What's the most important thing when adding a school?

[Bostonspider]

Oh, I am not doubting the Bluejays have a stronger basketball resume right now, though I would not discount a colleged owned 10,000 seat arena compared to a rented 18,000 seat civic arena. I just think that SLU is a "basketball school" as well. I think the hiring of Majerus, coupled with the building of Chaifetz, put them on that level.

[Jet915]

Well, I thought we were talking about baskeball programs in general. If you are going to discount "rented" arenas, well then over half of the BE7 play mostly in "rented" arenas, doesn't make SLU better than them.

[FlyerFan]

I look for commitment to basketball success.

This can be measured in many ways. Money invested in the program and the expectations of the fanbase are the most important factors. Will the fanbase/administration readily accept losing? Has the school devoted enough resources to winning regularly? Does the school have the necessary support in staff and amenities?

Is the school's present success achieved in spite of a lack of amenities (i.e., is it presently overachieving?) If so, long term success is probably not in the forecast as eventually these thing equal out. You may simply have a tremendous coach or got extremely lucky in recruiting. It is hard to keep getting lucky repeatedly.

Ultimately, I'd like to see a conference made up of the best, private, basketball committed schools that we can put together in the east and midwest, since that is the current footprint of the BE7. No public schools. No schools with FBS football or FCS football that is looking to move up. Similarity of institutions and goals equals stability, which is extremely important as a new conference tries to get established.

[Bostonspider]

All I an saying is there are many good reasons (financial and other) that schools like SLU, Xavier and VCU built their own arenas and moved out of the nearby local civic arena.

[yorost]

K, let's just talk about basketball.

NCAA tournament bids: 18 for Creighton (8 in last 15), 7 for SLU (3 in last 15)
Fan Support: 17,000 fans a game for Creighton (12,000 season ticket holders), 6-7K for SLU
Facilities: 18,500 NBA style arena for Creighton, 10,000 College Arena for SLU

There is no way SLU beats Creighton in any aspect related to basketball period.

If you're going to count your own NCAA bid from 1941, you should be mentioning older NIT bids. The further you go back the stronger the NIT was, and in the 40's it might have been the stronger tournament than the NCAA's. Creighton has 2 pre-75 (at large introduction) NIT bids while St. Louis has 11. Creighton did have an additional NIT bid in the short period after, where the NCAA+NIT still represented less bids than the NCAA has today.

I'd love to get a comprehensive data set on postseason bids and the schools eligible in each season. It's a curious question as to how prestigious any individual bid should be.

[Jet915]

K, let's just talk about basketball.

NCAA tournament bids: 18 for Creighton (8 in last 15), 7 for SLU (3 in last 15)
Fan Support: 17,000 fans a game for Creighton (12,000 season ticket holders), 6-7K for SLU
Facilities: 18,500 NBA style arena for Creighton, 10,000 College Arena for SLU

There is no way SLU beats Creighton in any aspect related to basketball period.

If you're going to count your own NCAA bid from 1941, you should be mentioning older NIT bids. The further you go back the stronger the NIT was, and in the 40's it might have been the stronger tournament than the NCAA's. Creighton has 2 pre-75 (at large introduction) NIT bids while St. Louis has 11. Creighton did have an additional NIT bid in the short period after, where the NCAA+NIT still represented less bids than the NCAA has today.

I'd love to get a comprehensive data set on postseason bids and the schools eligible in each season. It's a curious question as to how prestigious any individual bid should be.

That is why I also put bids in the last 15 years. Not sure anyone cares about bids from 30+ years ago for any school...

[yorost]

It just bothers me how the common historical perspective on college basketball is so skewed to today's situation. NCAA bids as a recent measure are fine with me, but they're not a great historical measure on their own.

I'm not trying to argue St. Louis is a better, or equal, invitation than Creighton. Far from it, I don't think St.Louis should be invited unless paired with Creighton. They just deserve some credit where it is due, and 7 NCAA bids is a gross undervaluing of their success.

[aughnanure]

It has to be a "basketball school". Some schools are quickly identified as such (Butler-Creighton) and some are not (SLU-Richmond).

How is Creighton more quickly identified as a "basketball school" than SLU? SLU has put their money where their mouth is and BUILT (not rented) a stunning 10,000 seat basketball arena. Spent ridiculous amounts of money to hire a coach (RIP). It is not like they are a football school. Yes they are great at soccer, but so is Creighton. Just because Creighton rents (and fills) a nice civic arena makes them a "basketball school". Creighton has no more recent NCAA tourney success than Richmond, so that is not it, what is it then?

Relax there. Creighton gets to call themselves a real basketball schools cause they've actually mattered in college basketball for a while now, not a just a few years as you are trying to twist and change the argument to w/ your "recent tourney success" criteria. Their resume is significantly stronger than yours or SLU's and there is no debating that. Creighton, and Dayton, have cared and emphasized basketball for a long time now and that matters - along with their much stronger fan bases.

Its hard to call yourself a basketball schools when you've never mattered or have little to no tradition.

[aughnanure]

K, let's just talk about basketball.

NCAA tournament bids: 18 for Creighton (8 in last 15), 7 for SLU (3 in last 15)
Fan Support: 17,000 fans a game for Creighton (12,000 season ticket holders), 6-7K for SLU
Facilities: 18,500 NBA style arena for Creighton, 10,000 College Arena for SLU

There is no way SLU beats Creighton in any aspect related to basketball period.

If you're going to count your own NCAA bid from 1941, you should be mentioning older NIT bids. The further you go back the stronger the NIT was, and in the 40's it might have been the stronger tournament than the NCAA's. Creighton has 2 pre-75 (at large introduction) NIT bids while St. Louis has 11. Creighton did have an additional NIT bid in the short period after, where the NCAA+NIT still represented less bids than the NCAA has today.

I'd love to get a comprehensive data set on postseason bids and the schools eligible in each season. It's a curious question as to how prestigious any individual bid should be.

That is why I also put bids in the last 15 years. Not sure anyone cares about bids from 30+ years ago for any school...

Schools that mattered 30+ years ago do.

[aughnanure]

K, let's just talk about basketball.

NCAA tournament bids: 18 for Creighton (8 in last 15), 7 for SLU (3 in last 15)
Fan Support: 17,000 fans a game for Creighton (12,000 season ticket holders), 6-7K for SLU
Facilities: 18,500 NBA style arena for Creighton, 10,000 College Arena for SLU

There is no way SLU beats Creighton in any aspect related to basketball period.

If you're going to count your own NCAA bid from 1941, you should be mentioning older NIT bids. The further you go back the stronger the NIT was, and in the 40's it might have been the stronger tournament than the NCAA's. Creighton has 2 pre-75 (at large introduction) NIT bids while St. Louis has 11. Creighton did have an additional NIT bid in the short period after, where the NCAA+NIT still represented less bids than the NCAA has today.

I'd love to get a comprehensive data set on postseason bids and the schools eligible in each season. It's a curious question as to how prestigious any individual bid should be.

Might have been is the key phrase. Only once did the Helms Athletic Foundation choose an NIT champ over the NCAA and often teams played in both. Still, by the 60s there was no argument about which was the real tournament, and probably not even much in the 50s.