(03-07-2013 04:16 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 02:03 PM)aughnanure Wrote:  Ok cool, you have a large student population. That must immediately = long-term success. Just like North Texas, UTEP, UTSA, Florida Atlantic, etc.

Fine, if you don't like JMU then George Mason. Better school, better location. Also, VCU isn't above UVA and Va Tech suddenly just because they had a little success. Long-term, George Mason and JMU have upside (JMU has football, so that was a + for a state school competing for attention and fans long term) and both are closer to the most influential TV market in the state -DC. VCU will never own the state. UConn was the flagship state university in Connecticut. VCU? One of a bunch way below Va Tech and UVA. Tell me, what power in college athletics is the 4th or 5th school in their conference. VCU is just a North Texas, Western Michigan, etc that doesn't play football.

And seriously, you're bragging about a home and home? Maybe that's why VCU has had some success, no team in Virginia ever has. That's a low bar to pass. So congrats.

Virginia hasn't made noise in college basketball since Ralph Sampson went to the NBA, and Virginia Tech hasn't made noise in college basketball ever. So VCU absolutely has a chance to be the #1 basketball school in Virginia.

Placing them behind FCS schools and lower-FBS schools who have no accomplishments of note in any revenue sport is ridiculous. George Mason had a Final Four, and is closer to DC. But closer to DC is in a way a disadvantage, because it puts you closer to Georgetown and Maryland. And George MAson went right back down after that Final Four.

No they do not. That's laughable. VA Tech and UVA will always have more fans than VCU. Did Houston have more fan support than UT when they were dominant in the 80s? NO. Success and fans are not co-dependent. Some institutions will always have a built-in natural advantage in a state, and VCU is just one of many large state public schools in VA in a lesser league. Sure they'll have a cute year now and then but UVA and Va Tech will suck up almost all of the attention, money, and fans - even with just minor success. That's the concern, even at the most optimistic projection VCU will be overshadowed by the 2 premier college athletic programs in the state - and more than likely be muddled in the middle with ODU, GMU and JMU.

(03-07-2013 04:37 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  There are multiple considerations and on the court success is NOT the only one. VCU wishes it had Daytons support or St. Louis market and both of their institutional fit. If they did they would be a shoe in, but on the court success is not the only consideration.

Look, I can name two schools that meet those criteria that aren't even slightly being considered. Wichita State has 100+ games over 95% capacity, and spends more on basketball than most of your candidates (including Dayton). They aren't really being considered.

Detroit has a far bigger market than SLU, and they aren't being considered. Neither are Holy Cross, Seattle, or Saint Mary's.

So those factors AREN'T the most important aspects of a school. You are treating them as sacred, above even basketball success. But in truth, it goes:

Basketball (present/future)
Geography
History
Support/Market

Why are we debating VCU again?

(03-07-2013 04:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 03:51 PM)Wolfpack Ram Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 02:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 02:33 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 02:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I'd say JMU SHOULD be way ahead of VCU, but realsitically they aren't. Haven't been to tourney in nearly 20 years and had more years in the 300's in RPI in that period than better than 100. I think in the general DC area I know a lot of folks go to JMU- but doesn't really translate in athletics for whatever reason.

GMU if you take away their final four run has all of 1 NCAA win. They outside that year are a complete afterthought here in DC.

You failed to bring up the 1 that eventually will beat VCU and that's ODU. They have 11 NCAA spots, just like VCU. I know myself(and a LOT of folks) think they are primed for success in the near future.

ODU and JMU have FB which helps jump BBall schools. Look at most of our mirror schools in the B1G. If it wasn;t for the pigskin a lot of those would be closer than they are, BUT you need to take the whole athletic dept.

Im not familiar with VA so I have no idea how it goes after UVA and VT.

FCS football- not really so much. ODU to me is the major threat to VCU because they have FBS now and frankly I'd be shocked if they don't blow up as a program more than if they do. Also they have a decent history in basketball(both Men's and women's). Only thing really seperating basketball VCU to ODU is the final 4 run.

