Better Fit for SLU: BE or AAC?

[sludevil]

oxymoron, double negative, irony, something?. only stable conference seems to be The Ivy

That's a fair point. To rephrase: relative to many other conferences (including the Big East), it's an unstable conference. The top teams are actively looking to get out (and would be out now but for no power conference wanting them), and the conference itself is basically just a marriage of convenience (/money). ...Again, uh, moreso than other conferences. Gotta love amateur athletics.

[Bay Area Billiken]

I finally need to ask this stupid question, why would you evan want to leave the A10?

By winning the A 10 or at least the Conference you get the automatic bid to the NCAA,

You get to pick a tough OOC schedule,

You get top recruits wanting to attend,

I you guys have it easier than you think,,, don't look a gifted horse in the mouth!!!

This is not a stupid question at all, but I will answer it from my perspective.

From being in Brooklyn for the A10 Tournament, at 2 sessions- Friday and Saturday afternoons, and venturing to Midtown Manhattan Friday night to see the Creighton-Xavier game at Madison Square Garden, the difference in the 2 leagues is clear. The A10 is a very good league, no question, but it is still the Minor Leagues, like a AAA or even Quad-A league in Baseball, not the Big Time, the very Top of the Bottom.

The Big East, even though it is really a startup league (the New Big East, NBE) is still perceived to be the Big Time, the Major Leagues.

Walk up session ticket prices were $35-37 for the A10 Tournament at the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, $70 and $90 at Madison Square Garden for the Big East Tournament.

In a more visual way, there were no curtains covering the upper deck for the Big East at Madison Square Garden like there were for the A10 at the Barclays Center.

The 2 principal differences overall between these 2 leagues are: (1) the Big East has exponentially more TV revenue potentially available than the A10, the difference being less than $400K per team per year in the A10 vs. $2.1-$4.1M per team per year potentially available in the Big East; and (2) the officiating, otherwise known as the refs. The Big East pays for the good refs. For instance, veteran Jim Burr refs the Big East, not the A10. The officiating has been a longstanding problem ever since SLU joined the A10 in 2005.

There was a 3rd issue with the A10, TV access, that has been solved. So it's not like the officiating issue also cannot be solved.

As for SLU itself, the fourth (now 3rd) issue is simple geography. SLU stands out like the North Star, or in its case, a Midwestern Star, isolated on an island by itself, in the A10, especially with Butler and Xavier now in the Big East. The nearest A10 school to SLU is Dayton, 5 hours by car to the East. And even Dayton is on an A10 island.

It was obvious to me in watching the Friday afternoon A10 Tournament session, SLU and Dayton playing back to back games, that neither one of us really belongs in the A10. SLU and Dayton should be in the Big East right now, and both SLU and Dayton should be unanimous choices for Big East expansion teams #'s 11 and 12. But Georgetown wants an East Coast team as one of the two expansion teams, if there is to be expansion, which I think there will be. The problem is that East Coast expansion team does not exist.

My vote is Big East for SLU.

In order of preference in this thread, for SLU, it would be: 1. Big East; 2. A10; 3. American (AAC).

SLU has been in 4 conferences with Cincinnati and Memphis: 1. the Missouri Valley; 2. the Metro; 3. the Great Midwest, which was a good league that I personally wish still existed; and 4. C-USA. But Cincinnati and Memphis are public schools, not "like minded institutions" to SLU in the way that fellow Jesuit schools Marquette, Creighton, and Xavier are, and not an urban Catholic (Vincentian) school like DePaul is.

Cincinnati and Memphis still play D1A-FBS Football. And as noted above, Cincinnati has a wandering eye, is looking along with UConn to get out of this American, which is the real successor in interest to the Old Big East.

The New Big East bought the Big East name and the rights to Madison Square Garden for the Big East Tournament.

The ultimate goal for SLU is to receive the Big East invitation. That is where SLU belongs, in my opinion.

[Deutschkind]

In order of preference in this thread, for SLU, it would be: 1. Valley 2. Big East 3. A10; 4. American (AAC).

Fixed it

[Bay Area Billiken]

Fixed it

Ach du meine Gutte! Nein!

I don't think so. And you might be about to start a revolution on this board with such a thought.

No, the Valley train left the station in about 2005 when SLU went to the A10 and stayed away forever when Creighton left the Valley to join the Big East in 2013.

[milwaukeebill]

Just watched the "require for the big east" 30 for 30 last night. Fantastic doc. I suggest everyone check it out.

