(03-27-2022 11:15 AM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 09:03 AM)schmolik Wrote:  I think the comment from St. Peter's AD about St. Peter's getting more of the NCAA money certainly can bring up the debate about how conferences share money. I think in the case of St. Peter's or Gonzaga, I think it is perfectly fair that one school gets more (not all, but certainly not the same as everyone else either). If Duke wins the NCAA Championship, should they get the same amount as Boston College? In football, if Michigan or Ohio State make the College Football Playoff, should they get the same amount as, yeah I'll say it, Illinois? In the Big Ten media contract, Ohio State, Michigan, and Illinois get the same amount. Ohio State-Michigan had almost 16 million viewers. Did Illinois football games have 16 million viewers total the entire season?

It does become a slippery slope. The Big 12 lost Nebraska because the Big 10 shared equally and the Big 12 didn't. I'm sure if one of the major conferences decided to proportionally stack revenue, another conference can use that against them. Or you never know, maybe the opposite could be true. What if the Big 10 said they will base it proportionally to entice Alabama? Even if the SEC sticks it to equally and we lose a few schools that prefer equal sharing, any school the Big Ten loses to the SEC for that reason will be worth it if we get Alabama (Ohio State and Michigan won't leave if they know they'll get larger shares).

Maybe have media revenue stay equal but postseason revenue be awarded proportionally. We don't want to award a Texas just for being popular or penalize a Wake Forest for being a private school but what's wrong with rewarding a Gonzaga or St. Peter's or in football an Alabama or Ohio State for winning? Pittsburgh won the ACC in football? They get a bonus. The schools that made the NCAA men's and women's tournaments get more than the ones that don't. The schools that made bowl games get more than the ones that don't.

The P5/BE and the one-bid leagues have no reason to change from an even split. For the most part, everyone is taking turns being up or down, getting plenty of bids and units. Sure in basketball, your Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, UNC, Syracuse, UCLA, Arizona, Michigan St, Indiana powers consistently lead their conferences in collecting NCAA Tournament revenue. But those also AREN'T the schools who are routinely collecting from the CFP.

Which is why Oklahoma St, Georgia, Clemson, USC, Penn State, Nebraska -- are okay with it, too. Those schools, combined with the guys who rarely win in either (Oregon St, Washington St, Northwestern, Minnesota, Vandy, Ole Miss, Rutgers) give "Even Split" the majority in a conference vote over the teams who are actually good at both (Oregon, Ohio St, Michigan, Oklahoma, WVU, Texas, LSU, Florida, FSU, Miami).

For the one-bid leagues, the even split is a far safer bet, because there's hardly anyone left who "dominates" their league. Maybe Vermont. But Davidson (SoCon), Butler (Horizon), Belmont and Murray State (OVC), Stephen F Austin (Southland) have all moved up.


It's the middle tier that needs to contemplate a performance split instead of an even split.

The A-10 already has it. It's about 75% keep, 25% share for your NCAA bids. St. Bonaventure got more from beating UCLA and losing to Florida in 2018 (1.5 NCAA units to keep, 0.5 to share), than Loyola earned from their 2018 Final Four in an even split (5 units, 10-way split = 0.5 for Loyola).

(Honestly, I think the A-10 needs to adjust more towards even. With 15 members, it makes sense to me that you Share 30% of what you earn, keep 60% of what you earn, and 10% goes into a MBB scheduling fund to be used for when bottom teams need the cash to not go play a guarantee game they'll lose to a P5).

The current model keeps the top A10 programs from leaving.

UMass though would actually get more NCAAT revenue if they played in the MAC because of its better split.

MAC has it 1/3 keep, 1/3 even split and 1/3 based on conference performance as reward for a good regular season.

(03-27-2022 10:55 AM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 12:22 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Sure, the A-10 is all about adding future dead weight that made a run or two in the Dance (Davidson, Loyola, George Mason).

George Mason was really more about ensuring the A-10 didn't lose their position than improving it. (Also, we took VCU too, who's good).