Have you seen ODU's basketball program lately? It's a train wreck. ODU fans are focusing way more on football right now than basketball. And look at the conference ODU is joining. It's going to be horrible in football and even worse in basketball. If anything, VCU is the major threat to ODU regarding basketball, not the reverse like you seem to think.

You are focusing way too much to 1 year. Also sure Memphis is gone, but look at 2 of the adds. Middle Tennessee, La Tech(both of whom should make NCAA tourney this year and could win a game or two). If anything, CUSA could be deeper than it has been, which helps. ODU had made postseason 8 straight years before this.

Memphis is not the only school they are losing. They are also losing Houston, SMU (Larry Brown) and Central Florida. And let's not forget the other additions like Texas San Antonio, North Texas & Florida Atlantic. Not a bunch of basketball power houses coming in with ODU.

One other note. If you look at the CAA when VCU was in it, the basketball only schools (including ODU at the time) dominated the schools that had football. Unless you are a high level BCS football school, many times the football program drags down the basketball program. That is startng to happen at ODU to some degree and it has definitely happened at JMU over the last several years.

(03-07-2013 04:50 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  Why are we debating VCU again?

Because someone said something has been consistently repeated on forum, and that something is false. I got irritated by this constantly repeated falsehood and posted to clear up that misconception.

(03-07-2013 04:50 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  Why are we debating VCU again?

Because some people just can't let...it...go.

(03-07-2013 04:53 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 04:50 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  Why are we debating VCU again?

Because someone said something has been consistently repeated on forum, and that something is false. I got irritated by this constantly repeated falsehood and posted to clear up that misconception.

It was an opinion, that on the court success is what matters most. Others do not agree with that assessment.

(03-07-2013 04:43 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 04:38 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 04:04 PM)Roader Wrote:  Id love for UD to have this success but if were going to over analyze everything lets look at the teams they beat, none of them are power teams whether they come from a power conference or not (exception being Duke). Then again 2 wins in over 20 years is not that great either. Add in their FF run and yes, they are more successful than a majority of NCAA teams

1981: #12 Long Island W 85-69
1983: #12 La Salle W 76-67
1984: #11 Northeastern W 70-69
1985: #15 Marshall W 81-65
2007: #6 Duke W 79-77
2012: #5 Wichita State W 62-59

But look at those losses. Two of them were overtime losses versus top 4 seeds. 5 of them were by less than 3 points.

The point is that they get to the tournament, and they have been consistently successful, more so than Creighton, SLU, Dayton, or Richmond. I'm not trying to make a broader statement than that, not trying to make a statement for their inclusion in the league.

Instead, I just think that people need to realize that their success is not based around the 2011 run or Shaka Smart. That caps off their success, but isn't everything.

The point is they don't make the tournament in most of those years playing in the old CUSA or Metro or those other leagues that St. Louis and Dayton had to play through. VCU wasn't going against Cincy, UofL and Marquette. The reason they were playing top 4 seeds is because they were in those leagues that only send one school and said school is usually just fodder. THATS the point im trying to make.

How many of those NCAA appearances were as an at-large? I believe only 83 & 84. When you are making the dance as an at-large, you are showing true consistency as a top flight program. That is the next step & VCU is moving in that direction with the move to the A-10 being a big help.

(03-07-2013 03:47 PM)Wolfpack Ram Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 02:47 PM)aughnanure Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 02:33 PM)thegalen Wrote:  And just for the record, the only reason there's more JMU gear floating around DC is they have football, and football is the most popular sport in America. This is a mechanical effect, not a showing of which school has more/better fans. The Dukes averaged 538 students per game in 2010-2011 (a 21 win season).

Totals:
2003-04: 3,697
2004-05: 3,223
2005-06: 3,819 (5-23 aka “rock bottom”)
2006-07: 3,303
2007-08: 3,632
2008-09: 3,603
2009-10: 3,732
2010-11: 3,721 (21-12)
2011-12: 3,427

But that's the point. They have football and therefore have better potential to attract more fans. Never said they have a better bball program. I'm thinking longer term. A lot can change in 15-20yrs. He'll, that's why I think VCU will probably look into football. No reason they shouldn't get better support than JMU if they do.

I can't believe you are carrying the torch for football schools in Virginia being superior. So where does that logic leave all of the C7 schools, which also do not have football? You're talking out of both sides of your mouth.