[cgeldmacher]

I agree with everyone's comments about the BE, and realizing that Louisville and Rutgers are already gone, and that UConn & Cinci want out, I have to agree that the BE is the best fit, with A-10 being a close second. The only reason A-10 is a close second is because of how bad the BE was this year, and the potential to become even worse (Villanova regresses to its mean, Creighton falls due to its losses, and rest of league stays the same).

Now to stir things up more: WHY DOES IT MATTER THAT SLU IS IN A LEAGUE WITH SIMILAR SCHOOLS???? I have heard this a lot and cannot for the life of me figure out why this matters. Would we turn down an invitation to the ACC or the Big 10 because they are all big state schools and we are a smaller sized Jesuit school? I seriously doubt it. Please don't argue the football schools vs. non-football schools issue. I know that football has driven the recent conference allignment frenzy, but that's going to happen regardless.

My opinion is that if we find a league that has the best prestige, allows SLU to optimize recruiting, and funnels the most money into athletic department/general fund, I could care less if the league is composed of mid-sized, urban, Jesuit institutions. If that optimal league happens to be made of mid-sized, urban, Jesuit institutions, fine. But someone please explain to me why that matters and why people keep raising that flag as part of our consideration.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Ach du meine Gute! Nein!

I don't think so. And you might be about to start a revolution on this board with such a thought.

No, the Valley train left the station in about 2005 when SLU went to the A10 and stayed away forever when Creighton left the Valley to join the Big East in 2013.

SLU's ultimate goal should still the NBE.

[Bay Area Billiken]

...

Now to stir things up more: WHY DOES IT MATTER THAT SLU IS IN A LEAGUE WITH SIMILAR SCHOOLS???? I have heard this a lot and cannot for the life of me figure out why this matters. Would we turn down an invitation to the ACC or the Big 10 because they are all big state schools and we are a smaller sized Jesuit school? I seriously doubt it. Please don't argue the football schools vs. non-football schools issue. I know that football has driven the recent conference allignment frenzy, but that's going to happen regardless.

My opinion is that if we find a league that has the best prestige, allows SLU to optimize recruiting, and funnels the most money into athletic department/general fund, I could care less if the league is composed of mid-sized, urban, Jesuit institutions. If that optimal league happens to be made of mid-sized, urban, Jesuit institutions, fine. But someone please explain to me why that matters and why people keep raising that flag as part of our consideration.

It matters due to the similar admissions standards and similar missions. When SLU was in the same leagues all those years with the likes of urban public schools Louisville, Cincinnati, and Memphis, SLU was not playing on the same level playing field.

[MusicCityBilliken]

It matters due to the similar admissions standards and similar missions. When SLU was in the same leagues all those years with the likes of urban public schools Louisville, Cincinnati, and Memphis, SLU was not playing on the same level playing field.

Budgets also. We don't come close to a Louisville or any ACC school.

[kshoe]

I agree with everyone's comments about the BE, and realizing that Louisville and Rutgers are already gone, and that UConn & Cinci want out, I have to agree that the BE is the best fit, with A-10 being a close second. The only reason A-10 is a close second is because of how bad the BE was this year, and the potential to become even worse (Villanova regresses to its mean, Creighton falls due to its losses, and rest of league stays the same).

Now to stir things up more: WHY DOES IT MATTER THAT SLU IS IN A LEAGUE WITH SIMILAR SCHOOLS???? I have heard this a lot and cannot for the life of me figure out why this matters. Would we turn down an invitation to the ACC or the Big 10 because they are all big state schools and we are a smaller sized Jesuit school? I seriously doubt it. Please don't argue the football schools vs. non-football schools issue. I know that football has driven the recent conference allignment frenzy, but that's going to happen regardless.

My opinion is that if we find a league that has the best prestige, allows SLU to optimize recruiting, and funnels the most money into athletic department/general fund, I could care less if the league is composed of mid-sized, urban, Jesuit institutions. If that optimal league happens to be made of mid-sized, urban, Jesuit institutions, fine. But someone please explain to me why that matters and why people keep raising that flag as part of our consideration.

I couldn't agree more. We just got done playing in the NATIONAL championship tournament. Not sure why it is critical that we be in a bunch of similar catholic based universities in order to be able to compete in the NATIONAL tournament. If the Big 10 called tomorrow, I'd jump in a heartbeat (obviously they aren't calling).

The things that should matter most for a league are the overall prestige of the league, monetary benefits, and geographic fit (which isn't solely distance from St. Louis but includes things like alumni bases, ease to get there via plane, etc.). Whether a school is catholic or not or similarly sized is of minimal importance.