Davidson has won like 71% of their basketball games for like the last 25 years. They're one of the most consistent programs (which is what the A-10 sorely needs because programs like SLU, GW, St Joe's, URI, and Richmond constantly bounce back and forth between 24-8 and 13-19 seasons).

Loyola was not good for a long time, but their Final Four, and Sweet 16 runs were more than a flash in the pan. They hired an AD from the A-10 with the goal of making their athletic department an A-10 school and he got to work improving facilities and committing to basketball. And that's when their success started to come. Look at Moser's record at Loyola before he showed up).

The A-10 didn't add Loyola just because they had a deep run. Loyola was added because Loyola made themselves into the image of an A-10 program, and when the college world was focused on realignment/expansion, they called the A-10 and said they wanted in. The A-10 said "why not now?" instead of waiting for a need.

Davidson likely declines significantly once McKillop hangs it up. There's nothing to suggest they can sustain their success.

Loyola despite some recent success and effort is a flash in the pan that according to their historical norm may not make another big run for decades.

Mason is a commuter school with very little history of success (6 total NCAA Tournament appearances). They'll be lucky to get something going more than once a decade.

Speaking of being a commuter school, that means they struggle to build a fanbase. All 3 do and will, with LUC in a pro sports market that already has a Catholic school to follow (DePaul) plus other schools like UIC and Northwestern. Davidson will especially struggle because it suffers many of the same problems and is a tiny school with a small alumni base and not not particularly rich.

(03-27-2022 02:41 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 10:55 AM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 12:22 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Sure, the A-10 is all about adding future dead weight that made a run or two in the Dance (Davidson, Loyola, George Mason).

George Mason was really more about ensuring the A-10 didn't lose their position than improving it. (Also, we took VCU too, who's good).

Davidson has won like 71% of their basketball games for like the last 25 years. They're one of the most consistent programs (which is what the A-10 sorely needs because programs like SLU, GW, St Joe's, URI, and Richmond constantly bounce back and forth between 24-8 and 13-19 seasons).

Loyola was not good for a long time, but their Final Four, and Sweet 16 runs were more than a flash in the pan. They hired an AD from the A-10 with the goal of making their athletic department an A-10 school and he got to work improving facilities and committing to basketball. And that's when their success started to come. Look at Moser's record at Loyola before he showed up).

The A-10 didn't add Loyola just because they had a deep run. Loyola was added because Loyola made themselves into the image of an A-10 program, and when the college world was focused on realignment/expansion, they called the A-10 and said they wanted in. The A-10 said "why not now?" instead of waiting for a need.

Davidson likely declines significantly once McKillop hangs it up. There's nothing to suggest they can sustain their success.

Loyola despite some recent success and effort is a flash in the pan that according to their historical norm may not make another big run for decades.

Mason is a commuter school with very little history of success (6 total NCAA Tournament appearances). They'll be lucky to get something going more than once a decade.

Speaking of being a commuter school, that means they struggle to build a fanbase. All 3 do and will, with LUC in a pro sports market that already has a Catholic school to follow (DePaul) plus other schools like UIC and Northwestern. Davidson will especially struggle because it suffers many of the same problems and is a tiny school with a small alumni base and not not particularly rich.

The A-10 is a mess. I have a thread going about an A-10 airport meeting. It’s time.

(03-26-2022 07:15 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(03-26-2022 06:49 PM)goofus Wrote:  The real question should be how long before the St. Peter's head coach receives an offer from an A-10 school to be their new head coach.

It's a given he's going to Seton Hall or there will be a revolt in Seton Hall. I think Holloway will be personally offended if he isn't their first choice.

THIS^. Shaheen Holloway is regarded as the first and only phone call Seton Hall should make. This is as much a done deal as there can be.

(03-27-2022 02:41 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 10:55 AM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 12:22 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Sure, the A-10 is all about adding future dead weight that made a run or two in the Dance (Davidson, Loyola, George Mason).

George Mason was really more about ensuring the A-10 didn't lose their position than improving it. (Also, we took VCU too, who's good).

