Big East as predator

[MayorBeluga]

So yesterday, whilst at the BC, had an interesting discussion with Gato. Apparently he and MUAlphaB were discussing the state of the Big East compared to the A10. Recall the A10 got 6 bids, SLU, Dayton, VCU, GW, St. Joe's and St. UMass. The Big East got only 4, Nova, Creighton, X and Providence (we obviously blame Creighton for the difference).

Should the Big East go and destroy the A10 the way the hated ACC destroyed the old Big East? This is not a question of expansion for sake of expansion since most here agree 10 teams is optimal. It's not a television markets discussion either. Rather, should we expand to ensure our primacy as the top non-football conference? Adding say 4 of the teams that made the tournament guts the A10, leaving it as a shell.

I admit, I'm not sure. I like 10 teams, but this move could be masterful since it destroys a potential competitor.

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

I'm still not sure adding more top-tier teams is the best move. You take Dayton & SLU as the philosophical fits, maybe VCU (or Richmond) and UMass (though they are going D1 in football) so you aren't entering conflicting markets, but then what do you have? There's still no one to lose. You end up with 12 of the 14 teams within a game or two of .500, mostly low seeds for teams that do get in and a bundle of teams that are probably good enough to play in the tourney but may just get passed over by the NIT (St. John's, Georgetown, Marquette all fit that bill this year) as well.

We'd probably have to go divisions at that point, not sure how that would work best. Play your own twice and 6 of the 7 in the other division once, rotating the team you don't play? The drawback there of course is that some teams you wouldn't see every year. Would we want to miss Villanova and Georgetown home games annually?

I still fully believe the Big East this year was by far superior to the A-10. Any top-7 Big East team would have at worst been third in the league, and I think even Marquette may have shared the league crown with an overrated SLU team. But while they have 6 decent teams, they also have 6 very bad teams that had losing records.

46-7. That is the record of the 6 A-10 teams that made the tournament against the 6 A-10 teams with double digit losses. 46-7. That's a 0.868 winning percentage. That's a minimum of 7 wins per team against terrible competition, and no one took more than 2 losses against them. Those 6 terrible teams are just as much the reason the A-10 got 6 bids as anything else. Because they didn't cannibalize themselves like the middle of the Big East did. Had Marquette played 9 games against those 6 teams we'd have won 7 or 8 of them as well. Go .500 against the rest of the league and we have 12 wins and are dancing with ease.

Fourty-six and freaking seven! This is why I am not such a huge fan of adding a bunch of very good teams. Because everyone thinks more good teams will prop this league up. It won't. They will drag it down, and they'll get dragged down right along with the rest of us. Pomeroy will rate us the 2nd or 3rd best conference and we'll have no more bids to show for it. If you really want to destroy the A-10, don't take the cream of the league. I'd recommend Dayton, Richmond, St. Bonaventure, and Duquesne. Everyone will laugh as we take the perceived weak links, but I expect that come March, we'd be the ones laughing last.

[unclejohn]

No. Dumb idea. Then you wind up with an unwieldy mess of teams that are not necessarily good fits, but which you cannot get rid of. This being the first year of the NBE, I think it will take a while for things to settle down. If the BE is going to expand, it will likely add a team or two from the A-10, mostly because of geography. Where else are teams going to come from? But I do not see much point in doing it just to torpedo another conference. And it is unnecessary. The A-10 had an unusually good year this year. It is not often going to get more bids than the BE.

[Gato78]

The concept has nothing to do with basketball other than eliminating the competition since I too think the A-10 was overrated. This is exactly what the ACC did to us. We cannot sit still. This year, the A-10 had 6 in the tourney. We had four. Can we claim superiority? Not this year. The question is whether we act in a manner that ensures there is no question. Take VCU and Dayton (not convinced by SLU) or UMass and go to a 12 team. All of a sudden the A-10 cannot compete with the BIG EAST. Just need Fox's permission to do it!