[JettFlight5]

I couldn't agree more. We just got done playing in the NATIONAL championship tournament. Not sure why it is critical that we be in a bunch of similar catholic based universities in order to be able to compete in the NATIONAL tournament. If the Big 10 called tomorrow, I'd jump in a heartbeat (obviously they aren't calling).

The things that should matter most for a league are the overall prestige of the league, monetary benefits, and geographic fit (which isn't solely distance from St. Louis but includes things like alumni bases, ease to get there via plane, etc.). Whether a school is catholic or not or similarly sized is of minimal importance.

Most of this I agree with you on, but geography is irrelevant at this point.

College sports has more or less killed it off in terms of relevance. The A-10 now is a pretty good example of that.

[kshoe]

Most of this I agree with you on, but geography is irrelevant at this point.

College sports has more or less killed it off in terms of relevance. The A-10 now is a pretty good example of that.

I think geography is still relevant for two reasons:

- it makes travel to games easier. I like attending a couple road games every year and except for Dayton, nothing in the A-10 is driveable. Its not an accident that we had 500 people show up in Butler last season as it was the closest conference opponent we've had in 20 years.

- it makes forming rivalries easier. Having people in your office, neighborhood, church, etc. that attended the schools you play adds to rivalries and excites the fan bases. The closer you are to the schools the more likely it is that these people will live near you. For example, I've never met a fan of St. Bonaventure in person but I've met plenty of SIU fans. I know a bunch of Dayton people as well as Marquette and Depaul grads. Don't really know anyone that graduated from Providence or Rhode Island though. These things have a direct impact on attendance.

[sludevil]

Similarity is important for a number of reasons. Often, conferences will go beyond mere athletics - there tends to be a lot of academic collaboration and general sharing of ideas (the Big 10 is probably the best example of this). Having similar missions and academics helps grease the wheels of that communication. It also helps unite interests in what often becomes a lobbying group (and this function should not be understated, given the rapidly shifting landscape of college athletics).

And, perhaps most importantly, it's just easier to get stuff done within the conference. If everyone is on the same page, you don't get these scenarios where certain schools or interests completely dominate at the expense of underrepresented interests/schools. And this has been a major factor in the instability of certain conferences (ACC has been dominated by Tobacco Road, Big 12 has been dominated by Texas, and the Big East immediately prior to the Catholic 7 breaking away was dominated by football interests). Big football-oriented state schools are just going to have a much different set of interests and goals than mid-sized private basketball-oriented schools. So having some uniformity can be a major advantage.

[hsmith19]

You think SLU and its administration would be able to co-exist productively in a Big 12/Big 10-style league of ginormous public schools? Really?? Sure, in a dream world, it would be awesome to play in a league filled with Jayhawks, Hoosiers, Tarheels, etc., because of the quality of basketball. But that's just not reality.

[cgeldmacher]

I don't question that SLU getting into the Big 10 or ACC is completely unrealistic. However, I still cannot see any reason that if it did happen, we wouldn't be able to be a successful member of either league, simply because we are a different type of school from their schools.

Here's an example: Does anyone think Gonzaga wouldn't be a successful member of the Pac-12 simply because the rest of the league would be big state schools and the Zags are from a smaller Jesuit school? I don't.

I guarantee that Georgetown would accept an invitation to join the ACC as a non-football member. I promise you that Marquette would join the Big 10 as a non-football member. None of the alumni at those schools would entertain any sort of debate about whether or not to join, if invited, over a concern that they are leaving a conference with similar programs for one with dissimilar programs.

So the question is, why do so many people on this board have the opinion that this is a terribly important consideration?

Also, SLUDevil, I just don't buy your argument that Division 1 college athletic conferences have any concern about academic collaboration or sharing of ideas. It has been proven over and over again that college athletic conferences only concern is making money for and bringing prestige to its member institutions. The academic collaboration and sharing of ideas concept is the biggest lie told by the Big 10 Conference for the past several decades.

[Bay Area Billiken]

...

Here's an example: Does anyone think Gonzaga wouldn't be a successful member of the Pac-12 simply because the rest of the league would be big state schools and the Zags are from a smaller Jesuit school? I don't.

...

So the question is, why do so many people on this board have the opinion that this is a terribly important consideration?

I have lived in the SF Bay Area since graduating from SLU Law School in 1985. The Bay Area has 2 Pac-12 schools (Stanford and Cal) and 3 WCC schools (USF, Santa Clara, and St. Mary's), with a new 4th school (UOP aka Pacific) in nearby Stockton.

When I first moved here, Gonzaga was little more than a WCC middler. There is no way, in my opinion, that Gonzaga, even now, located in Spokane, Washington, on the Other Side of Washington State, opposite Seattle, would be a consistently successful member of the Pac-12 Conference.

