(03-14-2013 04:34 PM)Title Wrote:  As I explained before, that is a temporary phenomena. The blue hairs that hold those season tickets attended the school in the 60s when the program was relevant. Those people aren't going to live forever. At some point, those same season tickets are going to have to be sold to a public that hasn't seen a 2nd Weekend of the NCAA Tournament since 1984 and 1 tournament win in 20 years.

Its unsustainable. They are a graying fanbase that hasn't been solidified with any sort of meaningful success for decades. Its a demographic problem

You are underestimating Dayton's love of mediocre basketball.

(03-14-2013 04:47 PM)Title Wrote:  Id be more concerned with what you are going to do to insure better NIT seeds

Great comeback. Tell us again how BBall started 7 years ago.

(03-14-2013 04:50 PM)Xumuskie1994 Wrote:  

(03-14-2013 04:34 PM)Title Wrote:  As I explained before, that is a temporary phenomena. The blue hairs that hold those season tickets attended the school in the 60s when the program was relevant. Those people aren't going to live forever. At some point, those same season tickets are going to have to be sold to a public that hasn't seen a 2nd Weekend of the NCAA Tournament since 1984 and 1 tournament win in 20 years.

Its unsustainable. They are a graying fanbase that hasn't been solidified with any sort of meaningful success for decades. Its a demographic problem

You are underestimating Dayton's love of mediocre basketball.

See this guy understands

(03-13-2013 01:55 PM)bmorex Wrote:  Creighton only owes a $50k exit fee. If Dayton (or SLU for that matter) is chosen as the 10th school, that would be a $2M exit fee. Huge difference.

Who really cares though? The exit fee is the school's problem, not the leagues. You think Dayton is going to say "Why don't you wait a year before inviting us so we can scrape together the cash" ?? No, they'll pony up on the spot. They can't risk having a disaster season next year and getting passed over.

(03-13-2013 04:51 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  Others have pointed out that Dayton has superb "off the court" numbers (fans, attendance, tv value, etc). But it's not like they've been slackers on the court either. They've had over 20 wins every year for the past 5 years, averaging 23.4 wins over that time… Personally, I think that UD is a sleeping giant.

To me, "infrastructure" is one of the most important factors. If you look at what Gonzaga (and Xavier) have done: Success in the NCAA Tournament made Gonzaga go from mid-major facilities to first-class facilities. It raised their programs across the board. Their women's team went from crappy to stringing together NCAA bids. Their other sports were insignificant until that basketball money trickled down. Xavier's success in men's basketball made the Cintas Center possible. The new facilities had the X women ranked in the top 10 two years ago.

Success is what let Xavier and Gonzaga improve their facilities and keep a good thing going.

Now why did USF and UCF get BEFB invites over ECU? ECU has had better teams for much longer. USF's program was less than 10 years old when they got to the BE, and UCF started around the same time. The reason those schools got invited before Tulane, Memphis, and ECU is because when you walked on campus, you said "Holy crap, this looks like a Big XII school." Their facilities, their budgets… they pretty much were a big time school without big time success. In a big conference, USF football suddenly was ranked #2 in the country one week a few years back.

You can build on success and raise your entire athletic department… or you can be a school like USF, UCF and Dayton: who built the facilities first and has EVERYTHING BUT the success.

UD's problem with NCAA success has been recruiting/coaching. Well, joining the Big East and having Big East TV money is going to be helpful on that front… and I don't know their lack of NCAA Success "matters" much anyway…

(03-14-2013 03:54 PM)Title Wrote:  Dayton is now 31-34 in the Atlantic 10 over the past four seasons. They aren't close to this level of a program, however. We are honestly talking about adding a below average A10 program, how does that compute with you?

Their A-10 record is irrelevant. How your conference-mates do IN CONFERENCE doesn't help you. It hurts you. If they go 16-0 in the Big East, it means the rest of you lost two more games. You'd WANT them to go 0-for in conference. More wins for you…

If they're 31-34 in the A-10, and "not good enough" to be in the new Big East, they aren't making the dance over G-Town, Nova, Marquette, Xavier, Butler, Creighton, etc, etc anyway.


But they have incredible value for the league if they're in this conference. If you add them in at the bottom, then the 6th place team is in the top half of the league instead of the bottom. The #6 team has more wins (beating Dayton 1-2 times, playing two more OOC games).