[kneelb4zerg]

The concept has nothing to do with basketball other than eliminating the competition since I too think the A-10 was overrated. This is exactly what the ACC did to us. We cannot sit still. This year, the A-10 had 6 in the tourney. We had four. Can we claim superiority? Not this year. The question is whether we act in a manner that ensures there is no question. Take VCU and Dayton (not convinced by SLU) or UMass and go to a 12 team. All of a sudden the A-10 cannot compete with the BIG EAST. Just need Fox's permission to do it!

Oh come on. Of course we can claim superiority. Overall, the league was clearly better, even if it didn't result in more tourney bids.

This year was an aberration because two of the BE flagship schools had down years.

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

If you take two of the A-10's tourney teams, they'll likely add 1 to get back to 12 and either Richmond or La Salle are good enough to slide up to the 6th spot in the conference. They could still get 5-6 bids per year with their current setup.

Why did the A-10 get so many teams? I'd argue conference record was a huge part of it. The 6 A-10 teams totaled 67 conference wins. 47 of them came against the bottom 6 teams. That's over 70% of their wins against teams that suck in their own league.

This reminds me of White Men Can't Jump. "Sometimes when you win, you really lose. And sometimes when you lose, you really win." If we add teams like VCU and SLU, it will look like we are "winning" but as a league we will really be losing. But if we add teams that can come in and lose, we will really be winning.

-----

EDIT: I know this seems completely counter-intuitive. Think of it like the stock market. When everything is high, people want to buy when they should be selling. When everything is plummeting, people want to sell when they should be buying. I've said it before, I'll say it again. Someone has to lose. The problem with our current league is that we don't have enough teams that are going to do that.

[BLT]

Jim mentioned the flaws with RPI in the selection process. These big mega conferences will always get more teams in. On average, 40-50% of the better conference teams.

Parity is not rewarded with RPI but being able to feast on conference bottom feeders are. TCU won zero conference games in the B12 but helped get more teams in by improving every team's RPI by just playing them. The bottoms of the B12, A10, and AAC were putrid, but their conferences will be collecting more than their deserved credits.

In the Big East, DePaul or a Seton Hall can beat a bubble team on any night. Providence wins the BET and is rewarded with an 11 seed. Parity is rewarded in the NFL, not with RPI and the NCAA. Change the ranking system or expand.

[IrwinFletcher]

Well, if that scenario played out, an overwhelming majority of the posters on Marquette message boards would have to explain why the BE doing this is OK, but the ACC doing it to the BE is evil.

I think we also need to be careful in talking about the greatness of a conference in a 1 year period. A10 had a great year, but is UMASS going to continue with the success they had this year? Will SLU? Dayton? St Joes?

They could easily be back to being a 3 bid conference and we will be looking back at this season as an anomoly.

[kneelb4zerg]

Well, if that scenario played out, an overwhelming majority of the posters on Marquette message boards would have to explain why the BE doing this is OK, but the ACC doing it to the BE is evil.

I think we also need to be careful in talking about the greatness of a conference in a 1 year period. A10 had a great year, but is UMASS going to continue with the success they had this year? Will SLU? Dayton? St Joes?

They could easily be back to being a 3 bid conference and we will be looking back at this season as an anomoly.

Yes exactly. A-10 isn't going to be a perennial 6-bid league. What, for example, makes anyone think that SLU is going to do anything under Crews once Majerus' recruits are gone?

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

The RPI is crap. No disputing that. All the more reason they should use Pomeroy or a similar system. Green Bay, Southern Miss, Belmont, and Toledo were teams that some felt should be on the bubble. Pomeroy had them ranked 61, 60, 109, and 110 going into the tournament. The reasons those teams didn't get at-large berths is because they simply weren't as good as teams that did.

Well...maybe not NC State. NC State didn't deserve it either. But there's the ACC for ya.

[Goose85]

I actually think it is good to have more than one non football playing conference that is successful in basketball.
That further illustrates to the NCAA and the Big 5 conferences that there are more than just 5 conferences out there, especially where basketball is involved, and that the non football conferences need to continue to be in the discussion.

A 10 had 6 bids or 46% of teams. ACC had 6 bids or 40% of teams. Big East had 4 bids or 40% of teams. The Big East was one bid away from having half the teams in the big dance, that is pretty good.

