[Bleacher Report] Why Marquette Must Leave the Big East

[kcasper13]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1331881-marquette-mens-basketball-why-marquette-must-leave-the-big-east

Last Nov. I posted that I thought there'd be a day when we'd be considered for a big four conference, due to the greediness of big conferences, the quality of our program, MKEs market size and the fact that we are Basketball only. I was called delusional by most.  I think this article does a better job of stating the case.   The top 5 conferences will all have 16 bball teams or more by 2016 or sooner, why wouldn't they, it is just more revenue avenues. 

[Warriors10]

Things kids write on Bleacher Report....

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

Agree we should bail sooner than later. Not sure on the DePaul addition... Louisville would make more sense to me for the B10.

[Groin_pull]

Do not see any possible way MU and DePaul end up in the Big 10. The Big 10 already owns Wisconsin and the city of Chicago (with Northwestern). What do MU and DePaul bring to the table?

[bilsu]

Louisville academically does not fit in Big 10, ACC or Sec. There is no way the Big 10 takes DePaul and MU. It is nice to say MU should jump ship, but the four top conferenses will not want them. There is a point where more teams mean less money per team. MU simply is not a value added for the football conferences. As we seen in the Big East more teams is not better.

[JoBo2756]

stupid article. ignores reality.

[Tugg Speedman]

We are not going to the B10 and neither is DePaul ... like ever (h/t Taylor Swift)

The ONLY schools they would consider are large state schools with established football teams and huge athletic budgets.

Why am I explaining this?  If you don't understand this, delete your scoop account and never come back.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

Agree - not likely we end up in the B10, but its also not likely that the Big10 "owns" Chicago with Northwestern. IMO MU owns Chicago as much as DePaul or Northwesters.

[We R Final Four]

Ha--the Big Ten owns Chicago. No one owns Chicago. That's the second stupid statement in the same day--good work.

[KenoshaWarrior]

Louisville academically does not fit in Big 10, ACC or Sec. There is no way the Big 10 takes DePaul and MU. It is nice to say MU should jump ship, but the four top conferenses will not want them. There is a point where more teams mean less money per team. MU simply is not a value added for the football conferences. As we seen in the Big East more teams is not better.

Yes because all of this has been fueled by academics 

[Dawson Rental]

The better title for this thread would have been; Why Marquette fans should ignore Bleacher Report.  Matt Barbato DO NOT quit your day job.

Modification:  Okay, I did what I should have done in the first place and read the author's bio.  He's a sophomore at Marquette, so he's a year removed from HS, trying to learn how to write about sports and a long way away from having a day job.  That's why posting links to Bleacher Report is rarely useful.

[GGGG]

My eyes are bleeding simply from reading that.

[🏀]

I had no reason to click the link, but can somebody tell me if there was a slideshow or not?

[Niv Berkowitz]

stupid article. ignores reality.

What does it ignore? The "big conferences" are jumping to poach football programs first and foremost, with MU and the hoops-only schools getting table-scraps. I see no reason why they shouldn't try to get into the B10. The question is, what football teams are out there that the B10 could/would poach? Louisville? Memphis? We'll see what shakes out there.

But...if the B10 feels like it is on solid football ground, why not add two non-football schools (or at least one in Marquette) that helps enhance your hoops toughness, can get you more NCAA tourney wins, more revenue via those wins, and a better hoops TV contract? I don't think it's crazy. Nothing is now a day if you ask me.

And NO university owns Chicago. Chicago is a garbage college sports town with a capital G.

[Blue Horseshoe]

1. This article doesn't mention $ at all.
2. Chicago is pro sports city
3. The biggest reason MU can't jump ship is because no major conference wants them

[JoBo2756]

What does it ignore? The "big conferences" are jumping to poach football programs first and foremost, with MU and the hoops-only schools getting table-scraps. I see no reason why they shouldn't try to get into the B10. The question is, what football teams are out there that the B10 could/would poach? Louisville? Memphis? We'll see what shakes out there.

