Conference Realignment Thread v. 2016

[DudeAnon]

I thought the B12 would just stay at 10 because the options for expansion other than BYU were just meh and BYU had plenty of warts too.

I love the BE with 10 teams. UCONN is going to stick with the slow death in the AAC in hopes that something changes in 8 years. I don't think it will but time will tell. Even if the B12 does implode, what does UCONN get if they join a league with the B12 leftovers?

UCONN makes sense only in the ACC but the ACC doesn't want/need UCONN anytime soon.

I'm glad UC took the blow too. UC will also stick with the slow death and will see their recruiting in football and basketball continue to decline.

I actually think UC might pivot at this point and refocus on basketball. The football experiment failed, I don't think the university is willing to throw more money down the drain.

[gtmoBlue]

Excellent Posts all: Xudash, GW11, WB77, DudeAnon,_ih, cu blujs, ArmyVet...

A couple of thoughts after yesterday's decision by Big 12 not to expand:

3.) Expansion in the Big East will not happen at least until new contract negotiations come up, and even by that point, we aren't expanding unless Saint Louis, Dayton, or any other Private/Catholic university proves that it belongs. 10 is a perfect number for basketball. Unless we get paid even more to add by Fox, we should stay that way until a viable and realistic opportunity presents itself.

I agree with you, except as follows:

Re #3 - - I'll place a slightly different spin on your #3. The first and foremost consideration for us moving forward IS US AND HOW WE'RE DOING TOGETHER. In other words, JOB ONE must be to make sure we track forward as strongly as we're tracking now, improving along the way (e.g. St. Johns and DePaul and what they mean with their large fan bases and with NY and Chicago locations). In other words, if we expand later by adding one of the existing basketball schools, that will mean that we lost traction as a group of ten. Each of us now earn about $4 million per year from Fox. If we wake-up one day to find that an A10 school is performing at a higher level than our lead schools, we're in trouble. We have everything going for each of us, as compared to an A10 school that makes $300k a year from its media agreement and otherwise sits in a conference that sends an average of 3 teams per year to the NCAA, with their NCAA unit money then divided 14 ways. Bottomline: if we add those schools moving forward, we will have screwed the pooch somewhere along the way. ADDITIONS MUST ALWAYS BE STRATEGIC IF THEY ARE TO OCCUR. Those schools are no where near fitting that bill.

GW11: I take it you both mean no midmajors?
By viable and realistic...are you inferring no Gonzaga?


Xudash: Additions must always be strategic... What do you mean specifically?

If the GW11 premise is correct we should not have to dwell, nor consider another midmajor, even if they are performing well.

If as Xudash purports, if the BE continues to perform well, whether teams are consistent or rotating at the top of the conference, and should we see some progress in NY and Chicago. Both contend there is no need to expand. In an ideal world this should hold true. In the real world, things change, egos inflate and deflate. Change is the only constant. Unseen, unplanned, and random circumstances intersect and create new situations and scenarios. 5 years ago no one foresaw the splitting and renovation of the Big East, for example, yet here we are entering into the 4th year of a new configuration. Many say the BE is perfect...Nothing is perfect. Yes, your little "10 team round robin" is cute, but nothing is perfect.

The Big East will change moving forward...it is not a question of "if", but "when". I prefer snatching an ACC team or two when they come available.

gtmo

[_lh]

I thought the B12 would just stay at 10 because the options for expansion other than BYU were just meh and BYU had plenty of warts too.

I love the BE with 10 teams. UCONN is going to stick with the slow death in the AAC in hopes that something changes in 8 years. I don't think it will but time will tell. Even if the B12 does implode, what does UCONN get if they join a league with the B12 leftovers?

UCONN makes sense only in the ACC but the ACC doesn't want/need UCONN anytime soon.

I'm glad UC took the blow too. UC will also stick with the slow death and will see their recruiting in football and basketball continue to decline.

I actually think UC might pivot at this point and refocus on basketball. The football experiment failed, I don't think the university is willing to throw more money down the drain.

