(01-09-2013 03:56 PM)Title Wrote:  OK, this is verbatim from Thamel's linked article...

Quote:The Basketball Seven are thought to be seeking a 12-year deal. The amount that the schools will receive is still under negotiation, but it's believed to be in the neighborhood of $3 million per school. The league is still expected to grow to 12 teams, although the possibility has been discussed that the league could start at 10 schools and grow into a 12-team league.

We can all agree that a lot of things are up in the air at this point. No one knows for sure how this will turn out.

I think the thing with membership- there is risk with almost every potential team. You don't know if a school that has done well for years will come in and turn into DePaul....

(01-09-2013 03:56 PM)Title Wrote:  OK, this is verbatim from Thamel's linked article...

Quote:The Basketball Seven are thought to be seeking a 12-year deal. The amount that the schools will receive is still under negotiation, but it's believed to be in the neighborhood of $3 million per school. The league is still expected to grow to 12 teams, although the possibility has been discussed that the league could start at 10 schools and grow into a 12-team league.

That's very different from your reading:
"the league is expected to grow to 12 teams, although the possibility has been discussed that the league could start, and remain, at 10 schools."

So the league is expected to grow to 12 teams (i.e. it's at 7 now but will grow to 12); however, it could start at 10 before going to 12. But it's going to 12, even if there's a 10-team league pit stop en route to 12.

If we're going off the Thamel piece, then the only fair reading is that 12 teams is baked into the contact-talks cake, even if there's some interim period in which only 10 teams are initial members.

(01-09-2013 11:12 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Oh and it's possible we could start play next year.

I have no problem with that if it happens, and I can certainly see why the C7 would desire it. But is it really practical to negotiate all the stuff that needs to be negotiated in <6 months?

Yes, everyone understands that.

The likely reason for the "pit stop" as you call it is that they aren't enthralled with anyone for spots 11 and 12 right now.

And to a previous point, once you have paused you are not limited to any set of programs. That's how I arrived at Gonzaga and BYU of the WCC. Gonzaga has already requested to be considered and that time could be exactly what it takes to figure it out.

(01-09-2013 11:12 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  reported that interest in VCU as the 5th team in has been intensifying the last few weeks. Looks like they could give SLU a run for that last spot.

Nothing against SLU, but if it comes down to them or VCU I'd take the Rams in a heartbeat. After all these years, it still gets under my skin that they were left out of C-USA back in 1995 after the Metro/Great Midwest merger. I felt strongly at the time that C-USA was making a mistake and in retrospect I think no one would deny it.

(01-09-2013 04:57 PM)Title Wrote:  Yes, everyone understands that.

The likely reason for the "pit stop" as you call it is that they aren't enthralled with anyone for spots 11 and 12 right now.

And to a previous point, once you have paused you are not limited to any set of programs. That's how I arrived at Gonzaga and BYU of the WCC. Gonzaga has already requested to be considered and that time could be exactly what it takes to figure it out.

Someone alot more informed than me can let me know. I remember hearing Gonzaga was receiving interest from the MWC. Is this correct??

(01-09-2013 05:10 PM)BigmanU Wrote:  Someone alot more informed than me can let me know. I remember hearing Gonzaga was receiving interest from the MWC. Is this correct??

I haven't heard that, but it makes sense.

(01-09-2013 04:57 PM)Title Wrote:  Yes, everyone understands that.

The likely reason for the "pit stop" as you call it is that they aren't enthralled with anyone for spots 11 and 12 right now.

And to a previous point, once you have paused you are not limited to any set of programs. That's how I arrived at Gonzaga and BYU of the WCC. Gonzaga has already requested to be considered and that time could be exactly what it takes to figure it out.

Thats a large jump to conclusion. As Thamel has previously reported that Butler, Xavier, Dayton and Creighton were all definite or near definite.

(01-09-2013 05:10 PM)BigmanU Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 04:57 PM)Title Wrote:  Yes, everyone understands that.

The likely reason for the "pit stop" as you call it is that they aren't enthralled with anyone for spots 11 and 12 right now.

And to a previous point, once you have paused you are not limited to any set of programs. That's how I arrived at Gonzaga and BYU of the WCC. Gonzaga has already requested to be considered and that time could be exactly what it takes to figure it out.

Someone alot more informed than me can let me know. I remember hearing Gonzaga was receiving interest from the MWC. Is this correct??

I haven't heard that. Maybe they will be used as bait to get BYU back. I don't know how much they would be paid though seeing how Boise is already getting the lions share of the money and that unlike the current BE there is just one all around contract.

(01-09-2013 04:57 PM)Title Wrote:  Yes, everyone understands that.

The likely reason for the "pit stop" as you call it is that they aren't enthralled with anyone for spots 11 and 12 right now.

