Conference Realignment Thread v. 2016

[GoldenWarrior11]

SLU hires Travis Ford.

What a great hire for them. Glad to see them making a strong commitment to basketball and become a top expansion candidate for the Big East, if and when the league decides to expand down the road.

The unfortunate thing with SLU was that, after Majerus sadly passed, they could not not go with Jim Crews as head coach. If they went with someone else, they would have had their strong nucleus from a few years ago transfer out, and they never would have had their nice stretch run under Majerus/Crews (w/ Jett, McCall, Loe). Unfortunately, Crews couldn't recruit - and it eventually derailed the program. They sacrificed long-term potential for the near-term success. It would have been very interested to see how they would have handled things differently had they known about the monumental realignment shift of 2013. Had they known, they could have possibly put a stronger full court press on the basketball program, in hopes of getting into the Big East.

[Edrick]

The hire is getting murdered.

Jerry Meyer just said this.....
@abcward cause I have serious doubts bout his coaching ability and have never once heard someone say something positive about him.

Then, really without a veil, called him an asshole that no one likes.

[gtmoBlue]

Travis Ford is a lousy coach for a lousy team. But let's take SLU now-based on Faith. In the meanwhile whilst we wait for them to improve the BE gains a regular 6th bid in the dance. Let's also take the Zags - now, in order to placate those who don't want to diminish league quality and potentially get that 7th bid (in some years). We can save 2 spots for ACC leftovers IF that league gets raided again.

[adoraz]

Travis Ford is a lousy coach for a lousy team. But let's take SLU now-based on Faith. In the meanwhile whilst we wait for them to improve the BE gains a regular 6th bid in the dance. Let's also take the Zags - now, in order to placate those who don't want to diminish league quality and potentially get that 7th bid (in some years). We can save 2 spots for ACC leftovers IF that league gets raided again.

What? How do we gain a bid by adding a bottom feeder? Even assuming best case scenario, that they go 0-18 in conference, that would still not help the conference if their RPI is around 200. You can have a great OOC record, like Marquette this year, but if you're playing poor opponents it hurts more than helps.

Take this year for example. If we had SLU it obviously wouldn't have resulted in an additional bid. If anything it would've hurt the bubble teams.

[DudeAnon]

Travis Ford is a lousy coach for a lousy team. But let's take SLU now-based on Faith. In the meanwhile whilst we wait for them to improve the BE gains a regular 6th bid in the dance. Let's also take the Zags - now, in order to placate those who don't want to diminish league quality and potentially get that 7th bid (in some years). We can save 2 spots for ACC leftovers IF that league gets raided again.

What? How do we gain a bid by adding a bottom feeder? Even assuming best case scenario, that they go 0-18 in conference, that would still not help the conference if their RPI is around 200. You can have a great OOC record, like Marquette this year, but if you're playing poor opponents it hurts more than helps.

Take this year for example. If we had SLU it obviously wouldn't have resulted in an additional bid. If anything it would've hurt the bubble teams.

Incoming JPSchmack rant in 3...2....1...

[Xudash]

There actually is ZERO incentive to add new members now. Nova delivered a badly needed and key piece: strengthened conference credibility by punching through to the Final Four. This year's conference tournament at MSG was a truly smashing success. Multiple ranked teams, a #1 ranked team, 2 Top 5/10 ranked teams and all that provided perception-wise throughout the regular season. Viewership is trending up. Loving the ten teams and the Round Robin format. It's all working, and very nicely.

We are in a buyers market, but with nothing worth buying presently. We certainly aren't going to do something amazingly stupid like dilute the conference with sub-par teams. Thank God for the Presidents and Val Ackerman. Nothing is a given anyway, especially when it comes to the notion of adding teams to attempt to increase NCAA bids.

The only program that has any kind of cache is Gonzaga, and it's just too far away.

I agree with this very much.

The incentives to expand are mostly about increasing revenue, specifically from media-related sources. Other leagues have expanded and gotten new money from (1) a new football conference championship game, (2) a re-negotiated TV contract that pays more, (3) a new conference network, or one that is expanded into new markets (most notably, this is why the Big Ten took Rutgers and Maryland).

The Big East doesn't have any of those options. Adding Saint Louis or Dayton or VCU or Gonzaga or even UConn isn't going to get them a conference network, period. Even the 16-team Big East of 2005-13 had little chance of making that happen. The TV contract would only go up at a pro-rate basis. No disrespect intended, but it can be argued that Fox paid above market rate for the Big East because it needed content. Adding ANY new team wouldn't give Fox the incentive to increase beyond pro-rata. Even adding UConn, which, for all its success, isn't the absolute ratings bonanza that a football team would be. And obviously the Big East will not be adding a football championship game.

