(01-30-2018 09:21 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(01-30-2018 07:29 PM)CenterSquarEd Wrote:  

(01-30-2018 02:04 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Which A10 school would be in favor of Sienna and Iona, not counting LaSalle?

Rough Count
Solidy Yes: St. Joe's, Duquesne, Fordham, St Bony's,
Likely Yes: GW

Who are the other 4 or 5 that would vote in favor or 2 more small Catholic NY schools?

Siena is a top 100 attendance leader for NCAA Division I men's basketball, a feat that's only matched by a few current A-10 members, and would immediately become one of the most popular teams in the conference. I'm not sure that enrollment size or affiliation with the Franciscan order matters so much when the team is able to play in downtown Albany's arena and draw fans from the community. The Siena program is well-funded compared to lots of struggling athletic programs. And the Albany area is doing well economically, it sits just outside the top 50 TV markets, and the fans here tend to favor college sports over the various minor league pro sports that come and go. (UAlbany football and basketball are also popular, as are the hockey programs at RPI and Union.)

Probably the one thing holding Siena back is whether it can consistently win on the court, with its last NCAA Tournament birth way back in 2010, a CBI championship in 2014, and another CBI appearance in 2016.

If you're going to pick on Siena's chances, first of all make sure you spell it right, and then figure out the things that the A-10 would actually prioritize.

That's one that makes no sense to me. Shouldn't it be Albany as the most popular program there? It's even an SUNY campus.

It *should* anywhere but the Northeast. Private schools actually do get casual support more easily in that area than elsewhere. And Siena...does VERY well in attracting local support.

First of all, I'm not really jazzed about adding anyone at this point. But here's how Siena rates versus SUNY-Albany

1) SUNY-Albany has FCS football and plays it at a high FCS level. Big demerits for that. A-10 spending requirements would blow their budget out of the water if they've still got high level FCS.

2) SUNY-Albany has more students. Siena has more money. Still have questions about money at Siena (they don't have a whole lot).

3) Siena is also private, which helps them spend money more easily than SUNY-Albany not if, but WHEN the state tells New York publics....you can't continue to lose 20 million a year on athletics.

4) Siena is a better fit, academically and culturally.

But basically, you can boil it down to the fact that Albany simply isn't going to be able to afford A-10 membership if they have a high level FCS football team. Fairfield would be a stronger competitor to Siena than SUNY-Albany.

---

Basically, the A-10 is going to be sitting on some motivated spending, well off schools, that are mostly PRIVATE, when the funding crisis hits.

(01-30-2018 09:57 PM)MKPitt Wrote:  I think you’re missing a lot of what goes into realignment. Davidson is an elite academic school that the other A-10 schools want to be aligned with. As long as they are decent every couple of years, most A-10 will be satisfied with the addition.

But what if they're not? Then you're weighed down with another Fordham or Duquesne for 30-50 years. As I recall, Fordham was decent in the years leading up to the A-10 invite but has never been competitive in men's basketball while in the conference and that started immediately (they were 4-23 their first year in the A-10).

You don't make 50 year decisions based on 5-10 years on winning on the field of play. It's why the Big East may regret adding Butler one day. They may never get back to that level again. They have been solid but we'll see if they can sustain it.

@Tom

I'm just wondering where their fanbase is gonna come from. The school is the size of a small high school (by Texas standards) and as noted, they share a market directly and indirectly with numerous other programs, to speak nothing of the NBA.

(01-30-2018 10:48 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(01-30-2018 09:57 PM)MKPitt Wrote:  I think you’re missing a lot of what goes into realignment. Davidson is an elite academic school that the other A-10 schools want to be aligned with. As long as they are decent every couple of years, most A-10 will be satisfied with the addition.

But what if they're not? Then you're weighed down with another Fordham or Duquesne for 30-50 years. As I recall, Fordham was decent in the years leading up to the A-10 invite but has never been competitive in men's basketball while in the conference and that started immediately (they were 4-23 their first year in the A-10).