I agree. UC will have to decide if they are a "football" or "basketball" school. They can't try to be both any longer in my opinion.

[GoldenWarrior11]

Thanks, gtmo.

With regards to "viable and realistic" I was referring to a few scenarios that, in my mind, have a very small chance of happening. One of those was/is obviously UConn. Dash brought up an excellent point about a reunion/partnership with them would have been under acceptable terms. To this notion, I do believe any partnership would have had to favor the Big East for protection purposes, but, in my opinion, UConn is/was never going to devalue or de-emphasize football until there is some type of official stipulation/guideline that says UConn will not get into the P5. Naturally, we can all look at the facts and figures - football is draining their program, they don't have the history, they don't have the success, etc. - but the reality is that their administration and school is committed to their current path, however right or wrong that path is. Basically, UConn never would have been able to accept our "acceptable" terms in order for inclusion in the Big East. If anything, watching schools like Cincinnati, Houston, etc., get life rafts out of the AAC, would/could have just forced them to put even more chips on the table in order of cashing out.

Another non-viable/unrealistic scenario is that of the Western wing of Gonzaga, BYU, St. Mary's, etc. While our schools and athletic programs are very similar, and we are aligned in many different institutional aspects, adding members that far west stretches the league too far, and takes away the significance of our East coast presence. While conference membership is extremely unlikely, I would say it would not be surprising at all to see a BE/WCC Challenge or scheduling alliance in the next few years. That would be easily to maintain and help build relationships with those schools.

I will get plenty of disagreement from some posters here, but I would also say that any public school - like VCU, Wichita State, etc. - is also unlikely to ever be considered for the Big East. Presidents make the call on all expansion decisions, and, for the most part, expansion decisions are driven not just by media markets and athletic programs, but institutional fits. At the time of their inclusions, Nebraska, Rutgers and Maryland were all AAU for the B1G. Colorado, Utah, Texas A&M, and Missouri are all big state schools, not unlike current memberships in the PAC-10 and SEC, respectively. The type of school matters, and unless there is a consistent remarkable situation where a school like VCU or Wichita State make numerous Final Fours, I truly don't think we will ever see a new Big East with public institutions.

These points bring me to my list of candidates, long-term and short-term, for the Big East. At the top, which would 1a and 1b would be Saint Louis and Dayton. Both schools are incredible institutional fits (Jesuit/Catholic). Saint Louis is in a major media market that just lost an NFL team, which means, during winter, there is a new demand for viewership. SLU has a tremendous opportunity to seize that market, and with the hiring of Travis Ford, is doing what it can to compete in the A-10 and get back to the levels of Rick Majerus before his unfortunate passing. Dayton will always have an excellent traveling fan base and sell out all of its home games. They are a basketball-first school and have made many commitments to ensuring Archie Miller stays there and continues to develop one of the best basketball programs in the A-10. Obviously, both bring a lack of historical basketball success, but every other box is checked in the expansion boxes. If the Big East were to expand, I would place heavy money on those two schools. Other schools, like Davidson, Richmond, Detroit and Duquesne, are also much longer-term possibilities, but they all really need to put resources into their basketball programs first in order to even be seriously considered.

Anyways, this is just my two cents (which is worth $0) from what I have read, heard and followed. For the record, I do think (and hope) we stay at 10 through our next deal. We have something truly special being created in this conference, and I am delighted to share this conference with all of the current schools.

[Xudash]

Excellent Posts all: Xudash, GW11, WB77, DudeAnon,_ih, cu blujs, ArmyVet...

A couple of thoughts after yesterday's decision by Big 12 not to expand:

3.) Expansion in the Big East will not happen at least until new contract negotiations come up, and even by that point, we aren't expanding unless Saint Louis, Dayton, or any other Private/Catholic university proves that it belongs. 10 is a perfect number for basketball. Unless we get paid even more to add by Fox, we should stay that way until a viable and realistic opportunity presents itself.