Adding more teams may not damage the A-10 and could lessen the revenue for the current Big East teams.
If SLU and Richmond leave and join Big East - what if Wichita State and Belmont join A-10. Is the Big East better and A 10 worse, or other way around?

[CaribouJim]

I actually think it is good to have more than one non football playing conference that is successful in basketball.
That further illustrates to the NCAA and the Big 5 conferences that there are more than just 5 conferences out there, especially where basketball is involved, and that the non football conferences need to continue to be in the discussion.

A 10 had 6 bids or 46% of teams. ACC had 6 bids or 40% of teams. Big East had 4 bids or 40% of teams. The Big East was one bid away from having half the teams in the big dance, that is pretty good.

Adding more teams may not damage the A-10 and could lessen the revenue for the current Big East teams.
If SLU and Richmond leave and join Big East - what if Wichita State and Belmont join A-10. Is the Big East better and A 10 worse, or other way around?

I pretty much agree with this. If the BE does expand, only go to 12 and only if it is the right teams. Even at 12 results in playing G-Town, 'Nova and even SJU less. Wasn't the Big 12 the highest ranked conference this year and they only have 10 teams. The BE problems this year were mostly self-inflicted - primarily MU and GT not pulling their weight - at least from an expectations standpoint. I too like the A10 - MU has a lot in common with those guys. Beyond all odds, I still go to bed every night with the dream of UCONN and Cinci joining us dancing in my head.

I'm on the side of no pillaging. However, not that this has anything to do with this thread, I am on the side of putting down Coach K every chance I have - that rat-faced, Hitler looking comb-over, and count me in that I don't believe that he doesn't dye his hair - putz.

[MUAlphaBangura]

I know most on the board really like the home and home scheduling a 10 team conference allows, but this can be a negative as far as strength in the middle of the conference-- which ultimately determines the number of bids a conference receives. Obviously the top teams will get in regardless, but a conference with more teams that plays an unbalanced schedule can manipulate that schedule to allow its' middle teams the best opportunity to get a bid. The old Big East did this very well for years and MU benefited from that. This year St. Joe's did also. They played SLU and VCU one time each, both at home, probably avoiding road losses to those two schools which may have eliminated them from NCAA consideration. So the A-10 may very well have a long term advantage as far as bids go, which is what determines the financial success of a conference along with the tv money(which the BE has the advantage). Really think this has to be at least considered and there will not be an A-10 team that would balk at coming to the BE due to the tv payday.

[MU88]

Adding teams does nothing except give you more mouths to feed. If you want to add UC and UConn (if they park their football in the MAC, for instance, while waiting for a BCS conference invite), then fine. Its worth consideration. At least, those schools add value. SLU, Dayton, VCU? Don't add much. While they are up now, it won't last. Plus, small markets don't increase the tv contract. Fox could buy the entire A-10 contract for less than the $5 million per school it is currently paying the Big East.

[Goose85]

As a season ticket holder I like knowing that everyone in the league will be coming to the Bradley Center. Imagine if we add two or four teams, and we have a year where there is no Georgetown and Villanova coming to the BC.

Stay at 10 for another year and see what happens with the football landscape.

[Halo]

Start with UConn and Cincy. That makes the most sense to me since we are interested in being a top basketball league. Those are the best out there that are in limbo. They need us as much as we need them.

I would like then SLU and maybe one of the following: Witchita State, VCU or Dayton and call it a day.

[Nukem2]

I know most on the board really like the home and home scheduling a 10 team conference allows, but this can be a negative as far as strength in the middle of the conference-- which ultimately determines the number of bids a conference receives. Obviously the top teams will get in regardless, but a conference with more teams that plays an unbalanced schedule can manipulate that schedule to allow its' middle teams the best opportunity to get a bid. The old Big East did this very well for years and MU benefited from that. This year St. Joe's did also. They played SLU and VCU one time each, both at home, probably avoiding road losses to those two schools which may have eliminated them from NCAA consideration. So the A-10 may very well have a long term advantage as far as bids go, which is what determines the financial success of a conference along with the tv money(which the BE has the advantage). Really think this has to be at least considered and there will not be an A-10 team that would balk at coming to the BE due to the tv payday.Agree. I've been saying all along that the BE needs critical mass in terms of NCAA bids. Nice to have the round-robin schedule, but I'm not sure that's in the best interest of the BE long-term.