Davidson has won like 71% of their basketball games for like the last 25 years. They're one of the most consistent programs (which is what the A-10 sorely needs because programs like SLU, GW, St Joe's, URI, and Richmond constantly bounce back and forth between 24-8 and 13-19 seasons).

Loyola was not good for a long time, but their Final Four, and Sweet 16 runs were more than a flash in the pan. They hired an AD from the A-10 with the goal of making their athletic department an A-10 school and he got to work improving facilities and committing to basketball. And that's when their success started to come. Look at Moser's record at Loyola before he showed up).

The A-10 didn't add Loyola just because they had a deep run. Loyola was added because Loyola made themselves into the image of an A-10 program, and when the college world was focused on realignment/expansion, they called the A-10 and said they wanted in. The A-10 said "why not now?" instead of waiting for a need.

Davidson likely declines significantly once McKillop hangs it up. There's nothing to suggest they can sustain their success.

Loyola despite some recent success and effort is a flash in the pan that according to their historical norm may not make another big run for decades.

Mason is a commuter school with very little history of success (6 total NCAA Tournament appearances). They'll be lucky to get something going more than once a decade.

Speaking of being a commuter school, that means they struggle to build a fanbase. All 3 do and will, with LUC in a pro sports market that already has a Catholic school to follow (DePaul) plus other schools like UIC and Northwestern. Davidson will especially struggle because it suffers many of the same problems and is a tiny school with a small alumni base and not not particularly rich.

Davidson was good in the 60s and 70s, making the elite 8 two years in a row, finishing #5 in the polls one year and ranking in the final top 10 4 times in the 60s.
There's plenty to suggest they will continue to be good.

On top of that, they share a nickname with Kentucky, Villanova and Arizona.

St Peters made me think of an old joke I heard:


I took my Dad to the mall the other day to buy some new shoes (he is 66).

We decided to grab a bite at the food court.

I noticed he was watching a teenager sitting next to him.

The teenager had spiked hair in all different colors - green, red, orange, and blue.

My Dad kept staring at her.

The teenager kept looking and would find my Dad staring every time.

When the teenager had had enough, she sarcastically asked: “What's the matter old man, never done anything wild in your life?”

Knowing my Dad, I quickly swallowed my food so that I would not choke on his response; I knew he would have a good one!

In classic style he responded without batting an eyelid …………

“Got stoned once and screwed a peacock. I was just wondering if you were my daughter."

(03-27-2022 06:30 PM)Todor Wrote:  St Peters made me think of an old joke I heard:


I took my Dad to the mall the other day to buy some new shoes (he is 66).

We decided to grab a bite at the food court.

I noticed he was watching a teenager sitting next to him.

The teenager had spiked hair in all different colors - green, red, orange, and blue.

My Dad kept staring at her.

The teenager kept looking and would find my Dad staring every time.

When the teenager had had enough, she sarcastically asked: “What's the matter old man, never done anything wild in your life?”

Knowing my Dad, I quickly swallowed my food so that I would not choke on his response; I knew he would have a good one!

In classic style he responded without batting an eyelid …………

“Got stoned once and screwed a peacock. I was just wondering if you were my daughter."

(03-27-2022 05:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  Davidson was good in the 60s and 70s, making the elite 8 two years in a row, finishing #5 in the polls one year and ranking in the final top 10 4 times in the 60s.
There's plenty to suggest they will continue to be good.

On top of that, they share a nickname with Kentucky, Villanova and Arizona.

I'm aware of Davidson's history. The history that got them into the A-10 came under one coach. Just because a school can make a run once a generation doesn't mean it can be sustained and you add them. That's the A-10's whole problem right now.

(03-27-2022 06:48 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 05:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  Davidson was good in the 60s and 70s, making the elite 8 two years in a row, finishing #5 in the polls one year and ranking in the final top 10 4 times in the 60s.
There's plenty to suggest they will continue to be good.

On top of that, they share a nickname with Kentucky, Villanova and Arizona.

