MU88
-
Posts
90 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by MU88
-
-
You can only have one team from a conference in a preseason tourney. If the St. Joe's coach is saying that its going to happen, wanna bet one team is St. Joe's? You can add one team from the WCC, Horizon and MAAC. Excluding the BE, are there any Jesuits in any other league?
-
WH, you make some interesting points. However, I question some of your assumptions.
First, you suggest the 7 or 8 bball schools would stick together if the football schools wanted to take 3 or 4 with them. I really doubt that. The bball schools know that it survival of the fittest. Georgetown is not going to risk their athletic programs to stay with PU or DePaul. It just won't happen. Schools must act in their own best interest. Based on conversations with people in the MU athletics department, they expect 4 or 5 of the bball schools to be dropped in 2010 and are postioning themselves to be one of the schools that make the cut. If the bball schools already see it coming, a doubt they will form a unified front against the football schools.
Second, even if they decided or were forced to stay together, I doubt the 12 team model would work for the BE bball schools. There is no finacial reason for the 7 or 8 bball schools to go to 12. It is just slicing the pie thinner. Adding SLU or Creighton or any of the other schools mentioned will not increase the pie enough unless those schools become a national power. An elite 8 or final four run by SLU in 2008 would make them attractive. A 7th place finish in the A-10 would not. I would guess 9 or 10 is the number. I would also look at schools that have athletic programs that mesh with the present BE schools. For example, if ND joins, I believe that the bball school conference would need to add a school with a baseball team to be able to sponsor that sport.
To the guy who suggested that the BE will lose their BCS status, that simply won't happen. The BE will probably have 2 preseason top 10 football teams next season. WV will probably be top 5. In addition, they may get another 1 or 2 schools ranked.
-
MU would not join a midwest conference unless they were left with no other choice. Right now, according to someone in athletic department, MU believes that the BE is trying out programs. Eventually, the BE will contract to 12 and MU is hoping to one of the 12. The football schools simply do not believe that there are any viable candidates outside the conference for expansion. MU is spending more on athletics than any other non-football school (over $20 million per year) and more than USF. I wonder why some think MU won't be able to compete. MU's hoops budget is the third highest in the country according to a Wall Street Journal article earlier this week.
In the event the BE splits along the football and bball lines, I would guess the 8 BE bball schools would stay together and maybe add 1 or 2 teams. There is probably no financial advantage to adding more. I would suspect schools like Holy Cross, SLU, X, Dayton and Creighton would be candidates. I don't think there is any chance for an A-10 merger. Too many bottom dwellers in the A-10. Would a public school be a candidate? Maybe. There are political reasons to do that. I think you have look at the school or schools that are the most successful in 2009. It is that school that will be the favorite to join the BE bball schools.
-
A few points. First, the 3 highest ranked Catholic schools in terms of academics are ND, BC and Georgetown. Funny, all of these schools have significantly higher athletic budgets than SLU. All three play football too. All three have higher endowments than SLU too. Further, all three have a much higher percentage of athletes on campus. In fact, SLU has one of the lowest percentage of student athletes in its student body of any Jesuit school. A school like Holy Cross or even Gonzaga has more athletes. Is there a connection? Maybe. BC has exploded as an academic and athletic school and it can be traced to one pass 25 years ago.
There are so many misconceptions about athletics on a college campus. The Ivy League schools are pretty good academics institutions. They also offer around 30 sports that all of their member play. Have these sports hurt their academic funding? One could make the argument that ther sports success in the early 1900s enhanced their academic reputations. It certainly has helped ND. Once considered an average school, ND has become an elite institution in the past 40 years.
Overall, if you look at the names on a list of the top academic schools in America, the same names will appear on the lists of the top athletic schools. The Big Ten, the Ivy League, UCLA, USC etc are all athletic powers too. In other words, successful universities are successful in all of their pursuits.
As for football, don't get me started. The foolishness and misinformation surrounding football and its costs are legendary. At a school like SLU, a $7 per credit hour fee would fund non-scholarship football, women's crew (which has 60-100 members)for Title IX reason and provide a surplus of over $1,000,000 for the school. And, that number does not include one cent of revenue from ticket sales or sponsorship. Add an endowment of $40 million and SLU could play 1-AA scholarship football and break even without selling 1 ticket. Provide a $75 million endowment with the student fee and SLU would be able to fund a 1-A team with 85 scholarships without a financial worry.
After crunching the numbers, there is absolutely no reason why SLU, Marquette and DePaul cannot start non-scholarship football if they wanted. Some people can debate the quality of non-scholarship football, but Harvard and Drake who are ranked in the lastest Street & Smith poll or Cornell, who made the 1-AA title game a couple of years ago, non-scholarship football can be of a very high quality. Further, for MU and SLU, it would add much need males to the student body and give the schools an opportunity for a real homecoming and way to get alums back on campus. More alums on campus means more donations which means improved academics. Silly me, I thought better academics was a worthwhile goal.