Eventually, the Football money going to the other schools would make it very difficult for Gonzaga to be a consistent winner in the Pac-12.

And it would never happen anyway. Led by Cal, the Pac-12 has no interest in being affiliated with a religious based school. That is the primary reason that BYU is not in the Pac-12 right now.

It also amuses me when I read the proclamations from On High at that NBE www.holylandofhoops.net website about the merits of the inclusion of Gonzaga in the New Big East. The logistics of getting to Spokane, Washington would be nightmarish for the Olympic sports, and a virtual impossibility for Gonzaga sports other than Men's Basketball, traveling both eastward and southward across 2 or 3 time zones. Gonzaga is better than Butler overall and over time, and the WCC is a better league overall than Butler's old Horizon League, but the two are very similar. Those people don't seem to realize that even Gonzaga's new Kennel, still seats only 6,000.

There was a time in the recent conference dominos that Texas and Oklahoma, along possibly with their appendages, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech (if Texas and OU had their way over the Pac-12 wants) were thought to be Pac-12 bound. But someone in Austin finally figured out how many Texas teams would be playing games 2 time zones, meaning 2 hour time difference, away in the Pacific Time Zone. There is a big land expanse East of Reno and West of Salt Lake City or Denver, take your pick.

[JettFlight5]

I have lived in the SF Bay Area since graduating from SLU Law School in 1985. The Bay Area has 2 Pac-12 schools (Stanford and Cal) and 3 WCC schools (USF, Santa Clara, and St. Mary's), with a new 4th school (UOP aka Pacific) in nearby Stockton.

When I first moved here, Gonzaga was little more than a WCC middler. There is no way, in my opinion, that Gonzaga, even now, located in Spokane, Washington, on the Other Side of Washington State, opposite Seattle, would be a consistently successful member of the Pac-12 Conference.

Eventually, the Football money going to the other schools would make it very difficult for Gonzaga to be a consistent winner in the Pac-12.

And it would never happen anyway. Led by Cal, the Pac-12 has no interest in being affiliated with a religious based school. That is the primary reason that BYU is not in the Pac-12 right now.

It also amuses me when I read the proclamations from On High at that NBE www.holylandofhoops.net website about the merits of the inclusion of Gonzaga in the New Big East. The logistics of getting to Spokane, Washington would be nightmarish for the Olympic sports, and a virtual impossibility for Gonzaga sports other than Men's Basketball, traveling both eastward and southward across 2 or 3 time zones. Gonzaga is better than Butler overall and over time, and the WCC is a better league overall than Butler's old Horizon League, but the two are very similar. Those people don't seem to realize that even Gonzaga's new Kennel, still seats only 6,000.

There was a time in the recent conference dominos that Texas and Oklahoma, along possibly with their appendages, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech (if Texas and OU had their way over the Pac-12 wants) were thought to be Pac-12 bound. But someone in Austin finally figured out how many Texas teams would be playing games 2 time zones, meaning 2 hour time difference, away in the Pacific Time Zone. There is a big land expanse East of Reno and West of Salt Lake City or Denver, take your pick.

"On High" is really ripping SLU.

Some things never change.

[sludevil]

I don't question that SLU getting into the Big 10 or ACC is completely unrealistic. However, I still cannot see any reason that if it did happen, we wouldn't be able to be a successful member of either league, simply because we are a different type of school from their schools.

Here's an example: Does anyone think Gonzaga wouldn't be a successful member of the Pac-12 simply because the rest of the league would be big state schools and the Zags are from a smaller Jesuit school? I don't.

I guarantee that Georgetown would accept an invitation to join the ACC as a non-football member. I promise you that Marquette would join the Big 10 as a non-football member. None of the alumni at those schools would entertain any sort of debate about whether or not to join, if invited, over a concern that they are leaving a conference with similar programs for one with dissimilar programs.

So the question is, why do so many people on this board have the opinion that this is a terribly important consideration?

Also, SLUDevil, I just don't buy your argument that Division 1 college athletic conferences have any concern about academic collaboration or sharing of ideas. It has been proven over and over again that college athletic conferences only concern is making money for and bringing prestige to its member institutions. The academic collaboration and sharing of ideas concept is the biggest lie told by the Big 10 Conference for the past several decades.

I wasn't arguing for what they think is best; I was arguing for what I think is best.