But...if the B10 feels like it is on solid football ground, why not add two non-football schools (or at least one in Marquette) that helps enhance your hoops toughness, can get you more NCAA tourney wins, more revenue via those wins, and a better hoops TV contract? I don't think it's crazy. Nothing is now a day if you ask me.

And NO university owns Chicago. Chicago is a garbage college sports town with a capital G.

The reality is that all conference moves thus far have been about football money, TV contracts and getting closer to a BCS bid. Give me one... just one example of a a single basketball-only school making a power move into a conference. Don't count ND because they are playing 4-5 football games (I can't remember) against ACC teams as a condition of their move.

You could say that 2005 was different because several BB only schools moved to the big east together.

It was a stupid article. MU isn't going to the Big Ten because they don't have anything the Big Ten wants...

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

The reality is that all conference moves thus far have been about football money, TV contracts and getting closer to a BCS bid. Give me one... just one example of a a single basketball-only school making a power move into a conference.

I think you are right... but looking 4 years into the future:

Do we think conferences/schools are going to quit hunting down revenue streams and wringing out every last bit of it?

The conferences have chased down all of the big money in college football. Next up? Find more money.

Personal seat licenses? Definitely.
More football games? Maybe.
Larger playoffs? Maybe.
Sponsorships and corporate stadium names? Probably.

Add partial conf. members?

This isn't going to stop.

With this said, it doesn't really mean MU is going to get an invite to a large conference. But, I can see how it would happen, whereas 5 years ago, I would have laughed hysterically.

On paper, adding partial members will help the Big10 bottom line.

We are going to find out in the next 5 years if $ is the primary goal of these major conferences.

[tower912]

Other than ND to the ACC, I do not see any of the B1G, ACC, SEC, B12 adding basketball only schools.   Pipe dream.

[brewcity77]

The article serves as an excellent way to demonstrate the writer's complete lack of understanding what is going on in college sports today. It's this kind of clueless writing that exemplifies why Bleacher Report is a complete and utter waste of time. There is a better chance of the SEC wanting Marquette and DePaul than the Big Ten. At least for the SEC, it would provide new markets and there isn't the same focus on academics. And does anyone think the SEC will come knocking any time soon?

If we left, we would have options. The Horizon, Missouri Valley, and C-USA would be falling over themselves to get Marquette back in the fold. Both the A-10 and West Coast would probably at least sound Marquette out as they are primarily basketball conferences and we would be a marquee name for either to add. There are other smaller names that would take us too. But none of the major conferences would. If we leave, we will either take a significant step down in status or form a new basketball-only league.

[Husker4MU]

I think you are right... but looking 4 years into the future:

Do we think conferences/schools are going to quit hunting down revenue streams and wringing out every last bit of it?

The conferences have chased down all of the big money in college football. Next up? Find more money.

Personal seat licenses? Definitely. Already happening in the form of annual seat donations.  I'm embarrassed to say what I paid per seat when I had Nebraska football tickets and they were 60 rows up in an end zone
More football games? Maybe. Not likely b/c of the injury concerns and finals week
Larger playoffs? Maybe. Oh hell yes
Sponsorships and corporate stadium names? Probably.

Add partial conf. members?

This isn't going to stop.

With this said, it doesn't really mean MU is going to get an invite to a large conference. But, I can see how it would happen, whereas 5 years ago, I would have laughed hysterically.

On paper, adding partial members will help the Big10 bottom line. How?  The adding of markets worked in FB b/c local fans have forced local cable operators to add the likes of the BTN so they can watch their teams.  That demand does not exist for basketball.  If anything, that demand is eroding for basketball as evidenced by the nationwide sliding attendance as folks just tune in during March.  Additionally, it requires the basketball team to be outside the conference's current footprint.  For MU, that leaves the Big XII, ACC and Pac 12, none of whom would ever come calling.  They probably all think MU is in Michigan.

We are going to find out in the next 5 years if $ is the primary goal of these major conferences. Find out?  That is their only goal.  Academics and cultural fit are just window dressing for the press release.

