direction. This year it was barely 7,000. According to DeCourcy, the Billikens bring the St Louis market. The question is, how much of that market does it bring?

If this was the pecking order of candidates a year and a half ago, I hope the thinking of the decision makers at the Big East has changed. According to DeCourcy's article, Richmond is #2. If that's the case, there's no point in expanding. Just stay at 10. As DeCourcy points out, it's tough to expand with a program that's #2 in their own city. But apparently #1 in Richmond is unacceptable because it's VCU, large, public, and with lots of resources - just what the C7 has been trying to get away from. He implies that the C7 weren't able to compete with that kind of school back in the old Big East days and won't be able to do so now. Really? What does that say about the ability of the membership to compete against national competition outside the conference right now? Not exactly a vote of confidence.

The article does an excellent job of explaining that every remaining candidate for expansion has a down side and is therefore a compromise. I'm more optimistic than he is and would make the compromises necessary to go with the candidates with the big up side rather than to settle for the safe choices that represent mediocrity.

That's something I've never understood about this expansion talk. The Big East schools ran away from football dominating their conference, they wanted autonomy and to put basketball first. It happened that all the football schools in the old Big East were big public schools. How could a 32k student population, another 15-20k employees not be an asset? That doesn't even count alumni etc.... Or the connection to the city that public schools inherently have over private institutions.

The only sport is basketball, that's all VCU invests in or supports fully. People talk about University of Richmond's endowment, but fail to mention VCU's 1.3 Billion endowment. Other posters keep saying that adding a public would leave the conference open to FOIA requests. Other conferences are able to work and grow, even with those requests. So what's the problem? If the BE wants to keep the institutions similar, that's understandable. But if they want to grow the conference I believe adding a public or two would add instant viewership on a scale that a private could not come with.

[Bill Marsh]

Yes, Gopher, and they do need more eyeballs, they do need more fans who are motivated to find FS1, and they do need to sell more tickets at the BE tourney.

[paulxu]

As opposed to possibly some posters, I have zero inside information on anything. I can only do what most others do, look at the info from the outside and try to make sense out of it.
Fox was apparently OK with going at the beginning (and assumedly now) with 12 schools fully paid.
The 7 who voted went with 3 to start.
The biggest criteria from the outside seems to have been institutional fit; having Butler means religion isn't the key.
With X in the same city as UC, and Butler near IU, fit was as important as eyeballs from a public school (relatively speaking).

To me that seems that although schools like VCU and Wichita would be great basketball fits (and more so 2 years ago when they were closer to their NCAA FF successes), and would have been new TV markets and very logical to get a good start...they weren't included.

Some schools play in markets where they are much smaller in enrollment/alumni base (Georgetown/Maryland, X/UC, etc.). So I don't believe that is a determinative factor. The institutional fit and possible market expansion seem to be the keys if the BE was thinking about going to 12. Even the number of potential NCAA bids would seem to fall behind these 2, since the math might have argued starting with 12 schools 2 years ago.

For those reasons I think the article by DeCoursey may still be on point. Richmond and St Louis still seem to fit the best. Would be nice to have more recent NCAA success, but might not be critical. Richmond would balance Butler as non-Catholic schools. Both have excellent basketball facilities, and the institutional fit is there.

Also, I have no idea why, but it is curious to me that a school with VCU's resources and enrollment doesn't start up big time football.

[muskienick]

2 years, and 54 pages in this thread, and not a whole lot has changed from this article about possible candidates:

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basket ... -henderson

I don't agree with Decoursey's statement that the C-7 were running away from programs like VCU in splitting from the last version of the Big East. VCU and Wichita State both lack the BCS-level football programs that were the real culprit in C-7's decision. But what VCU and WSU DO have (in spades) is a true commitment to maintaining a very good basketball program. They have proven it over time. The Rams and the Wichita State Shockers have large and rabid fan bases and quite nice facilities. Furthermore, they would provide a fine balance between East and Midwest as far as Conference Membership is concerned.

Some bring up that having public institutions in the League would cause the privates to disclose information not now required of them to do so. While that may actually be true, it certainly did not dissuade the C-7 from forming a very profitable and entertaining Conference originally that had public institutions almost from the very beginning! So why not take the best basketball schools available within the general footprint already established whenever it comes time to expand?

