Many have spoken about not being excited about having Seton Hall in the conference. If Seton Hall is ever not going to be in our conference, now is the time to do it, since it much easier to not invite someone to join you then to push them out once they are in your conference. Not inviting them, however, comes at a cost. Not bringing along seven teams from the old conference is required to get the automatic NCAA invite, for example.
Here's another possibility. Why not listen to UConn's request to join the new conference? That would solve the seven members from the old conference problem, and the profile of men's and women's basketball in the new conference would be much higher. Also, UConn is less likely to jump to the ACC than other football schools due to the apparent opposition of Boston College to UConn's joining the ACC. The TV viewership of the new league would be vastly improved, as well. Having a public institution will make the new league seem less, well, parochial.
New conferences aren't built every day, let's put some creative thinking into making this one.
Never going to happen. And UConn has completely denied having interest in the C7.
Interesting idea if you want to get rid of Seton Hall. Although, UCONN would only be here short term and would eventually leave. The last three invites would be Dayton, VCU, and SLU with one of them replacing Seton Hall's spot. So, the only thing that would be different long term is the new conference would include SLU and not Seton Hall. I'm not sure that's worth it.
I'd much rather get rid of DePaul than Seton Hall.
Quote from: muguru on January 18, 2013, 01:32:51 PM
I'd much rather get rid of DePaul than Seton Hall.
Both schools are in strong recruiting areas. They just need to bring in shady coaches and they'll be competitive again. I say that only about 25% in jest.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 18, 2013, 01:26:33 PM
Never going to happen. And UConn has completely denied having interest in the C7.
A lot of schools have denied rumors in the era of realignment.
Quote from: muguru on January 18, 2013, 01:32:51 PM
I'd much rather get rid of DePaul than Seton Hall.
+1
A Jersey Guy just published an update 5 minutes ago. He mentioned this:
"Cincinnati and UConn are still hopeful they get calls from other BCS conferences, but the odds of joining the Catholic 7 are fading as long as the current Big East football remains solvent."
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 18, 2013, 01:26:33 PM
Never going to happen. And UConn has completely denied having interest in the C7.
Just like Chip Kelly denied any interest in the Eagles. Denial is the new "I'm looking at all of my options"
Quote from: JakeBarnes on January 18, 2013, 01:52:07 PM
Just like Chip Kelly denied any interest in the Eagles. Denial is the new "I'm looking at all of my options"
I don't either side wants it to happen...
You would drop DePaul before you drop Seton Hall. We are 4-0 this year and if you want some perspective on that, DePaul may not of won more than four games total in the four most recent years. Seton Hall is not the problem. They probably also have a better record than Providence over the last four years and last year won more games than Villanova did.
No one is kicking anybody out. Loyalty in a conference is nice to have..
Quote from: LittleMurs on January 18, 2013, 01:24:00 PM
Many have spoken about not being excited about having Seton Hall in the conference. If Seton Hall is ever not going to be in our conference, now is the time to do it, since it much easier to not invite someone to join you then to push them out once they are in your conference. Not inviting them, however, comes at a cost. Not bringing along seven teams from the old conference is required to get the automatic NCAA invite, for example.
Here's another possibility. Why not listen to UConn's request to join the new conference? That would solve the seven members from the old conference problem, and the profile of men's and women's basketball in the new conference would be much higher. Also, UConn is less likely to jump to the ACC than other football schools due to the apparent opposition of Boston College to UConn's joining the ACC. The TV viewership of the new league would be vastly improved, as well. Having a public institution will make the new league seem less, well, parochial.
New conferences aren't built every day, let's put some creative thinking into making this one.
horrible post.
Not sure what "many people" means. I haven't heard any. I'm a big fan of the Hall. There are many people in South Orange who could care less about MU and Milwaukee
Yeah, well the world needs ditch diggers too. --Judge Smails
Anybody who wants DePaul out of the conference is a RumDumb.
