(03-22-2017 09:56 AM)esayem Wrote:  To illustrate my point, one would have to go back to 2008 for a school outside Gonzaga, St. Mary's, or BYU to make a tournament appearance from the WCC. In 2008 San Diego went dancing because of an upset victory in the conference tournament. Before that? San Diego once again with an upset victory... in 2003! The BYU addition was a great move by the WCC to try and strengthen their profile.

Let's compare that to the MWC:

Just going back to 2015, Nevada, SDSU, Fresno State, Boise State, Wyoming. 2014, add UNM. 2013, add UNLV and Colorado State.

I rest my case.

And of those 5 teams since 2015- 3 of them only got in because they won their conference tourney. Nevada, Fresno, and Wyoming.

(03-22-2017 10:04 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 09:56 AM)esayem Wrote:  To illustrate my point, one would have to go back to 2008 for a school outside Gonzaga, St. Mary's, or BYU to make a tournament appearance from the WCC. In 2008 San Diego went dancing because of an upset victory in the conference tournament. Before that? San Diego once again with an upset victory... in 2003! The BYU addition was a great move by the WCC to try and strengthen their profile.

Let's compare that to the MWC:

Just going back to 2015, Nevada, SDSU, Fresno State, Boise State, Wyoming. 2014, add UNM. 2013, add UNLV and Colorado State.

I rest my case.

And of those 5 teams since 2015- 3 of them only got in because they won their conference tourney. Nevada, Fresno, and Wyoming.

Nevada got in because they won their conference period. That is not a valid point because there is always going to be an auto-qualifier. How about all those years when Gonzaga made the lone appearance?

The fact remains that in the last ten years, hell we can go all the way back to 2002 when Pepperdine made an appearance to help your case, the MWC has 10/11 teams making tournament appearances (SJSU is hot garbage and hasn't been since their Big West days with an upset tourney victory and losing record) while the WCC has 5/10.

The MWC is much stronger top to bottom than the WCC and it's not even close.

(03-22-2017 09:52 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 09:47 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Makes sense for WSU for the short term...but does anyone actually think Cincy/UCONN are in the AAC forever?

I guess they could always move again once that domino falls

If it were up to those schools, no. But then, as a practical matter, it isn't really up to them if no P5 conference invites them.

Big East will be in play for UConn. Otherwise, things probably stay static until ESPN breaks up the Big 12 at the end of their current agreement, agreed.

(03-22-2017 09:59 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 09:47 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Makes sense for WSU for the short term...but does anyone actually think Cincy/UCONN are in the AAC forever?

I guess they could always move again once that domino falls

Here's the thing though. AAC even minus Cincy and UConn still light years better than MVC.

Right. Even if both those programs were to jump ship, Wichita would still be playing much better schools and expanding their recruiting footprint to much bigger cities (and their fans having an excuse to go to places like New Orleans and Florida mid-winter is a nice perk).

(03-22-2017 09:47 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Makes sense for WSU for the short term...but does anyone actually think Cincy/UCONN are in the AAC forever?

I guess they could always move again once that domino falls

It makes sense for Wichita State to be with Tulsa, SMU, Houston, Memphis, and Tulane more than anything.

(03-22-2017 09:29 AM)stever20 Wrote:  There is absolutely no guarantee the MWC is going to be good. I mean, San Diego St could easily go into the tank even more when Fisher leaves. UNLV is not what it used to be. New Mexico isn't what it used to be. If you stuck a gun to my head and who would be the best team outside of Gonzaga in either conference, I would say BYU. And BYU isn't going to the MWC. And frankly 2nd team would be St Mary's.

Not saying that's invalid analysis. You're right a lot more often than I am.

But ...

(03-22-2017 09:40 AM)esayem Wrote:  This may not be the MWC of five years ago, but the resources are there to make that happen. The MWC is much more likely to get three teams in the dance consistently than the WCC (which would require a tourney champ upset).

UNLV and UNM (the historic flagships) are rebounding from coaching changes and should be back to their old selves soon enough.

Nevada, SDSU, Utah State, and even Colorado State form a much stronger collection than the WCC's middle programs. All one has to look at is the last time MWC teams went to the dance vs. WCC teams. It's clear the MWC is a more competitive league top to bottom.

... this.

