Considering lax is parked in CAA and ice hockey in Hockey East, the rest being in A10 just for the basketball component is what must be pretty frustrating or annoying if you’re approached by UMass brass. I would hope some of these schools and conferences would lay into them some about it. Not to slight the A10, but, to remind UMass that they haven’t really committed to the conference’s overall success as many others, but also that the long-term view of the conference may not be as robust for bids as it once was. I love the A10…and while I would hate to see UMass leave, I think there has been this uneasy feeling of the ground dropping out from beneath the conference for some time now. It gets by, but other than its six-bid season some time back, those better years appear further back behind us more and more. This year could be the worst with just a single bid. Like, is ANYONE telling UMass this from a preservation standpoint? Or that there is good academic company in the MAC?

The A10 adding Loyola shores up concerns of losing multi-bid status a bit. Even right now, half the conference is in the Top 100 by KenPom. This should mean a good number of NIT bids if not NCAA bids.

The pressure the A10 face is that a handful of teams are unable or unwilling to participate in the arms race. La Salle, George Washington, Fordham, etc.

With lacking budgets and facilities, they will have to be crafty to punch above their weight class. To not fall into the 250-350 rankings and drag down the A10's strength of schedule.

(12-15-2021 10:25 AM)McKinney Wrote:  The A10 adding Loyola shores up concerns of losing multi-bid status a bit. Even right now, half the conference is in the Top 100 by KenPom. This should mean a good number of NIT bids if not NCAA bids.

The pressure the A10 face is that a handful of teams are unable or unwilling to participate in the arms race. La Salle, George Washington, Fordham, etc.

With lacking budgets and facilities, they will have to be crafty to punch above their weight class. To not fall into the 250-350 rankings and drag down the A10's strength of schedule.

Right - I actually don't see the A-10 dropping overall (despite several bottom feeders).

If anything, their relative position is stronger coming out of this round of conference realignment. The AAC has been significantly downgraded in basketball with their defections and the WCC lost their wealthiest athletic program of BYU. We need to keep this in mind with respect to at-large bids because the AAC in particular isn't going to be getting the same level of berths as before and the WCC is going to be hard-pressed to get more than one at-large bid beyond Gonzaga. I see the A-10 as the clear number 7 basketball league (after the P5 and Big East) going forward, which is a whole lot stronger than what I think a lot of people on this board are giving them credit for here. It's the psychological effect of convincing oneself that the A-10 is a little worse in basketball than it really is while thinking that the MAC is a little better in basketball than it really is, which then convinces that same person that the gap isn't really that large. In reality, the gap is much larger (and arguably growing with the addition of Loyola). (We see this effect all of the time when comparing leagues in conference realignment discussions. Slightly underrating one league while slightly overrating the other league can mistakenly convince people that there's a closer gap between the two than reality.)

One thing that I've mentioned in other threads about UMass is that too many people are taking the shortcut of linking UConn and UMass together as if they have the same athletic department goals and potential trajectories. Yes, they're independent flagship public schools in New England that are not playing very good football right now. However, they're coming from very different places.

In the past decade, UConn played in the Fiesta Bowl and was a coinflip away from getting into the ACC instead of Louisville. Anyone that is arguing that they should be dropping to FCS is being completely biased by recent on-the-field football results (which is a bad way to make long-term conference realignment decisions). UConn decided to move up to FBS because they had a home in a then-BCS AQ power conference that was also arguably the best basketball league in the country. They then were able to win that AQ conference only a few short years after upgrading. UConn was the frontrunner to get the last spot in the ACC when Maryland defected since they were total academic, geographic and institutional fit, but Louisville was essentially pushed in by the football-focused faction of the league led by Florida State.

