[Bleacher Report] Why Marquette Must Leave the Big East

[GGGG]

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.

The same Big Ten that invited Notre Dame as a full member now is "more likely" to reject MU based on religious affiliation??

I mean really???

The Big Ten doesn't want partial members.  They have no reason to take them, even with a short-term net gain of $90,000 per school.

[The Equalizer]

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.

You're assuming that all the current B10 teams would still have made the tourament had we been in the conference with them.

But you have to factor Marquette games into the regular season.  Its not difficult to imagine a scenario where Purdue plays us as a mirror opponent and loses both times.

All of a sudden they go from 10-8 and a 10 seed in the tourney to 8-10 and out of the tourney.  Yes, we would still make the tourney--but instead Purdue--not in addition. In that scenario there is no net revenue increase, and the pot is spread across 13 teams instead of 12.

[Sheriff]

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.

Chicago has hosted the Big 10 basketball tournament seven times.

[Benny B]

The same Big Ten that invited Notre Dame as a full member now is "more likely" to reject MU based on religious affiliation??

I mean really???

The Big Ten doesn't want partial members.  They have no reason to take them, even with a short-term net gain of $90,000 per school.

If you would be so kind as to forward the B?'s invitation letter to ND, I will retract my statement.

Really.

[GGGG]

If you would be so kind as to forward the B?'s invitation letter to ND, I will retract my statement.

Really.

Not a letter...but the invitation was extended in 1999.

http://articles.latimes.com/1999/feb/06/sports/sp-5501

"The university rejected an invitation to join the Big Ten on Friday, intent on preserving its unique national identity and fearing the move would hurt football recruiting."

[Benny B]

Not a letter...but the invitation was extended in 1999.

http://articles.latimes.com/1999/feb/06/sports/sp-5501

"The university rejected an invitation to join the Big Ten on Friday, intent on preserving its unique national identity and fearing the move would hurt football recruiting."

Since the political environment was much different 13 years ago, we could probably debate whether the 1999 invitation would be extended today... nevertheless, consider my statement retracted.

But I will stand by my opinion that:

1) It would be a tremendous obstacle to overcome for any religious-affiliated university to be admitted to a conference composed mostly of large, public, blue-Midwestern-state flagship universities.

2) MU's membership adds more value to any conference - mid or major - then most people think.  Sure, it may not be enough value that the B? is knocking down Pilarz's door, but if conference realignment is truly about the money, then MU is going to be much better off than the consensus opinion on Scoop.

[GGGG]

Since the political environment was much different 13 years ago, we could probably debate whether the 1999 invitation would be extended today... nevertheless, consider my statement retracted.

But I will stand by my opinion that:

1) It would be a tremendous obstacle to overcome for any religious-affiliated university to be admitted to a conference composed mostly of large, public, blue-Midwestern-state flagship universities.

I agree with that...except for the "religious" aspect.  Any private school is going to have trouble fitting in with the 11 large, public universities of the B10 with their huge fanbases.  If Northwestern were not an original member, it would certainly be an uphill battle for them to gain admittance now.  Notre Dame is an exception due to their large fan-base and national reputation.

[Tugg Speedman]

Wasn't the University of Chicago an original B10 member and didn't they have to drop out around WW2 because they could not compete with the larger state schools (and then decided to de-emphasize sports altogether)?

[GGGG]

Correct.  Chicago dropped out and Michigan State was added about a decade later.