(12-22-2012 07:22 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(12-22-2012 06:41 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  Right but at least from the C7 perspective we were going to have to send our Olympic sports to all those cities I listed above. So its already a cost savings for us. Now for Xavier, Butler, and Creighton its not costs y'all have previously incurred but if this TV contract number is accurate, this is such a large increase in money it should offset all of those travel costs.

But then you're not making any money. The increase is just going toward travel to play Gonzaga. Not really worth it then, especially if we can get valuable additions without going that far west.

How would traveling to Gonzaga for non revenue sports cost millions of dollars in travel? If Gonzaga helps move the needle for TV dollars its worth the increase in travel costs. If it doesn't then they shouldn't be added. I'm just saying its overstating the cost on the other schools. If reports are accurate that Gonzaga is desperate to join they must think its financially viable and they would have the highest travel costs.

(12-22-2012 07:22 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(12-22-2012 06:41 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  Right but at least from the C7 perspective we were going to have to send our Olympic sports to all those cities I listed above. So its already a cost savings for us. Now for Xavier, Butler, and Creighton its not costs y'all have previously incurred but if this TV contract number is accurate, this is such a large increase in money it should offset all of those travel costs.

But then you're not making any money. The increase is just going toward travel to play Gonzaga. Not really worth it then, especially if we can get valuable additions without going that far west.

For schools who would see an increase in TV revenues - from $330-400K per year to $2-3M per year, revenue surpluses will not evaporate with travel once per year/per 4-6 team to Spokane, Wa. Gonzaga will incur the largest increase in travel...not the others. Not all of Butler's teams will travel to Spokane each year. Some of the minor sports currently participate in regional meets and tourneys, rather than iindividual contests. This travel bias/anti-Zags positioning is not justifiable given the increases in the revenue base.

(12-27-2012 04:10 PM)gtmoBlue Wrote:  

(12-22-2012 07:22 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(12-22-2012 06:41 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  Right but at least from the C7 perspective we were going to have to send our Olympic sports to all those cities I listed above. So its already a cost savings for us. Now for Xavier, Butler, and Creighton its not costs y'all have previously incurred but if this TV contract number is accurate, this is such a large increase in money it should offset all of those travel costs.

But then you're not making any money. The increase is just going toward travel to play Gonzaga. Not really worth it then, especially if we can get valuable additions without going that far west.

For schools who would see an increase in TV revenues - from $330-400K per year to $2-3M per year, revenue surpluses will not evaporate with travel once per year/per 4-6 team to Spokane, Wa. Gonzaga will incur the largest increase in travel...not the others. Not all of Butler's teams will travel to Spokane each year. Some of the minor sports currently participate in regional meets and tourneys, rather than iindividual contests. This travel bias/anti-Zags positioning is not justifiable given the increases in the revenue base.

It's not just cost but also time. Traveling to Gonzaga has no travel partner and is too much time and cost for travel from eastern time zones. The travel impacts school recruiting. I would much prefer Wichita State over Gonzaga. Stronger all around program, travel partner with Creighton, basketball crazy state in Kansas. You would have Xavier/Butler, Marquette/DePaul, Creighton/Wichita State. If we go to 14 add Dayton in the west and George Mason or UMass in the east.

(12-21-2012 06:34 PM)TheRock Wrote:  From the Cracked Sidewalk blog.

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/12/...ad-of.html

"After a day of rumors the 7 Catholic, Basketball only schools left the Big East for a new conference which we hope will be called, well, the Big East. With Xavier and Butler also joining, the addition of VCU would put Marquette right back in the 2nd best conference in the land behind the Big Ten. Below are the averages of each team on http://www.kenpom.com, and the actual averages of the conferences:"

Rank Team Pyth
17 VCU 0.903
29 G'town 0.854
40 Marquette 0.827
55 Butler 0.789
73 Providence 0.746
80 Seton Hall 0.720
81 Xavier 0.714
85 DePaul 0.698
91 St. John's 0.678
93 Villanova 0.676

1 Big Ten 0.811
2 New Confererence Total 0.760
3 ACC 0.753
4 Big 12 0.736
5 MWC 0.724
6 Pac12 0.714
7 SEC 0.700

"The Big Ten would still be the top conference, but VCU would nudge the new conference past the ACC for the 2nd best conference. If Creighton, St. Louis or Dayton join instead of or in addition to VCU, then the conference would slip a few points from the totals below, but still be in the mix for 2nd best conference."

Very interesting!!

Please tell me this thread is not based on a blog article written with data through early season games before conference play has even taken place...please.

