Lunardi: Expansion impact on basketball

[brewcity77]

Joe Lunardi from ESPN wrote a piece on how Texas A&M's flip to the SEC could lead to the dominoes falling in the NCAA Tournament. Here are some of the highlights:

I argued then that the "big move" of the day -- five Conference USA schools to the Big East -- would only work if the new super conference generated at least as many NCAA invitations as its prior affiliations combined. And, while it was tough sledding in the first few years (six NCAA bids in 2007, for instance), the glass ceiling was shattered in 2011 with a record 11 tournament teams from the Big East. With it, the already dwindling impact of basketball on conference membership decisions was dead and gone.

I never really thought about it like this. Did our move to the Big East help precipitate the clusterf*** we are seeing today? As college sports move closer to consolidating power and money amongst the big boys, maybe we are as much to blame for what's happening as anyone. I'm not saying by any means it was the wrong move, but the 16-team superconference did begin with our move to the Big East.

Imagine a landscape of four 16-team super conferences, built for football and I suspect a short bowl-driven playoff that suddenly "makes sense" when you subtract the prospect of sharing revenue with non-BCS participants. (And with all of this conference expansion, this is the direction we are headed.) These super conferences could also prefer their own basketball championship, figuring that anything close to $11 billion split 64 ways is better than the present deal split 340-plus ways.

If this type of arrangement were to happen, at least nine current power conference members could potentially be left behind. It would most likely be non-BCS football schools such as St. John's, Villanova and Georgetown. The "best of the rest" -- e.g., Xavier, Butler, Gonzaga and the CAA -- would have little choice but to join forces with the BCS outcasts and hope for a fifth or sixth non-football super conference allowing them access to the primary college basketball tournament.

I think this has to be both the fear and the hope. College football drives the bus, college basketball is just the kid that's at least cool enough to sit in the back seats. And I really think that if the BCS broke off from the NCAA with four 16-team football leagues, it'd only be a matter of time before they tried to consolidate the basketball world as well. This is why we need to keep our ties to teams like Villanova and Georgetown. We're in much better position now to be part of a fifth league of basketball-only schools that get the same type of inclusion for basketball as the other BCS teams do.

But if you think power conferences suck up too many at-large bids today, just wait. The days of a Pac-16 team with a 6-12 conference record taking VCU's spot may be closer than anyone wants to believe. It won't matter that a VCU or a Northern Iowa can actually beat Kansas on a neutral floor. It will only matter that mid- and low-majors have even more hurdles in their path.

It may not be in a couple years, but I really think that within the next 10-20 years we could see this become the reality. Four 16-team BCS leagues and one 16-team BCS basketball league filling out roughly 45-50 of the tournament bids. The other 15-20 go strictly to AQs from the mid and low majors. No more VCUs getting at-large bids, the only way you get into the dance from there is by winning your tournament (or in the case of the Ivy, your league). They can't completely separate themselves from the rest of the NCAA, they need teams to play in the non-conference and they need some early-round slapdowns for the top seeds. I just hope that when it comes to this, Marquette is able to sit at the big boy table.

Full Insider Article

[We R Final Four]

Interseting stuff Brew--thanks.  However, if you believe that this may not happen for 10-20 years, I would take that deal any day of the week.  My gut tells me we are on the way to the super conferences quicker than that.

[brewcity77]

Interseting stuff Brew--thanks.  However, if you believe that this may not happen for 10-20 years, I would take that deal any day of the week.  My gut tells me we are on the way to the super conferences quicker than that.

It could be, but the one bugaboo with it going quick is current contracts. The CBS contract is in place for awhile...of course, so were all the Big 12 contracts, and where's that getting them  

EDIT: 5-10 is probably more realistic. It won't be overnight, but it won't be two decades either.

[Brewtown Andy]

And to think, this could have all been avoided if the NCAA had just manned up and instituted a D1 football playoff from day 1, just like they did with every other sport.

[bilsu]

The only real risk to the NCAA tournament is that the 4 super 16 football conferences have their own basketball tournament and exclude everyone else. Assuming they break away, they will not include any basketball only schools. After all they veiw themselves as the elite and the rest of as chumps.

[Litehouse]

With the football colleges starting to get more and more greedy for TV money, I wonder how long the NFL will continue it's gentlemans agreement of not scheduling games on Saturday.  The NFL could significantly increase it's own TV revenue by spreading games out more over the weekend, which would take away viewers from the college games.

[brewcity77]

With the football colleges starting to get more and more greedy for TV money, I wonder how long the NFL will continue it's gentlemans agreement of not scheduling games on Saturday.  The NFL could significantly increase it's own TV revenue by spreading games out more over the weekend, which would take away viewers from the college games.