[CaribouJim]

As a season ticket holder I like knowing that everyone in the league will be coming to the Bradley Center. Imagine if we add two or four teams, and we have a year where there is no Georgetown and Villanova coming to the BC.

Stay at 10 for another year and see what happens with the football landscape.

Again, I agree with this. I'm also a proponent of scheduling much more aggressively and have the the BE hold teams' feet to fire on this. And schedule creatively to help market the league further, i.e., mid-season OOC games against high profile teams on CBS - something along the lines of the doubleheader in MSG Super Bowl weekend. Even if you have to give up a buy game to do this, the incremental $'s each team is getting over the old allocation would lead me to believe net, net you are still getting more $'s and if that ultimately leads to more teams in the NCAA and more credits etc. it would be a wise investment.

[MKE_GoldenEagleFan]

I am a bit of a hybrid of all opinions... I think we need to wait a year or two, but ultimately I think we need to expand. I love the round robin schedule but everyone has to remember that the A-10's goal is to be better than the Big East, in this world of conference expansion it's eat or be eaten, that's the only reason the ACC stole from the Big East... With that being said I think the only way the Big East should expand is if they truly believe they can get half their teams into the tournament every year by doing so... It makes no sense to add 2-4 teams if it's still only going to get you 4-5 bids... I am open to the idea but it would need to be 2 or 3 teams that won't always be bottom feeders like DePaul, and then one so-so team that won't kill RPI but will get a few teams at the top of the league wins (like MU was this season)

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

UConn and Cincy? Who's going to lose? The AAC benefited from the exact type of scheduling the A-10 did. 5 pretty good teams, 5 absolutely awful ones. The reason people argue they deserved half their teams to go was because Louisville, Cincy, UConn, Memphis, and SMU absolutely pulverized the bottom of the conference. Those 5 teams went 46-4 against the bottom of their conference. So that's two leagues that got 10 bids because the 11 strongest teams in the leagues went a combined 93-11 against the 11 weakest teams.

If we add teams like UConn, Cincy, VCU, and other top tier teams, we will not get any more bids than we do now. Honestly, we could end up with even less because you would have 1-2 teams that were very good, then another 8-9 that are all right around .500 and end up taking a ton of losses to teams at their level in the conference.

Honest question. Anyone defending the addition of top-25 RPI caliber teams, can you seriously tell me how it will benefit us in terms of long-term March success? How will splitting the same or fewer shares among more teams be good for anyone involved?

Someone has to lose. It's as simple as that.

[Goose85]

The problem I see with going to 12 or 14 right now is there are really no teams out there that will really move the dial.
What schools out there, that don't have football, would increase TV revenue by more than what Big East schools make now?
What schools are sure to increase the number of NCAA bids for the conference?

You don't want more mouths to feed unless there is far more money coming to the table.

[Litehouse]

If Big East teams would have taken care of business this year, we could have had 7 bids. Win more big OOC games, schedule less crappy buy games, and don't lose to DePaul, Butler, and Seton Hall. We have only ourselves to blame. Adding more teams just means more mouths to feed.

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

Providence was an 11. If they lose to Creighton, do they even get in the tournament? It's entirely possible that the only reason the Big East was a 4-bid league is because Providence won the conference tournament. More good teams is not the answer if we want to put more teams into the Big Dance.

[Litehouse]

If Providence (1) beats Maryland and UMass, (2) doesn't lose to Seton Hall at home, and (3) schedules someone better than Fairfield and Maine, they're in regardless of the BE championship game.
If we (1) beat SDSU, ASU and NMU, (2) don't lose at Butler, and (3) schedule better games than Grambling, NHU, IUPUI, Ball St., and Samford, we're in.
If GU (1) beats Northeastern, (2) doesn't lose to Seton Hall twice, they're in. They actually had a great OOC schedule.
If SJU (1) beats Penn State, (2) doesn't lose to DePaul, and (3) schedules someone better than Monmouth and Longwood, they're in.

