Around the A10 20-21 season

[Crewsorlose]

56 minutes ago, bauman said:

Not intended to be groundbreaking.  I was just attempting to dispel what I thought was a misunderstanding of a prior post.  All good here.

Gotcha. I understand. I also root for Boston College and get the all boats rising thing, but I've never rooted for Duke. Just a bridge too far. I loved watching Dayton play last year with joy and brilliance on the offensive end. Toppin was legitimately fun.

Crutcher had a great statistical season but I don't see him as 1st team A-10 this year (JP, Gilyard, Mitchell, Fatts, J-Good) . I thought he should have gone to the draft, hoping an analytics-reliant team would take a risk on his gaudy numbers. 

[MichaelC]

Watching LaSalle play Army who is in the Patriot League. LaSalle looks like....a Patriot League team. I know that programs have paid to leave a conference, I wonder if there's every been a case where a conference paid a team to leave. LaSalle (and Fordham) would be perfect fits for the Patriot both geographically and competitively. 

[billiken_roy]

What's the history of ncaa conference payout dollars of the patriot and the a-10.  Without looking betting its substantially in favor of the A10, but not enough for the A10 to invest in a kickout payoff.

[CenHudDude]

16 minutes ago, MichaelC said:

Watching LaSalle play Army who is in the Patriot League. LaSalle looks like....a Patriot League team. I know that programs have paid to leave a conference, I wonder if there's every been a case where a conference paid a team to leave. LaSalle (and Fordham) would be perfect fits for the Patriot both geographically and competitively. 

 

16 minutes ago, MichaelC said:

Watching LaSalle play Army who is in the Patriot League. LaSalle looks like....a Patriot League team. I know that programs have paid to leave a conference, I wonder if there's every been a case where a conference paid a team to leave. LaSalle (and Fordham) would be perfect fits for the Patriot both geographically and competitively. 

Army may not be too bad.  They played Florida tough.  The poor Explorers must be jealous of Christl Arena.  Then again, they must be jealous of any court they visit.

[MichaelC]

31 minutes ago, CenHudDude said:

 

Army may not be too bad.  They played Florida tough.  The poor Explorers must be jealous of Christl Arena.  Then again, they must be jealous of any court they visit.

I agree, my comment wasn't meant as a slight to Army, I was just observing that from a competitive standpoint it looks like LaSalle would be better off in the Patriot League, playing the likes of Army, Navy, Bucknell, etc. 

[slu72]

3 hours ago, MichaelC said:

I agree, my comment wasn't meant as a slight to Army, I was just observing that from a competitive standpoint it looks like LaSalle would be better off in the Patriot League, playing the likes of Army, Navy, Bucknell, etc. 

[slu72]

Just now, slu72 said:

3 hours ago, MichaelC said:

I agree, my comment wasn't meant as a slight to Army, I was just observing that from a competitive standpoint it looks like LaSalle would be better off in the Patriot League, playing the likes of Army, Navy, Bucknell, etc. 

And take Fordham with them. Add Belmont and Loyola Chi. 

[HoosierPal]

I found this interesting.  Perkins is head and shoulders above the field.  The obvious question is where  is Goodwin. 

[Bills71]

Seth Davis

@SethDavisHoops

·

1h

1.Baylor 2.Gonz 3.Iowa 4.Creighton 5.Ill 6.Mich St 7.KU 8.Tenn 9.Nova 10.Duke 11.Fla St 12.Texas 13.UNC 14.West Va 15.Wisc 16.Ariz St 17.Hou http://18.St. Lou 19.Richmond 20.Tex Tech 21.Ore 22.Ind 23.Rutgers 24.Ok State 25.Marq

[The Wiz]

9 hours ago, CenHudDude said:

 

Army may not be too bad.  They played Florida tough.  The poor Explorers must be jealous of Christl Arena.  Then again, they must be jealous of any court they visit.

Army is a C- team....LaS is a D+ team....I had Army by 4 ...They won by 4....Not much to see here.

[cheeseman]

12 hours ago, slu72 said:

And take Fordham with them. Add Belmont and Loyola Chi. 