You don't make 50 year decisions based on 5-10 years on winning on the field of play. It's why the Big East may regret adding Butler one day. They may never get back to that level again. They have been solid but we'll see if they can sustain it.

?

They've made 5 sweet 16's since 2003 including one as far back as 2017.

They are more than those title contending years.

What part of "you don't make 50 year decisions based on a few years of winning on the field of play" don't you understand? Just because they punch above their weight on the field of play doesn't mean they can sustain it.

Imagine if conferences had added Jacksonville and St. Bonaventure after their Final Four runs? Indeed, the A-10 has been kinda stuck with Bonnie minus a flash in the pan every 5-10 years. Butler will likely be okay but it's no certainty. They were added immediately after their title runs. Dayton and St. Louis are much better long term bets.

(01-31-2018 12:30 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  What part of "you don't make 50 year decisions based on a few years of winning on the field of play" don't you understand? Just because they punch above their weight on the field of play doesn't mean they can sustain it.

Imagine if conferences had added Jacksonville and St. Bonaventure after their Final Four runs? Indeed, the A-10 has been kinda stuck with Bonnie minus a flash in the pan every 5-10 years. Butler will likely be okay but it's no certainty. They were added immediately after their title runs. Dayton and St. Louis are much better long term bets.

Butler has been good for 2 decades. Run started in the late 90's.

If a program can be sustained in college basketball for a decade that shows intrinsic strength.

Penn $12.2 bill 21 k students

Drexel $722 mill 26.4 students
Temple $513 mill 40k students
Villanova $712 mill 10.6 k students

St Joes $212 mill 8.4k
La Salle $88 mill, 5.9k enrollment

Past history was kind to St Joe's and La Salle. Present conditions might lead elsewhere.

(01-31-2018 01:19 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 12:30 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  What part of "you don't make 50 year decisions based on a few years of winning on the field of play" don't you understand? Just because they punch above their weight on the field of play doesn't mean they can sustain it.

Imagine if conferences had added Jacksonville and St. Bonaventure after their Final Four runs? Indeed, the A-10 has been kinda stuck with Bonnie minus a flash in the pan every 5-10 years. Butler will likely be okay but it's no certainty. They were added immediately after their title runs. Dayton and St. Louis are much better long term bets.

Butler has been good for 2 decades. Run started in the late 90's.

If a program can be sustained in college basketball for a decade that shows intrinsic strength.

Butler was a no name mid major taking advantage of the Horizon's auto-bid in the late 90's. They didn't really emerge until 2007 (the initial Sweet 16 run was a typical March Madness Cinderella run by a lower seed). Upon being granted membership in the Big East, they had 10 NCAA Tournament runs in 16 years. They had missed it the year before their first Big East year. They were good but inconsistent and had zero history to speak of before Barry Collier (blah, blah, blah Hinkle Fieldhouse is historic, blah, blah, blah they created the modern basketball).

They have done fine in the Big East but realistically, the A-10 is more or less where they should be for the long haul.

(01-30-2018 11:18 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  @Tom

I'm just wondering where their fanbase is gonna come from. The school is the size of a small high school (by Texas standards) and as noted, they share a market directly and indirectly with numerous other programs, to speak nothing of the NBA.

Siena consistently draws more fans than GW and several other A-10 schools. Siena, a member of the MAAC, routinely draws more fans to their basketball games than they have students and staff. Who else can say that? The fanbase isn't a real problem. I think money is a bit of a problem.

If you were talking about Davidson, they also draw more fans to their games, and by a large margin, than they have students and staff. They usually outdraw UNCC.

It was about Davidson.

I just think long term, they'll sink and become another Duquesne or Fordham. There's nothing wrong with being academically oriented and small but that's what they are.

(01-31-2018 04:21 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 01:19 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 12:30 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  What part of "you don't make 50 year decisions based on a few years of winning on the field of play" don't you understand? Just because they punch above their weight on the field of play doesn't mean they can sustain it.