And to a previous point, once you have paused you are not limited to any set of programs. That's how I arrived at Gonzaga and BYU of the WCC. Gonzaga has already requested to be considered and that time could be exactly what it takes to figure it out.

I get that, but you're starting from "BYU and Gonzaga are candidates" and working backwards. Makes sense that Gonzaga would get a mention because they're tops, but it's completely impractical and totally unsustainable. BYU? Less than impressive tourney success over the past 26 years + FOOTBALL. It would be one thing if BYU didn't have football and had Gonzaga's record, but they do, and they don't, respectively. Of the two, the 'Zags are the only longshot that's even worth thinking about trying to make work, but it's such a (literal!) logistical stretch and brings the old flailing Big East's geographic punchline with it.

Edit: not to mention 7 teams in Gonzaga+BYU+Creighton/Dayton+Xavier+Butler on top of Depaul and Marquette would decidedly re-balance the league. Anyone think Georgetown's up for being one the 5 east coast hanger-ons in the new Big Midwest?

(01-09-2013 02:31 PM)Title Wrote:  Yes because whomever is 11 and 12 are not what is defining the value proposition of the deal.

There is no one remotely comparable to the value of BYU and Gonzaga in those spots. It makes logical sense to take steps to see if its feasible. Both St Louis and Dayton will still be there in two years.

(01-09-2013 04:57 PM)Title Wrote:  The likely reason for the "pit stop" as you call it is that they aren't enthralled with anyone for spots 11 and 12 right now.

I can't imagine why they wouldn't be. Whomever is 11 and 12 isn't "defining" the value, but the presence of 11 and 12 very well could be. Teams 11 and 12 give you way more inventory: 6 more conference games, 48 more non-conference games, two more conference tournament games.

The schedule could be orchestrated to maximize more lucrative matchups. It doesn't "matter" WHO is #11 and #12 per se, because each of the candidates will bring enough interesting games into the mix; and merely HAVING 12 teams will provide additional revenue through the inventory and probably provide for an extra NCAA bid per season (not to mention hurting the A10 even more - or MVC/WCC as well).

Not enthralled by spots 11 and 12? We're talking about schools that have - with all due respect - accomplished as much or more than half the C7.

One of the main reasons people think it will be 12 (aside from inventory) is that most people can't agree on who's team NUMBER TEN because you'd have Saint Louis, Dayton, and Creighton…

… and VCU's currently has a higher profile than any of 'em, with the Final Four and one of the most dynamic young coaches in the country… who plays a style that's REALLY entertaining for TV.

I don't know who your #10 is, but VCU brings the excitement at #11 and #12 brings a developing market. A team you can beat now, and if being a member ups their game, delivers a big market for you in the future (Saint Louis or the Cincy-Dayton Metroplex).

(01-09-2013 02:42 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  No way is BYU added. This league is trying to get away from the whims of CFB. That is why UConn and Cincy aren't candidates. Also the whole "no play on Sunday" rule wouldn't fly with this league.

Also no way do we go western, too far away for the rest of our sports. The C7 presidents are very sour on the idea of a national conference.

Also once again, no reliable source considers Gonzaga, let alone BYU to be a realistic option. Right now the candidates are Butler, Xavier, Dayton, Creighton, SLU and VCU.

Even if the C7 wanted BYU (highly arguable), there's zero indication that BYU would want to be involved. You have to consider that BYU operates on a completely different plane than all the other schools in their decision making process:

The MAC will play football games any day/time ESPN asks in order to be on TV.
BYU refuses to play on Sundays, PERIOD. Not for the NCAA Tournament, not for any reason, even if it puts them at a competitive disadvantage.

Texas Athletics formed a network to get more TV revenue.
BYU formed a TV network because their President feels it's a mission given to him by God Himself to spread the message of the Latter Day Saints. It has nothing to do with athletics revenue, they are using athletics content to draw viewers to their network, hoping to win them over to the Church of Mormon. And that athletics content is provided virtually for free by the WCC.

I'm sure BYU-TV would love to get some games vs east coast schools in massive media markets… but I'm also pretty confident in saying there would be a lot less content available to BYU-TV in the C7 conference. With Fox playing catch-up and currently owning zero other conference TV rights, do you think they're gonna give up the first round of the men's basketball conference tournament BYU-TV? Because they currently carry all WCC basketball tournament games that the ESPN Family doesn't carry. And the WCC says "great, thanks for the exposure!"

(01-09-2013 03:31 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Could be a discussion about taking all 6 candidates and going to 13. If you're not going to divisions then why be hampered by even numbers?

Even numbers is a very desirable thing for all sports that aren't men's basketball. MBB could overcome the fact that one team has a Saturday off by scheduling Sunday/mid-week games on national TV. Volleyball, not so much.