Those are all realistic if our teams play like they should, plus everyone's RPI would increase if those things happened to help each other out.

[unclejohn]

Litehouse is right. Look at it this way. We grabbed two teams from the A-10 this year. Did that help the conference get more bids? Only if you figure that Butler helped most teams (but not us) get two wins this year. So suppose we grab another couple of A-10 teams, like St. Bonaventure and George Washington, to pick two. Does it make the conference stronger? Not really. Racking up conference wins against weaker competition just means you have a weaker conference.

The way to get more teams into the Dance every year is to win more OOC games. The way it worked in the old Big East was that there would be a bunch of teams ranked in the top 25, several in the top 10, and everybody had a shot at beating them and getting a signature win. Sometimes those rankings were based upon reputation and the ability to schedule lots of games without leaving their own home state. But it was also because those teams racked up some impressive non-conference wins. The last five years, we did as well. There were games we could point to where we beat really good non-conference teams. This year, we didn't. OTOH, beating South Florida every year did little to get us into the tournament. brewcity has a point that somebody in your conference has to lose, but that does not mean you should load up on losers. Ideally, for the conference, if not for Marquette, the idea would be to have teams rotate near the top and bottom. If most of your teams are at or near the top every couple of years, it means you have a good conference top to bottom. We had an off year this year. But Georgetown has had several since we joined the Big East. They went to the NIT a few times. Then went to the Final Four. Louisville had a couple off years and a couple FF's and a national championship. UConn was lousy for a year or two, and won it all. So it is our turn to have a down year and give Providence an Xavier a chance to be pretty good. No need to panic.

People are overreacting to the number of bids conferences received. A few years ago, the MVC got four, and everybody was excited. The next few years, they got two, barely. Some years back, the Colonial got three or four, and had several more in contention. This year I believe they got one. And of course, they lost a bunch of good teams to the A-10. One year the ACC got three and was embarrassed, particularly since the Big East got either eight or eleven that year. And the Pac-10 got two the year Washington beat us in the tourney, and just barely at that. Lots of people thought they deserved one. It goes up and down. This year, the A-10 happens to be up at the same time the Big East is down.

[MUFLA]

If we add teams like UConn, Cincy, VCU, and other top tier teams, we will not get any more bids than we do now. Honestly, we could end up with even less because you would have 1-2 teams that were very good, then another 8-9 that are all right around .500 and end up taking a ton of losses to teams at their level in the conference.

16 Big East teams probably justified more bids in the past--and the justification was probably due to quality programs (with quality wins).

It won't happen [football], but I would love to see: Uconn, Cincy, Umass, Memphis, & Temple. I can dream, right?

[Mucrisco]

I would love to get Dayton, Wichita St, St Louis, and VCU. I think different styles of play helps you for the tournament, plus as an X's and O's guy, it's more entertaining to me to see how styles matchup, rather than playing teams twice. I think having more teams in the dance has a bigger effect, in terms of perception, rather than the higher percentage. With more teams, I would think we'd be able to fill the Garden easier, especially with rabid fan bases such as Dayton and Wichita St.

[CaribouJim]

Providence was an 11. If they lose to Creighton, do they even get in the tournament? It's entirely possible that the only reason the Big East was a 4-bid league is because Providence won the conference tournament. More good teams is not the answer if we want to put more teams into the Big Dance.

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=209436900

The Big 12 spent most of his season ranked No. 1 in the Ratings Percentage Index – one of the measurables used by the Division I men’s basketball committee to select and seed the bracket. That power along with performances from the seven teams – Kansas, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and Baylor – helped the Big 12 match the most teams it has ever placed in the bracket.

Ron Wellman, athletic director at Wake Forest and the chair of the Division I Men's Basketball Committee, emphasized that the committee doesn’t keep track of how many teams from any conference makes the bracket. But he did say that playing in the top RPI league is an advantage.
“Individually it certainly is a factor, and a result of playing in a strong conference is going to elevate their overall strength of schedule,” he said. “So from that vantage point, yeah, having a great conference is going to help you in terms of strength of schedule. (It) might hurt you in your wins and loss, but it certainly helps you develop a strong schedule overall.”