I agree with this, much more than I agree with the "very recent wins/RPI" type analysis.

Size/cost of the home arena, percent of capacity average for conf games, head coach salary -- these are the types of numbers that truly show the "support" for a program, and indicate what it can do in the future.

(03-22-2017 09:47 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  Makes sense for WSU for the short term...but does anyone actually think Cincy/UCONN are in the AAC forever?

I guess they could always move again once that domino falls

Cincinnati - maybe. It's definitely not an ideal situation, but they have shared a conference previously with Memphis, Houston, Tulane, USF and East Carolina. I do think they need a closer regional rival (I believe Memphis is closest in miles, but could be wrong). A down the road addition in Western Kentucky or even Saint Louis could be beneficial for them, but the AAC should not make any one addition for the benefit of one school - it needs to be for the conference.

UConn - definitely not. They will not be in the AAC in 2025, guaranteed. They will either get called up to the ACC, B1G or Big 12 (whatever version is around in 2025), or they will de-emphasize or adjust football and go to the Big East. While UConn is at the top of the athletic expenses (on par with many power conferences), their TV revenue falls behind further and further each and every year. Even if the AAC's contract gets higher during next renegotiation (let's say $5 million per year per team), it is still light years behind every other power conference. When other regional schools such as Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Rutgers, Maryland and Virginia Tech get paid exponentially more than that every year, the race gets further and further over time. In a given year, UConn would make $5 million from its TV deal; Rutgers, in comparison would get $50 million - 10x as much.

Both situations are unfortunate, not due to the new schools they now share a conference with, but due to the removal of their power conference affiliation, and now they are forced to claw their way back into the group. Neither school deserved that demotion, but it where the cards fell unfortunately.

(03-22-2017 10:14 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 10:04 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 09:56 AM)esayem Wrote:  To illustrate my point, one would have to go back to 2008 for a school outside Gonzaga, St. Mary's, or BYU to make a tournament appearance from the WCC. In 2008 San Diego went dancing because of an upset victory in the conference tournament. Before that? San Diego once again with an upset victory... in 2003! The BYU addition was a great move by the WCC to try and strengthen their profile.

Let's compare that to the MWC:

Just going back to 2015, Nevada, SDSU, Fresno State, Boise State, Wyoming. 2014, add UNM. 2013, add UNLV and Colorado State.

I rest my case.

And of those 5 teams since 2015- 3 of them only got in because they won their conference tourney. Nevada, Fresno, and Wyoming.

Nevada got in because they won their conference period. That is not a valid point because there is always going to be an auto-qualifier. How about all those years when Gonzaga made the lone appearance?

The fact remains that in the last ten years, hell we can go all the way back to 2002 when Pepperdine made an appearance to help your case, the MWC has 10/11 teams making tournament appearances (SJSU is hot garbage and hasn't been since their Big West days with an upset tourney victory and losing record) while the WCC has 5/10.

The MWC is much stronger top to bottom than the WCC and it's not even close.

Sure Gonzaga may have made the lone appearance- BUT they would have been in if they hadn't won the conference tourney. You can not say the same about the MWC schools here recently. MWC lost some really good basketball when BYU and Utah both left. The conference isn't close at all to what it used to be.

Also the problem is conferences are measured what they are at the top. And if you take all 21 teams from the conferences- right now the WCC would have probably the top 3 teams.

The committee has had no problem snubbing the AAC, A10, MVC, MWC, and others since this power consolidation. They all have RPI top-40 or better snubs. And the AAC, A10, and MWC have gained from consolidation, too, on paper.

I'm not sold on a depleted AAC > MVC. Because, MVC was better than CUSA, and what's the composition of AAC again with former CUSA schools? It's about programs, and whether they are running at their peak levels. Yeah, it really hurts to lose the best programs in any conference, but are there other competitive programs picking up the slack? With the Valley, you have Wichita holding it together after Creighton left, but UNI and SIU aren't invisible. The CUSA that Memphis dominated...UTEP, UAB...that wasn't a conference of schlubs. AAC currently has an inconsistent Temple and Memphis program...UConn was down this year, too. The conference should be happy SMU has a basketball pulse...they were of no value in CUSA. The question looming in the Missouri Valley is...can the conference make the right decisions for basketball? Wichita, from what I understand, doesn't have faith it can make that decision. But, the AAC is thinking they'd like to focus on it. That's what this is about.