Imagine if conferences had added Jacksonville and St. Bonaventure after their Final Four runs? Indeed, the A-10 has been kinda stuck with Bonnie minus a flash in the pan every 5-10 years. Butler will likely be okay but it's no certainty. They were added immediately after their title runs. Dayton and St. Louis are much better long term bets.

Butler has been good for 2 decades. Run started in the late 90's.

If a program can be sustained in college basketball for a decade that shows intrinsic strength.

Butler was a no name mid major taking advantage of the Horizon's auto-bid in the late 90's. They didn't really emerge until 2007 (the initial Sweet 16 run was a typical March Madness Cinderella run by a lower seed). Upon being granted membership in the Big East, they had 10 NCAA Tournament runs in 16 years. They had missed it the year before their first Big East year. They were good but inconsistent and had zero history to speak of before Barry Collier (blah, blah, blah Hinkle Fieldhouse is historic, blah, blah, blah they created the modern basketball).

They have done fine in the Big East but realistically, the A-10 is more or less where they should be for the long haul.

They draw well, are in a large media market, have a successful program, have history with many of the other BE schools, are a good fit geographically, are similar academically and are not Catholic, which limits anti-Catholic bias against the conference. Most importantly, who is a better fit? SLU is a historical doormat, Dayton doesn't fit geographically because of X, and VCU was opposed by Georgetown. It was, most likely, Richmond and Butler fighting it out for the final spot. I think Butler was the far superior candidate.

(01-29-2018 11:18 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-29-2018 05:27 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(01-28-2018 01:51 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  La Salle is in serious financial jeopardy. Prior to the current academic year enrollment has been in steady decline and competition for students is gettting more challenging as high school enrollment in La Salle’s primary recruitment geography is stagnant (public schools) to declining (Catholic schools). They’re selling off art and closing their museum to raise money. However, I know for a fact that La Salle is not contemplating dropping to D3. That option was the result of the consultants making sure all options are reviewed.

La Salle is really caught in a bind. They don’t have the money to have A10 level facilities or coaching salaries which means that they are generally not competitive. That’s especially true in men’s basketball where they’ve had one NCCA bid in 22 years in the A10. Moving back to the MAAC would save them some money and they’d be more competitive. However, it would hinder their ability to increase the number of students enrolling from Mid-Atlantic states which the administration sees as crucial to the university’s survival.

I think sticking it out in the A10 is the most likely outcome for now, but this is an issue that isn’t going to go away for La Salle absent tens of millions of dollars in donations that are extremely unlikely to materialize in the near future.

What's utterly shocking to me is how invisible they are locally when it comes to advertising. You don't see them on billboards, you don't hear about them on the radio, and you don't see them on television. Go online, and they aren't popping up on ads.

Some area schools, like Widener, Wilmington, DeSales, and even Holy Family, who all struggle(d) for eyes and filling seats, started to fixate on recruiting the non-traditional populations, non-completers, and working professionals. Those were already schools like Temple and Peirce's bread and butter, as well as the county community colleges. La Salle just isn't there.

I suspect they just still believe in the traditional recruiting methods. Go to high schools, set up a booth, and talk to kids. Want a Masters? You'll find them at a booth at other schools' fairs, traditional job fairs, and the like. They still utilize some of the traditional methods for graduate program enrollment. I was looking at MBA programs some time ago, and while most of the majors still expected you to go the route of the GRE/GMAT, GPA requirements, etc., some of the others waived these requirements, including Villanova and St. Joe's...who have fantastic graduate programs and are still extremely competitive in certain disciplines. When reviewing La Salle, it was like I was back in the 90's or early 00's, and you were applying the same way for them as if you were applying to Wharton, Rutgers, or Smeal...schools who "need" the exams because their recruitment base is international, and applicant pool is massive, and STILL don't care if you're an hourly or in the c-suite, where the test can be waived based on experience.

