Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

[Westbrook#36]

Exactly. Texas (and Oklahoma, for that matter) don't have any interest in expanding (read watering down) the Big 12. The only people who are talking about it are those who like realignment in general and those that believe that their school will be "in" when (if and a really unlikely if) the Big 12 expands.

Except Oklahoma president, David Boren, just 3 months ago publicly stumped for expansion. Rumblings are that Oklahoma is finally fed up with Texas and pissed that the Big 12 might(probably) is at a competitive disadvantage without 12 teams/CCG.

[GoldenWarrior11]

Exactly. Texas (and Oklahoma, for that matter) don't have any interest in expanding (read watering down) the Big 12. The only people who are talking about it are those who like realignment in general and those that believe that their school will be "in" when (if and a really unlikely if) the Big 12 expands.

Except Oklahoma president, David Boren, just 3 months ago publicly stumped for expansion. Rumblings are that Oklahoma is finally fed up with Texas and pissed that the Big 12 might(probably) is at a competitive disadvantage without 12 teams/CCG.

While true, Texas has more clout (and voting rights) than OU does in the Big 12. OU and OK State vote the same, but Texas would be able to use it's power to convince Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU to vote with them. That's 40% of the conference right there, and, I believe, it takes 75% (or 8 members) to accept an expansion school. Schools like Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU need to vote with the Texas on these matters not because they see eye-to-eye on things, but because they need Texas to survive in any post-Big 12 world. Look at what happened to Houston and SMU when they were no longer members of the SWC - they were deregulated to C-USA status for nearly two decades.

Oklahoma may be upset with Texas, but until they get an invite elsewhere, they are stuck too. It doesn't help matters that there's a perception that they will not go anywhere unless OK State comes with them as a partner.

[stever20]

The problem with the Big 12 is that it is run by Texas, and the problem with Texas is that Texas will always do what is in the best interest for Texas. As long as Texas continues to get major revenue via the Longhorn Network, they don't care about adding more revenue to the Big 12, their members, or ensuring a spot for the league in the CFP. They really missed the boat in adding Louisville and Cincinnati when they added West Virginia in 2012. It would have given them a solid eastern wing, 12 members and a more stable conference moving forward.

If Cincinnati/Memphis/UCF/USF all manage to snag a life raft off the AAC (like to the Big 12), then I truly believe that UConn calls the Big East in desperation for non-football membership. A conference, in football or basketball, composed of East Carolina, Tulane, Tulsa, Houston, SMU (toxic at this point) and Temple would be a doomsday scenario. There's just no positive spin to it. The severance package that UConn/Cincinnati/USF all got will also run out soon. ESPN doesn't appear to need the inventory either, which doesn't bode well for their TV package.

Even if the AAC considers adding non-football schools (to balance the Navy membership), it is nothing different than the old Big East treading water for so many years to stay afloat as a conference. It doesn't stop the water from sinking the boat. Wichita State and VCU, when they have off-basketball seasons, would bring nothing to the conference (nothing in TV markets, nothing in school academic prestige).

The thing is, there's absolutely NO scenario where all 4 of those you mention would leave the AAC. It's very possible only Cincy does. That's the problem with all these AAC raid scenarios- they just aren't realistic. And without all of them leaving, UConn won't be needing to jump ship. Also there's the matter of new exit fees. Plus, the NCAA units- remember UConn has 25 units still to collect from their title 2 years ago.

About ESPN and their inventory- ESPN absolutely needs it. ACC is looking to get their own network, and Big Ten very possibly won't have as many games on. What is ESPN airing if not the AAC? Sun Belt? MAC?

VCU's market is up to #56 now. It's just behind Providence and Buffalo.

[stever20]

Exactly. Texas (and Oklahoma, for that matter) don't have any interest in expanding (read watering down) the Big 12. The only people who are talking about it are those who like realignment in general and those that believe that their school will be "in" when (if and a really unlikely if) the Big 12 expands.

