I would like to see SLU as a member of this league. That said, I don't want to spend time ripping other programs (unless it's Dayton).

The C7 will choose with the help of Benjamin Franklin (and all his closest friends).

(02-04-2013 01:38 PM)AMDG Wrote:  In a market 48 spots lower than SLU's. St. Louis is the 21st largest market in the country, 31 spots above the current lowest market in the C7, Providence. Wichita is 17 spots lower than Providence, Omaha is 24 spots below.

St. Louis is 300 miles from Chicago (the current city farthest west in the C7). Omaha is an additional 200 miles, Wichita is an additional 400 miles. These presidents know that money adds up when you're sending your field hockey team that additional distance.

St. Louis has 8 fortune 500 companies, Cincinatti has 6, Omaha has 5, Wichita has 0.

Like I said, anyone who pays attention to the factor that matters (money) knows that SLU comes out ahead of everybody. WE BRING MORE TO THE TABLE, NOT LESS

You just keep shifting your parameters. As soon as we disprove one thing, you jump to your next "BIG THING THAT MEANS SLU IS THE BEST!" Essentially, you are down to arguing that SLU is in the Saint Louis and the A-10 instead of in Omaha and the MVC.

The fact of the matter is that SLU isn't as rich as you claim (seriously, they aren't spending or earning significantly more than MVC schools), and doesn't have a history of success. Even if they manage to continue doing well this year, they don't have a coach of the future and have no guarantee of continuing their success without Majerus at the helm (right now, it is still his program even with a new coach). The basketball isn't there yet.

(02-04-2013 01:54 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 01:38 PM)AMDG Wrote:  In a market 48 spots lower than SLU's. St. Louis is the 21st largest market in the country, 31 spots above the current lowest market in the C7, Providence. Wichita is 17 spots lower than Providence, Omaha is 24 spots below.

St. Louis is 300 miles from Chicago (the current city farthest west in the C7). Omaha is an additional 200 miles, Wichita is an additional 400 miles. These presidents know that money adds up when you're sending your field hockey team that additional distance.

St. Louis has 8 fortune 500 companies, Cincinatti has 6, Omaha has 5, Wichita has 0.

Like I said, anyone who pays attention to the factor that matters (money) knows that SLU comes out ahead of everybody. WE BRING MORE TO THE TABLE, NOT LESS

You just keep shifting your parameters. As soon as we disprove one thing, you jump to your next "BIG THING THAT MEANS SLU IS THE BEST!" Essentially, you are down to arguing that SLU is in the Saint Louis and the A-10 instead of in Omaha and the MVC.

The fact of the matter is that SLU isn't as rich as you claim (seriously, they aren't spending or earning significantly more than MVC schools), and doesn't have a history of success. Even if they manage to continue doing well this year, they don't have a coach of the future and have no guarantee of continuing their success without Majerus at the helm (right now, it is still his program even with a new coach). The basketball isn't there yet.

What have you dis-proven? Nothing.
And the fact is, I am not shifting parameters, I am adding reasons.

The biggest argument here is between SLU and Wichita St?

(02-04-2013 01:38 PM)AMDG Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 01:17 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 12:27 PM)AMDG Wrote:  SLU the worst basketball school under consideration? Hardly. As I said before, we've beaten all of the schools under consideration at home and on the road in the last 13 months (except for VCU and Creighton). Look it up. We have the best facilities. We have a major donor who was referred to as the Mark Cuban of college basketball the other night on CBSsports network, who's goal it is to win a national championship.
Non-existent in our market you say? Hardly. 6000+ season ticket holders, almost 20,000 in attendance in two games in the last week.

You've been the the tournament one more time in the history of your school than Xavier has been to the Sweet 16 in the last 23 years.

Same thing for the other schools. We are talking about post-season success here, and SLU does not have that.

And having a major donor doesn't mean you are the best school. To use examples I know off the top of my head, you have Warren Buffett for Creighton ($50 billion net worth), and the Koch brothers for Wichita State ($60 million combined net worth). I'm sure the same could be said for every other school in contention.

And while getting some fans is impressive, there are a fair number of schools in the C7 with similar numbers. Heck, Wichita State has had over 10,000 fans (in a 10,506 arena) for over 100 straight games (again, using it because I don't want to research every other college).