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on January 18, 2013, 05:37:13 PM
Anybody who wants DePaul out of the conference is a RumDumb.
Yeah. Don't be silly heads.
Quote from: buckchuckler on January 18, 2013, 06:22:05 PM
Yeah. Don't be silly heads.
Could care less they are in Chicago or anything of that ilk. I look strictly at on the court results. DePaul has been at best a low major the last several years. I personally have no room for garbage like that being associated with MU. It just drags them down, and hurts MU's image. DePaul needs to drop down top a conference they can legitimately compete in...like the WIAC or something. Then again, UW-Whitewater would probably take them behind the woodshed.
I fail to see the benefit of inviting members that we know have absolutely no interest in staying, unless you are going to demand a $50 million exit fee and 5 year waiting period. Why start a conference with schools of that nature which could lead to more instability right from the start? Talk about getting off on the wrong foot. It's bad for the television angle, it's bad from league credibility angle, it's bad (very bad) perception wise.
What is the upside? I'm sure someone will say they bring great basketball, tradition, brand, etc. OK, and when that leaves, which it will, don't they take those things with them? If I'm brokering the deal from a TV side, why am I going to give a bunch of money to a conference that has members looking to leave minute one due to their football programs? If I'm going to invest all this money into a conference to help be an anchor for my programming, I don't want that conference diluted, even if I get a rebate on what I spent if they bolt. I need this conference not only strong, but stable.
Sorry, from where I sit and the people I've spoken to, we don't get the UCONN or UC thing at all from both a tv or conference angle. It would have a short term benefit only which could easily be drowned out by negative aspects of one or two of them leaving.
Quote from: muguru on January 18, 2013, 06:52:46 PM
Could care less they are in Chicago or anything of that ilk. I look strictly at on the court results. DePaul has been at best a low major the last several years. I personally have no room for garbage like that being associated with MU. It just drags them down, and hurts MU's image. DePaul needs to drop down top a conference they can legitimately compete in...like the WIAC or something. Then again, UW-Whitewater would probably take them behind the woodshed.
I think that calling DePaul low major overstates things. Their record is hurt by being in the Big East, as high a conference as any since they joined it. I remember being at a Marquette - DePaul game in Chicago two years or so ago that DePaul won. More to the point, I can't remember anytime since they've been in the league that DePaul has dropped below 150 in RPI. (or risen above 100 RPI) That doesn't sound low major to me.
Why would you want to kick a team out from the 3rd largest media market in the US? This new conference needs this market and the New Jersey area. The more markets we are in the better it is for recruiting.
So by some people's reasoning almost everyone should be kicked out of the SEC because they bring down Kentucky. So ridiculous.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 18, 2013, 06:59:53 PM
I fail to see the benefit of inviting members that we know have absolutely no interest in staying, unless you are going to demand a $50 million exit fee and 5 year waiting period. Why start a conference with schools of that nature which could lead to more instability right from the start? Talk about getting off on the wrong foot. It's bad for the television angle, it's bad from league credibility angle, it's bad (very bad) perception wise.
What is the upside? I'm sure someone will say they bring great basketball, tradition, brand, etc. OK, and when that leaves, which it will, don't they take those things with them? If I'm brokering the deal from a TV side, why am I going to give a bunch of money to a conference that has members looking to leave minute one due to their football programs? If I'm going to invest all this money into a conference to help be an anchor or programming, I don't want that conference diluted, even if I get a rebate on what I spent. I need this conference not only strong, but stable.
Sorry, from where I sit and the people I've spoken to, we don't get the UCONN or UC thing at all from both a tv or conference angle. It would have a short term benefit only which could easily be drowned out by negative aspects of one or two of them leaving.
I was trying to think of a sneaky way to keep Seton Hall out of the league. I'd much rather have VCU. But, not inviting Seton Hall in favor of VCU had the problem of leaving the new league without seven members from the old league being involved in the new one. When UConn left which I'm beginning to believe would be a long way down the road -not because they won't want to, but because they won't get an invite to somewhere else anytime soon- then they could be replaced with VCU at a time when maintaining the an original seven from the old league would no longer be a concern.