Except Oklahoma president, David Boren, just 3 months ago publicly stumped for expansion. Rumblings are that Oklahoma is finally fed up with Texas and pissed that the Big 12 might(probably) is at a competitive disadvantage without 12 teams/CCG.

While true, Texas has more clout (and voting rights) than OU does in the Big 12. OU and OK State vote the same, but Texas would be able to use it's power to convince Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU to vote with them. That's 40% of the conference right there, and, I believe, it takes 75% (or 8 members) to accept an expansion school. Schools like Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU need to vote with the Texas on these matters not because they see eye-to-eye on things, but because they need Texas to survive in any post-Big 12 world. Look at what happened to Houston and SMU when they were no longer members of the SWC - they were deregulated to C-USA status for nearly two decades.

Oklahoma may be upset with Texas, but until they get an invite elsewhere, they are stuck too. It doesn't help matters that there's a perception that they will not go anywhere unless OK State comes with them as a partner.

The thing is, if Baylor/TCU get shafted again this year- wouldn't be shocked if they are firmly in the want to expand camp.

[Westbrook#36]

Exactly. Texas (and Oklahoma, for that matter) don't have any interest in expanding (read watering down) the Big 12. The only people who are talking about it are those who like realignment in general and those that believe that their school will be "in" when (if and a really unlikely if) the Big 12 expands.

Except Oklahoma president, David Boren, just 3 months ago publicly stumped for expansion. Rumblings are that Oklahoma is finally fed up with Texas and pissed that the Big 12 might(probably) is at a competitive disadvantage without 12 teams/CCG.

While true, Texas has more clout (and voting rights) than OU does in the Big 12. OU and OK State vote the same, but Texas would be able to use it's power to convince Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU to vote with them. That's 40% of the conference right there, and, I believe, it takes 75% (or 8 members) to accept an expansion school. Schools like Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU need to vote with the Texas on these matters not because they see eye-to-eye on things, but because they need Texas to survive in any post-Big 12 world. Look at what happened to Houston and SMU when they were no longer members of the SWC - they were deregulated to C-USA status for nearly two decades.

Oklahoma may be upset with Texas, but until they get an invite elsewhere, they are stuck too. It doesn't help matters that there's a perception that they will not go anywhere unless OK State comes with them as a partner.

Oklahoma getting an invite to another conference isn't hard to imagine, sort of like a hot girl in HS getting asked out on a date. If they're unhappy about their situation and make it known, someone will come knocking.

[R Jay]

The problem with the Big 12 is that it is run by Texas, and the problem with Texas is that Texas will always do what is in the best interest for Texas. As long as Texas continues to get major revenue via the Longhorn Network, they don't care about adding more revenue to the Big 12, their members, or ensuring a spot for the league in the CFP. They really missed the boat in adding Louisville and Cincinnati when they added West Virginia in 2012. It would have given them a solid eastern wing, 12 members and a more stable conference moving forward.

If Cincinnati/Memphis/UCF/USF all manage to snag a life raft off the AAC (like to the Big 12), then I truly believe that UConn calls the Big East in desperation for non-football membership. A conference, in football or basketball, composed of East Carolina, Tulane, Tulsa, Houston, SMU (toxic at this point) and Temple would be a doomsday scenario. There's just no positive spin to it. The severance package that UConn/Cincinnati/USF all got will also run out soon. ESPN doesn't appear to need the inventory either, which doesn't bode well for their TV package.

Even if the AAC considers adding non-football schools (to balance the Navy membership), it is nothing different than the old Big East treading water for so many years to stay afloat as a conference. It doesn't stop the water from sinking the boat. Wichita State and VCU, when they have off-basketball seasons, would bring nothing to the conference (nothing in TV markets, nothing in school academic prestige).

The thing is, there's absolutely NO scenario where all 4 of those you mention would leave the AAC. It's very possible only Cincy does. That's the problem with all these AAC raid scenarios- they just aren't realistic. And without all of them leaving, UConn won't be needing to jump ship. Also there's the matter of new exit fees. Plus, the NCAA units- remember UConn has 25 units still to collect from their title 2 years ago.