In terms of fan support, money, alumni and media attention? Uhhhhh, yeah. Duh.

If you noticed, I listed the primary positions of where the C7+ schools would rank in their respective states. Butler and Dayton were the only two that could be argued aren't in the Top 3.

Also, understand that public schools competing against each other is different. They are generally competing for the same fan base and students. UW-Green bay doesn't really 'compete' against UW-Madison. Madison is the big boy and all their students want to go there and root for the Badgers. VA is a bit different, but its clear UVA is the flagship. Va Tech is #2. And together, they've pretty much sucked up all the college athletics oxygen in the state. There's a reason TV pays them $20+ million to play.

(03-07-2013 04:48 PM)aughnanure Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 04:16 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 02:03 PM)aughnanure Wrote:  Ok cool, you have a large student population. That must immediately = long-term success. Just like North Texas, UTEP, UTSA, Florida Atlantic, etc.

Fine, if you don't like JMU then George Mason. Better school, better location. Also, VCU isn't above UVA and Va Tech suddenly just because they had a little success. Long-term, George Mason and JMU have upside (JMU has football, so that was a + for a state school competing for attention and fans long term) and both are closer to the most influential TV market in the state -DC. VCU will never own the state. UConn was the flagship state university in Connecticut. VCU? One of a bunch way below Va Tech and UVA. Tell me, what power in college athletics is the 4th or 5th school in their conference. VCU is just a North Texas, Western Michigan, etc that doesn't play football.

And seriously, you're bragging about a home and home? Maybe that's why VCU has had some success, no team in Virginia ever has. That's a low bar to pass. So congrats.

Virginia hasn't made noise in college basketball since Ralph Sampson went to the NBA, and Virginia Tech hasn't made noise in college basketball ever. So VCU absolutely has a chance to be the #1 basketball school in Virginia.

Placing them behind FCS schools and lower-FBS schools who have no accomplishments of note in any revenue sport is ridiculous. George Mason had a Final Four, and is closer to DC. But closer to DC is in a way a disadvantage, because it puts you closer to Georgetown and Maryland. And George MAson went right back down after that Final Four.

No they do not. That's laughable. VA Tech and UVA will always have more fans than VCU. Did Houston have more fan support than UT when they were dominant in the 80s? NO. Success and fans are not co-dependent. Some institutions will always have a built-in natural advantage in a state, and VCU is just one of many large state public schools in VA in a lesser league. Sure they'll have a cute year now and then but UVA and Va Tech will suck up almost all of the attention, money, and fans - even with just minor success. That's the concern, even at the most optimistic projection VCU will be overshadowed by the 2 premier college athletic programs in the state - and more than likely be muddled in the middle with ODU, GMU and JMU.

So that explains why VCU is out drawing Virginia Tech in attendance to basketball games. And last time I checked Virginia Tech was in the ACC. The gap would be even larger if VCU had a larger facility as we have only sold out the last 35 home games.

Clearly you know nothing about college basketball in Virginia.

(03-07-2013 04:54 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  It was an opinion, that on the court success is what matters most. Others do not agree with that assessment.

No, that came later. The thing I originally started posting about was the idea that VCU is just a Final Four run.

(03-07-2013 04:53 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 04:50 PM)nathanhm Wrote:  Why are we debating VCU again?

Because someone said something has been consistently repeated on forum, and that something is false. I got irritated by this constantly repeated falsehood and posted to clear up that misconception.

Why did the Big Ten just add Maryland and Rutgers? Was it due to past or recent success? Obviously not. They wanted to make their conference bigger and better, and they weren't looking at success on the field or on the court to do that. They were intersted in MARKETS! Please, stop your tired and silly nonsense.

(03-07-2013 04:55 PM)XU-XHI Wrote:  How many of those NCAA appearances were as an at-large? I believe only 83 & 84. When you are making the dance as an at-large, you are showing true consistency as a top flight program. That is the next step & VCU is moving in that direction with the move to the A-10 being a big help.

83, 84, and 2011 at least.