Pragmatically, I am well aware that the chance this idea has is only slightly better than DePaul's chances of winning the NCAA title this year. I just thought it would be an interesting thought to float out there.
My comment really wasn't specifically to you LittleMurs. Several others posted thoughts about adding them and there was a poll on here last week about UCONN and UC. I just fail to see the benefit unless there is a major major set of strings attached to it.
Understand you on DePaul and Seton Hall. Those guys are going to have to take the money they get from this deal and make statement hires most likely. They have got to make commitments that are worthy of the tv money that has been talked about. If not, they could be relegating themselves to doldrums for another 10 year cycle if not longer.
Quote from: MUMonster03 on January 18, 2013, 07:05:26 PM
Why would you want to kick a team out from the 3rd largest media market in the US? This new conference needs this market and the New Jersey area. The more markets we are in the better it is for recruiting.
So by some people's reasoning almost everyone should be kicked out of the SEC because they bring down Kentucky. So ridiculous.
The reason that I'd want to kick them out is because I doubt their commitment to making their men's basketball team first rate. They are in one of the elite areas for recruiting talent as well as a top league and they are still patching their team together with transfers and foreign players. I figured that another plus of replacing them with UConn would be east coast and specifically New York area market coverage.
People need to stop trying to dump conference members. We're in this together. Everything runs in cycles. There were many long stretches where we would have been voted off the island had we been in the Big East. DePaul has been great, not so good, very good, passable and not good again. Seton Hall played for a national title 12 years more recently than we did. Seton Hall, DePaul and Providence are the least of our problems.
Quote from: Knight Commission on January 18, 2013, 05:33:19 PM
horrible post.
Not sure what "many people" means. I haven't heard any. I'm a big fan of the Hall. There are many people in South Orange who could care less about MU and Milwaukee
"I'm a big fan of the Hall."
Can you elaborate? It would be reassuring to hear some positives about the Hall.
"There are many people in South Orange who could care less about MU and Milwaukee"
No hurt feelings here. Judging by the Hall's average home attendance of 6,941 last year (in an unusually good year for the team), they feel the same way about the Hall. Hopefully, South Orange residents could get excited about the league having St. John's and UConn.
Quote from: muguru on January 18, 2013, 01:32:51 PM
I'd much rather get rid of DePaul than Seton Hall.
word
Quote from: muguru on January 18, 2013, 06:52:46 PM
I look strictly at on the court results.
And that's why conference presidents are conference presidents and you do... whatever it is that you do.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 18, 2013, 06:59:53 PM
I fail to see the benefit of inviting members that we know have absolutely no interest in staying, unless you are going to demand a $50 million exit fee and 5 year waiting period. Why start a conference with schools of that nature which could lead to more instability right from the start? Talk about getting off on the wrong foot. It's bad for the television angle, it's bad from league credibility angle, it's bad (very bad) perception wise.
What is the upside? I'm sure someone will say they bring great basketball, tradition, brand, etc. OK, and when that leaves, which it will, don't they take those things with them? If I'm brokering the deal from a TV side, why am I going to give a bunch of money to a conference that has members looking to leave minute one due to their football programs? If I'm going to invest all this money into a conference to help be an anchor for my programming, I don't want that conference diluted, even if I get a rebate on what I spent if they bolt. I need this conference not only strong, but stable.
Sorry, from where I sit and the people I've spoken to, we don't get the UCONN or UC thing at all from both a tv or conference angle. It would have a short term benefit only which could easily be drowned out by negative aspects of one or two of them leaving.
Agree with you! What are your thoughts on getting Gonzaga into the league. I know a lot has been discussed about non- mens basketball sports travel costs but if I were a Network Exec and wanted a legitimate high major basketball league I certainly would like to have a program like Gonzaga in the mix. Should be some way to make it all work.