[MUFLA]

With more teams, I would think we'd be able to fill the Garden easier, especially with rabid fan bases such as Dayton and Wichita St.

If you want to fill the garden (& add more traditional Big East base), consider another NYC team -- Fordham, Iona, Manhattan, etc. Yes, I know some of these are horrible. Disclosure--my mom's cousin was former head coach at Iona.

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

If Providence (1) beats Maryland and UMass, (2) doesn't lose to Seton Hall at home, and (3) schedules someone better than Fairfield and Maine, they're in regardless of the BE championship game.
If we (1) beat SDSU, ASU and NMU, (2) don't lose at Butler, and (3) schedule better games than Grambling, NHU, IUPUI, Ball St., and Samford, we're in.
If GU (1) beats Northeastern, (2) doesn't lose to Seton Hall twice, they're in. They actually had a great OOC schedule.
If SJU (1) beats Penn State, (2) doesn't lose to DePaul, and (3) schedules someone better than Monmouth and Longwood, they're in.

Those are all realistic if our teams play like they should, plus everyone's RPI would increase if those things happened to help each other out.

If if's and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Selection Sunday. Any league can say "if" about any of their teams. The reality is that sometimes good teams lose to bad teams and you have to prepare yourself accordingly. You can't just tick off wins on the schedule in October, what you can do is better prepare yourself by making sure you play teams that give you a good opportunity to get wins while minimizing games where the teams drag you down. That's why I constantly argue that a good non-con schedule is one with a high number of 100-200 ranked teams. They boost your RPI and give you a great chance to win. Why would it be different in league play?

And yes, the Big 12 this year was amazing. I would say this year was by far the anomaly for that league. They will not regularly put 7 teams in, I'd guess 5 will be the average unless they expand. But at the end of the day, we're NOT the Big 12. I wish we were. But we don't have a Kansas. We don't have schools with the athletic budgets of Oklahoma, Texas, Oklahoma State, and all those other state schools. They won't consistently do what they did this year, but we will never have the kind of finances in this league to rival what that league's ceiling is.

Because of that, you have to decide how you want to attack the beast. Do you want to have as competitive a conference as possible, like we did this year? A mini-Big 12 with a number of good teams, but not good enough to get more than 3-4 bids most years, or do you want a conference with some disparity but a greater likelihood to put 5-6 teams in every year? I'd argue that we're better off doing the latter. It may not be as sexy, but how sexy is it to not have teams playing deep into this tournament?

I know my philosophy seems counter-intuitive, I know it isn't going to be the most popular method, but I think long-term it is far more likely to produce regular success.

Heck, we even had 3 teams in our league that fit the bill this year. The top-7 went 40-9 against Seton Hall, Butler, and DePaul. If we had another 2 teams like that, we'd probably be looking at a 7-bid league too.

[Gato78]

The point has nothing to do with the basketball strength of the BIG EAST or television money or what anyone has to bring to the table. The argument is that the BIG EAST has to deal with some reality and that reality is that the A-10 is trying to topple the BIG EAST. If one looks at the ACC and their motives in poaching Louisville, Syracuse and Pitt, it looks more and more like it had little to do with football (Notre Dame exception but they are not full football members and they were the last to move because they were out of options). The ACC wants the Garden. The A-10 might want the Garden. We need to be proactive because we just had our asses handed to us by the Presidents of Pitt and Syracuse. If we as a conference lay back because we are all "like minded", we might end up "like minded" with Fordham and Iona. This is on Val Ackerman and why she is paid the big bucks.

[MUAlphaBangura]

I think the focus of this thread has started to dilute a bit. Didn't ever want the discussion to trend back to who do you want in the conference. It was more about keeping a competitive advantage to what is our closest "like" conference, the A-10. Many state that the A-10 will not sustain this year's success. Well, what if they do? I would like the BE to be the aggressor in maintaining it's status as the premiere non-football conference. I'm sure the A-10 will be doing everything in their power to try to better themselves. What if the A-10 has multiple years of success and then come up on contract negotiations? What if the struggles of some in the BE continue past this year? Don't want to see what happened to us before, happen again.