I agree with you, except as follows:

Re #3 - - I'll place a slightly different spin on your #3. The first and foremost consideration for us moving forward IS US AND HOW WE'RE DOING TOGETHER. In other words, JOB ONE must be to make sure we track forward as strongly as we're tracking now, improving along the way (e.g. St. Johns and DePaul and what they mean with their large fan bases and with NY and Chicago locations). In other words, if we expand later by adding one of the existing basketball schools, that will mean that we lost traction as a group of ten. Each of us now earn about $4 million per year from Fox. If we wake-up one day to find that an A10 school is performing at a higher level than our lead schools, we're in trouble. We have everything going for each of us, as compared to an A10 school that makes $300k a year from its media agreement and otherwise sits in a conference that sends an average of 3 teams per year to the NCAA, with their NCAA unit money then divided 14 ways. Bottomline: if we add those schools moving forward, we will have screwed the pooch somewhere along the way. ADDITIONS MUST ALWAYS BE STRATEGIC IF THEY ARE TO OCCUR. Those schools are no where near fitting that bill.

GW11: I take it you both mean no midmajors?
By viable and realistic...are you inferring no Gonzaga?


Xudash: Additions must always be strategic... What do you mean specifically?

If the GW11 premise is correct we should not have to dwell, nor consider another midmajor, even if they are performing well.

If as Xudash purports, if the BE continues to perform well, whether teams are consistent or rotating at the top of the conference, and should we see some progress in NY and Chicago. Both contend there is no need to expand. In an ideal world this should hold true. In the real world, things change, egos inflate and deflate. Change is the only constant. Unseen, unplanned, and random circumstances intersect and create new situations and scenarios. 5 years ago no one foresaw the splitting and renovation of the Big East, for example, yet here we are entering into the 4th year of a new configuration. Many say the BE is perfect...Nothing is perfect. Yes, your little "10 team round robin" is cute, but nothing is perfect.

The Big East will change moving forward...it is not a question of "if", but "when". I prefer snatching an ACC team or two when they come available.

gtmo

That is an exact example of what I mean by strategic. We don't need to draw from "below" even if doing so means pulling up a team that is doing "well." Regardless of how they're doing, whether they like it or not, they probably would still carry a brand image that does not yell PEER to anyone and everyone watching what we do.

I hold that $4 million per year, MSG for a conference championship location and all that tournament still entails in location and tradition in the largest city in the States, and a lot of ongoing NCAA Unit money split over a denominator of 10 should position the 10 of us well until 2023, when the B1G and the SEC go into their next round of media negotiations in a world that will look vastly different than the one that exists today in terms of the economic model that presently is in play for content ownership and rights and distribution.

We will get to a separate thread that is much, much more critical to us all than what the conference realignment topic has brought to-date: the economics of sports about 7 years from now. This is about cord cutting. This is about content, television and cable systems being in a state of flux. This is still about 900 pound guerrillas like Ohio State, Alabama and Texas running around trying to figure out how to vacuum up more money.

The bottomline is that we must continue to build the Big East BRAND collectively and each of our school brands individually. The composition of this conference must be regarded as damn near sacred for the forward purpose of monetizing our value to the consuming public when monetizing that value flows into an entirely newish, brave world. Forget how I may feel about Dayton personally or about St. Louis, even if they went nuts all of a sudden and went to 5 straight NCAA Tournaments with some success while there. So what, in the scheme of things now and to come. Schools like that do NOTHING for us for where we must go from here.

What if the guerrillas want to take it from 65 teams to 4x12, jettisoning the likes of BC, Wake, Vandy, etc.? Assuming that is done for football reasons only - which remains a very safe assumption in my world; I adamantly believe they're solving for football and will not F-up the basketball tournament - then we have available to us then precisely what you just pinpointed: candidates that come from a prestigious pool. Of course, we would want them to have a clue when it comes to running a solid basketball program at that point. At the very least, if it came to that for them, you would think that they would place an emphasis on basketball to keep their alumni somewhat appeased. This is where it gets just too complicated to say with any level of confidence what could or should be done with expansion. Just too much is unclear at this point.