It's not looking good there. They slashed tuition costs, but, that's not something sustainable. Next would be forcing out the lifer staff/admin employees who clog salary lines...they don't go screaming to the Chronicle to out the awful conditions of a place like the faculty do, but you don't see profs working in operations keeping the school functioning daily. It can't stay that way.

LaSalle is the THIRD most recognized Catholic school in Philadelphia. They just don't have a product that differentiates very well beyond that either. If you want a public education in Philly, you can go to Temple. If you want a private education, you can go to Nova, or St Josephs or Drexel (which, for whatever reason, has done an excellent job in gaining and retaining enrollment). LaSalle will survive as an institution, but they're really not making the case that what they provide is really unique. Completely smothered in every direction. What is their niche? What is their target market?

The real up and coming institution in that metro is Drexel.

Drexel's kind of a mess organizationally. They reorganize their programs frequently and when they do, they tend to shed faculty and administrators because they feel they're always in peril. Drexel's not the kind of place where they're getting drilled in enrollment, though they do try VERY hard to keep up with Penn, Penn State, and Lehigh, but, they seem inconsistent. From time to time, they go all-in on transfer programs and articulation agreements with area community colleges...then drop them.

Drexel's also known for being a bit of a scrooge with the kids with financial aid. They don't exactly give much of it out, and they lose quite a lot of students that way.

They seem fine now...I suspect that a decade later, they'll be working with the 2-year schools again because they did something they shouldn't have internally. That's the Drexel people seem to know around here.

The ones who are growing are Thomas Jefferson and Villanova. Oh, and Penn and Temple...but that's nothing new with those two, basically buying everything around their respective campuses. UPenn just took over Princeton HealthCare System. UPenn's the real monster.

@MU88


You answered your own question, Dayton is a better fit. They have always filled their arena win or lose, actually are Catholic and are basically the only game in town. SLU may be a typical doormat but they are the highest level of basketball in St. Louis and also have a sizeable arena, plus a larger, less saturated market than Butler.

I think Butler is a great story and has done more with less than almost anyone in college basketball. But that will only take you so far. Long term, they are a not particularly rich private school and no better than the third basketball team in Indianapolis and probably the fourth. To put it in perspective, they've been better than Indiana by a country mile the last decade or so yet still are dwarved by Indiana basketball in fanbase and other areas. Their long term potential is limited, though they have done great over the last 12 years.

Also, the Big East didn't have to take them. They could always wait to take them later like they're doing with Dayton and Saint Louis.

wasn't LaSalle a French Pirate?


We all wait with bated breath for this momentous decision... which surely will ripple across the sands of time...

(01-31-2018 12:09 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  @MU88


You answered your own question, Dayton is a better fit. They have always filled their arena win or lose, actually are Catholic and are basically the only game in town. SLU may be a typical doormat but they are the highest level of basketball in St. Louis and also have a sizeable arena, plus a larger, less saturated market than Butler.

I think Butler is a great story and has done more with less than almost anyone in college basketball. But that will only take you so far. Long term, they are a not particularly rich private school and no better than the third basketball team in Indianapolis and probably the fourth. To put it in perspective, they've been better than Indiana by a country mile the last decade or so yet still are dwarved by Indiana basketball in fanbase and other areas. Their long term potential is limited, though they have done great over the last 12 years.

Also, the Big East didn't have to take them. They could always wait to take them later like they're doing with Dayton and Saint Louis.

Dayton? No chance. Besides being in X's market, they did a nice job of ticking off Marquette back in the early 2000s. Dayton is also a distant 4th in their market behind UC, X and OSU. As for SLU, besides being a doormat, their President at the time was a bit nuts, which didn't help their cause. Also, while St. Louis is a good size city, it isn't known has a being a big supporter of basketball, college or pro. SLU has very little fan support., even Siena outdrew SLU last year.