In a market 48 spots lower than SLU's. St. Louis is the 21st largest market in the country, 31 spots above the current lowest market in the C7, Providence. Wichita is 17 spots lower than Providence, Omaha is 24 spots below.

St. Louis is 300 miles from Chicago (the current city farthest west in the C7). Omaha is an additional 200 miles, Wichita is an additional 400 miles. These presidents know that money adds up when you're sending your field hockey team that additional distance.

St. Louis has 8 fortune 500 companies, Cincinatti has 6, Omaha has 5, Wichita has 0.

Like I said, anyone who pays attention to the factor that matters (money) knows that SLU comes out ahead of everybody. WE BRING MORE TO THE TABLE, NOT LESS

OMG you are so right, how could we forget to count Fortune 500 companies when choosing our league partners.

Lets add in other useful metrics like miles of highway, number of redheads, and average price of movie tickets.

I know its a lot of work AMDG but since you are so talented at finding these valuable numbers could you continue to show us how amazing St. Louis is by adding the additional metrics I suggested.

(02-04-2013 02:02 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 01:38 PM)AMDG Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 01:17 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 12:27 PM)AMDG Wrote:  SLU the worst basketball school under consideration? Hardly. As I said before, we've beaten all of the schools under consideration at home and on the road in the last 13 months (except for VCU and Creighton). Look it up. We have the best facilities. We have a major donor who was referred to as the Mark Cuban of college basketball the other night on CBSsports network, who's goal it is to win a national championship.
Non-existent in our market you say? Hardly. 6000+ season ticket holders, almost 20,000 in attendance in two games in the last week.

You've been the the tournament one more time in the history of your school than Xavier has been to the Sweet 16 in the last 23 years.

Same thing for the other schools. We are talking about post-season success here, and SLU does not have that.

And having a major donor doesn't mean you are the best school. To use examples I know off the top of my head, you have Warren Buffett for Creighton ($50 billion net worth), and the Koch brothers for Wichita State ($60 million combined net worth). I'm sure the same could be said for every other school in contention.

And while getting some fans is impressive, there are a fair number of schools in the C7 with similar numbers. Heck, Wichita State has had over 10,000 fans (in a 10,506 arena) for over 100 straight games (again, using it because I don't want to research every other college).

In a market 48 spots lower than SLU's. St. Louis is the 21st largest market in the country, 31 spots above the current lowest market in the C7, Providence. Wichita is 17 spots lower than Providence, Omaha is 24 spots below.

St. Louis is 300 miles from Chicago (the current city farthest west in the C7). Omaha is an additional 200 miles, Wichita is an additional 400 miles. These presidents know that money adds up when you're sending your field hockey team that additional distance.

St. Louis has 8 fortune 500 companies, Cincinatti has 6, Omaha has 5, Wichita has 0.

Like I said, anyone who pays attention to the factor that matters (money) knows that SLU comes out ahead of everybody. WE BRING MORE TO THE TABLE, NOT LESS

OMG you are so right, how could we forget to count Fortune 500 companies when choosing our league partners.

Lets add in other useful metrics like miles of highway, number of redheads, and average price of movie tickets.

I know its a lot of work AMDG but since you are so talented at finding these valuable numbers could you continue to show us how amazing St. Louis is by adding the additional metrics I suggested.

If you don't understand why corporate money is more important than a final four appearance is the 1970s, then you don't understand sports.

(02-04-2013 01:59 PM)LouPower Wrote:  The biggest argument here is between SLU and Wichita St?

Nobody is arguing for Wichita State. I take that back, there is one Butler fan that has.

I do find all of this interesting because I enjoy following all of the conference realignment stuff and that the C7 could have an impact on Wichita State by taking Creighton.

(02-04-2013 02:04 PM)AMDG Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 02:02 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 01:38 PM)AMDG Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 01:17 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 12:27 PM)AMDG Wrote:  SLU the worst basketball school under consideration? Hardly. As I said before, we've beaten all of the schools under consideration at home and on the road in the last 13 months (except for VCU and Creighton). Look it up. We have the best facilities. We have a major donor who was referred to as the Mark Cuban of college basketball the other night on CBSsports network, who's goal it is to win a national championship.
Non-existent in our market you say? Hardly. 6000+ season ticket holders, almost 20,000 in attendance in two games in the last week.

You've been the the tournament one more time in the history of your school than Xavier has been to the Sweet 16 in the last 23 years.