As long as Dayton is winning OOC games, they're helping the league. 31-34 in the A-10 isn't important. They wouldn't be in the A-10 anymore.

Dayton is 57-26 OOC in that span (.687).
Dayton is 19-5 vs teams the "BCS Power Six" teams going forward (counting the America 12 teams) in the last six seasons.

6-0 vs the SEC (Alabama, Auburn 3, Ole Miss 2)
3-0 vs the ACC (BC, GT, Wake)
1-0 vs the Big 10 (Minn)
1-1 vs the Big XII (W WVU*, L KU*)
0-1 vs the Pac-12 (L, Colorado)
8-3 vs America 12 (In 2008 they upset #5 Louisville and pummeled #10 Pitt -- and got left out of the dance with an RPI of #32).

They also split with New Mexico in Lobo NCAA years (losing by 1 in the Pit).

Wouldn't it help Providence/Xavier's case for an at-large this season if they can say "We finished 5th in the new Big East, The SEC second-place team, Alabama, is on the bubble with us… and our LAST PLACE team beat them on their home floor." And "Big deal, Southern Miss, you beat UAB three times. Our last place team beat them too."

Bottom line: a team that wins OOC like Dayton has done for the last 12+ seasons will help the league. If they contribute that and then finish dead last in the Big East, it means more bids for the conference.

Blaudschun acknowledges that Dayton is now in the running, but his sources are telling him that Creighton is still in the lead for the 10th spot.

http://ajerseyguy.com

(03-14-2013 04:57 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-14-2013 04:47 PM)Title Wrote:  Id be more concerned with what you are going to do to insure better NIT seeds

Great comeback. Tell us again how BBall started 7 years ago.

You know this is your board, you could take advantage of the threads on it.

Why don't you go ahead and look at weeks in the Top 25 in the last 25 years, that your buddy so kindly posted. And tell me what you see.

Regardless, this has nothing to do with St Johns preparing for a NIT. We were talking about adding a program that just doesn't meet the minimum threshold for what we should be considering. And, if the story above is correct, I'd imagine that'll be moot too.

If GU wants Richmond as opposed to Dayton? Well, congrats Spiders.

St John's might not even make the NIT this year... Part of their problem is the NIT gives teams that won their reg season conference an auto bid into the NIT. Already got 9 automatic teams in the NIT- only MTSU has a remote shot of getting into the NCAA. Of the 9, 7 are 7/8 seeds.

Right now the last 5 in:
Richmond, Indiana St, St John's, Northern Iowa, and LSU.

still got several conferences to go- so some of those #1 teams lose, and some of those last 5 in won't make the NIT even. It's possible the NIT could have automatic teams. Definitely not what it used to be where if you were .500 or better from a big conference you were getting in no questions asked.

On the commissioner search, why is there typically an overemphasis on getting TV or cable executives high on the list? Or, why do these guys have to be on the top of the list? Shouldn't a commissioner first of all be a college basketball person? TV guys may know the sport, but in a more detached way-- maybe they were more focused on Formula One or tennis in their TV days. Commissioners do more than just sign TV contracts, right? They've got to be able to promote the league, hopefully have a history with one or more of the schools, hopefully have the respect of the schools.

What's Bill Clinton (Georgetown) up to in the next couple of years anyway? He's been at the tourney this week and had a good grasp of the game and teams during an interview last night. Getting Clinton as commissioner would sure go up the ACC's nads.

Apparently there's a rumor going around that Dayton is willing to pay some sort of 'fee' to get into the conference in front of Creighton.

Apart from my allegiance to CU, which naturally makes me extremely irritated by this idea, how is this in the best interests of the league in ANY form? Bribery? Especially if both DU and CU both wind up in at 12 anyway. Plus, if I were to find out that this was true, I'd be furious at all the schools in the league that were willing to entertain changing their plan due simply to a few bucks being proffered.

I cannot see how creating a bunch of enmity is what a league that's putting a premium on shared vision and stability really wants.

Look at Thamel's timeline. 9 teams

BS. They're not going to play 16 conference games. Everyone plays 18 now. Fox is paying for a full slate.