Quote from: MU82 on January 18, 2013, 07:48:45 PM
People need to stop trying to dump conference members. We're in this together. Everything runs in cycles. There were many long stretches where we would have been voted off the island had we been in the Big East. DePaul has been great, not so good, very good, passable and not good again. Seton Hall played for a national title 12 years more recently than we did. Seton Hall, DePaul and Providence are the least of our problems.
"People need to stop trying to dump conference members. We're in this together."
This comment echos an earlier one by Aughnanure, another poster, like yourself, whose opinions carry weight with me.
"Seton Hall played for a national title 12 years more recently than we did."
Yes, and that was also their last final four, our last final four was in 2003. 1989 was also the second year that they actually made the NCAA tourney. Almost all of Seton Hall's post season success came under the direction of P. J. Carlesimo, their Al McGuire, if you will. I was pleasantly surprised to be reminded that since Carlesimo left, they did reach a sweet sixteen in 2000. In total, the Hall has made the NCAA tourney 3 times in the 18 years since Carlesimo left for the NBA. They also have six NIT appearances in those 18 years, giving them a 50/50 record of playing in one of those tourneys, during that time.
"Everything runs in cycles."
I think that NCAA men's basketball programs only run in cycles if you admit when your program is slipping and take whatever steps are necessary to right the ship. Since Carlesimo, the only other effective coach that I'm aware of them having was Louis Orr who they fired after five years after the 2005-06 season, even though he had gotten two of the Hall's three post Carlesimo NCAA invites and one of the NIT invites in those five years. So, I'm not really buying "everything runs in cycles, or...
"Seton Hall, DePaul and Providence are the least of our problems."
Under Cooley, Providence seems to be on the right track. The Keno Davis disaster of recruiting talented players other coaches seemed to know weren't ready for the responsibility of being Division I athletes is over. And if you're going to take transfer centers, taking a former top 100 guy from Wake Forest is far preferable to taking a bust from Southern Illinois, like the Hall did. Willard is relatively new at the Hall, but the recruiting results so far aren't looking great, although they did get a commitment form a top 100 point guard, albeit one with outside "issues". Purnell
should have been a great hire for DePaul. He's gotten programs at two other schools that had fallen off the rails back on track at Dayton and Clemson. Hell, he had Clemson back in the AP poll. So far the going seems to be slower at DePaul. If Purnell can't get it turned around there, it'll be hard to see how its Purnell's fault. CAN YOU HEAR ME LENTI-PONSETTO? Which brings me to my favorite response on this thread from CBB.
"Understand you on DePaul and Seton Hall. Those guys are going to have to take the money they get from this deal and make statement hires most likely.
They have got to make commitments that are worthy of the tv money that has been talked about."
Amen.
Amazingly, the schools in this new league will actually be getting more money than they were getting to play in a far better league when the new league starts up. I hope to God that those putting together this new league have the wherewithal to ensure that everyone coming into the league make a commitment to men's basketball (the financial engine of the league) commensurate to the opportunity that they are receiving.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on January 18, 2013, 09:09:34 PM
Agree with you! What are your thoughts on getting Gonzaga into the league. I know a lot has been discussed about non- mens basketball sports travel costs but if I were a Network Exec and wanted a legitimate high major basketball league I certainly would like to have a program like Gonzaga in the mix. Should be some way to make it all work.
If I am Gonzaga, I think I take a pass. Killer travel for all sports, especially basketball. Just don't see it working out where you have weekday conference games 2500 miles away. That doesn't even begin to get into the other sports. Just my opinion.
Quote from: muguru on January 18, 2013, 06:52:46 PM
Could care less they are in Chicago or anything of that ilk. I look strictly at on the court results. DePaul has been at best a low major the last several years. I personally have no room for garbage like that being associated with MU. It just drags them down, and hurts MU's image. DePaul needs to drop down top a conference they can legitimately compete in...like the WIAC or something. Then again, UW-Whitewater would probably take them behind the woodshed.