Same thing for the other schools. We are talking about post-season success here, and SLU does not have that.

And having a major donor doesn't mean you are the best school. To use examples I know off the top of my head, you have Warren Buffett for Creighton ($50 billion net worth), and the Koch brothers for Wichita State ($60 million combined net worth). I'm sure the same could be said for every other school in contention.

And while getting some fans is impressive, there are a fair number of schools in the C7 with similar numbers. Heck, Wichita State has had over 10,000 fans (in a 10,506 arena) for over 100 straight games (again, using it because I don't want to research every other college).

In a market 48 spots lower than SLU's. St. Louis is the 21st largest market in the country, 31 spots above the current lowest market in the C7, Providence. Wichita is 17 spots lower than Providence, Omaha is 24 spots below.

St. Louis is 300 miles from Chicago (the current city farthest west in the C7). Omaha is an additional 200 miles, Wichita is an additional 400 miles. These presidents know that money adds up when you're sending your field hockey team that additional distance.

St. Louis has 8 fortune 500 companies, Cincinatti has 6, Omaha has 5, Wichita has 0.

Like I said, anyone who pays attention to the factor that matters (money) knows that SLU comes out ahead of everybody. WE BRING MORE TO THE TABLE, NOT LESS

OMG you are so right, how could we forget to count Fortune 500 companies when choosing our league partners.

Lets add in other useful metrics like miles of highway, number of redheads, and average price of movie tickets.

I know its a lot of work AMDG but since you are so talented at finding these valuable numbers could you continue to show us how amazing St. Louis is by adding the additional metrics I suggested.

If you don't understand why corporate money is more important than a final four appearance is the 1970s, then you don't understand sports.

Oh I'm sorry I must have missed post on corporate money, I just see your post on counts of Fortune 500 companies. If you don't realize the difference than you don't know business.

(02-04-2013 02:06 PM)SubGod22 Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 01:59 PM)LouPower Wrote:  The biggest argument here is between SLU and Wichita St?

Nobody is arguing for Wichita State. I take that back, there is one Butler fan that has.

I do find all of this interesting because I enjoy following all of the conference realignment stuff and that the C7 could have an impact on Wichita State by taking Creighton.

I'm not going to rip on Valley schools by any means. I just saw a lot of references to WSU.

I don't have anything negative to say about the MVC (not a big Mo. St. fan), because it's good basketball.

(02-04-2013 01:57 PM)AMDG Wrote:  What have you dis-proven? Nothing.
And the fact is, I am not shifting parameters, I am adding reasons.

Well, on a short list:

1. SLU is NOT a top-half basketball team, in either the past or present (and probably the future)
2. SLU is NOT outspending or out-earning other programs (~4.6 million revenue/expenses if I remember correctly)
3. SLU is NOT a consensus top100 university
4. SLU does NOT have a $1 billion endowment
5. Arguing 3 and 4 is an argument for Richmond over SLU
6. SLU does NOT have richer donors than other schools
7. SLU does NOT capture their market (significantly behind Missouri, Illinois, and even farther behind the Rams, Cardinals and probably NASCAR)
8. If we are arguing geography now, points go to Richmond/VCU over Saint Louis
9. If we arguing Fortune 500 companies (not really relevant, but whatever), I'm sure you have no problem with Duquesne (23) or Fordham (50) taking your spot
10. Again, any basketball metric will have SLU behind Xavier, Butler, Gonzaga, Creighton, and Dayton (just using private schools), as well as VCU and Wichita State.

(02-04-2013 02:09 PM)LouPower Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 02:06 PM)SubGod22 Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 01:59 PM)LouPower Wrote:  The biggest argument here is between SLU and Wichita St?

Nobody is arguing for Wichita State. I take that back, there is one Butler fan that has.

I do find all of this interesting because I enjoy following all of the conference realignment stuff and that the C7 could have an impact on Wichita State by taking Creighton.

I'm not going to rip on Valley schools by any means. I just saw a lot of references to WSU.

I don't have anything negative to say about the MVC (not a big Mo. St. fan), because it's good basketball.

We can get along as I'm no fan of Hillbilly State either.

I'm surprised in this piece that they didn't make an argument for Missouri to join the C7.

(02-04-2013 02:10 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 01:57 PM)AMDG Wrote:  What have you dis-proven? Nothing.
And the fact is, I am not shifting parameters, I am adding reasons.