I love what VCU has done on the court (along with having a ton of respect for Shaka Smart), but I'm very wary that it's not an institutional fit at all with the other C7 (which is a major reason why they split off from the Big East in the first place). Richmond would make more sense from that market as an institution while St. Louis and Dayton fit into the school profile, as well. This is about building a league for the long haul with like-minded schools (or else the C7 would have just as soon have stayed with UConn, Memphis and Cincinnati).

By the way, there's no need to split up a 12-team league into divisions. Other conferences that have been that large haven't done so. All you need to do is assign 2 or 3 protected rivals that you play twice per year and then rotate everyone else.

(12-27-2012 05:14 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I love what VCU has done on the court (along with having a ton of respect for Shaka Smart), but I'm very wary that it's not an institutional fit at all with the other C7 (which is a major reason why they split off from the Big East in the first place).

I have to disagree. The C7 aren't just Catholic colleges, they're Catholic-urban-elitebasketball colleges, and VCU meets 2 of those three criteria.

What difference does it make if a school is public or private? How does that change their priorities?

IF the C7 presidents are genuinely interested in creating an elite national league of private schools (with elite hoops) that would both attract a significant TV contract and earn multiple, lucrative NCAA bids, the first three teams added should be Gonzaga, Xavier and Butler -- and nobody else is really close.

IF Gonzaga is genuinely interested, forget about using "travel to Spokane" as an issue to keep them out. The expense and inconvenience of having to go that far west would be far outweighed by the fact that Gonzaga's national brand would instantly make it the second-most recognizable product in the new league. Xavier and Butler would fall right in with the Zags and give the league a cache it needs after losing so many quality programs over the last few years.

IF the new league's presidents decide they're better off (both logistically and financially) going to 12, I'd go outside the box and convince BYU to come aboard as team No. 11. Gotta ignore the Catholic-Mormon stuff because BYU is truly the only national name left on the board once you take Zags, X and Butler.

One of Creighton/Dayton/SLU would be the 12th and final entry.

Presto! You now have a national league with 7-8 perennial NCAA teams and a bunch of brand-name schools that even casual fans know beyond one or two March Madness moments. By including BYU and its legion of loyal fans, I can't see how you'd get less than 3MM per school in a national TV deal. It even opens the possibility of the new league creating its own network.

EAST: G'town, 'Nova, SJU, Hall, Providence

MIDWEST: DePaul, Marquette, Xavier, Butler, Creighton

WEST: Gonzaga, BYU

If I was king of the world, I'd make this happen tomorrow.

(12-27-2012 05:42 PM)gmubballfan Wrote:  IF the C7 presidents are genuinely interested in creating an elite national league of private schools (with elite hoops) that would both attract a significant TV contract and earn multiple, lucrative NCAA bids, the first three teams added should be Gonzaga, Xavier and Butler -- and nobody else is really close.

IF Gonzaga is genuinely interested, forget about using "travel to Spokane" as an issue to keep them out. The expense and inconvenience of having to go that far west would be far outweighed by the fact that Gonzaga's national brand would instantly make it the second-most recognizable product in the new league. Xavier and Butler would fall right in with the Zags and give the league a cache it needs after losing so many quality programs over the last few years.

IF the new league's presidents decide they're better off (both logistically and financially) going to 12, I'd go outside the box and convince BYU to come aboard as team No. 11. Gotta ignore the Catholic-Mormon stuff because BYU is truly the only national name left on the board once you take Zags, X and Butler.

One of Creighton/Dayton/SLU would be the 12th and final entry.

Presto! You now have a national league with 7-8 perennial NCAA teams and a bunch of brand-name schools that even casual fans know beyond one or two March Madness moments. By including BYU and its legion of loyal fans, I can't see how you'd get less than 3MM per school in a national TV deal. It even opens the possibility of the new league creating its own network.

EAST: G'town, 'Nova, SJU, Hall, Providence

MIDWEST: DePaul, Marquette, Xavier, Butler, Creighton

WEST: Gonzaga, BYU

If I was king of the world, I'd make this happen tomorrow.

Can a king be impeached?

I mean absolutely no disrespect to your idea, but you have just reintroduced the C7 to another hybrid situation by the addition of a school with major college football aims (BYU). Why would they want to create another situation that could eventually lead to a schism they have just gone through?

Your East/Midwest 10 are just fine. By leaving it at 10, you negate the necessity of going to divisions and an unbalanced Conference schedule. Evereybody would play an 18-game League schedule with H/A games against each fellow member.