About ESPN and their inventory- ESPN absolutely needs it. ACC is looking to get their own network, and Big Ten very possibly won't have as many games on. What is ESPN airing if not the AAC? Sun Belt? MAC?

VCU's market is up to #56 now. It's just behind Providence and Buffalo.

How so? I can think of multiple scenarios that have all 4 of those schools taken. They might not be likely, but they are possible. I mean, we are talking about them right now, correct? For instance Texas changes their mind one day and says "go big or go home" and grabs 4 AAC schools and the Big 12 goes to 14.
ESPN can always take games back from the SEC Network or the Big 12 Network (regional - but it still exists, I think). Plus, the ACC isn't going to totally leave ESPN - they'll leave some games on like the Big Ten. They could also work on a sub license agreement with another network to put more product on.
Even if those programs (and ESPN games) leave the AAC, they don't just vanish. They become inventory in another conference and could remain on ESPN.

[Gopher+RamFan]

Wichita State and VCU, when they have off-basketball seasons, would bring nothing to the conference (nothing in TV markets, nothing in school academic prestige).

Cannot let this comment go without a response. Adding a program should be about the program, not "off" or "on" seasons. Now those seasons kind of let you know the range of that program. VCU, despite having now 4 coaches in the past decade - has never ranked outside the top 100 RPI (despite playing in the CAA). I'm sure you'd consider CIB and NIT seasons "off" years, but that is the low point of VCU's program since 2003.

You know the high point, you know VCU's only been past the first weekend once (I hate that VCU lost in the round of 32 being up 4 at the FT line with 1 minute left against Indiana the year after the final four). What VCU has done is invest in it's program, opening up a $25 million practice facility this week. VCU has over 56 straight sell outs; 33,000 students - another 20,000 employees and when it comes to CBB owns it's market. The market may be only the 56th largest, but VCU has the majority of it. VCU sports a top notch medical campus with the #1 anesthesiology program in the country, the only level 1 trauma center in the state and is "close to the flagpole" as we said in the Army (meaning close to leadership, like the governor and state legislature). VCU ranks academically on par with Saint Johns, Seton Hall etc... It may lack academic prestige but it is certainly not dragging a conference down.

VCU would bring a rabid fanbase, one that ALREADY travels to NYC regularly, a new market that is actually cornered and most importantly a top to bottom commitment to basketball. I thought we would take a step back on the recruiting trail until Will Wade proved himself, but it seems he's not concerned with my schedule as VCU landed a Top 60 Wing.

VCU will have down years, but knowing what a "down" year for that program is important. Other programs have dipped drastically - even outside the top 150 (SLU/UR/Dayton) in the recent past, but adding VCU to the Big East would bring a stable, committed program.

Of course I can certainly see staying at 10 and adding nobody, as well as this post beating a dead horse.

[GoldenWarrior11]

Every program - whether you are an Indiana, North Carolina or a VCU - eventually goes through a "down" period and falls off. It is inevitable. Marquette, in the past two years, has really fallen off. However, when an Indiana/UNC/Creighton/St. Johns/Marquette (regardless of their program's prestige) has a down period - they still bring the TV market, academics and institutional fit to the conference. Now, I'm not discounting the run VCU has made, or the level of commitment that VCU has made to basketball over the past few decades - they are very worthy and helped elevate the program to national attention. However, VCU brings a lower TV market than current members (New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Indianapolis, Milwaukee, Providence), and their academics would rank below half of the Big East - and this doesn't even examine the institutional fit scenario that was very clear and evident when the league was formed.

Xavier, Butler and Creighton were the original three choices to bring the C7 to 10-members for a reason - they were in big cities, with big TV markets, with a strong commitment to men's basketball (and a near 10k arena) and with a Private/Catholic institution. It's the same reason why, if the league had to expand today (which they clearly do not), Saint Louis and Dayton would be the next schools added. VCU, while a very strong basketball program, misses on several of the conference requirements the league clearly established in re-starting the league. Does that mean they aren't a strong basketball program? Of course not - they have a better basketball resume that some of the current Big East schools, but realignment has shown that expansion is not just about adding programs - it's about the school, institutional and locational fit.