Really, the only new revenue source might be the possibility of increasing NCAA tournament credits, but that is a bit of a gamble. As others pointed out, for all the ACC's tournament credits this year, that league HAD to do as well as it did in the tournament in order to get $2M/team because the money is divided among 15 schools. Meanwhile, the Big East, with two fewer teams in the tournament and only one team making it past the first weekend (albeit, at least all the way to the Final Four), gets to share $1.9M/team because there are only 10 teams in the league. In other words, the Big East is doing about as well as the ACC is for per-team NCAA revenue, and it could have done even better with one or two different plays in the Xavier/Wisconsin game.

At best, a few more tickets might get sold at the Big East Tournament, which would have to happen since there would be "one more mouth to feed."

Outside of financial motivations for expansion, what else is there? Perception? That can be improved by having more seasons like the one the league just had. Dominant out of conference. Several top 25 teams. Winning records going deep into the standings. And, of course, a deep run into the tournament.

Truthfully, as time passes, I think people around the country are going to be envious of what the Big East has, which other leagues have lost. When I hear my in-laws, who have lived in NC for over 40 years, talk about the ACC of the 70's, 80's, and 90's, they really miss the smaller league. Everyone played everyone once for football, twice in basketball. Geography was tightly knit. People knew fans/graduates from just about every other school. More or less, there was plenty of commonality among institutions. There was definitely more conference camaraderie. It can be argued that money and keeping up with the joneses demanded expansion, but some things were lost with that. I think the same goes for the Big Ten. Many fans didn't even like Penn State. They definitely don't like playing Rutgers and Maryland instead of Wisconsin and Iowa.

The Big East of today, though more spread out than it was during its nostalgic years in the 80's, really matches what Dave Gavitt put together in the first place. It has exactly the qualities which many fans of schools in other conferences once had and today wish their teams' conferences had. There's conference camaraderie. There's rivalries coupled with mutual respect. There's commonality among institutions. There are shared goals. And, significantly, there isn't any desire by schools to look elsewhere. Even for a league like the Big Ten, where almost certainly no one would ever leave voluntarily, there are some who wish that other schools would get "kicked out" (knowing that won't ever happen). With the Big East, no one wants other schools kicked out, nor does anyone want to leave.

Congrats to fans of Big East teams, most especially Villanova. Even as a longtime ACC fan, I find myself rooting for the Wildcats to pull it off in six days just because I like the whole story of your conference.

All the best!

Thanks Michael for a great post.
I think we all always enjoy getting your take on things.

+1

MiR's points make clear the importance of BRAND MANAGEMENT in all this. Protecting revenue from media related sources is Job One. You don't improve a product by diluting it, at least not this kind of product.

Read this again: There's conference camaraderie. There's rivalries coupled with mutual respect. There's commonality among institutions. There are shared goals. And, significantly, there isn't any desire by schools to look elsewhere.

Now, that's exactly what you want for a conference. What must happen in order for that to fully come to fruition and be sustainable is what is happening now with the Big East: improving media numbers, successful conference championships, strong performances in the regular season, and post-season success in the NCAA Tournament. It's working, and very well at that.

[Michael in Raleigh]

Xudash and Billyjack: Thank you for the kind words, gentlemen.

I understand why some people may like the idea of adding VCU, Dayton, Gonzaga, UConn, Wichita State, Richmond, or others I may have missed. Most of those are good programs and most of them would fit in alongside the other schools in the Big East. Plus, the richest conferences have had a history of expanding and getting paid well for it. That doesn't mean that it's good, nor does it mean that expanding would result in more money for the Big East.

With so few financial incentives to expand, it just seems like the healthy thing to do would be to let the programs improve and grow with the league comprised as is.

Besides, hasn't there been enough Big East expansion in the past? Look at how many schools have played Big East basketball, football, or at least been scheduled to play one of the two:

Current Big East: (10) Providence, St. John's, Seton Hall, Georgetown, Villanova, DePaul, Marquette, Xavier, Butler, & Creighton.
Currently in ACC: (7) Miami, Virginia Tech, Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, & Louisville.
Currently in AAC: (3) UConn, Cincinnati, & USF.
Currently in Big 12: (1) West Virginia.
Currently in Big Ten: (1) Rutgers.
Played Big East football & was scheduled to join full-time: (1) Temple
Scheduled to join Big East full-time, but plans changed: (6) TCU, UCF, Houston, SMU, Memphis, & Tulane.
Scheduled to join Big East for football, but plans changed: (4) Boise State, San Diego State, Navy & ECU.

*In spring of 2013, Tulsa announced plans to eventually join what became the AAC. That announcement was prior to the July 2013 legal separation of hoops and football schools. That announcement happened, though, after the split itself, and the fact that the basketball schools would retain the "Big East" name, had been officially announced. Therefore, Tulsa is the only AAC school that was never scheduled to "join the Big East.")

Total schools whose names have been graced in some form with the Big East banner for basketball or football: 33. Amazing. 22 have actually played Big East basketball, and 12 played Big East football.

This is the most stable the league has ever been. Expansion in the past, for this league, gave temporary stability but led to long-term instability. Ironically, I think the best change for this league would be to remain the same for the foreseeable future.