(03-22-2017 10:51 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  The committee has had no problem snubbing the AAC, A10, MVC, MWC, and others since this power consolidation. They all have RPI top-40 or better snubs. And the AAC, A10, and MWC have gained from consolidation, too, on paper.

I'm not sold on a depleted AAC > MVC. Because, MVC was better than CUSA, and what's the composition of AAC again with former CUSA schools? It's about programs, and whether they are running at their peak levels. Yeah, it really hurts to lose the best programs in any conference, but are there other competitive programs picking up the slack? With the Valley, you have Wichita holding it together after Creighton left, but UNI and SIU aren't invisible. The CUSA that Memphis dominated...UTEP, UAB...that wasn't a conference of schlubs. AAC currently has an inconsistent Temple and Memphis program...UConn was down this year, too. The conference should be happy SMU has a basketball pulse...they were of no value in CUSA. The question looming in the Missouri Valley is...can the conference make the right decisions for basketball? Wichita, from what I understand, doesn't have faith it can make that decision. But, the AAC is thinking they'd like to focus on it. That's what this is about.

I think you underestimate the real difference. Its money. Its exposure. Virtually every AAC school is spending far more on basketball than every MVC school but Wichita. The middle of the AAC (Houston, Tulsa, UCF) would likely vie for the top of a MVC without Wichita. The top of the AAC would win the MVC in a cake walk. The AAC WITH Wichita is head and shoulders above the MVC---and that's really all that's important to the Shockers.

What you are seeing is the separation in perception of the basketball P5 and all else. The exception is the Big East---and that exception is lighting the way for other non-P5 basketball powers.

The key in the future to "at large bids" is to organize as many high end non-P5 basketball programs under one flag as possible. That's how you manufacture the schedule necessary to vie for at large bids. If I were the AAC--I'd be adding VCU as well as Wichita. Im not quite as sold on Dayton---but I woudnt argue against them either. That would give the AAC a very solid core of schools that will consistently field teams with the ability to compete for a NCAA bid (UConn, Temple, Cinci, SMU, Memphis, Wichita, VCU, Dayton, Houston, Tulsa). Ten of 14 would be very solid. Only 4 teams would not be in that group---and most of those schools are working hard to change that situation (for instance, look at UCF's development).

(03-22-2017 10:38 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 10:14 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 10:04 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 09:56 AM)esayem Wrote:  To illustrate my point, one would have to go back to 2008 for a school outside Gonzaga, St. Mary's, or BYU to make a tournament appearance from the WCC. In 2008 San Diego went dancing because of an upset victory in the conference tournament. Before that? San Diego once again with an upset victory... in 2003! The BYU addition was a great move by the WCC to try and strengthen their profile.

Let's compare that to the MWC:

Just going back to 2015, Nevada, SDSU, Fresno State, Boise State, Wyoming. 2014, add UNM. 2013, add UNLV and Colorado State.

I rest my case.

And of those 5 teams since 2015- 3 of them only got in because they won their conference tourney. Nevada, Fresno, and Wyoming.

Nevada got in because they won their conference period. That is not a valid point because there is always going to be an auto-qualifier. How about all those years when Gonzaga made the lone appearance?

The fact remains that in the last ten years, hell we can go all the way back to 2002 when Pepperdine made an appearance to help your case, the MWC has 10/11 teams making tournament appearances (SJSU is hot garbage and hasn't been since their Big West days with an upset tourney victory and losing record) while the WCC has 5/10.

The MWC is much stronger top to bottom than the WCC and it's not even close.

Sure Gonzaga may have made the lone appearance- BUT they would have been in if they hadn't won the conference tourney. You can not say the same about the MWC schools here recently. MWC lost some really good basketball when BYU and Utah both left. The conference isn't close at all to what it used to be.

Also the problem is conferences are measured what they are at the top. And if you take all 21 teams from the conferences- right now the WCC would have probably the top 3 teams.

Yeah, and San Diego wouldn't have made the dance either, that's the point.

Conferences absolutely are not measured by where they are at the top or there wouldn't be so many mid-major snubs! The WCC has two great coaches that are content where they are and BYU.