In short, I have no problems with Butler being in the Big East. If they were looking to expand, I don't think I would put SLU or Dayton on the top of the list. They simply don't add anything to the conference.

(01-31-2018 01:18 PM)No Bull Wrote:  wasn't LaSalle a French Pirate?


We all wait with bated breath for this momentous decision... which surely will ripple across the sands of time...

Jean Lafitte was the French Pirate, that's who you're thinking of unless you want to infer La Salle was one too.

(01-31-2018 04:32 PM)MU88 Wrote:  Dayton? No chance. Besides being in X's market, they did a nice job of ticking off Marquette back in the early 2000s. Dayton is also a distant 4th in their market behind UC, X and OSU. As for SLU, besides being a doormat, their President at the time was a bit nuts, which didn't help their cause. Also, while St. Louis is a good size city, it isn't known has a being a big supporter of basketball, college or pro. SLU has very little fan support., even Siena outdrew SLU last year.

In short, I have no problems with Butler being in the Big East. If they were looking to expand, I don't think I would put SLU or Dayton on the top of the list. They simply don't add anything to the conference.

Dayton is not even in the same CSA as Cincinnati let alone MSA or TV market. Therefore, it is its own market and the only game in town. I can buy the politics angle but not that it in any way shape or form is too close to Cincinnati. Even Ohio State is at best an equal partner in the market when it comes to college basketball.

SLU still has more long term potential than Butler, even with everything you said. If they start winning, they can be the team in St. Louis. Butler almost won two straight national titles and still isn't bigger than Indiana in Indianapolis. They're just that other team people get behind when Indiana isn't playing.

(01-31-2018 06:14 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(01-31-2018 04:32 PM)MU88 Wrote:  Dayton? No chance. Besides being in X's market, they did a nice job of ticking off Marquette back in the early 2000s. Dayton is also a distant 4th in their market behind UC, X and OSU. As for SLU, besides being a doormat, their President at the time was a bit nuts, which didn't help their cause. Also, while St. Louis is a good size city, it isn't known has a being a big supporter of basketball, college or pro. SLU has very little fan support., even Siena outdrew SLU last year.

In short, I have no problems with Butler being in the Big East. If they were looking to expand, I don't think I would put SLU or Dayton on the top of the list. They simply don't add anything to the conference.

Dayton is not even in the same CSA as Cincinnati let alone MSA or TV market. Therefore, it is its own market and the only game in town. I can buy the politics angle but not that it in any way shape or form is too close to Cincinnati. Even Ohio State is at best an equal partner in the market when it comes to college basketball.

SLU still has more long term potential than Butler, even with everything you said. If they start winning, they can be the team in St. Louis. Butler almost won two straight national titles and still isn't bigger than Indiana in Indianapolis. They're just that other team people get behind when

SLU will never be bigger than Mizzou in St. Louis either.

But Indiana basketball is a much bigger deal in Indianapolis than Missouri in STL and there has been no NBA team in St. Louis for over half a century. Thus, Saint Louis could more easily carve a long term niche than Butler. Butler is not the first unheralded private school to play for a national title. Other than Big East schools, most have withered away into irrelevance or dropped out of D-I. One such example is...La Salle.

(01-31-2018 12:09 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  You answered your own question, Dayton is a better fit. They have always filled their arena win or lose, actually are Catholic and are basically the only game in town. SLU may be a typical doormat but they are the highest level of basketball in St. Louis and also have a sizeable arena, plus a larger, less saturated market than Butler.

Here I think you've at least given a concrete reason as to why Butler shouldn't be in the Big East....because they aren't a catholic university.

But I don't think its too important. It not like its 1930 where Northeast protestants were the elites in every sector of the economy. Today they are in the minority of the elite sectors of the economy. Anti-catholic bias hasn't existed in elite sectors in decades. In my estimation catholics are probably the largest representative of the elite sector since they have a strong population base in the coastal elite cities.