[notkirkcameron]

It would have been very interested to see how they would have handled things differently had they known about the monumental realignment shift of 2013. Had they known, they could have possibly put a stronger full court press on the basketball program, in hopes of getting into the Big East.

SLU most definitely knew, or should have known, what was coming down the pike.

I had the good fortune to meet Coach Majerus in February of 2010 when he was coaching at SLU, and I was in my third year of law school there.

Majerus complained that SLU's decision to go to the A-10 was on par with the decision to send troops to Vietnam. It was a poor decision made on bad information and had been disastrous for SLU. "We have the most travel in the league. That absolutely affects you from a competitive perspective. Likewise, even if you're successful, our alumni don't care about beating Rhode Island or St. Bonaventure."

Majerus suggested it wouldn't be the worst idea to pull out of the A-10, and move SLU's athletic programs to the Valley. Majerus bemoaned that such a move would not happen due to the large alumni bases of the Valley schools in St. Louis. In short, because of the market penetration by the other Valley schools, SLU needed the Valley more than the Valley needed SLU. However, if possible, such a move would enable SLU to build up its athletic programs, compete against local rivals, and cut travel expenses (SLU's farthest rival in the Valley would Wichita State, a 6.5 hour drive from St. Louis. Xavier was SLU's closest rival in the A-10, at 5.5 hours). Majerus said if SLU made this move, SLU would be in a good position "when the football schools and basketball schools of the Big East break up."

Mind you, this is in February 2010...before Nebraska, Missouri, Texas A&M, Colorado, et. al. moved conferences. Before talk of 16-team superconferences. At the time, the Big East was a BCS football conference, and arguably the greatest basketball conference ever assembled. Majerus' prediction proved prescient.

[Edrick]

Mind you, this is in February 2010...before Nebraska, Missouri, Texas A&M, Colorado, et. al. moved conferences. Before talk of 16-team superconferences. At the time, the Big East was a BCS football conference, and arguably the greatest basketball conference ever assembled. Majerus' prediction proved prescient.

In February 2010, the Big East was in the midst of a season that would eventually finish 3rd. The year before that in 2009 it finished 4th.

The Big East finished 3rd in 2016 and 2nd in 2015. There is a certain amount of fairy tale about the 2000s Big East that just doesn't hold up if you look at the data. (below)

Big East finishes (Sagarin) over the last decade.

16 - 3rd
15 - 2nd
14 - 5th
13 - 2nd
12 - 3rd
11 - 1st
10 - 3rd
09 - 4th
08 - 3rd
07 - 5th

[gtmoBlue]

Good posts all. Thanks MiR for your take on the BE.

2 quick points:

The foreseeable future

The foreseeable future is about 1-2 years...until the SEC and/or B1G raid again. Doesn't really matter who they raid, B12 or ACC, but there will be fallout-panic-and leftover teams - ripe for the picking. Leftover ACC teams present a better option, as there are former BE schools and a couple of private schools with middlin' football. None are good cultural/institutional fits, but several are teams we know and would be amenable to joining the BE.

Waiting is a good thing-for now. The Prez's need to decide what compromises they are willing to make amongst the 3 pillars - stay all private vs admission of a public school; take a footballer (ND, S'cuse-who parks FB elsewhere), cultural/institutional fit: take a former BE team vs an historic ACC team (BC, ND, S'cuse vs WF, Duke). Although expansion is not currently on the table - the talks at the summer meetings ought to be priming the pump for the inevitable expansion opportunities - when they arise. When folks scoff at the notion of a Duke possibly having interest - they forget that a "Private" university, especially a rich one, may prick its' ears at the notion of not having to report ALL its' earnings to the government. A WF or Duke would consider the ramifications and benefits of joining an all-private league - if only for the overall bigger institutional benefits and gains - not merely sports.

Financial Incentives

Most here and on my home boards don't favor padding the bottom to boost the top scenarios laid out by JPSchmack and the other guy. Most fail to perceive the benefit of gaming the system for additional NCAA bids. Most don't see the BE as leaving NCAA bucks on the table. I am not surprised.

1 - However, even as conference networks are "hitting the wall" with the media companies (notably the LHN and ESPN, the aborting of a potential ACC Network) the BE is primed to make headway in the newest media venue - online. The BEDN is optimally set to forge boldly ahead on the Internet with online content, streaming video and internet broadcasting of BE sports to both home and mobile platforms - across the board. The conference should forge ahead with all due haste to provide the broadest online access, expanding it's content offerings, and building alliances (when necessary).

2- The BE has opportunities to upscale its 2nd and 3rd tier Media rights packages. This should be the 2nd most important goal as the league moves forward. Member schools with limited deals or minimal deals may be better served by bundling their individual 2nd/3rd tier rights with an umbrella BE Conference Media rights package to maximize their income opportunities. Elite schools such as Villanova and Georgetown may be able to stand alone, but others may fare far better by hitching their rights to an overarching conference package.

Oh the times...they are a changin'. For the better.
gtmo