I'm aware of Davidson's history. The history that got them into the A-10 came under one coach. Just because a school can make a run once a generation doesn't mean it can be sustained and you add them. That's the A-10's whole problem right now.

A10's problem is it doesn't have FBS football to be able to bring in larger TV revenue.

If there is a split with FBS forming a new division the BE might be able to entice G5 programs to join it but the A10 is likely screwed.

(03-27-2022 02:41 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 10:55 AM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 12:22 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Sure, the A-10 is all about adding future dead weight that made a run or two in the Dance (Davidson, Loyola, George Mason).

George Mason was really more about ensuring the A-10 didn't lose their position than improving it. (Also, we took VCU too, who's good).

Davidson has won like 71% of their basketball games for like the last 25 years. They're one of the most consistent programs (which is what the A-10 sorely needs because programs like SLU, GW, St Joe's, URI, and Richmond constantly bounce back and forth between 24-8 and 13-19 seasons).

Loyola was not good for a long time, but their Final Four, and Sweet 16 runs were more than a flash in the pan. They hired an AD from the A-10 with the goal of making their athletic department an A-10 school and he got to work improving facilities and committing to basketball. And that's when their success started to come. Look at Moser's record at Loyola before he showed up).

The A-10 didn't add Loyola just because they had a deep run. Loyola was added because Loyola made themselves into the image of an A-10 program, and when the college world was focused on realignment/expansion, they called the A-10 and said they wanted in. The A-10 said "why not now?" instead of waiting for a need.

Davidson likely declines significantly once McKillop hangs it up. There's nothing to suggest they can sustain their success.

Loyola despite some recent success and effort is a flash in the pan that according to their historical norm may not make another big run for decades.

Mason is a commuter school with very little history of success (6 total NCAA Tournament appearances). They'll be lucky to get something going more than once a decade.

Speaking of being a commuter school, that means they struggle to build a fanbase. All 3 do and will, with LUC in a pro sports market that already has a Catholic school to follow (DePaul) plus other schools like UIC and Northwestern. Davidson will especially struggle because it suffers many of the same problems and is a tiny school with a small alumni base and not not particularly rich.

Well Davidson did have Lefty Driesell, assistant Rick Barnes, Terry Holland, assistant Matt Doherty, and Jim Larranaga.
I think they will be able to attract a coach that can win.

(03-27-2022 07:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 02:41 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 10:55 AM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 12:22 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Sure, the A-10 is all about adding future dead weight that made a run or two in the Dance (Davidson, Loyola, George Mason).

George Mason was really more about ensuring the A-10 didn't lose their position than improving it. (Also, we took VCU too, who's good).

Davidson has won like 71% of their basketball games for like the last 25 years. They're one of the most consistent programs (which is what the A-10 sorely needs because programs like SLU, GW, St Joe's, URI, and Richmond constantly bounce back and forth between 24-8 and 13-19 seasons).

Loyola was not good for a long time, but their Final Four, and Sweet 16 runs were more than a flash in the pan. They hired an AD from the A-10 with the goal of making their athletic department an A-10 school and he got to work improving facilities and committing to basketball. And that's when their success started to come. Look at Moser's record at Loyola before he showed up).

The A-10 didn't add Loyola just because they had a deep run. Loyola was added because Loyola made themselves into the image of an A-10 program, and when the college world was focused on realignment/expansion, they called the A-10 and said they wanted in. The A-10 said "why not now?" instead of waiting for a need.

Davidson likely declines significantly once McKillop hangs it up. There's nothing to suggest they can sustain their success.

Loyola despite some recent success and effort is a flash in the pan that according to their historical norm may not make another big run for decades.

Mason is a commuter school with very little history of success (6 total NCAA Tournament appearances). They'll be lucky to get something going more than once a decade.

Speaking of being a commuter school, that means they struggle to build a fanbase. All 3 do and will, with LUC in a pro sports market that already has a Catholic school to follow (DePaul) plus other schools like UIC and Northwestern. Davidson will especially struggle because it suffers many of the same problems and is a tiny school with a small alumni base and not not particularly rich.