[muwarrior69]

As long as there is an NCAA championship and as long as we keep Buzz it does'nt really matter where we wind up. The key is keeping Buzz and the recruits will come. Gonzaga, St. Marys and and to some extent San Diego have outshined the PAC 12. Even the A10 has kept pace with the ACC and SEC as to tournament bids. Come November will know if Butler will be a consistent contender as a D1 basketball school. My fear is the BCS will have their own basketball championship with ESPN paying the bill in the next few years denying every little school a shot at the championship.

[Hards Alumni]

Since we are all into making up our own delusional dream scenarios these days, why not just come up with the 'idea' of dissolving all of the major conferences, and creating a new one with Marquette, Duke, UNC, Wisconsin, UCLA, Indiana, Kentucky, etc.

Some of you guys are out of your damn minds.

If we don't circle the wagons and start poaching A-10 teams the BEAST is sliding down the slope to irrelevance.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

On paper, adding partial members will help the Big10 bottom line. How?  The adding of markets worked in FB b/c local fans have forced local cable operators to add the likes of the BTN so they can watch their teams.  That demand does not exist for basketball.  If anything, that demand is eroding for basketball as evidenced by the nationwide sliding attendance as folks just tune in during March.  Additionally, it requires the basketball team to be outside the conference's current footprint.  For MU, that leaves the Big XII, ACC and Pac 12, none of whom would ever come calling.  They probably all think MU is in Michigan.

We are going to find out in the next 5 years if $ is the primary goal of these major conferences. Find out?  That is their only goal.  Academics and cultural fit are just window dressing for the press release.

The Big10 has it's own network, which is a double edged sword. After college football is over, they need content for the rest of the year. Northwestern vs Nebraska women's basketball on a tuesday night is going to draw a terrible rating. I'm not foolish enough to think that MU is a huge national draw (it's not)... but MU vs UW men's basketball would draw a better rating.

College hockey draws terrible attendance compared to basketball, yet the Big10 is moving forward with a hockey conference. Why? Content.

MU and DePaul are not going to put a huge amount of money into the Big10, but conferences are going to continue to look for incremental value that they can add. It starts big (football) and will work to small (urinals with TVs over them).

Now, do MU and DePaul add enough value in content and $ to make it worth it for the Big10 to add them?

Probably not now, and realistically, probably not ever.

But, I can't snicker and dismiss the idea like I used to.

Oh, and yes, I agree that the conferences are all about $.

EDIT: Just to be clear, I don't think MU can hold it's breath waiting for the B10 invite. MU will most likely end up in some sort of A-10 type conference. I'm just saying, I can't laugh at the idea of MU in the B10 anymore. 10 years ago, the idea of Nebraska in the B10 was crazy. These are strange times.

[Groin_pull]

Ha--the Big Ten owns Chicago. No one owns Chicago. That's the second stupid statement in the same day--good work.

You're right. Chicago isn't smack in the middle of Big 10 country. It's not the home of their Media Days. And it's never hosted the Big 10 hoops tourney. Check any newspaper or TV newscast on Big 10 game days and tell me there aren't multiple stories about Illinois and Northwestern, plus extensive coverage of other Big 10 schools.

Idiot.

[Benny B]

Assuming that NCAA Tourney Shares are equally divided amongst B? schools, each of the 12 schools would have received $1.73M in 2012 and only four schools (MSU, OSU, PU, UW) would have a positive net contribution to the conference (i.e. the other schools receive more from the conference than they earn in NCAA performance).

In a hypothetical where MU was in the B?, the per school distribution would have increased to $1.82M (a 5% increase), and MU would be the fifth positive net contributor to the conference out of 13 teams.

MU wouldn't take any football money from the conference, and its basketball would be a net gain.  Heck, you wouldn't have to cut MU in on the existing BTN money... just give MU half of the profits from televising an additional 10-15 basketball games/year - which would probably be more than is or would be making under a new Big East TV deal - and everybody makes more money.


But at the end of the day, the B? is exponentially more likely to reject MU based on religious affiliation than for size, market, financial or geographical reasons.