[stever20]

Every program - whether you are an Indiana, North Carolina or a VCU - eventually goes through a "down" period and falls off. It is inevitable. Marquette, in the past two years, has really fallen off. However, when an Indiana/UNC/Creighton/St. Johns/Marquette (regardless of their program's prestige) has a down period - they still bring the TV market, academics and institutional fit to the conference. Now, I'm not discounting the run VCU has made, or the level of commitment that VCU has made to basketball over the past few decades - they are very worthy and helped elevate the program to national attention. However, VCU brings a lower TV market than current members (New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Indianapolis, Milwaukee, Providence), and their academics would rank below half of the Big East - and this doesn't even examine the institutional fit scenario that was very clear and evident when the league was formed.

Xavier, Butler and Creighton were the original three choices to bring the C7 to 10-members for a reason - they were in big cities, with big TV markets, with a strong commitment to men's basketball (and a near 10k arena) and with a Private/Catholic institution. It's the same reason why, if the league had to expand today (which they clearly do not), Saint Louis and Dayton would be the next schools added. VCU, while a very strong basketball program, misses on several of the conference requirements the league clearly established in re-starting the league. Does that mean they aren't a strong basketball program? Of course not - they have a better basketball resume that some of the current Big East schools, but realignment has shown that expansion is not just about adding programs - it's about the school, institutional and locational fit.

You do know that Omaha is #74 in Nielsen markets while Richmond is #56. Richmond is about 34% larger than Omaha- 549k to 409k.

Richmond is about 18% larger than Dayton- 549k to 462k.

Richmond is only 10% smaller than Providence.

So TV market isn't a reason at all why VCU isn't in. There ay be others- but TV isn't one of them.

[Fieldhouse Flyer]

Knowing what a "down" year for that program is important.

Other programs have dipped drastically - even outside the top 150 (SLU/UR/Dayton) in the recent past.

If your definition of "recent past" means one or two complete roster turnovers (i.e. four or eight basketball seasons), neither Richmond nor Dayton have been outside the top 150.

Dayton - Final RPI Rankings

2007-08 ==> 28
2008-09 ==> 26
2009-10 ==> 35
2010-11 ==> 79

2011-12 ==> 91
2012-13 ==> 115
2013-14 ==> 33
2014-15 ==> 29

Richmond - Final RPI Rankings

2007-08 ==> 129
2008-09 ==> 124
2009-10 ==> 24
2010-11 ==> 33

2011-12 ==> 131
2012-13 ==> 91
2013-14 ==> 71
2014-15 ==> 64

Saint Louis - Final RPI Rankings

2007-08 ==> 135
2008-09 ==> 130
2009-10 ==> 81
2010-11 ==> 184

2011-12 ==> 28
2012-13 ==> 17
2013-14 ==> 24
2014-15 ==> 273

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAST FOUR SEASONS: Average RPI Ranking – Team (Best RPI Ranking, Worst RPI Ranking)
67.0 - Dayton (29, 115)
85.5 - Saint Louis (17, 273)
89.3 - Richmond (64, 131)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAST EIGHT SEASONS: Average RPI Ranking – Team (Best RPI Ranking, Worst RPI Ranking)
54.5 - Dayton (26, 115)
83.4 - Richmond (24, 131)
109.0 - Saint Louis (17, 273)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the last eight seasons, Dayton has five Top 35 finishes and one seasons worse than RPI 100.
In the last eight seasons, Richmond has two Top 35 finishes and three seasons worse than RPI 100.
In the last eight seasons, Saint Louis has three Top 35 finishes and four seasons worse than RPI 100.

For the 2015-16 season, Joel Welser will pick Dayton to finish first or second in the Atlantic 10.
For the 2015-16 season, Joel Welser picked Richmond to finish third in the Atlantic 10 (#43 overall).
For the 2015-16 season, Joel Welser did not include Saint Louis in his Top 144.