Well Davidson did have Lefty Driesell, assistant Rick Barnes, Terry Holland, assistant Matt Doherty, and Jim Larranaga.
I think they will be able to attract a coach that can win.

I was with you until you mentioned Douherty. He was a garbage coach at UNC and I am a Dougherty player fan. And a HUGE Heel fan.

(03-27-2022 07:55 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 07:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 02:41 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 10:55 AM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 12:22 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Sure, the A-10 is all about adding future dead weight that made a run or two in the Dance (Davidson, Loyola, George Mason).

George Mason was really more about ensuring the A-10 didn't lose their position than improving it. (Also, we took VCU too, who's good).

Davidson has won like 71% of their basketball games for like the last 25 years. They're one of the most consistent programs (which is what the A-10 sorely needs because programs like SLU, GW, St Joe's, URI, and Richmond constantly bounce back and forth between 24-8 and 13-19 seasons).

Loyola was not good for a long time, but their Final Four, and Sweet 16 runs were more than a flash in the pan. They hired an AD from the A-10 with the goal of making their athletic department an A-10 school and he got to work improving facilities and committing to basketball. And that's when their success started to come. Look at Moser's record at Loyola before he showed up).

The A-10 didn't add Loyola just because they had a deep run. Loyola was added because Loyola made themselves into the image of an A-10 program, and when the college world was focused on realignment/expansion, they called the A-10 and said they wanted in. The A-10 said "why not now?" instead of waiting for a need.

Davidson likely declines significantly once McKillop hangs it up. There's nothing to suggest they can sustain their success.

Loyola despite some recent success and effort is a flash in the pan that according to their historical norm may not make another big run for decades.

Mason is a commuter school with very little history of success (6 total NCAA Tournament appearances). They'll be lucky to get something going more than once a decade.

Speaking of being a commuter school, that means they struggle to build a fanbase. All 3 do and will, with LUC in a pro sports market that already has a Catholic school to follow (DePaul) plus other schools like UIC and Northwestern. Davidson will especially struggle because it suffers many of the same problems and is a tiny school with a small alumni base and not not particularly rich.

Well Davidson did have Lefty Driesell, assistant Rick Barnes, Terry Holland, assistant Matt Doherty, and Jim Larranaga.
I think they will be able to attract a coach that can win.

I was with you until you mentioned Douherty. He was a garbage coach at UNC and I am a Dougherty player fan. And a HUGE Heel fan.

A huge Heel fan would know how to spell Doherty's name.

(03-27-2022 12:00 PM)Pastasevensamurai Wrote:  Wcc does not. Wcc did. Pacific gets nothing.

Gonzaga will keep all their revenue earned. Where did you get your information from?

That's not at all what was reported when Gonzaga turned down the MWC.

Included in those changes was a restructuring of the financial distribution of the league’s revenue from the NCAA basketball tournament, allowing teams that advance deep into the tournament to retain a larger portion of the revenue.
https://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/...486972002/


And the AP:
Under terms of the compromise, the conference will now divide the first unit of tournament revenue evenly among the 10 teams, but give the teams a larger slice of any additional units they generate by winning games.
https://apnews.com/article/275680042f9e4...4fbca0ff10

(03-27-2022 08:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 07:55 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 07:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 02:41 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-27-2022 10:55 AM)JSchmack Wrote:  George Mason was really more about ensuring the A-10 didn't lose their position than improving it. (Also, we took VCU too, who's good).

Davidson has won like 71% of their basketball games for like the last 25 years. They're one of the most consistent programs (which is what the A-10 sorely needs because programs like SLU, GW, St Joe's, URI, and Richmond constantly bounce back and forth between 24-8 and 13-19 seasons).

Loyola was not good for a long time, but their Final Four, and Sweet 16 runs were more than a flash in the pan. They hired an AD from the A-10 with the goal of making their athletic department an A-10 school and he got to work improving facilities and committing to basketball. And that's when their success started to come. Look at Moser's record at Loyola before he showed up).