Oh, and there's no reason that if you go with 12 teams, you can't just call Gonzaga and sign a deal with them to play four C7 teams a year OOC. In the WCC, they'll be looking for tough games all the time. They might even be willing to play SIX a year. You get two Gonzaga games a year minimum on your TV package, two games a year at Gonzaga on ESPN as part of THEIR TV package, and you don't have to send all your teams Spokane in all sports.

(01-09-2013 07:03 PM)JPSchmack Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 02:31 PM)Title Wrote:  Yes because whomever is 11 and 12 are not what is defining the value proposition of the deal.

There is no one remotely comparable to the value of BYU and Gonzaga in those spots. It makes logical sense to take steps to see if its feasible. Both St Louis and Dayton will still be there in two years.

(01-09-2013 04:57 PM)Title Wrote:  The likely reason for the "pit stop" as you call it is that they aren't enthralled with anyone for spots 11 and 12 right now.

I can't imagine why they wouldn't be. Whomever is 11 and 12 isn't "defining" the value, but the presence of 11 and 12 very well could be. Teams 11 and 12 give you way more inventory: 6 more conference games, 48 more non-conference games, two more conference tournament games.

The schedule could be orchestrated to maximize more lucrative matchups. It doesn't "matter" WHO is #11 and #12 per se, because each of the candidates will bring enough interesting games into the mix; and merely HAVING 12 teams will provide additional revenue through the inventory and probably provide for an extra NCAA bid per season (not to mention hurting the A10 even more - or MVC/WCC as well).

Not enthralled by spots 11 and 12? We're talking about schools that have - with all due respect - accomplished as much or more than half the C7.

One of the main reasons people think it will be 12 (aside from inventory) is that most people can't agree on who's team NUMBER TEN because you'd have Saint Louis, Dayton, and Creighton…

… and VCU's currently has a higher profile than any of 'em, with the Final Four and one of the most dynamic young coaches in the country… who plays a style that's REALLY entertaining for TV.

I don't know who your #10 is, but VCU brings the excitement at #11 and #12 brings a developing market. A team you can beat now, and if being a member ups their game, delivers a big market for you in the future (Saint Louis or the Cincy-Dayton Metroplex).

You're replying to a Butler fan, no need to bring the C7 into this.

(01-09-2013 07:06 PM)JPSchmack Wrote:  Oh, and there's no reason that if you go with 12 teams, you can't just call Gonzaga and sign a deal with them to play four C7 teams a year OOC. In the WCC, they'll be looking for tough games all the time. They might even be willing to play SIX a year. You get two Gonzaga games a year minimum on your TV package, two games a year at Gonzaga on ESPN as part of THEIR TV package, and you don't have to send all your teams Spokane in all sports.

I love it. Agree to a block of home and homes effectively making them an informal 13th member and the new conference relevant in a new market for the low low price of $0 (save for travel costs incurred by individual schools, of course).

(01-09-2013 07:23 PM)thegalen Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 07:06 PM)JPSchmack Wrote:  Oh, and there's no reason that if you go with 12 teams, you can't just call Gonzaga and sign a deal with them to play four C7 teams a year OOC. In the WCC, they'll be looking for tough games all the time. They might even be willing to play SIX a year. You get two Gonzaga games a year minimum on your TV package, two games a year at Gonzaga on ESPN as part of THEIR TV package, and you don't have to send all your teams Spokane in all sports.

I love it. Agree to a block of home and homes effectively making them an informal 13th member and the new conference relevant in a new market for the low low price of $0 (save for travel costs incurred by individual schools, of course).

I think that helps them a lot more than that helps us. They get big names from the best pure BBall conference. We get an essential mid-major. We need to be scheduling big name schools like Duke, UK, Ohio St, Indiana, Cuse, UofL, UConn, UCLA, Arizona and KU. Schools from the Big 5 are who we need to play and beat to be seen as equals to them. The BBall cousin of the Big 5 so to speak.

(01-09-2013 07:30 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 07:23 PM)thegalen Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 07:06 PM)JPSchmack Wrote:  Oh, and there's no reason that if you go with 12 teams, you can't just call Gonzaga and sign a deal with them to play four C7 teams a year OOC. In the WCC, they'll be looking for tough games all the time. They might even be willing to play SIX a year. You get two Gonzaga games a year minimum on your TV package, two games a year at Gonzaga on ESPN as part of THEIR TV package, and you don't have to send all your teams Spokane in all sports.

I love it. Agree to a block of home and homes effectively making them an informal 13th member and the new conference relevant in a new market for the low low price of $0 (save for travel costs incurred by individual schools, of course).