UConn in its heart and soul believes that it is a power conference school. (They're similar to BYU in that way.) The Huskies were at least able to regain that in basketball by rejoining the Big East. For football, it's legitimately more important for them to play more P5 opponents than any type of G5 conference schedule. Football success for UConn is consistently going 6-6 or 7-5 with bowl berths against an attractive mix of P5 opponents and local schools (such as Army and UMass), which is honestly what UConn would have been reasonably hoping for in the ACC or Big Ten. At worst, keeping FBS football is a lottery ticket in the event that a spot in the ACC (or less likely Big Ten) opens up. At the end of the day, UConn's best selling point to a power conference is that it is an elite basketball school with great academics in a large market that just happens to have an FBS football team. (This is similar to the Kansas argument.) That's not as great of a selling point as having a great FBS football program, but it's still a better argument for a power conference spot than most schools will ever have (particularly when great FBS football programs aren't often available for realignment purposes).

In contrast, UMass never had the pretense of ever being a power conference school. That would be a total fantasy for them as opposed to a legitimate institutional goal. As a result, they're looking at their football options very differently, but still keeping in mind that the A-10 continues to be the best basketball league that they could ever realistically be a part of (so they're not just going to give that up).

(12-15-2021 10:52 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Right - I actually don't see the A-10 dropping overall (despite several bottom feeders).

If anything, their relative position is stronger coming out of this round of conference realignment. The AAC has been significantly downgraded in basketball with their defections and the WCC lost their wealthiest athletic program of BYU. We need to keep this in mind with respect to at-large bids because the AAC in particular isn't going to be getting the same level of berths as before and the WCC is going to be hard-pressed to get more than one at-large bid beyond Gonzaga. I see the A-10 as the clear number 7 basketball league (after the P5 and Big East) going forward, which is a whole lot stronger than what I think a lot of people on this board are giving them credit for here. It's the psychological effect of convincing oneself that the A-10 is a little worse in basketball than it really is while thinking that the MAC is a little better in basketball than it really is, which then convinces that same person that the gap isn't really that large. In reality, the gap is much larger (and arguably growing with the addition of Loyola). (We see this effect all of the time when comparing leagues in conference realignment discussions. Slightly underrating one league while slightly overrating the other league can mistakenly convince people that there's a closer gap between the two than reality.)

Adding to that, we know that the Big East is at least eyeballing Gonzaga right now in the lead-up to a new tv deal. The WCC could drop out of the ranks of the mid-majors entirely if the Big East poaches the Zags, or the MW manages to pull off some sort of Gonzaga/Wichita basketball move down the line. I'm not convinced that St Mary's and San Francisco can keep a league alive as a mid-major by themselves.

(12-15-2021 11:09 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  UConn in its heart and soul believes that it is a power conference school. (They're similar to BYU in that way.)

Don't think of UConn as a wannabe Buffalo or wannabe Houston or a wannabe Rutgers. Think of them as a wannabe Duke.

Duke barely cares about being GOOD in football. (Rutgers would very much like to be good in football, but they have the Big Ten East on their schedule, so ......) They're in a power football conference though, playing power conference teams.

That's where UConn sees themselves, if things work out. And joining CUSA or the MAC for football doesn't help get them there.

(12-15-2021 11:30 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-15-2021 11:09 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  UConn in its heart and soul believes that it is a power conference school. (They're similar to BYU in that way.)

Don't think of UConn as a wannabe Buffalo or wannabe Houston or a wannabe Rutgers. Think of them as a wannabe Duke.

Duke barely cares about being GOOD in football. (Rutgers would very much like to be good in football, but they have the Big Ten East on their schedule, so ......) They're in a power football conference though, playing power conference teams.

That's where UConn sees themselves, if things work out. And joining CUSA or the MAC for football doesn't help get them there.

Exactly! Hence, my comparison that UConn's power conference pitch is essentially the same as the Kansas power conference pitch. Duke, Kansas, Indiana... those are the types of athletic department examples that UConn is more interested in as opposed to Houston (albeit they are still great in hoops) or UCF.

(12-15-2021 11:40 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-15-2021 11:30 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-15-2021 11:09 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  UConn in its heart and soul believes that it is a power conference school. (They're similar to BYU in that way.)