That makes it clear to protect the brand as it now exists. To build it through the financial advantages we enjoy. I truly will go to my grave knowing that Xavier in particular and all 10 of us in general were in precisely the right place at precisely the right time when it comes to our Fox deal, as well as our deal with MSG. Whomever it was within the C7 leadership base that made all this happen deserves a freakin bronze statue somewhere.

"Knowledge Is Good."

[stever20]

2.) ... yesterday's decision was a huge win for the AAC

Agree with all GW11's comments save the above. It was more of a break, or dodging a bullet. It's not a good thing when ZERO of your conference schools were judged worthy of F5 status, especially since the B12 is by far the weakest, most unstable of the 5. Prolly didn't help the AAC's image that they pandered on bended knee for the past three months like homeless refugees desperate to get out of the American.

I totally think it was a huge win for the AAC. I mean, they still have a league where in the last 5 years- the teams in the league for basketball have had
Temple 3 NCAA appearances
SMU 1 NCAA appearance(plus last year)
Cincy 5 NCAA appearances
Tulsa 2 NCAA appearances
UConn 3 NCAA appearances(plus a title, plus a year where they would have made tourney except for APR)
Memphis 3 NCAA appearances
so that's 17 NCAA appearances by the teams in the last 5 years, plus 2 more where probation/APR stopped it.

They had 4 NCAA teams last year. Houston is trending up.

So by losing no one, that league can continue to grow. They have 4 schools in the top 33 in recruiting this year so far. With 3 more schools in the 51-56 range.

I think the big loser in yesterday from a conference perspective is the A10. I think something we're going to see the AAC do now before their TV deal ends in a few years is expand by 1 team all sports but football. That team could easily be VCU. A10 minus VCU would be devastated, especially when Miller leaves Dayton and Hurley leaves Rhode Island. VCU is #23 currently recruiting. The next best A10 team is Richmond all the way down at #57.

[David G]

I've heard different stuff about the AAC. Another rumor is that they may try and pull in Rice and LA Tech, and have 13 for basketball where they play a 16 game conference schedule, and 14 for football with Navy as an affiliate where they play a setup that's like the current CUSA and SEC models (or, what will be the CUSA model next year when UAB is back). I don't think they'll add a basketball only member. It's not that it wouldn't make sense. It's just that I've heard nothing to indicate that they're looking to do that.

But, Rice and UTEP are also being rumored to be leaving for the Mountain West, which would put them at 14 for football and 13 for basketball. So, who knows? CUSA may be slimming down, which I personally don't think would be bad for them, but they'll probably look to add teams themselves if that happens.

I've always thought of the A10 as being kind of a junkyard. Now, by that I mean you can find some pretty sweet stuff in a junk yard, and there are some very good programs in that league, but in its totality it is still a junk yard. I also think that the Big East has shown that when basketball centric schools come together they can be very successful. And, I think that's the answer for some of the A10 programs. They don't need to be positioning themselves to get into the Big East. That just won't happen. They need to look at creating their own Big East type conference3s. There are enough schools out there to create a league of basketball centric schools that can be successful.

Dayton - A good program, and it's about time they finally started dominating the A10 considering they have twice the resources as the rest of the league. I think they've finally realized that they don't need to hold on to a mediocre coach for six years too long becaues it's a job that a lot of good coaches would want.