I think that helps them a lot more than that helps us. They get big names from the best pure BBall conference. We get an essential mid-major. We need to be scheduling big name schools like Duke, UK, Ohio St, Indiana, Cuse, UofL, UConn, UCLA, Arizona and KU. Schools from the Big 5 are who we need to play and beat to be seen as equals to them. The BBall cousin of the Big 5 so to speak.

I'm not with you on Gonzaga being a "mid major." I am with you on packing the OOC with blue bloods, but there will be plenty of open OOC slots thanks to plenty of schools like Duke and Kentucky wondering why they should deign to schedule "essentially a mid-major" in Butler, Xavier or Creighton and thereby pick their own pocket in helping the NBE's at-large prospects. Plus, I like the idea of hoops-first/only schools sticking together, even if they can't all be in the same super-hoops conference.

Group scheduling Gonzaga, and scheduling blue bloods, aren't either/or propositions!

(01-09-2013 07:47 PM)thegalen Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 07:30 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 07:23 PM)thegalen Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 07:06 PM)JPSchmack Wrote:  Oh, and there's no reason that if you go with 12 teams, you can't just call Gonzaga and sign a deal with them to play four C7 teams a year OOC. In the WCC, they'll be looking for tough games all the time. They might even be willing to play SIX a year. You get two Gonzaga games a year minimum on your TV package, two games a year at Gonzaga on ESPN as part of THEIR TV package, and you don't have to send all your teams Spokane in all sports.

I love it. Agree to a block of home and homes effectively making them an informal 13th member and the new conference relevant in a new market for the low low price of $0 (save for travel costs incurred by individual schools, of course).

I think that helps them a lot more than that helps us. They get big names from the best pure BBall conference. We get an essential mid-major. We need to be scheduling big name schools like Duke, UK, Ohio St, Indiana, Cuse, UofL, UConn, UCLA, Arizona and KU. Schools from the Big 5 are who we need to play and beat to be seen as equals to them. The BBall cousin of the Big 5 so to speak.

I'm not with you on Gonzaga being a "mid major." I am with you on packing the OOC with blue bloods, but there will be plenty of open OOC slots thanks to plenty of schools like Duke and Kentucky wondering why they should deign to schedule "essentially a mid-major" in Butler, Xavier or Creighton and thereby pick their own pocket in helping the NBE's at-large prospects. Plus, I like the idea of hoops-first/only schools sticking together, even if they can't all be in the same super-hoops conference.

Group scheduling Gonzaga, and scheduling blue bloods, aren't either/or propositions!

I was just saying that they get a LOT more out of the arrangement than we do. We put them on our level without really getting anything back. We in fact make the WCC more valuable.

(01-09-2013 07:55 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 07:47 PM)thegalen Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 07:30 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 07:23 PM)thegalen Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 07:06 PM)JPSchmack Wrote:  Oh, and there's no reason that if you go with 12 teams, you can't just call Gonzaga and sign a deal with them to play four C7 teams a year OOC. In the WCC, they'll be looking for tough games all the time. They might even be willing to play SIX a year. You get two Gonzaga games a year minimum on your TV package, two games a year at Gonzaga on ESPN as part of THEIR TV package, and you don't have to send all your teams Spokane in all sports.

I love it. Agree to a block of home and homes effectively making them an informal 13th member and the new conference relevant in a new market for the low low price of $0 (save for travel costs incurred by individual schools, of course).

I think that helps them a lot more than that helps us. They get big names from the best pure BBall conference. We get an essential mid-major. We need to be scheduling big name schools like Duke, UK, Ohio St, Indiana, Cuse, UofL, UConn, UCLA, Arizona and KU. Schools from the Big 5 are who we need to play and beat to be seen as equals to them. The BBall cousin of the Big 5 so to speak.

I'm not with you on Gonzaga being a "mid major." I am with you on packing the OOC with blue bloods, but there will be plenty of open OOC slots thanks to plenty of schools like Duke and Kentucky wondering why they should deign to schedule "essentially a mid-major" in Butler, Xavier or Creighton and thereby pick their own pocket in helping the NBE's at-large prospects. Plus, I like the idea of hoops-first/only schools sticking together, even if they can't all be in the same super-hoops conference.

Group scheduling Gonzaga, and scheduling blue bloods, aren't either/or propositions!

I was just saying that they get a LOT more out of the arrangement than we do. We put them on our level without really getting anything back. We in fact make the WCC more valuable.

Gonzaga is on our level. Look at their schedules normally. This year a down schedule for them- West Virginia, Clemson, Oklahoma, Illinois, Kansas St, Baylor, Oklahoma St, Butler still... They are elite any way you slice it.

If Gonzaga is not on the list for an invite, the new conference should definately try to schedule 4 OOC games a year with them.