Anybody who says we don't need DePaul has no idea what they are talking about. We have both made 1 Final 4 since 1979.....they can resurrect with the right coach....So should Providence play in the WIAC or something since DePaul beat them on the road? Ignorance is bliss.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 18, 2013, 07:23:12 PM
Understand you on DePaul and Seton Hall. Those guys are going to have to take the money they get from this deal and make statement hires most likely. They have got to make commitments that are worthy of the tv money that has been talked about. If not, they could be relegating themselves to doldrums for another 10 year cycle if not longer.
Agree. By all accounts, these programs are going to be getting an extra $1.5M per year in their pockets minimum. They can't be pocketing this. The programs that have had success and the new invitees can't have that from them either. There will be A-10 programs that won't get invites (aka not even the 4-5 best) that are getting 1/3 the television revenue and much less exposure now and manage to outperform Providence, DePaul, and Seton Hall every single year. And the commitment has to go beyond big hires - they help, but if the coach's salary represents 60% of their basketball budget it's just a facade to make it look like they're trying.
Funny thing about these kinds of posts. Fans speculate, which is what they are supposed to do, I suppose, but few if any have any idea what they are talking about.
It appears that Marquette and DePaul were added to the Big East at least in part because that would give seven basketball schools the option to leave and form their own conference. Nobody is getting dumped or replaced.
Similarly, the suggestion that the conference invite or allow football schools like Cinci or UConn is not happening. The AD's do not want the grief and instability.
And no matter how much people like Gonzaga, they are not getting invited. The rest of the teams do not want to send their non-revenue teams there.
Speculation is fun, but it is helpful if it is based on fact.
The comments about dumping the Hall are just flat out wrong. We are charter members of the Big East. Not sure why you think Marquette is so special. We are one hire away from prominence. Your coach might leave soon and you could be back to what you were for 20 years.
Quote from: PJFinal4 on January 19, 2013, 04:08:28 AM
The comments about dumping the Hall are just flat out wrong. We are charter members of the Big East. Not sure why you think Marquette is so special. We are one hire away from prominence. Your coach might leave soon and you could be back to what you were for 20 years.
3 of our last four coaches have gotten MU to the Sweet 16 over the past 20 years. You cant say the same thing.
Although I agree with you that dumping any of the C7 is stupid.
We're not dumping anyone. We were brought into this league not just for basketball voting equity but to give the non-football schools the chance to break off and create their own league down the line. What we are doing is exactly why we are here in the first place. And why would we want to ditch someone who does want to be there in exchange for someone who doesn't.
Regardless, the C7 will all go forward together. No point debating what's already set in stone.
Quote from: PJFinal4 on January 19, 2013, 04:08:28 AM
The comments about dumping the Hall are just flat out wrong. We are charter members of the Big East. Not sure why you think Marquette is so special. We are one hire away from prominence. Your coach might leave soon and you could be back to what you were for 20 years.
The whole premise of this thread is "interesting". Not gonna happen.
Amongst the billion reasons why it won't happen is the fact that it would be a very dishonorable move. The seven schools are committed to each other for the foreseeable future. Honor (or lack thereof) is also why ND shouldn't be let in too. ;)
Apparently, you've not read any of the posts that dismiss this notion.
The entire concept of dropping one of the C7 is just silly.
Also, SHU played a great game against us this week. Not sure why this came out after a really competitive hard fought game.
The following logic runs rampant on this board:
"Team X hasn't been good for a few years, so there is no chance they will ever be better."
kind of a variation on "Player X (usually a freshman) didn't play well, so he's never going
to improve."
Quote from: buckchuckler on January 19, 2013, 09:33:30 AM
The entire concept of dropping one of the C7 is just silly.