Well, on a short list:

1. SLU is NOT a top-half basketball team, in either the past or present (and probably the future)
2. SLU is NOT outspending or out-earning other programs (~4.6 million revenue/expenses if I remember correctly)
3. SLU is NOT a consensus top100 university
4. SLU does NOT have a $1 billion endowment
5. Arguing 3 and 4 is an argument for Richmond over SLU
6. SLU does NOT have richer donors than other schools
7. SLU does NOT capture their market (significantly behind Missouri, Illinois, and even farther behind the Rams and Cardinals)
8. If we are arguing geography now, points go to Richmond/VCU over Saint Louis
9. If we arguing Fortune 500 companies (not really relevant, but whatever), I'm sure you have no problem with Duquesne (23) or Fordham (50) taking your spot
10. Again, any basketball metric will have SLU behind Xavier, Butler, Gonzaga, Creighton, and Dayton (just using private schools), as well as VCU and Wichita State.

you forgot the Blues even, important during winter months.

I went to SLU. Yeah, I'm biased for them. There are a lot of good arguments for a lot of schools to get in this thing.

What is WSU's plan if Creighton goes C7?

(02-04-2013 02:14 PM)LouPower Wrote:  I went to SLU. Yeah, I'm biased for them. There are a lot of good arguments for a lot of schools to get in this thing.

What is WSU's plan if Creighton goes C7?

Hope to get into the MWC, or try and dominate the incredibly poor MVC while that league disintegrates (hoping to improve their position by outplaying a weak conference ala Gonzaga 15 years ago).

(02-04-2013 02:14 PM)LouPower Wrote:  I went to SLU. Yeah, I'm biased for them. There are a lot of good arguments for a lot of schools to get in this thing.

What is WSU's plan if Creighton goes C7?

With or without Creighton, WSU has been exploring options to leave. However, not a lot of option out there for schools that don't have football. So as it is, we'll probably just continue to build upon what we've been doing under Coach Marshall and if nothing changes, we may look into bringing back football in 5-7 years. That's when we'd beging to look and not a target date to be on the field.

WSU will do whatever it has to do to protect basketball and if that means bringing back football to potentially put us into a better conference for basketball, then I'm sure we'll do it. We have a pretty strong athletic department as it is and outside of softball, have been pretty good in most of our other sports. Women's basketball has recently turned a corner. But men's basketball pays the bills and our heavy donors know it. And they know if football is required to protect all of that, that they'll pitch in to help do that right.

To make a long answer longer, we'd like to get into the C7 IF it ever goes beyond 12 and publics were considered. We also wouldn't mind getting into the MWC as a nonfootball to offset Hawaii. That would be an upgrade for basketball, volleyball and baseball. Outside of all that, I'm not sure there are any other potential options better than the MVC.

My biggest fear with the MVC replacing CU is that they'll add a small school already within the footprint to appease the poor sisters of the east and further weaken the conference. We really need for Geno Ford to get Bradley moving forward and he appears to be doing so. I believe they could be a very strong school.

(02-04-2013 02:21 PM)SubGod22 Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 02:14 PM)LouPower Wrote:  I went to SLU. Yeah, I'm biased for them. There are a lot of good arguments for a lot of schools to get in this thing.

What is WSU's plan if Creighton goes C7?

With or without Creighton, WSU has been exploring options to leave. However, not a lot of option out there for schools that don't have football. So as it is, we'll probably just continue to build upon what we've been doing under Coach Marshall and if nothing changes, we may look into bringing back football in 5-7 years. That's when we'd beging to look and not a target date to be on the field.

WSU will do whatever it has to do to protect basketball and if that means bringing back football to potentially put us into a better conference for basketball, then I'm sure we'll do it. We have a pretty strong athletic department as it is and outside of softball, have been pretty good in most of our other sports. Women's basketball has recently turned a corner. But men's basketball pays the bills and our heavy donors know it. And they know if football is required to protect all of that, that they'll pitch in to help do that right.

To make a long answer longer, we'd like to get into the C7 IF it ever goes beyond 12 and publics were considered. We also wouldn't mind getting into the MWC as a nonfootball to offset Hawaii. That would be an upgrade for basketball, volleyball and baseball. Outside of all that, I'm not sure there are any other potential options better than the MVC.