Don't think of UConn as a wannabe Buffalo or wannabe Houston or a wannabe Rutgers. Think of them as a wannabe Duke.

Duke barely cares about being GOOD in football. (Rutgers would very much like to be good in football, but they have the Big Ten East on their schedule, so ......) They're in a power football conference though, playing power conference teams.

That's where UConn sees themselves, if things work out. And joining CUSA or the MAC for football doesn't help get them there.

Exactly! Hence, my comparison that UConn's power conference pitch is essentially the same as the Kansas power conference pitch. Duke, Kansas, Indiana... those are the types of athletic department examples that UConn is more interested in as opposed to Houston (albeit they are still great in hoops) or UCF.

I have no doubt that UConn sees itself as a power conference school. I just doubt that any power conferences (at least those that sponsor football) see them that way any more, if they ever did. For football, they have the same options that UMass does. The difference is that UConn can probably pull off remaining independent better than UMass can, as long as they're OK with aspiring to 6-6 or 7-5 seasons as their ceiling.

(12-13-2021 12:27 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:16 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 12:04 PM)3BNole Wrote:  

(12-13-2021 11:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  The question remains whether UMass is sufficiently committed to finding a conference home for its football program to abandon its stance on only joining as a football only affiliate. It's hard to see how UMass football adds enough value to any FBS conference to justify an invitation.

This is the key. If UMASS offered to join as a full member, CUSA would take them in a second. If they’re only bringing football though, I’m not really sure what would be attractive for a conference. It’s a tough decision. I understand the basketball thing, plus travel wouldn’t be great in CUSA, but unless they go all in, I just don’t see a conference taking them. So it depends on what their priorities are.

I'm not even sure CUSA would be interested at all. UMass basketball is still living off its reputation earned by the likes of Dr. J, Marcus Camby and John Calipari. Since then they have been ordinary at best, and travel considerations would be just as bad for current CUSA members as it would be for UMass.

To me, it seems like it's MAC all-sports or bust for UMass, and if they don't want that they will have to look hard at the long-term future of their football program.

Bingo! If UMass wants to join the MAC, it will likely need to be for all sports, along with WKU.

Is it possible the MAC would consider a situation similar to what the AAC has with Navy (football affiliate) and Wichita State (Olympic sports), whereby they bring UMass back as a football affiliate, then invite Northern Kentucky from the Horizon League for Olympic sports?

This would make for an ideal fit with WKU as an instate rival and easy travel partner as well as a bridge from the Cincinnati metroplex to the rest of the MAC.

On very little sleep but will address some things in the thread and personal ideas to make MAC all sports happen with some comments.

Number one UMass continues to invest in Football. Raising the salary for our new head coach, which we are all excited with the assistants and recruiting. The salary pool has increased by 500k. You all know the move to FBS and then independence jig has been met with poor results. Despite this donations to the Gridiron Club continue to rise and currently over 1 Million and the current fund raiser ends at midnight with the current balance $1,005,460. Yes chicken feed to established programs but really good for us. The Tulane game should be exciting to open the season.

Fund raiser link

Wtf good is the A10 conference has the basketball team shown no rewards for the sacrifice of the football program, not to mention that the MAC is better or equal to the A10 except for men's basketball, especially as women's basketball and men's soccer.

The A10 has 7 teams in the top 100 at last check, but the issue is with the lack in the Top 40 and being a 2 bid league. The last time the A10 had 3 bids was in 2018 and NONE of the teams advanced to the round of 32, while the last few years the MAC team has advanced.

Here is a thought that is slanted for a UMass basketball zealot. Remember a long time ago when Temple ruled the A10. Then UMass rose, challenged and surpassed Temple rising the rest of the conference.

The same thing can happen if we move to the MAC with Buffalo, Ohio etc. Well the gap may still exist between the MAC and A10, with WKU and UMass the gap will get smaller. If the Big East raids the A10 again even smaller.