The MWC four years ago (2013) is the exact same MWC right now (minus a historically strong Utah State and a historically abysmal SJSU). There were FIVE representatives from the conference in the NCAA tournament: UNM (regular season and tournament champ), Colorado State, UNLV, SDSU, and Boise State. That's four at-larges! The WCC will never sniff that.

(03-22-2017 10:14 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 10:04 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 09:56 AM)esayem Wrote:  To illustrate my point, one would have to go back to 2008 for a school outside Gonzaga, St. Mary's, or BYU to make a tournament appearance from the WCC. In 2008 San Diego went dancing because of an upset victory in the conference tournament. Before that? San Diego once again with an upset victory... in 2003! The BYU addition was a great move by the WCC to try and strengthen their profile.

Let's compare that to the MWC:

Just going back to 2015, Nevada, SDSU, Fresno State, Boise State, Wyoming. 2014, add UNM. 2013, add UNLV and Colorado State.

I rest my case.

And of those 5 teams since 2015- 3 of them only got in because they won their conference tourney. Nevada, Fresno, and Wyoming.

Nevada got in because they won their conference period. That is not a valid point because there is always going to be an auto-qualifier. How about all those years when Gonzaga made the lone appearance?

The fact remains that in the last ten years, hell we can go all the way back to 2002 when Pepperdine made an appearance to help your case, the MWC has 10/11 teams making tournament appearances (SJSU is hot garbage and hasn't been since their Big West days with an upset tourney victory and losing record) while the WCC has 5/10.

The MWC is much stronger top to bottom than the WCC and it's not even close.

As an aside, every single Big West member except for UC Riverside has a tournament appearance since 2008. It's much more competitive than it looks. Oh, and the last two years it has doubled up the MWC in tourney credits.

(03-21-2017 04:22 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  AAC to 14 w/ Wichita St, VCU, Dayton

WCC to 14 w/ SDSU, Boise St, UNLV, New Mexico

That would pretty much take care of the multibid problem, IMO.

Yeah, 4 big state schools that play football combined with 10 private, small schools (other than BYU) makes a lot of sense.


Outside of BYU and Gonzaga, no WCC team draws more than 2,500/night.

You would still have the deadweight of the bottom of the WCC.

Try again with something realistic.

(03-22-2017 09:56 AM)esayem Wrote:  To illustrate my point, one would have to go back to 2008 for a school outside Gonzaga, St. Mary's, or BYU to make a tournament appearance from the WCC. In 2008 San Diego went dancing because of an upset victory in the conference tournament. Before that? San Diego once again with an upset victory... in 2003! The BYU addition was a great move by the WCC to try and strengthen their profile.

Let's compare that to the MWC:

Just going back to 2015, Nevada, SDSU, Fresno State, Boise State, Wyoming. 2014, add UNM. 2013, add UNLV and Colorado State.

I rest my case.

The MWC had the worst tourney record of any conference from 2013, going 6-13. They were horribly overrated & living off of their old reputation. That's why they were snubbed in 2016 & their sole 2017 rep was seeded so low.

(EDIT-Fresno went to the tourney in 2016 as a#14 seed)

You're also overlooking Pacific's tourney appearance in 2013.

I don't disagree that the MWC is a more balanced conference than the WCC. But that's mostly because their top is so weak.

(03-22-2017 12:02 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 10:38 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 10:14 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 10:04 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-22-2017 09:56 AM)esayem Wrote:  To illustrate my point, one would have to go back to 2008 for a school outside Gonzaga, St. Mary's, or BYU to make a tournament appearance from the WCC. In 2008 San Diego went dancing because of an upset victory in the conference tournament. Before that? San Diego once again with an upset victory... in 2003! The BYU addition was a great move by the WCC to try and strengthen their profile.

Let's compare that to the MWC:

Just going back to 2015, Nevada, SDSU, Fresno State, Boise State, Wyoming. 2014, add UNM. 2013, add UNLV and Colorado State.

I rest my case.

And of those 5 teams since 2015- 3 of them only got in because they won their conference tourney. Nevada, Fresno, and Wyoming.

Nevada got in because they won their conference period. That is not a valid point because there is always going to be an auto-qualifier. How about all those years when Gonzaga made the lone appearance?

The fact remains that in the last ten years, hell we can go all the way back to 2002 when Pepperdine made an appearance to help your case, the MWC has 10/11 teams making tournament appearances (SJSU is hot garbage and hasn't been since their Big West days with an upset tourney victory and losing record) while the WCC has 5/10.