I am just am confused by this great love by some for Belmont.  Their coach of many years who built that program has left and we really do not know what the future holds for them.  Last year when we played them I was not impressed.  I am not crazy about Loyola either given that we recruit Chicago and I really do not think that is in our best interest but I could be convinced to change my mind.

[3star_recruit]

10 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

I am just am confused by this great love by some for Belmont.  Their coach of many years who built that program has left and we really do not know what the future holds for them.  Last year when we played them I was not impressed.  I am not crazy about Loyola either given that we recruit Chicago and I really do not think that is in our best interest but I could be convinced to change my mind.

Year for year, Belmont has been better than Davidson going on three years now.  Jon Axel was the Billiken killer when he was there so that hasn't been our experience but the overall performance of both teams bears that out.

[MusicCityBilliken]

21 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

I am just am confused by this great love by some for Belmont.  Their coach of many years who built that program has left and we really do not know what the future holds for them.  Last year when we played them I was not impressed.  I am not crazy about Loyola either given that we recruit Chicago and I really do not think that is in our best interest but I could be convinced to change my mind.

I put Davidson over Belmont. Playing both, since 2009 we played Belmont only 2x we are 2-0. For Davidson we played them since 2015 and we are 2-6. I looked at Pomeroy rating (since I have that the most easily available) last 5 years (2016-20) 70, 85, 43, 85, & 106. For Belmont 109, 49, 83, 83 &129. If you average it Davidson comes out. What is impressive is Davidson almost consistently top 100s and not 250+ like some of our fellow A10 members. In addition Davidson not only had Axel but all-A10ers like Jack Gibbs, Kalinowski & Peyton Aldridge.

[3star_recruit]

2 hours ago, tarheelbilliken said:

I put Davidson over Belmont. Playing both, since 2009 we played Belmont only 2x we are 2-0. For Davidson we played them since 2015 and we are 2-6. I looked at Pomeroy rating (since I have that the most easily available) last 5 years (2016-20) 70, 85, 43, 85, & 106. For Belmont 109, 49, 83, 83 &129. If you average it Davidson comes out. What is impressive is Davidson almost consistently top 100s and not 250+ like some of our fellow A10 members. In addition Davidson not only had Axel but all-A10ers like Jack Gibbs, Kalinowski & Peyton Aldridge.

We've spent the last few days lamenting how good teams refuse to play us and how that's affected our national perception.  Hell, that was the narrative for Rick Byrd's whole career.  Well Davidson has been playing good P6 teams in the nonconference for years now, and for the last three years they've been losing to those teams.  But losing to good P6 teams doesn't really hurt a mid-major's perception in the eyes of patronizing talking heads.  They're not supposed to win those games.

Then Davidson out-fundamentals a league full of teams with bad fundamentals and finishes near the top of the standings.  Rinse and repeat.  We're quietly entering the third year of Davidson likely missing the NCAA tournament but their reputation as a viable mid-major brand has already been established.  I'd argue that a number of fundamentally sound mid-major programs outside the top 100 could duplicate the same level of success.  The hard part is getting an east-coast dominated league to drop a handful of their weak charter members to make room.

[brianstl]

54 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

I am just am confused by this great love by some for Belmont.  Their coach of many years who built that program has left and we really do not know what the future holds for them.  Last year when we played them I was not impressed.  I am not crazy about Loyola either given that we recruit Chicago and I really do not think that is in our best interest but I could be convinced to change my mind.

It is easier to recruit an area when you regularly have a game in that area for family and friends to attend like games at Loyola. 

Belmont is a solid program, in one of the fastest growing metro areas, in one of the fastest growing states, a state with a growing number of Catholics as the Hispanic population has more than doubled, the school makes geographic sense for SLU and is in a state that is consistently producing a growing number of D1 basketball players.  Belmont in the A10 makes sense for on both a basketball level and a school to recruit students level. 