The A-10 didn't add Loyola just because they had a deep run. Loyola was added because Loyola made themselves into the image of an A-10 program, and when the college world was focused on realignment/expansion, they called the A-10 and said they wanted in. The A-10 said "why not now?" instead of waiting for a need.

Davidson likely declines significantly once McKillop hangs it up. There's nothing to suggest they can sustain their success.

Loyola despite some recent success and effort is a flash in the pan that according to their historical norm may not make another big run for decades.

Mason is a commuter school with very little history of success (6 total NCAA Tournament appearances). They'll be lucky to get something going more than once a decade.

Speaking of being a commuter school, that means they struggle to build a fanbase. All 3 do and will, with LUC in a pro sports market that already has a Catholic school to follow (DePaul) plus other schools like UIC and Northwestern. Davidson will especially struggle because it suffers many of the same problems and is a tiny school with a small alumni base and not not particularly rich.

Well Davidson did have Lefty Driesell, assistant Rick Barnes, Terry Holland, assistant Matt Doherty, and Jim Larranaga.
I think they will be able to attract a coach that can win.

I was with you until you mentioned Douherty. He was a garbage coach at UNC and I am a Dougherty player fan. And a HUGE Heel fan.

A huge Heel fan would know how to spell Doherty's name.

Not necessarily. I'm a Cincinnati Bearcat fans and a fan of the City of Cincinnati and sometimes misspell it as "Cinccinati" or "Cinncinnati."

Holloway will get an invite to coach an A-10 school much sooner than St. Peter's will get an invite. Perhaps by 30 years.

(03-27-2022 02:57 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  The A-10 is a mess. I have a thread going about an A-10 airport meeting. It’s time.

It's really not. I love that thread, because I'm an A-10 guy. But A-10 programs 3-10 are basically the same kind of program: 4 NCAA bids in 20 years, up and down patches. If the A-10 had an airport meeting to split in half, no one would be able to agree on who the top 7 are, and who was being left behind.

The names change all the time, but it boils down to the A-10 would be the 14 teams you'd want to be the second best hoops-only league behind the Big East, if you just got rid of Fordham and LaSalle and added Belmont and one other school.

(03-27-2022 06:48 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  I'm aware of Davidson's history. The history that got them into the A-10 came under one coach. Just because a school can make a run once a generation doesn't mean it can be sustained and you add them. That's the A-10's whole problem right now.

It's really funny to me that in another thread, I have people disagreeing with me on UMass' long-term future expectations because they've averaged a .496 win percentage and 2 NCAA bids for 64 of the last 72 years, with the only exception being an 8-year Calipari era.

While Davidson has had 33 years of McKillop, which is far more time to turn from the work of "one coach" into "what the program is" than Calipari's stint in Amherst. And in the 33 years before McKillop, Davidson was .519 with 5 NCAA bids.

YES, Davidson before McKillop all-time is only a .504 program. But the old history of Davidson's W-L record is from a time when they shared the SoCon with HALF THE SEC AND ACC. Yeah, they were bad in the 40s and 50s, when Duke, North Carolina, NC State, West Virginia, Clemson, Maryland, South Carolina, Wake Forest, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Richmond and George Washington finished ahead of them!

Fortunately for their record, and unfortunately for the A-10 NCAA Revenue, the post-McKillop A-10 Wildcats won't be facing 11 of those 13 teams.

(03-28-2022 04:26 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Holloway will get an invite to coach an A-10 school much sooner than St. Peter's will get an invite. Perhaps by 30 years.

Holloway already has a Big East invite and announcement.

(03-28-2022 04:26 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Holloway will get an invite to coach an A-10 school much sooner than St. Peter's will get an invite. Perhaps by 30 years.

Yeah, but on the Archie Miller/Frank Martin track down, not the Sean Miller/Danny Hurley way up.

(03-28-2022 04:56 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(03-28-2022 04:26 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Holloway will get an invite to coach an A-10 school much sooner than St. Peter's will get an invite. Perhaps by 30 years.

Holloway already has a Big East invite and announcement.

Yeah, he won't even have to move. He just goes a slightly different direction on his commute.