-
I think its easier for a west coast school to put together a very good program because they have less competition. Think about how many high and mid major schoools that are within 250 miles of St. Louis. West of the Rockies, you have the Big West, WAC, WCC and Pac 10, and to a degree, the Mountain West and Big Sky. Using the 250 miles range, you have maybe Washington, Washington St, EWU, Idaho, ISU and Boise State close to Gonzaga. SLU competes with the Big Ten, CUSA, Big 12, and the SEC. You also have the Valley, MAC, MCC and Sun Belt, close by. Even the Mid-Con and OVC recruit the midwest. The density of conferences on the East Coast is even greater.
You can set yourself apart on the east coast, but you have to have an advatage that the others don't. Creighton has a new arena and a long term coach. X has brand new facilities and a pretty strong history and fan base. UMass had history and Calipari (plus they cheated). Temple has Phily, Cheaney and a long history of success. Dayton has great facilities and fan support. For SLU to makes its mark, they need to upgrade their facilities and coach. When he was hired, I posted my belief that Soderburg would drive the program into the ground. I thought most would be calling for his head after 3 years. I am guessing it will be 4. You guys are way too patient. He coached USD to 2 of its worst years in past 30, he turned a Final Four team at UW that lost 1 role player into a team that lost to Georgia State in the first round of the NCAAs, and he is killing SLU.
-
If the NIT wins, the ruling won't be limited to basketball, and its effects will be far reaching. The BCS schools could form their own football playoff without allowing the smaller schools to participate. More importantly, the BCS schools could form their own basketball tourney and no longer participate in the NCAA. The BCS conferences have around 72 members, if you include the BE bball schools. A 32 team touney or an all-in tourney would generate even more revenue for the BCS schools, leaving the others with little or nothing. Unfortunately, if you are a fan of college basketball and your schools doesn't belong to a BCS conference, you probably should hope the NCAA wins this one.
-
The Blues are not going to move. And, you are not going to get a sweatheart deal because the NHL is on strike. In Milwaukee, the Bucks get 80 cents of every dollar spent in the BC. The BC charges MU $4 per ticket distributed as rent and MU gets a small amount of money back from concessions. I am sure SLU has a comparable deal, if not better. In fact, you may have a better deal since there is only one other major tenant at your arena. Further, your selection of dates is probably better too, since MU is not only behind the Bucks, but the Admirals too (the people who donates the building to the city also owned the minor league hockey team).
The selling of the NHL team really should have no effect on SLU's decision to build an arena. I am not sure I agree its the best use of $70 million, but it should help the program. In my opinion, a practice facility would probably have the same effect at half the cost. However, it sounds like the administration have come to a different conclusion. That's fine. They are closer to the situation. Personally, for $70 million, I would screw the bball team altogether and endow a football team. You have a stadium and could have stayed in CUSA. Within 5 years, you could have been playing for a Liberty Bowl birth.
-
No offense, but UWM is a much better team than Dayton or Hawaii or Oakland. They are the class of the Horizon League, beat Air Force, and just beat UIC on the road. SLU will have to play its finest game of the year, by far, to beat UWM.
-
Easy answer. The Big East hoops conference has generated around $20 million per year for its members, without NCAA tourney revenue. The Horizon generates less than $1 million. If the payouts of each conference were close, say within $2 or $3 million per year, and the quality of the league was close, than I think MU would have to seriously consider joining the Horizon. As it stands, the conferences are not close. The A-10 and the Valley are close. In fact, the Valley may be better this year.
>mu, just curious, with only notre dame for basketball and
>depaul, marquette really is as geographically challenged by
>the big east than slu is, in fact with more teams in the big
>east, and a crazy schedule to follow, it might end up being
>worse. so why again is our travel expenses bad but
>marquette's is ok?
>
>you guys should really rethink that horizon option.
-
How would SLU be an odd duck in the Valley? While Creighton is the only Catholic school, Creighton, Drake, Evansville, and Bradley have similar environments and missions as SLU.
Further, you guys are crazy if you think the A-10 is far superior to the Valley or that revenue is even a factor. Yes, the A-10 usually has a one team that boosts their RPI (UMass, Temple and St. Joe's), but the depths of LaSalle, Duquense and now, St. Bonnies is lower than anything even Drake imagined. As for revenue, in 2000, the A-10 did make around $2 million in tv revenue, but split 14 ways, that amounts to almost nothing and certainly not enough to justify the travel expense associated with joining the conference. Don't forget, the A-10 draws very, very poorly. Duquense, at 4032, outdrew LaSalle, GW, UMass, St. Joe's, and Fordham. I believe that Dayton was the only school in the A-10 to average over 10,000 fans and X was the only other school over 6000. The Valley averaged over 1400 fans more per game.
Finally, the Valley is much better than most of you people believe. This isn't a case of choosing between a great conference, say the BE, and a poor conference, the Horizon. Joining the A-10 was a bad decision. Lets see if you don't agree in 5 years.