[RUBillsFan]

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

I am just am confused by this great love by some for Belmont.  Their coach of many years who built that program has left and we really do not know what the future holds for them.  Last year when we played them I was not impressed.  I am not crazy about Loyola either given that we recruit Chicago and I really do not think that is in our best interest but I could be convinced to change my mind.

 

51 minutes ago, tarheelbilliken said:

I put Davidson over Belmont. Playing both, since 2009 we played Belmont only 2x we are 2-0. For Davidson we played them since 2015 and we are 2-6. I looked at Pomeroy rating (since I have that the most easily available) last 5 years (2016-20) 70, 85, 43, 85, & 106. For Belmont 109, 49, 83, 83 &129. If you average it Davidson comes out. What is impressive is Davidson almost consistently top 100s and not 250+ like some of our fellow A10 members. In addition Davidson not only had Axel but all-A10ers like Jack Gibbs, Kalinowski & Peyton Aldridge.

I sort of agree on Belmont.  Who knows if they can sustain their moderate success without Rick Byrd.  Davidson is an interesting comp for Belmont because Davidson's success is also built on one coach (McKillop) and you could question how good they will remain when he retires.

The thing is that if we're talking about a pipe dream of the A10 dropping Fordham or LaSalle and adding Belmont, then you need to compare one of those 2 programs and not Davidson.  A10 would undoubtedly be better with Belmont than Fordham or LaSalle.

[slu72]

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

I am just am confused by this great love by some for Belmont.  Their coach of many years who built that program has left and we really do not know what the future holds for them.  Last year when we played them I was not impressed.  I am not crazy about Loyola either given that we recruit Chicago and I really do not think that is in our best interest but I could be convinced to change my mind.

Both schools are closer to SLU and Dayton which would allow the A10 to have 2 divisions: East/West. Duquesne and St B could be added to the West plus one of the Virginia schools since they are furthest from the East Coast cities. Playing Loyola would increase our footprint in Chicago. And both schools have much better programs than FU and LaSalle. I think this plan has a lot going for it. 

[ACE]

5 minutes ago, slu72 said:

Both schools are closer to SLU and Dayton which would allow the A10 to have 2 divisions: East/West. Duquesne and St B could be added to the West plus one of the Virginia schools since they are furthest from the East Coast cities. Playing Loyola would increase our footprint in Chicago. And both schools have much better programs than FU and LaSalle. I think this plan has a lot going for it. 

Yep, Loyola would be the best possible addition for our program.

[kshoe]

We aren't booting 2-4 schools and adding some more closer to St. Louis. I get why this conversation comes up frequently but it's not realistic at all.

Unfortunately, the only realistic way to "drop" schools is to form a new conference and don't invite the schools that you don't want. There are a 1,000 reasons that isn't going to happen to the current version of the A-10. You guys are wasting keystrokes even talking about this kind of stuff.

[MusicCityBilliken]

47 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

We've spent the last few days lamenting how good teams refuse to play us and how that's affected our national perception.  Hell, that was the narrative for Rick Byrd's whole career.  Well Davidson has been playing good P6 teams in the nonconference for years now, and the for the last three years they've been losing to those teams.  But losing to good P6 teams doesn't really hurt a mid-major's perception in the eyes patronizing talking heads.  They're not supposed to win those games.

Then Davidson out-fundamentals a league full of teams with bad fundamentals and finishes near the top of the standings.  Rinse and repeat.  We're quietly entering the third year of Davidson likely missing the NCAA tournament but their reputation as a viable mid-major brand has already been established.  I'd argue that a number of fundamentally sound mid-major programs outside the top 100 could duplicate the same level of success.  The hard part is getting an east-coast dominated league to drop a handful of their weak charter members to make room.

So if Belmont was in the A10 do you think they would have been in the NCAA? Say what you want about the A10 traditional bottom feeders but the OVC is dominated by those kind of schools. I have no qualms about dumping Fordham/LaSalle but as RU said, not gong to happen. 

Let compare atrtendance: Belmonts last 4 years (2017-2020)> 2300, 2600, 2400 & 2400. Davidson's 3600, 3800, 4200, & 4200. Belmont is small time.

I think we could do better. I take ETSU over Belmont.