While the football colleges are grabbing for everything they can, they haven't tried stepping on the NFL's toes so far. The only Sunday games they have are preseason. They make sure to put their NC game and major bowl games when they won't conflict. I think the NFL keeps up their end unless the football schools step on their toes first. I have to think they're smarter than that.

[HoopsMalone]

The NCAA tournament would not be the same without the Northern Iowa-type games.  We already see what happens when the super conferences play each other in the conference tournaments. 

Maybe the payout per school would be bigger if the BCS had a basketball tournament, but ratings would go way down in the long run in my opinion.  If the BCS ruins college basketball, I will look elsewhere for my basketball.  I will of course still support Marquette, but I will watch the NBA and international ball before watching the BCS college basketball tournament if they slap mid and low majors in the face.

[HoopsMalone]

With the football colleges starting to get more and more greedy for TV money, I wonder how long the NFL will continue it's gentlemans agreement of not scheduling games on Saturday.  The NFL could significantly increase it's own TV revenue by spreading games out more over the weekend, which would take away viewers from the college games.

That's a good point, and it highlights the strong position that the football schools are in.  There is nothing to replace watching college football on Saturdays right now.  Soccer is not catching on and there really are no other fall sports. 

Basketball, on the other hand, is very replaceable in my opinion.  They are head-to-head with a NBA product getting better, and international play is getting exciting.  I would love to watch the Spanish league or the Turkish league. 

If the BCS ruins college basketball by taking away the Cinderella storylines in the NCAA tournament, I think people will look elsewhere.  People watch the NCAA tournament because everyone gambles on it and to see the courage that the mid-major players show by going in and beating a big boy.  Butler, George Mason, Northern Iowa are the reason that people are so intrigued with the NCAA tournament. 

[brewcity77]

That's a good point, and it highlights the strong position that the football schools are in.  There is nothing to replace watching college football on Saturdays right now.  Soccer is not catching on and there really are no other fall sports. 

Soccer's catching on, but it doesn't really compete with college football. There are plenty of rabid soccer fans watching games from 5:30-11:30 am. The Euro games do get attention, EPL games being on ESPN2 every week shows that. But college football doesn't start until 11 am.

If soccer games were played later, though, they still wouldn't take much away from the college football games. Two different markets that will both watch what they want.

[Litehouse]

I think the NFL keeps up their end unless the football schools step on their toes first. I have to think they're smarter than that.

I don't know.  Even if the colleges don't step on their toes first, the NFL might look at these ridiculous amounts of money being thrown around for minor league football, and start to see it as an opportunity to increase their own revenue.  They could even televise Sat. games on the NFL network.  With the labor issues of this past off-season, I think both sides (players and owners) might be more interested in that option.

[muwarrior69]

I hate football. Forty out of the sixty minutes is dead time watching the teams huddle.

[bamamarquettefan]

And to think, this could have all been avoided if the NCAA had just manned up and instituted a D1 football playoff from day 1, just like they did with every other sport.

Except that it is the football coaches who don't want the playoff. The want the monthlong practice to work on all the new players becAuse there starters Lready have the offenses down after 12 games. Behind the scenes, they are strongly fighting a playoff.

[GGGG]

And to think, this could have all been avoided if the NCAA had just manned up and instituted a D1 football playoff from day 1, just like they did with every other sport.

Don't blame the NCAA.  It is made up of its member institutions, who wanted nothing to do with that. 

[Aughnanure]

This simply will NOT happen. Once the BCS schools start really ****ing with the NCAA formula, lawsuits will begin immediately. You think that all those schools and their alumni will be okay with 64 schools deciding everyone else doesn't matter? Fat chance. You think Houston, Baylor, SMU, Rice alumni are going to like their state money going to Texas, while they are eliminated from any competitive discussion? The BCS schools have to be careful in how they approach this, cause in the end they are public institutions. You think a state like Nevada is going to just sit back and take its two main schools being eliminated from the two major college sports?

Georgetown, St. John's, Marquette, Villanova, Xavier, etc., are not going to be removed from college basketball. We are already too important part of the narrative. The tournament will lose its legitmacy when you remove a school, like Butler, that has been in the past two championship games.

Now, could some of the schools from 150-330 be removed from the payout? Possibly, and potentially likely. But once you start trying to touch a Georgetown, Marquette, and in essence, Houston, Central Florida, etc., you are starting a very BIG fight. The little guys will NOT take that lying down, and they have the numbers in their favor....and the BCS schools really have no legal right to do so.