If ESPN or another major bidder on a TV contract for the new league "suggests" 12 teams, they you'll need one more in the East and one more in the Midwest, neither of which has (or covets) major college football. I prefer a Richmond presence in the East and I have no problem with VCU (large alumni base, good facilities, solid commitment to its basketball program) despite its non-private status. In the Midwest, SLU seems to stand out due to its strong media presence (no overlapping), good facilities, and partnering possibilities with Creighton.

(12-27-2012 05:35 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  What difference does it make if a school is public or private? How does that change their priorities?

University Presidents are making this decision and like-minded is likely including to a great degree like-minded academic institutions with similar academic standards and academic admission standards.

I know that Creighton is at a big admissions disadvantage to the public schools in the MVC that showed up just this last year where CU wanted a kid out of Dayton a lot and he was interested in CU enough that he visited and changed his "school affiliation" on Facebook to CU after the visit. Jays backed off due to academics. He signed with Wichita (Turns out that his grades were not good enough to even get into WSU and he ended up at a Prep School.). I want to be on a level playing field in this regard. The U Presidents probably want that too.

And just to get it out of the way in case a Wichita person reads this and wants to play the card (which they like to do when this topic arises), Creighton made a mistake with a kid 30+ years ago who should not have been allowed into Creighton and got a real black eye over it when there was a lot of press about him later. It was unfortunate but nothing like it has happened since.

(12-27-2012 06:14 PM)muskienick Wrote:  I mean absolutely no disrespect to your idea, but you have just reintroduced the C7 to another hybrid situation by the addition of a school with major college football aims (BYU). Why would they want to create another situation that could eventually lead to a schism they have just gone through?

It's not a schism, it's one team leaving. That's a huge difference.

The problem with the hybrid for us was A) basketball powers leaving (Syracuse, Louisville, etc) but also B) replacement schools chosen for football reasons (USF, UCF, SMU, Houston, Tulane). And to some degree C) conference decisions and focus on football rather than basketball. Having one FBS member wouldn't raise any of those problems, except for A. And in the case of A, having UConn until the ACC calls them is better than not having UConn from the get-go.

If an FBS school (Notre Dame, UConn, BYU) signed up with the C7 Big East, and put their football somewhere else or played indy, I'd be fine with that if they bring basketball credibility. Yes, they're a flight risk if a better football situation comes along. But one school leaving doesn't turn the conference upside down--we can replace them with a non-FBS school, or not replace them at all.

All that said, I don't think any FBS schools are going to be interested. And I'm not crazy about the idea of coast-to-coast travel in conference.

But if all the stars lined up, I don't think we'd say "No, you're not invited because you play FBS football."

(12-27-2012 06:17 PM)LJay Wrote:  

(12-27-2012 05:35 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  What difference does it make if a school is public or private? How does that change their priorities?

University Presidents are making this decision and like-minded is likely including to a great degree like-minded academic institutions with similar academic standards and academic admission standards.

I know that Creighton is at a big admissions disadvantage to the public schools in the MVC that showed up just this last year where CU wanted a kid out of Dayton a lot and he was interested in CU enough that he visited and changed his "school affiliation" on Facebook to CU after the visit. Jays backed off due to academics. He signed with Wichita...

This is actually the best argument I've seen for having the conference be private-schools only.

I don't accept the argument, because while we're competing with each other in conference, we're also competing with the Big 10, Big 12, NBE, SEC and ACC on the national level. So keeping public schools out doesn't really solve the problem there.

(12-27-2012 06:14 PM)muskienick Wrote:  Can a king be impeached?

I mean absolutely no disrespect to your idea, but you have just reintroduced the C7 to another hybrid situation by the addition of a school with major college football aims (BYU). Why would they want to create another situation that could eventually lead to a schism they have just gone through?

Your East/Midwest 10 are just fine. By leaving it at 10, you negate the necessity of going to divisions and an unbalanced Conference schedule. Evereybody would play an 18-game League schedule with H/A games against each fellow member.

If ESPN or another major bidder on a TV contract for the new league "suggests" 12 teams, they you'll need one more in the East and one more in the Midwest, neither of which has (or covets) major college football. I prefer a Richmond presence in the East and I have no problem with VCU (large alumni base, good facilities, solid commitment to its basketball program) despite its non-private status. In the Midwest, SLU seems to stand out due to its strong media presence (no overlapping), good facilities, and partnering possibilities with Creighton.

No disrespect taken, Muskie. I'd be a benevolent king.

I really do believe, though, that if the new Big East wants to market itself as something truly elite and attract an elite-level TV package without Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, et al, you need to add as high-profile programs as possible.