As far as rivals, we only have 1 in the A10, URI. Thorr Bjorn is URI AD, a former UMass football player and acting AD. Believe we will always play URI no matter where we are. Ohio is almost a mirror of UMass, good university with a history of good basketball and football. Both land grant universities overshadowed by an instate University in a hilly non urban location. Buffalo is AAU and an academic peer also good in both main sports.

While the A10 has had and will be adding another Midwest university the MAC is almost all there. Would have to adjust OOC scheduling for games up and down the eastern seaboard for our alumni, recruiting and fans with some local games to help with the overall average of 2 extra hours in travel time. The A10 is not a bus league stretching from St. Louis, new Loyola Chicago, to 3 teams, Davidson, Richmond, and VCU in North Carolina or near it's border etc.

Once UMass exhausts its football only bid, will see if leadership statements are sincere for finding a football home, MAC all sports. The possibility of pairing with Western Kentucky is very excited for this guy as would help make it more reasonable to our leadership.

A few thoughts:

* The A10 will emerge as the clear No. 7 hoops league (behind the P5 and BE) most seasons.

* The MVC counters the loss of Loyola with the one-two punch of Murray (assuming it happens) and Belmont.

* UConn eventually will be a member of an all-sports league. That conference, however, will not be the ACC as currently configured.

* If UMass stays in the A10 and rides out football independence ... that might be good. Because if the ACC undergoes an implosion, UMass could find itself in a future all-sports league (along with UConn) that emerges from that blow-up.

(12-15-2021 10:25 AM)McKinney Wrote:  The pressure the A10 face is that a handful of teams are unable or unwilling to participate in the arms race. La Salle, George Washington, Fordham, etc.

Fordham has one NCAA invite since 1971 and play in the oldest gym in the nation, seating 3200. They spend twice as much on football than basketball.

(12-15-2021 11:09 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  In contrast, UMass never had the pretense of ever being a power conference school. That would be a total fantasy for them as opposed to a legitimate institutional goal. As a result, they're looking at their football options very differently, but still keeping in mind that the A-10 continues to be the best basketball league that they could ever realistically be a part of (so they're not just going to give that up).

I don't think UMass thinks of itself as a power conference school. I'm sure the academic brass would love to affiliate themselves with the P5s in the other top public schools. But they haven't raised the resources to do it and haven't positioned themselves to really even try as UConn is trying. I'm not so sure it couldn't be a legitimate institutional goal, it just hasn't been.

That said, they very much would like to link themselves to UConn. Outside of athletics, you'd be hard-pressed to find more similar institutions. There's still a large cohort of UMass fans that remember the days of UMass playing UConn football in the Yankee Conference. Maybe even some who remember back to when they played basketball in the Yankee Conference. There's an even larger cohort of people who remember UMass being a national power in basketball in the 1990s. Refusing to Lose to blue-bloods. Anyone, anytime, anywhere.

Back then UMass was right there with UConn. The real separation between the schools' positions came in the following decade when UConn became a nouveau riche power in basketball and invested BCS AQ resources into football. To some degree I think the viewpoints have overlap. It's just that UConn only has to look back 10 years. While UMass has to look back 25.

(12-15-2021 01:04 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  The last time the A10 had 3 bids was in 2018 and NONE of the teams advanced to the round of 32, while the last few years the MAC team has advanced.

I'm curious, does anyone really believe that the quality of your conference has much to do with whether teams advance in the NCAAs?

If you're advancing because you were the higher seed, that speaks to the power of the program, the strength of schedule of the conference etc. But if you're knocking off a higher seed, that's more a matter of your senior shooters having hot streaks, etc.

Did anyone really look and re-evaluate the strength of America East when UMBC took down Virginia? Naah.

(12-15-2021 02:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-15-2021 01:04 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  The last time the A10 had 3 bids was in 2018 and NONE of the teams advanced to the round of 32, while the last few years the MAC team has advanced.