 

[Pistol]

8 minutes ago, kshoe said:

We aren't booting 2-4 schools and adding some more closer to St. Louis. I get why this conversation comes up frequently but it's not realistic at all.

Unfortunately, the only realistic way to "drop" schools is to form a new conference and don't invite the schools that you don't want. There are a 1,000 reasons that isn't going to happen to the current version of the A-10. You guys are wasting keystrokes even talking about this kind of stuff.

This.

The most likely way we see any attrition from the A10's lesser programs is if the schools themselves opt out. Given how the pandemic has exacerbated some existing challenges in college athletics and accelerated some negative trends, we could actually see it happen for one or more of them. We've already seen schools cut certain sports. No one's getting kicked out, though.

Fordham gets mentioned a lot but I've never seen a conference try to get out of the NYC market. Fordham's non-basketball sports also do pretty well in the A10. Unless Fordham says it can't commit to D-I sports anymore, they're staying put. It's also a Catholic school ranked in the top 75 of national universities every year. It's exactly the kind of institution we want to be aligned with; we just need them to be more competitive in basketball.

La Salle is the most likely if I had to pick one; they've cut programs recently, we don't lose the Philly market if they leave, and their strongest selling point is a rich history that's unfortunately several decades in the past. Still, no one's getting kicked out.

I'm bullish on the long-term potential of both Belmont and Davidson. I think both programs understand that their current success has been based on the culture built by single long-tenured coaches and that they're willing and able to sustain it. Belmont's successor to Byrd played and coached there under him. McKillop's associate head coach is his son, who played for him and started coaching for him shortly after graduating. Kevin Kuwik is another assistant there who I think could take over a program of that type and maintain their culture and success. Loyola will be good as long as Moser's there. I think like a lot of programs of this level, fortunes can rise and fall dramatically based on who's in charge.

[brianstl]

No schools in the conference want Fordham to leave, because every school in the conference wants as many chances as possible to have fundraising opportunities with alumni in NYC.

[3star_recruit]

1 hour ago, tarheelbilliken said:

So if Belmont was in the A10 do you think they would have been in the NCAA? Say what you want about the A10 traditional bottom feeders but the OVC is dominated by those kind of schools. I have no qualms about dumping Fordham/LaSalle but as RU said, not gong to happen. 

Let compare atrtendance: Belmonts last 4 years (2017-2020)> 2300, 2600, 2400 & 2400. Davidson's 3600, 3800, 4200, & 4200. Belmont is small time.

I think we could do better. I take ETSU over Belmont.

 

Davidson's KenPom ranking the two years before they entered the A-10 was 66 and 123.  They WERE Belmont.  

East Tennessee State lost their program-changing coach in the offseason, hired his assistant and started off the season by losing by 23 to Abilene Christian.  Belmont hired a former Rick Byrd assistant, who had already built Lipscomb into a NCAA team, and business at Belmont has continued largely as usual.

If mid-majors want to improve their schedule strength, they'll have to do it by combining with other top mid-majors.  The high-major programs have already spoken with their actions.  They're moving to 20 game conference schedules and and ducking really good mid-majors like this year's SLU team that could embarrass  them on national TV .

Whether that means the A-10 gatekeepers having a come to Jesus moment or mid-majors signing long term non-con deals with other top mid-majors, it's mid-majors that need to do the work.

[Cowboy]

49 minutes ago, kshoe said:

We aren't booting 2-4 schools and adding some more closer to St. Louis. I get why this conversation comes up frequently but it's not realistic at all.

Unfortunately, the only realistic way to "drop" schools is to form a new conference and don't invite the schools that you don't want. There are a 1,000 reasons that isn't going to happen to the current version of the A-10. You guys are wasting keystrokes even talking about this kind of stuff.

-I agree but will ask if schools are dropped why replace them? get closer to playing a full conference schedule

[cheeseman]

4 minutes ago, Cowboy said:

-I agree but will ask if schools are dropped why replace them? get closer to playing a full conference schedule

As Branch Rickey said - Addition by subtraction