In comparison, Creighton has made the tournament at as an at-large once in that time period. SLU has made more at-large appearances, with four, but has only won their conference tournament once (and didn't win their conference ever). Dayton made it 5 times.

Sorry I asked.......<backs away slowly>

(03-07-2013 04:56 PM)Wolfpack Ram Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 04:48 PM)aughnanure Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 04:16 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 02:03 PM)aughnanure Wrote:  Ok cool, you have a large student population. That must immediately = long-term success. Just like North Texas, UTEP, UTSA, Florida Atlantic, etc.

Fine, if you don't like JMU then George Mason. Better school, better location. Also, VCU isn't above UVA and Va Tech suddenly just because they had a little success. Long-term, George Mason and JMU have upside (JMU has football, so that was a + for a state school competing for attention and fans long term) and both are closer to the most influential TV market in the state -DC. VCU will never own the state. UConn was the flagship state university in Connecticut. VCU? One of a bunch way below Va Tech and UVA. Tell me, what power in college athletics is the 4th or 5th school in their conference. VCU is just a North Texas, Western Michigan, etc that doesn't play football.

And seriously, you're bragging about a home and home? Maybe that's why VCU has had some success, no team in Virginia ever has. That's a low bar to pass. So congrats.

Virginia hasn't made noise in college basketball since Ralph Sampson went to the NBA, and Virginia Tech hasn't made noise in college basketball ever. So VCU absolutely has a chance to be the #1 basketball school in Virginia.

Placing them behind FCS schools and lower-FBS schools who have no accomplishments of note in any revenue sport is ridiculous. George Mason had a Final Four, and is closer to DC. But closer to DC is in a way a disadvantage, because it puts you closer to Georgetown and Maryland. And George MAson went right back down after that Final Four.

No they do not. That's laughable. VA Tech and UVA will always have more fans than VCU. Did Houston have more fan support than UT when they were dominant in the 80s? NO. Success and fans are not co-dependent. Some institutions will always have a built-in natural advantage in a state, and VCU is just one of many large state public schools in VA in a lesser league. Sure they'll have a cute year now and then but UVA and Va Tech will suck up almost all of the attention, money, and fans - even with just minor success. That's the concern, even at the most optimistic projection VCU will be overshadowed by the 2 premier college athletic programs in the state - and more than likely be muddled in the middle with ODU, GMU and JMU.

So that explains why VCU is out drawing Virginia Tech in attendance to basketball games. And last time I checked Virginia Tech was in the ACC. The gap would be even larger if VCU had a larger facility as we have only sold out the last 35 home games.

Clearly you know nothing about college basketball in Virginia.

If this, if that. Va Tech is bigger, more well known, has a larger fan base, and makes more money. Selling out 35 games in an arena less than 8,000 isn't as impressive as it seems.

Clearly you only want to talk about attendance numbers (and more specifically, the most recent ones as is always the case with VCU) instead of the fact that VA Tech has a dominant well-known name that will always place them over VCU. If VCU can claim the state of VA basketball as easily as you say, how much easier is it for Va Tech and UVA to steal it right back? Probably not much at all.

This is true for Marquette as well. Even if we would win the Natl Championship, the Badgers would still own the state in terms of fan support and media attention.

(03-07-2013 05:02 PM)BigBCherney Wrote:  Why did the Big Ten just add Maryland and Rutgers? Was it due to past or future success? Obviously not. They wanted to make their conference bigger and better, and they weren't looking at success on the field or on the court to do that. They were interested in MARKETS! Please, stop your tired and silly nonsense.

Please read a couple of posts above yours. But to address your point:

THE C7 IS NOT THE B1G! They don't have 100 years of excellence in both football and basketball. They don't have the complete control of their area. The B1G is motivated by other factors because they no longer have to worry about on-court/field performance, but that doesn't mean those aren't important.

According to that logic the A10 is the equal or superior to the C7. Nope, doesn't work that way. The A10 had markets, but they didn't have the ON-COURT performance to make use of them. Same deal with Detroit: Better market than SLU, no use of it.

On court performance drives everything for the C7. Otherwise, you wouldn't see Butler and Xavier as the automatic locks for the conference.