[texaswarrior74]

^

It's already happening and once the ball gets rolling it will be almosy impossible to stop.

The ACC and Big East better get proactive because they are the two major conferences with the most to lose if reshuffling begins.

The Big 12 is already cooked with OU probably headed out.

[Aughnanure]

^

It's already happening and once the ball gets rolling it will be almosy impossible to stop.

The ACC and Big East better get proactive because they are the two major conferences with the most to lose if reshuffling begins.

The Big 12 is already cooked with OU probably headed out.

Yes realignment has begun, and many schools will be marginalized as never before. But thinking that the top 64 or whatever teams will be able to get away with completely removing all other schools from college football, and especially basketball, is not at all a realistic outcome. If they try, be prepared for one of the ugliest legal fights ever.

These are PUBLIC institutions, not private corporations. They all get money from the state and US government, and attempting to basically destroy every other university's top sports programs will not be as simple and easy as many speculators are acting like it is.

[Brewtown Andy]

Except that it is the football coaches who don't want the playoff. The want the monthlong practice to work on all the new players becAuse there starters Lready have the offenses down after 12 games. Behind the scenes, they are strongly fighting a playoff.

I'm talking about starting the playoff system 70 years ago.

[GGGG]

I'm talking about starting the playoff system 70 years ago.

You don't understand.  What is the NCAA?  It is an organization that is made up of its individual institutions.  If its members don't want a playoff system (and they don't...never have) then there won't be one.  70 years ago...40 years ago...now...that hasn't changed.

[tower912]

They don't want a playoff.....except at every level but the top 1.

[Buzz Williams' Spillproof Chiclets Cup]

http://www.sportspickle.com/news/7930/but-how-will-conference-realignment-affect-basketball-asks-moron

"But how will conference realignment impact basketball?" Asks Moron.

Texas A&M Board of Regents member Marsha Keaton expressed reservations today about the school's move to the Southeastern Conference, asking fellow board members if anyone had considered how conference realignment might affect their basketball program.
"I realize football is king, but basketball is also a major sport and we probably need to consider how moving to the SEC might- ..." Keaton said, before being cut off by the laughter that filled the room.

"Ha! Basketball! Good one, Marsha. Where do you come up with this stuff," fellow board member Andrew Burnett said after composing himself. "Basketball. Hilarious."

After all of the laughter finally died down, Keaton continued on.

"And what about our other sports like soccer and softball and tennis," she said, as the room exploded into laughter again. "How can we afford to fly those teams halfway across the country all the time?"

The other board members then asked Keaton to "stop" because their "stomachs were hurting from laughing" or because they wanted to "call in some people down the hall to hear this. It's so great."

Once everyone was assembled, Burnett asked Keaton to continue — "Okay, tell the one about basketball and soccer and everything. We're ready," he said.

So Keaton obliged.

"Seriously, has anyone thought through everything here?" she asked.

"Ha! 'Seriously' she says," someone interjected, as the laughter began again.

"No, seriously," Keaton asked again as the room went silent.

"Umm ... no. Not that I know of," Burnett eventually piped up.

Finally, after about a minute of awkward silence, the room broke into cheers of: "S-E-C! S-E-C! S-E-C!"

[bilsu]

How about the title of the article. Moron asks....... I do not think questions that ask you to think are dumb. The wrtier is a moron.

[Silkk the Shaka]

How about the title of the article. Moron asks....... I do not think questions that ask you to think are dumb. The wrtier is a moron.

Do you honestly not ever get sarcasm? You take offense to satirical posts mocking things you're against all the time. The writer is on your side. If you can't see that he thinks it's dumb that all anyone seems to care about in realignment is football then I don't know what to tell you.

[bilsu]

Do you honestly not ever get sarcasm? You take offense to satirical posts mocking things you're against all the time. The writer is on your side. If you can't see that he thinks it's dumb that all anyone seems to care about in realignment is football then I don't know what to tell you.

I suspose it depends on how you read the artice. The article was about her being laughed at for asking the question. No where in the article did it say they should take her seriously. When the article is titled a moron ask a question, I do not know how you come to the conclusion the writer is taking her side.

[MUMac]

I suspose it depends on how you read the artice. The article was about her being laughed at for asking the question. No where in the article did it say they should take her seriously. When the article is titled a moron ask a question, I do not know how you come to the conclusion the writer is taking her side.

I am guessing you are either alone on this Island or there are very few along with you.  It sure seemed pretty obvious that it was a sarcastic article.  I guess the writer could have written it in teal for you.

The article looked like it came right from The Onion.