I'm curious, does anyone really believe that the quality of your conference has much to do with whether teams advance in the NCAAs?

If you're advancing because you were the higher seed, that speaks to the power of the program, the strength of schedule of the conference etc. But if you're knocking off a higher seed, that's more a matter of your senior shooters having hot streaks, etc.

Did anyone really look and re-evaluate the strength of America East when UMBC took down Virginia? Naah.

To some extent, believe it can help with recruits and coaching staff. But yes to your point, it does not matter what the A10 or MAC does as it does how your team performs.

(12-15-2021 02:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-15-2021 01:04 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  The last time the A10 had 3 bids was in 2018 and NONE of the teams advanced to the round of 32, while the last few years the MAC team has advanced.

I'm curious, does anyone really believe that the quality of your conference has much to do with whether teams advance in the NCAAs?

If you're advancing because you were the higher seed, that speaks to the power of the program, the strength of schedule of the conference etc. But if you're knocking off a higher seed, that's more a matter of your senior shooters having hot streaks, etc.

Did anyone really look and re-evaluate the strength of America East when UMBC took down Virginia? Naah.

The quality of the conference absolutely has something to do with teams advancing in the NCAAs if the conference has been successful in the NCAA Tournament over a long period of time. UMBC/America East is a poor example because that's cherrypicking a one-off.

(12-15-2021 01:04 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  As far as rivals, we only have 1 in the A10, URI. Thorr Bjorn is URI AD, a former UMass football player and acting AD. Believe we will always play URI no matter where we are.

At least maybe for the next decade. Although likely not a home & home arrangement. URI not coming into Amherst every year would be tough. No other way to say it. And if you don't think that out-of-conference rivalries can just disappear, look again. We don't play Temple anymore. We don't play UConn anymore. We don't play BC anymore.

It's not just UMass. This is a phenomenon that's happened around the country. In out-of-conference rivalries, it just takes one negligent or ignorant party to decide they're no longer interested or can't make it work and poof. It disappears. Duke-Maryland, Syracuse-UConn, Texas-Arkansas (this one being restored), Xavier-Dayton, WVU-Pitt has sputtered.

I hear what you're saying on Ohio and Buffalo. But they are no more our rivals than Mason and VCU are.

Outside of rivals, the quality of opponents absolutely would go down. That's okay if we can just buy our way to success. But if we're middling in the MAC it's a really bad situation. You can throw out the idea of being a bubble team. The MAC doesn't have the strength of schedule where you can be #2, #3, or #4, take a bad loss in conference and still make the tournament.

You also have to probably remove the idea that the NIT is a measure of a successful season. Because a 20ish win team in the MAC that doesn't win the regular season or conference tournament is probably sitting at home in March. At-large bids to the NCAA (and even the NIT) are a rare occurrence in the MAC. You must win the regular season or the tournament if you want to make the postseason. Even with WKU, Buffalo, and UMass that status does not change.

Moving to the MAC is sacrificing basketball for football. It just is. If we get in there and don't seriously invest in basketball, it makes no sense. As bad as you think it is UMass sacrificed football for basketball in the season we were ranked and got an at-large bid. Imagine how bad things will be if UMass makes this move and football is still in the bottom 10 of FBS.

UMass needs to take FBS football seriously and moving to the MAC in all sports should be on the table. But it's not a lateral move and not a decision to make lightly.

(12-15-2021 02:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-15-2021 01:04 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  The last time the A10 had 3 bids was in 2018 and NONE of the teams advanced to the round of 32, while the last few years the MAC team has advanced.

I'm curious, does anyone really believe that the quality of your conference has much to do with whether teams advance in the NCAAs?

If you're advancing because you were the higher seed, that speaks to the power of the program, the strength of schedule of the conference etc. But if you're knocking off a higher seed, that's more a matter of your senior shooters having hot streaks, etc.

Did anyone really look and re-evaluate the strength of America East when UMBC took down Virginia? Naah.

Agreed.