Also, SHU played a great game against us this week. Not sure why this came out after a really competitive hard fought game.
Yes, yes it is.
Quote from: LittleMurs on January 18, 2013, 07:53:26 PM
"I'm a big fan of the Hall."
Can you elaborate? It would be reassuring to hear some positives about the Hall.
The orignal post cites the ethereal "many have spoken", yet would like specific examples of the counter-argument.
Classic Scoop gambit.
Quote from: PJFinal4 on January 19, 2013, 04:08:28 AM
The comments about dumping the Hall are just flat out wrong. We are charter members of the Big East. Not sure why you think Marquette is so special. We are one hire away from prominence. Your coach might leave soon and you could be back to what you were for 20 years.
Terrific, make the hire.
I do not think we should get rid of any of the 7 teams. I just wanted to point out that Seton Hall, since we have been in the conference has out performed DePaul and probably Providence.
Quote from: LittleMurs on January 18, 2013, 07:44:22 PM
The reason that I'd want to kick them out is because I doubt their commitment to making their men's basketball team first rate. They are in one of the elite areas for recruiting talent as well as a top league and they are still patching their team together with transfers and foreign players. I figured that another plus of replacing them with UConn would be east coast and specifically New York area market coverage.
I don't see what UConn brings besides name recognition. We have St. John's to bring in the NY area (on a side note why are they not better, all you have to do is walk into a recruits house and say MSG) also we don't know if UConn will stay UConn now that Calhoun is gone.
The other thing is even if these teams get better yo will still have good teams and bad teams every year. Not every team in the conference can win 10 plus conference games and make the tournament. Every team in the conference has 10+ wins except USF and providence. For some of these teams to rise up and return to success means that others have to fall back to the pack. The wins have to come from somewhere.
Quote from: lab_warrior on January 19, 2013, 10:04:12 AM
The following logic runs rampant on this board:
"Team X hasn't been good for a few years, so there is no chance they will ever be better."
kind of a variation on "Player X (usually a freshman) didn't play well, so he's never going
to improve."
+1
You have to take a team's potential into account, not just their record the past couple years.
Quote from: bilsu on January 19, 2013, 10:46:02 AM
I do not think we should get rid of any of the 7 teams. I just wanted to point out that Seton Hall, since we have been in the conference has out performed DePaul and probably Providence.
Yes, in addition to Rutgers and USF.
Seton Hall 52-76
Providence 42-85
South Florida 35-91
Rutgers 34-93
DePaul 26-100
So they're not a big lost cause. Aside from one 4-12 season, they typically are just a few games under .500 in Big East play; not good, but far from the embarrassing seasons the others on this list have managed to pile up. The statistics I can find say they typically spend more on their program than all of these teams as well, which would indicate that they indeed could be a good coaching hire away from seeing more success.
Or maybe these teams are a year of not getting curb stomped in conference by monster teams away from competing. For all the success the BEAST has had, someone has to lose those games. Thats why I hate hearing talk about "well the winners should get more money cuz they win unlike those losers who lose." You have to have partners with big stadiums and passionate fans that win games out of conference to come in and get handed a 4-14 record. Its just a reality of college ball. The C7 have the best most desirable losers in the country in addition to the teams that have been able to compete for bids. And thats valuable. Also, they won't suck forever.
Quote from: chapman on January 19, 2013, 11:58:26 AM
Seton Hall 52-76
Providence 42-85
South Florida 35-91
Rutgers 34-93
DePaul 26-100
Good research. For all the DePaul hate, who among the people that want them gone would have guessed they have only been 8 & 9 games worse than Rutgers and South Florida respectively since the modern BEast? I know there are also football considerations, but Rutgers just got an invite to the B10, and South Florida might get into the ACC before UConn. If it Rutgers were about to join the C7 rather than DePaul (football and catholicism aside) I can't imagine that people would want them gone. And yet, they would bring a similar profile to DePaul, to the tune of 1 W/L per year.