And BYU offers a unique opportunity for a couple reasons: Its admin has already established a willingness (perhaps bordering on eagerness) to go indy in FB; and, if that doesn't happen, its ability to park its football in whatever western-based (non-BCS) league it wants without having to commit to all sports. I just can't see football being a major issue in their case.

The five household names that would immediately add huge credibility to the C7: Gonzaga, Xavier, Butler, BYU and Creighton.

For all of its recent success, VCU is not a household brand name on that level. Neither are Dayton, SLU, Wichita State, Richmond or any of the other schools that have been mentioned.

And the increase in travel costs wouldn't be as significant as you'd think. Smart scheduling can easily limit the number of trips each East Coast team would have to make out to Utah and Spokane. For the Midwest schools, those trips won't be much more taxing (logistically or fiscally) than the frequent eastern trips they already make.

As a bonus, the eastern schools' non-revenue sports would never have to go out there. There are already leagues where all Olympic sports teams don't play each other during the regular season and only get together in a central location for the conference tournament. I think this trend is only going to take greater hold as ADs seek to further cut costs.

Between TV and the 6-7 NCAA bids you'd expect to bank in an average season, starting up a league like this would basically be like printing money ... lots of it.

(12-27-2012 06:17 PM)LJay Wrote:  

(12-27-2012 05:35 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  What difference does it make if a school is public or private? How does that change their priorities?

University Presidents are making this decision and like-minded is likely including to a great degree like-minded academic institutions with similar academic standards and academic admission standards.

I know that Creighton is at a big admissions disadvantage to the public schools in the MVC that showed up just this last year where CU wanted a kid out of Dayton a lot and he was interested in CU enough that he visited and changed his "school affiliation" on Facebook to CU after the visit. Jays backed off due to academics. He signed with Wichita (Turns out that his grades were not good enough to even get into WSU and he ended up at a Prep School.). I want to be on a level playing field in this regard. The U Presidents probably want that too.

And just to get it out of the way in case a Wichita person reads this and wants to play the card (which they like to do when this topic arises), Creighton made a mistake with a kid 30+ years ago who should not have been allowed into Creighton and got a real black eye over it when there was a lot of press about him later. It was unfortunate but nothing like it has happened since.

It makes no sense to me to only look at private schools. We are talking about hosting at MSG, performing better than the Big 6 conferences, getting a max TV deal and we don't wan to let in a public school because its not a level playing field? Any school that thinks that way should not be joining this league. This should be about basketball excellence and schools that put basketball first in their athletic department. That's it.

Public schools will strengthen this league, and if they can perform on the hardwood we should all want them to hoop with us. This league is starting out a half step behind the other major leagues and now we want to compete with 1 hand tied behind our back? I hope the leadership at the C7 remembers some of our best rivarlies were with public schools.

Not to mention the PAC-12, B1G, ACC, Big East, and SEC all have a mix of public and private schools

(12-27-2012 08:52 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  This should be about basketball excellence and schools that put basketball first in their athletic department. That's it.

Nathan, no offense, but these are colleges and universities you're talking about -- not minor-league franchises. You're espousing a pretty cynical approach to this whole process.

I'm not naive enough to think that academics is going to be the most important factor in who the C7 invite to join them, but it should and will be a consideration for the leaders of institutions of higher learning.

Why? When we play in the NCAA tourney we don't get bonus points for ranking high in the US news and world reports. A sports conference is exactly that, the teams you play sports with, no who you loan professors out to or have cross admission policies with.

I've always thought it was pretentious to be like, our school is too smart to play sports with your school. Who cares!?

Well those Presidents were all okay with playing in the Big East for a long time which had a wide range of schools on the academic spectrum. I'd imagine if they had an aversion to playing with schools with lower academic profiles they would have stated so a long time ago.

The bottom-line is they made more money playing with those schools regardless of affiliations and profiles. I think that will be the bigger thing in all of this. If the networks tell them schools X,Y, and Z will get you the most money as opposed to a catholic, private alternative, the presidents aren't going to care who those schools are or how highly ranked they are in the US News & World Report.

(12-27-2012 09:35 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  Why? When we play in the NCAA tourney we don't get bonus points for ranking high in the US news and world reports. A sports conference is exactly that, the teams you play sports with, no who you loan professors out to or have cross admission policies with.

I've always thought it was pretentious to be like, our school is too smart to play sports with your school. Who cares!?

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Great basketball and academic excellence are not mutually exclusive. In my book looking for both creates a conference of which to be proud to belong.