The poster has made the same argument elsewhere (who appears to badly want UMass to join the MAC for all-sports) and it simply doesn't track with reality.

The strength of a conference is much more about at-large bids in and of themselves much more than how far those teams advanced. Sure, a conference gets a bump in perception if they're able to combine a lot of at-large bids AND advancing far in the tournament consistently, but on balance, it's much more about the former than the latter.

Case in point is the A-10's own latest addition of Loyola. By the poster's logic, Loyola should have stayed in the MVC since they've had a better record of total NCAA Tournament credits compared to the A-10 due to Loyola's advancing to the Final Four and Sweet Sixteen in recent years along with Wichita State's prior achievements. Yet, both of those schools left because the A-10 and AAC (respectively) simply have (or at least had for the AAC) much more depth as evidenced by the number of at-large bids that they've received over the years.

(12-15-2021 11:09 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  In the past decade, UConn played in the Fiesta Bowl and was a coinflip away from getting into the ACC instead of Louisville.

I rarely differ with Frank, but this information is true yet may as well be 30 years ago. The Big 12 just added four new schools,, stretching from Florida to Ohio to Utah. None was UConn. I don't know how true the rumors are, but allegedly the Big 12 is looking at expanding by four more with SMU, USF, Memphis, and Boise. (This according to David Smoak of 365 Sports.) Another considered was SDSU instead of SMU, again, ALLEGEDLY. UConn is not being considered. UConn's membership in a power conference is every bit a part of the past, even though more recent, as Rice's membership in the SWC.

Now is UConn a power basketball school and a great university? Absofreakinglutely. But they're far removed from P5 membership.

Even if the ACC expanded, they'd have WVU, Cincinnati, and maybe even Navy football, UCF, or another Big 12 school on their wish list ahead of UConn, in my opinion.

Quote:UConn in its heart and soul believes that it is a power conference school. (They're similar to BYU in that way.) The Huskies were at least able to regain that in basketball by rejoining the Big East. For football, it's legitimately more important for them to play more P5 opponents than any type of G5 conference schedule. Football success for UConn is consistently going 6-6 or 7-5 with bowl berths against an attractive mix of P5 opponents and local schools (such as Army and UMass), which is honestly what UConn would have been reasonably hoping for in the ACC or Big Ten.

Again, UConn is a power institution and a power basketball school. But their football is so unattractive that they won't make the cut of a Big 12 expanding by EIGHT MEMBERS.

Football REALLY matters. Boise is decidedly a lesser institution than UConn, yet they're the ones with a real chance at the Big 12.

I haven't argued that UConn (or UMass) should go back to FCS or drop the sport. But they're not a P5 school for a reason. UConn has a wonderful home in the Big East. I just hope they're comfortable. I really don't think they're getting into a P5 league any sooner than far more successful G5 programs like App State is.

(12-15-2021 03:30 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(12-15-2021 11:09 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  In the past decade, UConn played in the Fiesta Bowl and was a coinflip away from getting into the ACC instead of Louisville.

I rarely differ with Frank, but this information is true yet may as well be 30 years ago. The Big 12 just added four new schools,, stretching from Florida to Ohio to Utah. None was UConn. I don't know how true the rumors are, but allegedly the Big 12 is looking at expanding by four more with SMU, USF, Memphis, and Boise. (This according to David Smoak of 365 Sports.) Another considered was SDSU instead of SMU, again, ALLEGEDLY. UConn is not being considered. UConn's membership in a power conference is every bit a part of the past, even though more recent, as Rice's membership in the SWC.

Now is UConn a power basketball school and a great university? Absofreakinglutely. But they're far removed from P5 membership.

Even if the ACC expanded, they'd have WVU, Cincinnati, and maybe even Navy football, UCF, or another Big 12 school on their wish list ahead of UConn, in my opinion.