With that said, though, I think academics plays a bigger role than the cynics would like to believe. (Though, admittedly, it still sits a distant second to revenue.) I'm most in touch with the ACC, and I can tell you that academics played a significant role in bringing Syracuse and Pitt into the conference. And there was a lot of consternation (mostly from Tobacco Road) re: inviting Louisville because of their poor academics. But when Florida State started hinting (or, eventually, threatening) that they might jump to Big 12 if the ACC didn't bring in Louisville, academics took a backseat to the Seminoles. (In return, Louisville has pledged to continue boosting their academic profile. We'll see if this happens.)

I'm not as closely familiar with the Big 10, but I've heard that Nebraska's AAU status was a big point in their favor, and that Delany & co. were pretty upset when Nebraska lost it almost immediately after joining. I didn't follow the Rutgers acquisition very much, but I wouldn't be surprised if academics (along with TV footprint) played a role there, too, given that Rutgers is not exactly tearing it up on the football field (or basketball court). (Maryland, at least from Maryland's perspective, was purely a money grab. Their athletics department is just hemorrhaging cash. From the Big 10's perspective, I imagine a similar argument applies as to Rutgers, though with a stronger basketball program.) In any case, the Big 10's CIC is dealing with funding that absolutely dwarfs what they pull in from athletics/TV deals.

[JettFlight5]

I wasn't arguing for what they think is best; I was arguing for what I think is best.

With that said, though, I think academics plays a bigger role than the cynics would like to believe. (Though, admittedly, it still sits a distant second to revenue.) I'm most in touch with the ACC, and I can tell you that academics played a significant role in bringing Syracuse and Pitt into the conference. And there was a lot of consternation (mostly from Tobacco Road) re: inviting Louisville because of their poor academics. But when Florida State started hinting (or, eventually, threatening) that they might jump to Big 12 if the ACC didn't bring in Louisville, academics took a backseat to the Seminoles. (In return, Louisville has pledged to continue boosting their academic profile. We'll see if this happens.)

I'm not as closely familiar with the Big 10, but I've heard that Nebraska's AAU status was a big point in their favor, and that Delany & co. were pretty upset when Nebraska lost it almost immediately after joining. I didn't follow the Rutgers acquisition very much, but I wouldn't be surprised if academics (along with TV footprint) played a role there, too, given that Rutgers is not exactly tearing it up on the football field (or basketball court). (Maryland, at least from Maryland's perspective, was purely a money grab. Their athletics department is just hemorrhaging cash. From the Big 10's perspective, I imagine a similar argument applies as to Rutgers, though with a stronger basketball program.) In any case, the Big 10's CIC is dealing with funding that absolutely dwarfs what they pull in from athletics/TV deals.

Academics has been at the forefront of UConn not getting an invite to the ACC as well.

I hope President Pestello gets our academic rating into the Top 50.

[sludevil]

Academics has been at the forefront of UConn not getting an invite to the ACC as well.

I hope President Pestello gets our academic rating into the Top 50.

Yup. Cincy, too. (Both - and especially UConn - have problems that extend beyond lackluster academics. But academics is certainly one more significant roadblock to their inclusion in the ACC.)

[Bay Area Billiken]

"On High" is really ripping SLU.

Some things never change.

What does this Board think our best way to respond to that is? Irrespective, we can only hope that the Big East decision makers do not think this same stuff.

BAB tried once to respond, coming to SLU's defense, and got hammered over there.

It appears to be a 2 to 4 pronged turf protection from the usual suspects, especially one of them, mixed in with East Coast bias concerns.

One thing that is obvious- many of the views over there re Dayton seem to have taken a 180 degree turn in the past 2 weeks. I wonder why.

[JettFlight5]

St. John's fans are my new favorite. They can insult with the best of 'em.

[sludevil]

Wait, where is this happening? Curious as to what they're saying.

[kshoe]

What does this Board think our best way to respond to that is? Irrespective, we can only hope that the Big East decision makers do not think this same stuff.

BAB tried once to respond, coming to SLU's defense, and got hammered over there.

It appears to be a 2 to 4 pronged turf protection from the usual suspects, especially one of them, mixed in with East Coast bias concerns.

One thing that is obvious- many of the views over there re Dayton seem to have taken a 180 degree turn in the past 2 weeks. I wonder why.

If there's one thing I'm certain of regarding the Big East its that posters on message boards such as "On High" have absolutely 0 impact on what direction the Big East takes regarding expansion.

[Bay Area Billiken]

If there's one thing I'm certain of regarding the Big East its that posters on message boards such as "On High" have absolutely 0 impact on what direction the Big East takes regarding expansion.

Perhaps, although the main evidence they cite may be a cause for concern, there are explanations for everything they cite.

Of course, they will hear none of them.

Note the background of one of SLU's biggest persecutors over there.