[Goose85]

The point has nothing to do with the basketball strength of the BIG EAST or television money or what anyone has to bring to the table. The argument is that the BIG EAST has to deal with some reality and that reality is that the A-10 is trying to topple the BIG EAST. If one looks at the ACC and their motives in poaching Louisville, Syracuse and Pitt, it looks more and more like it had little to do with football (Notre Dame exception but they are not full football members and they were the last to move because they were out of options). The ACC wants the Garden. The A-10 might want the Garden. We need to be proactive because we just had our asses handed to us by the Presidents of Pitt and Syracuse. If we as a conference lay back because we are all "like minded", we might end up "like minded" with Fordham and Iona. This is on Val Ackerman and why she is paid the big bucks.

The A 10 is having a tough time with the Barclays, and are even allowing the ACC to grab their place there in a few years. I don't think they are a concern regarding the Garden.

I am not worried that the A-10 will topple the Big East. Our current TV contract is head and shoulders above the A10 TV deal.

The A10 bottom half (Fordham / GM / Duquense / RI / St. Bon / LaSalle) are far more bottom feeders than our bottom half (DePaul / Butler /Seton Hall / Gtown / MU).

I would be cautious on adding schools unless they really enhance the product. Who knows, UConn, if the football product doesn't improve, could be a school that would consider Big East for all sports but football (MAC).

Improve non conference scheduling conference wide and improve the overall RPI and I would think we could be a 5 bid league in most years.
Not bad if half the teams are generating NCAA credits annually.

Need to be creative to get the Big East involved in some non conference made for tv events (posslble challenge with Pac 12 / select games at big venues, etc).

[Mucrisco]

Sorry about that. I would like to raid the A-10 by taking Dayton, VCU, and SLU. In a competitive capitalist world, you have to be the aggressor. Having more bids is better for perception rather than percentage. Add Wichita St to round out the teams. I think we might have an inflated view of the Big East, but if we raid their conference further, that only shows that we are the top dog.

[Goose85]

Sorry about that. I would like to raid the A-10 by taking Dayton, VCU, and SLU. In a competitive capitalist world, you have to be the aggressor. Having more bids is better for perception rather than percentage. Add Wichita St to round out the teams. I think we might have an inflated view of the Big East, but if we raid their conference further, that only shows that we are the top dog.

I think the A10 may have some issues next year.
VCU will be good as long as Smart is there but, I think SLU post Majerus recruits will take a big tumble. Dayton is not a regular NCAA participant either.

I think a key to our conference is not raiding others at this point, but making sure we maintain what we have from a coaching standpoint.
Big East needs to make sure the conference keeps coaches like Buzz, Wright, JT3, Cooley, Mack, and even a guy like Lavin. Teams that win consistently generally have consistency at the head coach position. These guys are forming what is a pretty good core of well known coaches and that is really the face of the league.

[Mucrisco]

I think the A10 may have some issues next year.
VCU will be good as long as Smart is there but, I think SLU post Majerus recruits will take a big tumble. Dayton is not a regular NCAA participant either.

I think a key to our conference is not raiding others at this point, but making sure we maintain what we have from a coaching standpoint.
Big East needs to make sure the conference keeps coaches like Buzz, Wright, JT3, Cooley, Mack, and even a guy like Lavin. Teams that win consistently generally have consistency at the head coach position. These guys are forming what is a pretty good core of well known coaches and that is really the face of the league.

Not to take it off topic from the thread again, but I've always said that the key will be fan support, administration that wants to win, and a cool atmosphere for games. You add those things with the prestige of playing in the Big East, and you will have a winning program. VCU had good coaches before Smart. Dayton has the fan support and the administration that wants to win. Archie Miller is a good coach. I am hesitant about St Louis, because they seem to be more of bandwagon fans, but since this thread is about raiding the A-10, then I would either get them or St Joe's. Wichita St is my ideal school. They have rabid fan support, and administration that cares, and an incredible game atmosphere.

[Mucrisco]

Also, adding Archie, Smart, and Marshall, you are adding three great coaches which is what said you wanted. With the Big East, I would think they'd be more likely to stay at their schools.