Quote:UConn in its heart and soul believes that it is a power conference school. (They're similar to BYU in that way.) The Huskies were at least able to regain that in basketball by rejoining the Big East. For football, it's legitimately more important for them to play more P5 opponents than any type of G5 conference schedule. Football success for UConn is consistently going 6-6 or 7-5 with bowl berths against an attractive mix of P5 opponents and local schools (such as Army and UMass), which is honestly what UConn would have been reasonably hoping for in the ACC or Big Ten.

Again, UConn is a power institution and a power basketball school. But their football is so unattractive that they won't make the cut of a Big 12 expanding by EIGHT MEMBERS.

Football REALLY matters. Boise is decidedly a lesser institution than UConn, yet they're the ones with a real chance at the Big 12.

I haven't argued that UConn (or UMass) should go back to FCS or drop the sport. But they're not a P5 school for a reason. UConn has a wonderful home in the Big East. I just hope they're comfortable. I really don't think they're getting into a P5 league any sooner than far more successful G5 programs like App State is.

Big 12 would be bad for UConn. No more plains states conferences. I'm actually one of those weirdos who thinks even the ACC or Big Ten wouldn't be a great thing for specifically the basketball program. The secret sauce for UConn basketball is absolutely hammering NY/NJ recruiting and the New England prep school circuit. No conference is as well-positioned to do that as the Big East.

(12-15-2021 03:23 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-15-2021 02:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(12-15-2021 01:04 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  The last time the A10 had 3 bids was in 2018 and NONE of the teams advanced to the round of 32, while the last few years the MAC team has advanced.

I'm curious, does anyone really believe that the quality of your conference has much to do with whether teams advance in the NCAAs?

If you're advancing because you were the higher seed, that speaks to the power of the program, the strength of schedule of the conference etc. But if you're knocking off a higher seed, that's more a matter of your senior shooters having hot streaks, etc.

Did anyone really look and re-evaluate the strength of America East when UMBC took down Virginia? Naah.

Agreed.

The poster has made the same argument elsewhere (who appears to badly want UMass to join the MAC for all-sports) and it simply doesn't track with reality.

The strength of a conference is much more about at-large bids in and of themselves much more than how far those teams advanced. Sure, a conference gets a bump in perception if they're able to combine a lot of at-large bids AND advancing far in the tournament consistently, but on balance, it's much more about the former than the latter.

Case in point is the A-10's own latest addition of Loyola. By the poster's logic, Loyola should have stayed in the MVC since they've had a better record of total NCAA Tournament credits compared to the A-10 due to Loyola's advancing to the Final Four and Sweet Sixteen in recent years along with Wichita State's prior achievements. Yet, both of those schools left because the A-10 and AAC (respectively) simply have (or at least had for the AAC) much more depth as evidenced by the number of at-large bids that they've received over the years.

Frank the Tank do agree with a conference strength helps with at-large bids, but the A10 peaked in 2014 with 6 bids. By 2018 it was 3 bids and none of the teams advanced out of the 64 team round. (Bonnies did win their play in game.) Following that year, the A10 has received 2 bids and would have been true the Covid year. The A10 is not the same strong league as the Big East has become the best non football conference, which all teams want to be in and has gained bids.

The point being there's a threshold of strength that applies for getting those at-large bids and hence not being a 3 bid conference is the border of that threshold.

Hope the A10 starts to improve and feel the ceiling is 3 bids and will not call it a 3 bid conference until the conference earns 3 bids in back to back years. Keep an eye on that and painfully aware of this. It's hard to justify the A10 at the expense of football and all other non men's basketball teams, when this advantage only played out once in over 20 years.

The other thing playing into the 3 bid ceiling is the potential for the A10 getting raided again if the media tells the Big East to expand. Do agree there was and still is a big difference, but still feel it's up to UMass basketball to perform. If they perform, it will not matter tremendously if we are in the A10 or the MAC.

To the point of rivals there are 2 main types and the super rival that contains both. There are local rivals as URI and how we feel BC and UConn. There are rivals when two teams start competing for top dog in the conference. If we are successful we could form the latter type of rival with anyone in our conference.