Oso planning to go pro
Okay. But it wasn't the question posed in this thread.SLU absolutely could be competitive if they were in the Big East.SLU also doesn't bring enough value to justify slicing the pie an additional way.Both of these things are true. But the first one is only relevant if the second one isn't true. And the second one isn't an insult to SLU, its a statement that applies to the vast majority of college basketball programs.
You mentioned Gonzaga for example. It took Mark Few 18 years to make a Final Four. That's a lot of years of often being a double digit NCAA seed pulling off the Sweet 16 upset. What happens when he leaves? How is that Gonzaga spot looking after that? Someone else also mentioned Creighton. Creighton had made 2 of the previous 6 NCAA's prior to joining the Big East. While not as big of brand as Gonzaga, they have elevated themselves on and off of the court since joining the league. The league would perhaps be even worse on the floor had they not joined. Regular Season League Title, and 6 of 8 top 3 league finishes. They are a much bigger brand in the Big East than prior, and, they are having more success in the league than prior to joining the league. That's how it often works.I don't think you are seeing the forest for the trees.Years 18 to 22 of Mark Few aren't walking through the door.
We were in the same conference (Great Midwest and Conference USA) as SLU between 1991 and 2004. IMO the reason Creighton got the BE bid over SLU was due to Creighton really emerging as a basketball program and due to SLU's leadership issues at the exact wrong time.But no, SLU does nothing for the BE to warrant splitting the pie another way. I agree that Gonzaga is the only program presently that would.
Just want to point out the 2009 Creighton team was victim to being in a mid major conference. They were tournament caliber for sure. But the general point holds true.
TAMUI do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.
If Gonzaga were located in Denver, it would be a no brainer.
Denver is already in the Big East (for lacrosse)If UD were ever to put together a solid basketball program with sustained success, they'd at least be on the radar, because of the existing connection. But that's 20 or more years down the road.
It was more than that.First, SLU reneged on an agreement to join the MVC after CUSA imploded and they weren't invited along to the Big East. They blamed Marquette for that. Then, the then SLU President, Father Biondi not only rejected the MVC invite in person but nuked every bridge in the room by insulting the membership and conference. This particularly pissed off Creighton.Now, a few years later, it's Creighton or SLU for the final BE spot. Creighton still holds a grudge and Creighton's president has close ties to MU's leaders so MU makes a push to bring Creighton instead. Besides, nobody wants anything to do with Biondi. Even fellow Priests dislike him. Game over for SLU.
Gonzaga has developed a national following that brings value. SLU has not. Maybe that will fall off when Few leaves but just as you pointed out that being in the Big East would help SLU, it would also help Few's successor. Guaranteed value now and possible value later is better than less value now and possible value later.Creighton is already in the Big East. SLU is not. Creighton already has a slice of the pie. Adding SLU takes away from everyone else's pie. If you want to argue that it should have been SLU instead of Creighton back in 2014, you can make that argument....but we don't have a time machine so there's nothing that can be done. We could theoretically add a 12th team, which is what this thread is about.
I'm aware what the thread is about and what I believe is your short sightedness on the topic, thanks. Gonzaga isn't walking through the door. (Insert your own Rick Majerus Cindy Crawford joke here.) And again, as I said, it's up to the Big East if they want an elevated SLU with a bigger following and top 20 market and all that goes with that.
That is hilarious. I kind of wonder if those midwestern schools could have formed a more basketball centric conference when the BE expanded back then. (St. Louis, Creighton, Dayton, Xavier, Butler, Drake, Wichita, Loyola, etc.) Because it seems to me that the A10 just has a lot of junky programs that don't do much for the conference.
This would be disgusting for the existing Big East schools that get stuck in that midwest division.
Big East-East and Big East-West.Big East-original and Big East-from lesser conferences.
My Father in law played basketball for SLUH for Hank Raymond’s and was offered a college scholarship by Hank Raymonds. My Wife’s Uncle was President of SLU High for many years. The college seems to have been generating many high end donors lately from my distant observations. But I do not know if they would be a good addition.
More opportunities for attendance, sell-outs and matchups at MSG for the BET is invaluable in itself. Eliminating the round robin allows for conferences to "remove" a home/home from a projected top team and bottom team, to maximize NET and SOS rankings in conference, which is what other larger leagues already utilize. Finally, adding peer programs adds content, and adding content means more $$$ from Fox for our next TV deal. UConn should have already boosted our TV deal (a new deal has not yet been announced, but rumors are that we are seeing a bump).
I agree with many of your other comments, but I'm not so sure about this one. While adding a team very likely would increase revenues, it definitely would divide the pot by another full share. So the question really becomes whether the bump would be sufficient to justify cutting each piece a bit smaller. Essentially, you'd need to show that the pie would grow by at least 9% (1/11th), or the existing schools would actually be harmed financially. IMO, it was so clear that SLU would bring in the sufficient $$$, they'd already be here.