[Goose85]

Also, adding Archie, Smart, and Marshall, you are adding three great coaches which is what said you wanted. With the Big East, I would think they'd be more likely to stay at their schools.

Smart and Marshall bring coaching cache and new markets.

[mufan2003]

Interesting thought....but I say no. Entering the new Big East, the teams with most history and recent success were Georgetown, MU and Villanova. Georgetown and MU have rare NCAA miss this year. Add them and u have 6 teams in the tourney this year. I think 5 or 6 will be the norm with 7 in years when the conference is stacked.

If the conferences were stocks, the Big East would be ticking up while the A-10 would be ticking down. Just look at the 2014 recruiting class rankings (scout.com). Big East has 5 schools in the Top 25. Atlantic 10 has zero teams in the Top 25. This will prove to have been the toughest year. Round Robin schedule is great.

If Big East wanted 2 teams, and if guaranteed the coaches would stay, I would add Wichita State and VCU. Both schools have coaches that have a national reputation, and Wichita State was a rival with Creighton all those years in the Missouri Valley.

[TulsaWarrior]

Expansion -- it's about TV markets and cable contracts:

SLU has some big money donors and have shown over a number of years a desire to take things to another level. If you have been to Dayton you'll understand the ownership the community has to the Flyers. They put butts in the seats, in a 13,000 plus arena. That makes for good TV. VCU has done things right even before Shaka Smith. They share the market with Richmond, a school with modest success. What Richmond has is wealthy alums. Will they pony up to get in the BE and can they capture VCUs thunder? With money could a program like Siena make a move? Albany is a decent market and it's a decent drive to NYC for the conference tournament.

My thought is money spent well or the right coach can elevate any program. Past examples include UNLV, Wichita State, GW, VCU and George Mason. It takes a sustaining effort. I think the new Big East should lose biases about schools sharing a market or being close to an existing market. That would open up DC and Philadelphia in particular. I just don't see a good candidate in NYC unless CCNY gets back into big time sports.

The no brainer additions are clearly St. Louis and Dayton. UMass, St. Joesph's, Siena, VCU and Richmond need to be in the discussion because of potential cable TV contract appeal. I sure wish I could see a way to crack the Boston market.

Fox will call the expansion tune.

[CaribouJim]

UOTE=MUFAN2003;61201]Interesting thought....but I say no. Entering the new Big East, the teams with most history and recent success were Georgetown, MU and Villanova. Georgetown and MU have rare NCAA miss this year. Add them and u have 6 teams in the tourney this year. I think 5 or 6 will be the norm with 7 in years when the conference is stacked.

If the conferences were stocks, the Big East would be ticking up while the A-10 would be ticking down. Just look at the 2014 recruiting class rankings (scout.com). Big East has 5 schools in the Top 25. Atlantic 10 has zero teams in the Top 25. This will prove to have been the toughest year. Round Robin schedule is great.

If Big East wanted 2 teams, and if guaranteed the coaches would stay, I would add Wichita State and VCU. Both schools have coaches that have a national reputation, and Wichita State was a rival with Creighton all those years in the Missouri Valley.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. I think 5-6 teams per year is a realistic goal and 4 for an off year is not bad at all if you ask me for a 10 league team. How many did the SEC place this year - 3? Far too early to panic IMO and I just don't see the sex appeal of the A-10 that would lead them to eventually pass the Big East, at least in the short term.

I'd rather see Val shore up the product we have now and that would include an aggressive, creative OOC schedule (and presumably win more than a few - where MU fell miserably short this year), address the "DePaul problem", and do anything they can to help FS1 secure the Big 10 TV contract.

I'm all for being proactive and I guess expansion is inevitable, especially if FS1 is prodding the BE, but I'd rather see the dust settle a little. That and just take care of business on the court and things will take of itself IMO.

[MU/Panther]

UMass play FBS level football, they are out. When it comes to Boston, it's a pro city.

[TulsaWarrior]

UMass football is parked and will stay in the MAC. Boston -- you're probably right.

[mufan2003]

Val Ackerman alluded to the fact they (presidents of schools) are comfortable right now with 10. She also said conference realignment is far from over and the Big East will be "monitoring." I think that is the right approach.