The MWC is much stronger top to bottom than the WCC and it's not even close.

Sure Gonzaga may have made the lone appearance- BUT they would have been in if they hadn't won the conference tourney. You can not say the same about the MWC schools here recently. MWC lost some really good basketball when BYU and Utah both left. The conference isn't close at all to what it used to be.

Also the problem is conferences are measured what they are at the top. And if you take all 21 teams from the conferences- right now the WCC would have probably the top 3 teams.

Yeah, and San Diego wouldn't have made the dance either, that's the point.

Conferences absolutely are not measured by where they are at the top or there wouldn't be so many mid-major snubs! The WCC has two great coaches that are content where they are and BYU.

The MWC four years ago (2013) is the exact same MWC right now (minus a historically strong Utah State and a historically abysmal SJSU). There were FIVE representatives from the conference in the NCAA tournament: UNM (regular season and tournament champ), Colorado State, UNLV, SDSU, and Boise State. That's four at-larges! The WCC will never sniff that.

And the MWC will never sniff that either again. And the conference hasn't been all that.
New Mexico 5 NCAA trips since 1999. 2 wins.
UNLV 7 NCAA trips since 1999. 3 wins.
SD St 8 NCAA trips since 1999. 6 wins.
Boise 3 NCAA trips since 1999. 0 wins.
Colorado St 3 NCAA trips since 1999. 1 win.
Fresno St 2 NCAA trips since 1999. 1 win.
Nevada 5 NCAA trips since 1999. 4 wins.
Utah St 8 NCAA trips since 1999. 1 win.
Wyoming 2 NCAA trips since 1999. 1 win.
Air Force 2 NCAA trips since 1999 0 wins.
San Jose St 0

so as a conference- 45 trips since 1999. 18 years. Several of those trips auto bids from MWC and WAC. only 19 wins in those 18 years.
The WCC teams even w/o Gonzaga- 25 trips and 12 wins. Add them in and it's 43 trips and 35 wins.

Not that this doesn't also apply to the WAC and possible MWC, but how many of those "wins" are First Four?

A little dubious to include those, imo.

(03-22-2017 11:59 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The key in the future to "at large bids" is to organize as many high end non-P5 basketball programs under one flag as possible.

I agree. This is already so, though. The question is, why such a drop off.

If I told you there was a conference with three teams that have 54 NCAA bids and another three with 50 between them alone, which conferences do you think I'd be speaking of? Now pit it between A10 and CUSA, and who has which number? Between WKU, UTEP, and UAB versus St. Joe's, Dayton, and La Salle?

When's the last time CUSA's gotten multiple bids, and what's their average the last 10 years, or since they lost the bunch that went to the Big East? It's not like basketball pedigree isn't to be found in that conference. It's got plenty. But, if you're always going to be pulling out the little guy card, putting it to budgets and whatnot, then nobody but the majors should be putting good basketball on the courts.

Maybe the truth is, since basketball is an actual revenue-generating sport and football mostly isn't, why are programs letting themselves drop off on both when there's no guarantee the one will ever turn a profit or fund itself, let alone multiple athletic programs, or an entire department...like the other can and does elsewhere?

LOL... This thread has gone off road

(03-22-2017 03:27 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  LOL... This thread has gone off road

Yeah...I'm the OP who reported Pete Thamel of SI wrote about the AAC happening soon for Wichita St....it's now evolved into UNLV, UNM, SDSU etc. of the Mountain West joining Gonzaga in their conference. I strongly suspect that will not happen. I do think Wichita St to the AAC happpens very soon though.

(03-22-2017 03:27 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  LOL... This thread has gone off road

(03-22-2017 03:27 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  LOL... This thread has gone off road

Well, count me as one who puts that stuff out there because I don't quite understand what Wichita is doing now that gets any better in the AAC?

This is year, what, three or four for the conference, and it's still getting the shaft in some kind of way, either losing bids or getting crap seeds. For Wichita, it's basically a lateral move.

Same goes for MWC.

If they want their hoops in a better place, and it isn't one of the P5, then it's Big East or Atlantic 10.

It's no better anywhere else. They'll get stuck with bad programs or get lost among former greats anywhere else. Literally.