FIVE "Power" Conferences:
(These four have 16 teams)
B10
SEC
B12
PAC10
A new "Big Atlantic Conference" would have 16 football schools PLUS Nova, ND, SJU and GTown as basketball-only.
Where do we end up...along with the rest of the bball-only schools? The A-10.
http://media.nj.com/ledgerarchives/other/colorBIG10.DT.pdf
This makes me want to cry
Don't worry, it's not going to happen. First, the Pac-10 is not going to 16 schools and one of the them would not be Boise St. The ACC with 20 schools for basketball, no way.
If we were put as a basketball only school in the big ten, this proposal would go from devastating to awesome
These idiots who come up with these silly schemes have no idea what is really driving expansion.
Quote from: mupanther on May 10, 2010, 09:49:42 AM
Don't worry, it's not going to happen. First, the Pac-10 is not going to 16 schools and one of the them would not be Boise St. The ACC with 20 schools for basketball, no way.
These power conferences are not going to be aligned in the next year. What so many people are writing about is how the conference landscape "may" look like after a couple of rounds of shuffling. And if expansion continually adds value to a conference and its members, they will continue to do it....until they get to 16....or wherever the law of diminishing returns shows up. PAc-10 commish said he wants to "expand in pairs." So, if they are at 10 now, we're talking about 3 rounds max.
I can understand Marquette being placed in the A-10 only because their women's basketball sucks
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 10, 2010, 10:00:56 AM
These idiots who come up with these silly schemes have no idea what is really driving expansion.
Even an idiot understands that money is driving everything!
Assuming we're going to end up with Nova & Georgetown is pie in the sky thinking.
I would think in Some ways Marquette Would be more likely partner then St John's. Marquette spends more money on its program, which I believe woudl be mor eimportant in the eyes of some Athletic Director's. MU invests way too much in basketball to be forgotten and most other AD's would understand that.
Quote from: OneMadWarrior on May 12, 2010, 09:06:09 AM
I would think in Some ways Marquette Would be more likely partner then St John's. Marquette spends more money on its program, which I believe woudl be mor eimportant in the eyes of some Athletic Director's. MU invests way too much in basketball to be forgotten and most other AD's would understand that.
Except St. John's just assembled a super-coaching staff.
St. Johns has too much history to be excluded, plus it gives an opening to msg, where everyone wants to have their conference tournament.
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on May 12, 2010, 09:24:23 AM
St. Johns has too much history to be excluded, plus it gives an opening to msg, where everyone wants to have their conference tournament.
Are you kidding? St. John's may have a history....a long time ago, but they haven't been relevant on the college basketball landscape for 20+ years. And a conference can have its tournament at MSG regardless of whether St. John's is involved or not.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 12, 2010, 09:32:43 AM
Are you kidding? St. John's may have a history....a long time ago, but they haven't been relevant on the college basketball landscape for 20+ years. And a conference can have its tournament at MSG regardless of whether St. John's is involved or not.
Try bringing that argument to the tri state area or the east coast. people here would rather have st. johns than marquette, and it wouldn't be close.
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on May 12, 2010, 09:49:19 AM
Try bringing that argument to the tri state area or the east coast. people here would rather have st. johns than marquette, and it wouldn't be close.
Of course. No doubt about that...but that's not what I was disputing. The major conferences would rather have neither. (And I'm not including the BE as a major conference in this reference.)
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 12, 2010, 09:52:32 AM
Of course. No doubt about that...but that's not what I was disputing. The major conferences would rather have neither. (And I'm not including the BE as a major conference in this reference.)
I agree with you on that point. I think marquette has a better shot at joining the big ten as a bball only rather than the acc
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on May 12, 2010, 10:02:32 AM
I agree with you on that point. I think marquette has a better shot at joining the big ten as a bball only rather than the acc
They don't have a shot at either.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 12, 2010, 10:39:00 AM
They don't have a shot at either.
Your probally right, but thinking we do gets me through the day.
Hell, If we are shifting everything, why not make the conference all private.
MU, Butler, Dayton, Depaul, Georgetown, Providence, Seton Hall, St, Johns, St. Louis, Villanova, Xavier, and Notre Dame (if they want to stay independent in football)/Creighton/George Washington/St. Joes
I am really bumbed that the USC series isn't starting this year, (I believe someone said that in a different thread) hopefully we get that and the LSU series set for next year. I think scheduling like this will be key if we want to remain on a high level. That hopefully would be the start of a Gonzaga type of schedule(anyone, anywhere, anytime) that would continue if post conference realignment. If we can get into or stay in a conference with a few other big names and have an extremely tough nonconference schedule we can continue to have success and get games on national TV I believe. (see: Memphis, Gonzaga)