Frank the Tank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 19,001
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1879
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
|
RE: Loyola to MVC
(04-14-2013 01:39 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote: (04-14-2013 01:27 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote: As I've said many times about the MVC, there isn't anyone that even approaches the quality and fan base of Creighton out there. Virtually any school that the MVC could realistically add would drag down the conference's RPI. So, when I see MVC fans complaining about this move, I'm not sure what they were going to expect. The #1 off-the-court problem for the MVC was demographics by a wide margin. The league's markets are AWFUL. I can't state that enough and that's why the A-10 is higher than the MVC on the conference realignment pecking order. Focusing on RPI in the immediate term is short-sighted - the MVC, if it wants long-term stability, needs to be in a place like Chicago. (And Downstate Illinois is NOT Chicago. There is no such thing as an "Illinois" market, so the fact that the MVC already has Bradley, Illinois State and SIU doesn't bring Chicago. I see a lot of MVC fans complain about the number of Illinois teams, which is completely misguided.) It also can't be understated how much more massive the Chicago market is even compared to places like Denver and Nashville, not to mention the amount of basketball talent that the region produces (which is more important than any TV market issues). The MVC has been fortunate that its demographics problem has been kept in check the past few years, but going forward, it was going to rear its head in a bad way.
It's not about whether Loyola can "deliver" the Chicago market. It's about the fact that absolutely no one that the MVC could have realistically added could "deliver" any market worth anything (including Denver and Belmont, who also have tepid interest in their hometowns) and the ones that could supposedly deliver their own markets like the Dakota schools and Murray State covered population numbers that are literally smaller than individual neighborhoods in Chicago. So, a lot of MVC fans are overstating the qualifications of the other candidates. The MVC presidents likely saw all of these schools as relatively equal, so if that was the case, then there's very little reason to NOT take a school that's directly located in Chicago over the others.
I think the only people that really dislike the Loyola add are Shocker fans that wanted to add Belmont/Denver, largely out of the fear that Gregg Marshall would consider leaving if the MVC deteriorated to a 1-bid conference. Don't get me wrong; the MVC doesn't have options. It has been relatively stable over the last 20 years because the schools in the MVC didn't have anywhere to go, not because the league offered anything incredible to members.
I think Wichita State would start to consider a move to the A10, especially if the Big East decides not to add SLU or Dayton. Even if they do, being in conference with VCU, Richmond, and La Salle is better than the MVC (I think other MVC schools would also make the move). While the conference RPI would be similar, the A10 would still be able get a team an at-large bid. The two conferences were roughly equal because the MVC's bottom schools were considerably better than the A10's, but low level additions change that.
Basically, the MVC is affirming that it wants to be regional, mediocre basketball only conference. The poor MVC schools are largely okay with this, but Wichita State has entirely different goals. Most of the bitching has been from Wichita State fans that don't want to see their efforts to improve after the Final Four grow to waste in a bad conference with no room for growth.
I understand that mentality. The issue, though, is that it's not about what Wichita State wants despite their on-the-court success (which is likely how Shocker fans are approaching this). As you've noted, the MVC has been stable largely because no one could move even if they wanted to, but the thing is that this largely applies to Wichita State, too. They just don't have any bargaining power in the conference realignment game even with the A-10, much less the MWC or AAC. That's not a knock on what Wichita State has been able to do performance-wise (which has been outstanding), but rather facing the reality of conference realignment factors of market size, demographics, national brand name, academics, and what a school brings to the table even when they're 0-18 in conference play (not just when they make it to the Final Four).
Wichita State "considering the A-10" implies that they have any real choice in the matter, which they don't really have. It's all about whether the A-10 would want Wichita State as opposed to, say, George Mason, Siena and/or Davidson. There's no question in my mind that Wichita State should take an A-10 invite if it's ever offered, but the school has almost no control over whether that offer will come. The geography of Wichita State (which is also a demographic problem) is simply a negative no matter how well the school might perform in the NCAA Tournament. (Look at Gonzaga and their long-term record of success and national TV appeal - they don't have any realistic choice outside of the WCC because of geographic limitations, as well.) So, if the A-10, Big East and any league that plays FBS football like the MWC and AAC are all off the table for Wichita State, where else can they go that's not a downgrade from the MVC even without Creighton? I don't see a better option. I have great respect for Wichita State and what they've done on the court, but in the conference realignment game off-the-court, they are essentially in the same realm of George Mason with a much worse location, so the conference options are going to reflect that.
|
|