Wichita State - They didn't finish in the top 25 last year, but I believe they had in the previous four years

VCU - I like Will Wade and think they'll continue to be successful post Shaka/Havoc. I think they've been on an upward trajectory for at least ten years

That's a pretty good nucleus right there. Those are basketball centric schools that pack their arenas in November, and have been very successful in recent years, and have all the indications that they can continue to be successful. As far as other candidates, none are as strong as those three, but there are still some pretty good ones

Davidson - I really like them, but I think we all know who the next coach will be, and when the head coach in waiting is the son of a legend, that doesn't always go well, and it also oftentimes means that the school is somewhat hesitant to make a change even though one needs to be made. But, all and all, I do like them

SLU - they've sucked more than they've been good, but the potential is there if they have the right coach, and I do kinda like Travis Ford

Belmont - I'm not as big on them, but the market is good, the support is at least decent, and they probably are kind of held back by their conference. I think this new league would elevate them

Siena - I think they're at the top of their talent cycle right now, but their facilities are really nice, and they have the potential to make quite a bit of noise this year. Everyone is excited about Monmouth, but I think Siena is even better, and if things fall right they could make the kind of noise they made under Fran MccAffery where they earned a #9 seed and made the round of 32.

Valpo - I like them A LOT, and feel that their conference has held them back. There have been times where I felt they were better than some of the teams that made the NCAAs, but just couldn't get in because they didn't have paper to get them in. Last year being among them. I'll be interested to see what Lottich does as a first year head coach, but as a program I think Valpo would be successful in a league that afforded them more opportunities. And, they've got a pretty loyal fanbase.

As far as one or two others, Saint Joe's? - meh, they're okay. I guess they're good enough of the time. Richmond? - same, I guess. Oakland? While good, I've always felt they were somewhat overvalued. The Horizon isn't exactly gangbusters, and they don't exactly dominate it. Or...just start out with eight. You don't really NEED any more than that.


So, if you sift through the junk yards, you can find some pretty decent stuff, and if you put it all together you can end up with a pretty good league. It's certainly better than any league that any of those teams are currently in, and it would garner a better TV/media deal than the leagues they're currently in. Having three teams that have recently been to the Elite Eight or further, and who have recognizable brands and passionate fanbases is a pretty good nucleus, and having a supporting cast of teams that are better than the rest of their current leagues typically are is a plus. The A10 schools make about half the money per school that the MVC makes, and despite being a regular multi-bid league a lot of their games are buried on premium tier networks. Who the hell negotiated that deal?

[Fieldhouse Flyer]

What if the guerrillas want to take it from 65 teams to 4x12, jettisoning the likes of BC, Wake, Vandy, etc.?

Are you not aware that the By-Laws of the P5 conferences do not contain provisions for the involuntary expulsion of a member school?

Why would BC, Wake, or Vandy (or any other school) voluntarily leave a P5 conference (and the guaranteed $20,000,000+ per year) to join the Big East?

[whiteandblue77]

anybody know the breakdown of those $20 mill per year figures for the F5 schools, re the percentage of that money that goes to mens basketball? And how our $4 mil a year with the FS1 deal compares?

[TAMU Eagle]

The Big East will expand before the next contract with Fox

The rule about no public schools is a fantasy dreamed up by fans. The conference leadership has no qualms about state schools. They just want good basketball programs with good academics.

UConn is and always will be a candidate unless they end up in the P5. (The only scenario I see this happening under would be if the ACC gets gutted...in which case, is it worth it?)

If UConn comes to the Big East it will be on the Big East's terms.

SLU and Dayton will not be included in the Big East during the next round of expansion (further down the line? Who knows?) Only circumstance where they would be included this round is one of them (SLU would be my guess) being paired with a big name school like UConn.

The double round robin is great for fans. Conference leadership doesn't care. 1st thru 15th rule of expansion: All about the $$$$

The first and most important question to ask when considering candidates for Big East expansion: Do they draw enough eyeballs to get Fox to sweeten the next contract? (SLU/Dayton, NO. UConn, YES)

While the Big East will expand before the next contract, there is no need to expand now. The landscape of college athletics will shift dramatically in the next 10 years. Power is already starting to slide away from football. Will it go to basketball? Still to early to tell. Will it slide enough? Who knows? But in 10 years the B12 or ACC or both might implode (smart money on B12 right now). Big East could put itself in position to be a taker, not a takee when this happens.