-
Out of those games, how many were against LaSalle, Duquense, St. Bonnies, Fordham, X, Dayton or St. Joe's? Face it, Temple can draw teams in, the others can't. X is complaining about their schedule, and Dayton will never get Marquette at home again, at least not after the way they ticked off Crean this year. UNLV drew teams in the Big West. If you fill the arena and pay, the ooc will be fine.
-
>...and I'm still waiting for anyone who is knowledgeable
>about college sports and isn't in the pocket of a BCS
>conference (hmm, who might that include in national media?)
>to show me how the MVC could be better than the A-10
>for helping SLU better its position nationally.
>
>I give up on trying to convince people locally that the
>decision that's in the books is the best choice, because --
>bottom line -- SLU is St. Louis's team and they're going to
>have to follow SLU in the A-10 despite the fact that it's
>not the Valley, whether they like it or not. No, I started
>this thread because I'm concerned about whether the national
>media (like ESPN -- Doug Gottlieb) will stop looking down
>their noses at SLU.
You equate someone the favors the Valley over the A-10 as someone who is looking down their noses at SLU. That simply is not true. You ask how could the MVC better SLU position nationally? Well, how about an example?
Let's compare Creighton, the lone Catholic school in the Valley, with the Catholic schools in the A-10, namely, Duquense, Fordham, St. Bonnies, X, St. Joe's, Dayton and LaSalle. Duquense and LaSalle were also in the MCC, with SLU, for a short time. Do those schools' affiliation with the A-10 make these programs nationally known? It clearly has not helped Duquense or LaSalle. Are the A-10 teams significantly more successful than Creighton? These are the questions you have to ask.
You may suggest that X and Dayton are more nationally known than Creighton, but I doubt it. National announcers still cannot pronounce Xavier. As for St. Joe's, almost no one in America outside A-10 fans and those in Phily even know were the school is located. On the other hand, has the Valley limited Creighton's name recognition? I don't think so. I would suspect that Creighton's reputation is as national as X and Dayton.
Clearly, Creighton has been more successful than any Catholic school in the A-10. Creighton has made the NCAAs 5 straight years and is 2-5 over that time. X is 2-3 over that time period, Dayton is 0-2, St. Joe's is 1-2 and St. Bonnies is 0-1. So, Creighton has as many bids and NCAA credits as Dayton and X combined. Credits mean money. Hence, being a Catholic school in the Valley clearly has not limited Creighton's cash flow as compared to the A-10 schools.
If you win, whether its in the Valley or the A-10, the program will be considered "nationally." I would guess that in the areas that SLU recruits, St. Louis, Chicago, etc, the Valley has greater name recognition than the A-10. Who do you recruit against? It seems that a team like SIU comes up often when I am reading about your recruits.
I understand the reason for joining the Valley. You need to make the potential donors for the arena feel comfortable. However, don't think that SLU's future success will be assured because they chose the A-10 over the Valley. That decision will have little or no effect on the strength of your teams. You could have been successful in the Valley, you may be successful in the A-10. We will see.
-
SLU should not have gone to the A-10. Its not that they will not be able to compete. That is silly. SLU will do fine, although I don't believe you have the right coach. The A-10 is simply not that good of a league. With 10 NCAA wins in the last 5 years, and 7 of those coming from a Temple program in decline, I just think the league is hhighly overrated. The Valley is just as good of a league in hoops and better in most other sports. If SLU had joined the Valley, it would have regional rivalries that would help fill that new arena of yours. Except for maybe Temple, X and Dayton, Duquense, LaSalle, Fordham and the rest are not going to put one single fanny in the seats. On the other hand, even tiny Drake would probably have had an alumni event to coincide with the game and generate an extra 300-500 tickets sold. Of course, I understand that that joining the A-10 was probably dictated by fundraising for the new arena, but I think would achieve greater and more long lasting success in the Valley. In any event, you will be in the private school version of the Big East in 5 years, so I guess the point is somewhat moot.
Future of A-10, Big East and St. Louis, Part 2
in Billikens.com Main Board
Posted
Well, two years ago was a different story. With ND, the bball schools held all the cards. If the 5 football schools left, the $70 million in tourney money would have stayed with the hoops schools. Plus, the 6 bball schools could have blocked expansion. In five years, all the schools can walk away with no penalty.
From what I understand, ND, VU and GU are the there three privates to beat out. SJU, DePaul, PU and SH are longshots. The decision may come down to MU or a football school for 12. I don't think MU can pass up VU, ND or GU in the pecking order, but they are trying very hard to do it. New facilities, new coaches, etc. This future scenario is what MU is working under. They are trying to get into the top 3 so that they get invited to go with the football schools. There is a reason MU is spending so much cash on athletics. An article in today's Milwuakee paper describes MU's decision to upgrade athletics. It pointed out that Crean made $1.65 million last year and is the highest paid coach in the Big East (although, outside income probably increases some coaches(Calhoun, Pitino, etc) take beyond Crean).