My biggest fear with the MVC replacing CU is that they'll add a small school already within the footprint to appease the poor sisters of the east and further weaken the conference. We really need for Geno Ford to get Bradley moving forward and he appears to be doing so. I believe they could be a very strong school.

On the small school footprint point, a friend of mine mentioned SIU-E. I told him the Valley would probably have Doug Elgin deported if that were the case.

(02-04-2013 02:12 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 02:10 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 01:57 PM)AMDG Wrote:  What have you dis-proven? Nothing.
And the fact is, I am not shifting parameters, I am adding reasons.

Well, on a short list:

1. SLU is NOT a top-half basketball team, in either the past or present (and probably the future)
2. SLU is NOT outspending or out-earning other programs (~4.6 million revenue/expenses if I remember correctly)
3. SLU is NOT a consensus top100 university
4. SLU does NOT have a $1 billion endowment
5. Arguing 3 and 4 is an argument for Richmond over SLU
6. SLU does NOT have richer donors than other schools
7. SLU does NOT capture their market (significantly behind Missouri, Illinois, and even farther behind the Rams and Cardinals)
8. If we are arguing geography now, points go to Richmond/VCU over Saint Louis
9. If we arguing Fortune 500 companies (not really relevant, but whatever), I'm sure you have no problem with Duquesne (23) or Fordham (50) taking your spot
10. Again, any basketball metric will have SLU behind Xavier, Butler, Gonzaga, Creighton, and Dayton (just using private schools), as well as VCU and Wichita State.

you forgot the Blues even, important during winter months.

1. SLU received 8 votes in the AP Top 25 behind only Gtown and Marquette in the C7. That's top half.
3. SLU is top 100 in the USNews National University Rankings and higher than any C7 school with the exception of Gtown and Marquette. The same is true if you use other, less-regarded rankings as you did.
4. I said near, which it is.
6. SLU has bigger spenders in basketball recently than other schools being considered
8-9. These are arguments for SLU over Creighton or Wichita
10. See point 1. SLU is higher than Xavier, Dayton and tied with VCU

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

(02-04-2013 02:25 PM)LouPower Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 02:21 PM)SubGod22 Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 02:14 PM)LouPower Wrote:  I went to SLU. Yeah, I'm biased for them. There are a lot of good arguments for a lot of schools to get in this thing.

What is WSU's plan if Creighton goes C7?

With or without Creighton, WSU has been exploring options to leave. However, not a lot of option out there for schools that don't have football. So as it is, we'll probably just continue to build upon what we've been doing under Coach Marshall and if nothing changes, we may look into bringing back football in 5-7 years. That's when we'd beging to look and not a target date to be on the field.

WSU will do whatever it has to do to protect basketball and if that means bringing back football to potentially put us into a better conference for basketball, then I'm sure we'll do it. We have a pretty strong athletic department as it is and outside of softball, have been pretty good in most of our other sports. Women's basketball has recently turned a corner. But men's basketball pays the bills and our heavy donors know it. And they know if football is required to protect all of that, that they'll pitch in to help do that right.

To make a long answer longer, we'd like to get into the C7 IF it ever goes beyond 12 and publics were considered. We also wouldn't mind getting into the MWC as a nonfootball to offset Hawaii. That would be an upgrade for basketball, volleyball and baseball. Outside of all that, I'm not sure there are any other potential options better than the MVC.

My biggest fear with the MVC replacing CU is that they'll add a small school already within the footprint to appease the poor sisters of the east and further weaken the conference. We really need for Geno Ford to get Bradley moving forward and he appears to be doing so. I believe they could be a very strong school.

On the small school footprint point, a friend of mine mentioned SIU-E. I told him the Valley would probably have Doug Elgin deported if that were the case.

Some in the Valley, especially WSU fans, would like to see someone else in Elgins role anyway. SIU-E would temp WSU to go Independent. I joke, mostly. I've heard some OK schools mentioned in the past. Wright State, Murray State, Belmont and ORU are all schools I wouldn't have big issues with. Milwaukee could have potential. NDSU and SDSU are possibles that don't excite many. I'm pretty confident we'd stay away from UMKC and SEMO and SIU-E. Other possibilities are UIC (I believe) is the one I've heard. I hate the idea of having four schools in Illinois. Some have mentioned UNO, but I certainly hope not. Valpo is another one that doesn't excite me personally, but would make our poor sisters happy as it's an easy bus ride for all of them.

I think Murray or Belmont would be a solid get.