(03-07-2013 05:06 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 05:02 PM)BigBCherney Wrote:  Why did the Big Ten just add Maryland and Rutgers? Was it due to past or future success? Obviously not. They wanted to make their conference bigger and better, and they weren't looking at success on the field or on the court to do that. They were interested in MARKETS! Please, stop your tired and silly nonsense.

Please read a couple of posts above yours. But to address your point:

THE C7 IS NOT THE B1G! They don't have 100 years of excellence in both football and basketball. They don't have the complete control of their area. The B1G is motivated by other factors because they no longer have to worry about on-court/field performance, but that doesn't mean those aren't important.

Now you're making excusses. You're trolling. The new league, even with only Xavier and Butler, will be a top 5 league.

(03-07-2013 05:11 PM)BigBCherney Wrote:  Now you're making excusses. You're trolling. The new league, even with only Xavier and Butler, will be a top 5 league.

The league is nothing right now. While it technically has the history of the Big East, in reality it is entirely unconnected to that conference. It is new, and its first year will give its first impressions.

The B1G is not playing by that standard. It is a completely different situation, not something that is applicable to every conference. The B1G has a media contract that essentially works like a tax, which means that it doesn't need to have super high performing teams to get a lot of money.

The Fox contract doesn't work that way. The C7 doesn't have the same incentive to expand and grab big media markets, because they don't have a network that is a part of basic programming throughout the media landspace. The C7 also has far more incentive to achieve, especially in the short term, both because it will shade perceptions of the league and because performance in the tournament is huge from a monetary standpoint.

Your example is simply not applicable. And if you think on-court performance is a negligible standard, then it should be a negligible standard to ALL teams. What is the difference between Detroit, and SLU? Detroit has a bigger market, and surely will get better and have more fan support in the C7 conference. What is the difference between Siena and Dayton? Siena is in a better market, with a bigger arena and will assuredly improve and get more fan support to fill that arena.

How can you disagreed with that and then turn around and use the same argument in favor of Detroit and SLU? It doesn't work that way. Ultimately fan support and media perceptions are guided by one thing and one thing only: Performance. Dayton wouldn't be drawing 12,000 steady fans if they had never been a high quality team. Xavier and Butler wouldn't be in the conference if they hadn't been highly successful over the last couple of decades.

Again, the deciding factor is performance. Performance separates the blue-bloods from the rest of basketball, Georgetown from Seton Hall, Xavier from Fordham, and Fordham from the dregs of the SWAC and Patriot Leagues.

(03-07-2013 04:57 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  

(03-07-2013 04:54 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  It was an opinion, that on the court success is what matters most. Others do not agree with that assessment.

No, that came later. The thing I originally started posting about was the idea that VCU is just a Final Four run.

Two things:

1) No one has ever said VCU is "only" their Final Four run. What was said is they were only "discussed" because of the Final Four run. Big difference

2) Can we please keep this talk to the all things VCU thread?

[/quote]

The point is they don't make the tournament in most of those years playing in the old CUSA or Metro or those other leagues that St. Louis and Dayton had to play through. VCU wasn't going against Cincy, UofL and Marquette. The reason they were playing top 4 seeds is because they were in those leagues that only send one school and said school is usually just fodder. THATS the point im trying to make.
[/quote]

VCU 1980's

1980-1: VCU 78- Cincinatti 58
1980-1: VCU 57- Va Tech 51 We all know Tech blows

1981:VCU was a #5 seed, which beat the #12. Then obviously played the #4 seed, not because they were "cannon fodder"

1981-1982 did not make tournament

1982-1983

Lost in tournament final to UAB. Lost to WVU in OT by 1 in the "Mountaineer Classic".
Again a #5 seed, beat LaSalle And loses to #4 Georgia by 2 points.

1983-1984

Only notable opponents are UAB. Again, get an at-large. In the tourney as a #6 seed, beat Jim Calhoun's Northeastern. Loses to Syracuse big.

1984-1985

Loses at Louisville By 12. Again beats Tech and Auburn. Earns a #2 seed, beats Marshall, then gets upset by Alabama.

The 1996, 2004, 2007, 2009, 2011 and 2012 were all cannon fodder double digit seeds. That'll change this year, however.