[Gopher+RamFan]

As opposed to possibly some posters, I have zero inside information on anything. I can only do what most others do, look at the info from the outside and try to make sense out of it.
Fox was apparently OK with going at the beginning (and assumedly now) with 12 schools fully paid.
The 7 who voted went with 3 to start.
The biggest criteria from the outside seems to have been institutional fit; having Butler means religion isn't the key.
With X in the same city as UC, and Butler near IU, fit was as important as eyeballs from a public school (relatively speaking).

To me that seems that although schools like VCU and Wichita would be great basketball fits (and more so 2 years ago when they were closer to their NCAA FF successes), and would have been new TV markets and very logical to get a good start...they weren't included.

Some schools play in markets where they are much smaller in enrollment/alumni base (Georgetown/Maryland, X/UC, etc.). So I don't believe that is a determinative factor. The institutional fit and possible market expansion seem to be the keys if the BE was thinking about going to 12. Even the number of potential NCAA bids would seem to fall behind these 2, since the math might have argued starting with 12 schools 2 years ago.

For those reasons I think the article by DeCoursey may still be on point. Richmond and St Louis still seem to fit the best. Would be nice to have more recent NCAA success, but might not be critical. Richmond would balance Butler as non-Catholic schools. Both have excellent basketball facilities, and the institutional fit is there.

Also, I have no idea why, but it is curious to me that a school with VCU's resources and enrollment doesn't start up big time football.

I know you're also a richmond fan (but mostly X). VCU will not start a football program for the foreseeable Future. No donors or alumni are interested in donating 100 million to start a football program from scratch. VCU does not even field an FCS team, but posters on here keep wondering when it will happen (maybe because they assume publics will always start one?) VCU has missed the boat on starting football, it's not worth starting unless there's a good chance of being P5 in 10-15 years. VCU can instead focus all those resources and enrollment on becoming the best it can at basketball.

The school carries the richmond market by far, and would be the only school in the BE who could claim that (maybe Marquette and Milwaukee too?). Adding VCU would bring a proven traveling fan base to MSG (already the largest fan presence in Brooklyn), 42-47,000 people directly associated to the school every year (students/employees), a 1.3 Billion endowment, a basketball program that hasn't been outside the RPI top 100 in more than a decade (spanning 3 coaches). As well as including a program that has been to the NCAAs 7 out of the last 9 years, brought 1200 fans to a press conference for the new coach, and a new $25 million basketball only practice facility opening in September.

They're not a slam dunk candidate because they're public, but they'd instantly be the hated team in conference (being public). They'd trqvel well to east coast schools (filling in some portions of the Verizon center) and add viewership to FS1. I'm a VCU fan, so take everything with a grain of salt (I know nobody here makes the decision anyway).

[Bill Marsh]

As opposed to possibly some posters, I have zero inside information on anything. I can only do what most others do, look at the info from the outside and try to make sense out of it.
Fox was apparently OK with going at the beginning (and assumedly now) with 12 schools fully paid.
The 7 who voted went with 3 to start.
The biggest criteria from the outside seems to have been institutional fit; having Butler means religion isn't the key.
With X in the same city as UC, and Butler near IU, fit was as important as eyeballs from a public school (relatively speaking).

To me that seems that although schools like VCU and Wichita would be great basketball fits (and more so 2 years ago when they were closer to their NCAA FF successes), and would have been new TV markets and very logical to get a good start...they weren't included.

Some schools play in markets where they are much smaller in enrollment/alumni base (Georgetown/Maryland, X/UC, etc.). So I don't believe that is a determinative factor. The institutional fit and possible market expansion seem to be the keys if the BE was thinking about going to 12. Even the number of potential NCAA bids would seem to fall behind these 2, since the math might have argued starting with 12 schools 2 years ago.

For those reasons I think the article by DeCoursey may still be on point. Richmond and St Louis still seem to fit the best. Would be nice to have more recent NCAA success, but might not be critical. Richmond would balance Butler as non-Catholic schools. Both have excellent basketball facilities, and the institutional fit is there.

Also, I have no idea why, but it is curious to me that a school with VCU's resources and enrollment doesn't start up big time football.

Paul, you may be right. Here's my 2 cents.

As enlightening as the retroactive analysis is, circumstances have changed.

1. The 7 decision makers from 2012 have changed with 3 new members having been added and 2 new presidents taking over at St. John's and Marquette. With 5 new decision makers at the table, the current thinking may be different than it was in 2012.