(03-15-2013 09:40 AM)aughnanure Wrote:  BS. They're not going to play 16 conference games. Everyone plays 18 now. Fox is paying for a full slate.

A 12 team league is a 16 conference game slate.

Yes, I'm sure they are making it up.

A Scout national guy has all sorts of motivation to do that.

Anyway, you guys are acting like Fox won't show our OCC games. They'll get all the content they require. Before football-centric expansion, 9 was where conferences wanted to be.

(03-15-2013 09:47 AM)Title Wrote:  Yes, I'm sure they are making it up.

A Scout national guy has all sorts of motivation to do that.

Anyway, you guys are acting like Fox won't show our OCC games. They'll get all the content they require. Before football-centric expansion, 9 was where conferences wanted to be.

Except that respectable news sources have been putting out statements that point in a dozen different directions. Somebody somewhere is just pumping out grist for the mill (or trying to turn the dynamic in a certain direction when it's not headed that way at the time) so belief of any single source can't be absolute.

(03-15-2013 09:43 AM)handdownmandown Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 09:40 AM)aughnanure Wrote:  BS. They're not going to play 16 conference games. Everyone plays 18 now. Fox is paying for a full slate.

A 12 team league is a 16 conference game slate.

Not in most leagues anymore. They'll play an extra 2 home and homes (like one guaranteed with a cross-division scheduling rival).

ACC, PAC 12, and B1G all play an 18 game conference schedule w/ 12 teams.

(03-14-2013 04:34 PM)Title Wrote:  As I explained before, that is a temporary phenomena. The blue hairs that hold those season tickets attended the school in the 60s when the program was relevant.

Far be it from me to get in the middle of a good old fashioned pissing match, but does anyone else find the irony of a Butler fan referring to another team as a temproary phenomenon? BTW, how can their attendence be considered temporary when they've been drwing like this for 25 years, and Butler's succes, while impressive, has been for a bit less than a decade? how can one person make both arguments?

(03-13-2013 04:51 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  Now why did USF and UCF get BEFB invites over ECU? ECU has had better teams for much longer. USF's program was less than 10 years old when they got to the BE, and UCF started around the same time. The reason those schools got invited before Tulane, Memphis, and ECU is because when you walked on campus, you said "Holy crap, this looks like a Big XII school." Their facilities, their budgets… they pretty much were a big time school without big time success.

This cannot be overlooked. It was a big factor in Louisville going to the ACC, as every team plays in a facility that was built or renovated within the last 8 years (or in process) including basketball, football, baseball, softball, lacrosse, soccer, and track and field. And all were state of the art. That stuff does matter, regardless of what people think.

(03-15-2013 09:43 AM)handdownmandown Wrote:  

(03-15-2013 09:40 AM)aughnanure Wrote:  BS. They're not going to play 16 conference games. Everyone plays 18 now. Fox is paying for a full slate.

A 12 team league is a 16 conference game slate.

Nah, 12 is perfect for an 18 game slate. Allows you to play every team once, three teams twice every year, and play the other eight teams twice every other year. For example, it would like something like this:



So the above teams would each play those three teams twice every year. They would then play the other 8 teams twice in alternating years, giving you a total of 18 games, where you play everyone at least three times every two years.

16 games would get better RPIs and lead to more bids. Xavier's admin (Well, Bobinski, I don't know about the new one) understood this. Hell, the A-10 went to a 14-game WBB schedule to try and get more NCAA bids (and it worked).

(03-15-2013 06:26 AM)Title Wrote:  

(03-14-2013 04:57 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-14-2013 04:47 PM)Title Wrote:  Id be more concerned with what you are going to do to insure better NIT seeds

Great comeback. Tell us again how BBall started 7 years ago.

You know this is your board, you could take advantage of the threads on it.

Why don't you go ahead and look at weeks in the Top 25 in the last 25 years, that your buddy so kindly posted. And tell me what you see.

Regardless, this has nothing to do with St Johns preparing for a NIT. We were talking about adding a program that just doesn't meet the minimum threshold for what we should be considering. And, if the story above is correct, I'd imagine that'll be moot too.

If GU wants Richmond as opposed to Dayton? Well, congrats Spiders.

Being a great TV draw and having a large rabid fan base isn't meeting the threshold?

Also quit baiting with the NIT jabs. Off topic trolling.