2. Ratings on Fox are low. That has to be an issue that needs to be addressed. Perhaps they can wait a few years to see what develops,but they can't wait forever. Bottom line is that whatever expansion decisions are made, how it helps or hurts this issue must be factored in.

3. Attendance at Big East conference games - both regular season and tournament - have gone in the wrong direction from year one to year two. Not by a lot. The decrease is a small amount, but it's still going in the wrong direction. This too must be factored into expansion decisions.

It would be nice to have a conference in which institutional fit and markets drive decisions, but how will such a conference play out? How much of the new markets will new additions bring? How much interest will an all Catholic, all Private, and only the current footprint conference generate?

[Bill Marsh]

As opposed to possibly some posters, I have zero inside information on anything. I can only do what most others do, look at the info from the outside and try to make sense out of it.
Fox was apparently OK with going at the beginning (and assumedly now) with 12 schools fully paid.
The 7 who voted went with 3 to start.
The biggest criteria from the outside seems to have been institutional fit; having Butler means religion isn't the key.
With X in the same city as UC, and Butler near IU, fit was as important as eyeballs from a public school (relatively speaking).

To me that seems that although schools like VCU and Wichita would be great basketball fits (and more so 2 years ago when they were closer to their NCAA FF successes), and would have been new TV markets and very logical to get a good start...they weren't included.

Some schools play in markets where they are much smaller in enrollment/alumni base (Georgetown/Maryland, X/UC, etc.). So I don't believe that is a determinative factor. The institutional fit and possible market expansion seem to be the keys if the BE was thinking about going to 12. Even the number of potential NCAA bids would seem to fall behind these 2, since the math might have argued starting with 12 schools 2 years ago.

For those reasons I think the article by DeCoursey may still be on point. Richmond and St Louis still seem to fit the best. Would be nice to have more recent NCAA success, but might not be critical. Richmond would balance Butler as non-Catholic schools. Both have excellent basketball facilities, and the institutional fit is there.

Also, I have no idea why, but it is curious to me that a school with VCU's resources and enrollment doesn't start up big time football.

I know you're also a richmond fan (but mostly X). VCU will not start a football program for the foreseeable Future. No donors or alumni are interested in donating 100 million to start a football program from scratch. VCU does not even field an FCS team, but posters on here keep wondering when it will happen (maybe because they assume publics will always start one?) VCU has missed the boat on starting football, it's not worth starting unless there's a good chance of being P5 in 10-15 years. VCU can instead focus all those resources and enrollment on becoming the best it can at basketball.

The school carries the richmond market by far, and would be the only school in the BE who could claim that (maybe Marquette and Milwaukee too?). Adding VCU would bring a proven traveling fan base to MSG (already the largest fan presence in Brooklyn), 42-47,000 people directly associated to the school every year (students/employees), a 1.3 Billion endowment, a basketball program that hasn't been outside the RPI top 100 in more than a decade (spanning 3 coaches). As well as including a program that has been to the NCAAs 7 out of the last 9 years, brought 1200 fans to a press conference for the new coach, and a new $25 million basketball only practice facility opening in September.

They're not a slam dunk candidate because they're public, but they'd instantly be the hated team in conference (being public). They'd trqvel well to east coast schools (filling in some portions of the Verizon center) and add viewership to FS1. I'm a VCU fan, so take everything with a grain of salt (I know nobody here makes the decision anyway).

Gopher, all good points.

My only issue would be a reference to VCU's market being Richmond. While that is their primary market, they are a state school. They draw their student body from all over Virginia as well as from outside the state. When they do well, I expect that they carry the banner for the entire state and draw statewide interest.

Obviously they have instate competition from UVA, from VA Tech, and to a lesser extent from other mid majors around the state. But Virginia is a big state with a population of 8 million. Their market potential is much higher than from just the Richmond area. Just my opinion. Any state university represents the entire state, so that state is their market. UConn, for example, is not limited to the Hartford market as. Some mistakenly assume.

BTW, I feel the same way about most of the Big East schools. Although they were founded to serve local needs, their current student bodies are mostly regional and in some cases national. They are no longer commuter schools. When discussions about Dayton focus on them duplicating Xavier in the southwest Ohio market, I have to wonder why some assume that Dayton alums and other fans throughout Ohio and other parts of the Midwest are not tuning into games just because they don't live in Dayton. Obviously attendance is primarily based on local interest, but TV ratings can be drawn from anywhere