What's Your Ideal New Conference?

[LAZER]

This! If we're eliminating Gonzaga due to distance, Creighton is the clear choice for #10.

Agreed, but I really want them to explore every avenue possible to get Gonzaga in the confernce.  It would be such a huge addition to the conference and I think it would get a lot of attention from the get go.  You need to add the best programs possible regardless of the size of the market they're in. 

The success and popularity will really be on the success of the conference, I think the number 1 priority should be getting all the best teams together regardless of where they're situated, they need to think long term about the culture and reputation as opposed to focusing on near term TV revenue.

[buckchuckler]

Boy, that Dayton board is amusing.  I love how they seem to think they are on par with Marquette, except for the 70's, the only time we have ever been good (obviously!).  They don't seem to realize that we have the same amount of tourney wins in the last 5 seasons as they have since 1969.

[The Equalizer]

You'd be wrong about Iona.
But while you're working on your answer about C-USA's inability to produce any new good programs post-2005, despite its lesser competition (that answer is coming, right?), riddle me this:

No, I'd be right about Iona.  And I already answered the CUSA question, but let's make it clearer for you:

Let's comapre two equivalent teams over a 10-year stretch in GMC/CUSA.  In the same conferences for the decade prior to the split:
Memphis: 2 NCAA tournaments (both 7 seeds in 2003, 2004).  1-2 tournament record.  
DePaul:  2 NCAA tournaments (9 seed in 2000, 7 seed in 2004).  1-2 tournament record.

Since the CUSA/BE split in 2006, one of these two emerged as a national power, and one has languished.

Memphis:  6 NCAA tournaments in 7 years.
DePaul: 0 NCAA tournaments in 7 years.

If Seton Hall, Providence, DePaul would be better off in lesser leagues, why aren't they scrambling to get into lesser leagues?
I'm sure the Horizon would love to have DePaul.
The CAA would happily take Seton Hall.
The Northeast Conference would open its arms wide for Providence.
Why do you believe these schools are acting against their own best interests?

There are a bunch of possible reasons.  Not sure any of them have any relevance at this point--just you trying to change the subject.

The question you must still be pondering is if it was truly a "no brainer" for Xavier, Memphis, Gonzaga etc. to join this new conference, where were they last Saturday?  Could it be that they actually DO have to think about this?  

As I said, they may still decide to join--but the fact that it didn't happen last Saturday means the decision wasn't the no-brainer you and other claim it to be.  And based on the comparitive success of X, Butler and Gonzaga, there's probably only one way for them to go if they start beating up on each other (and MU, Georgetown, etc).

[Pakuni]

No, I'd be right about Iona.  And I already answered the CUSA question, but let's make it clearer for you:

Let's comapre two equivalent teams over a 10-year stretch in GMC/CUSA.  In the same conferences for the decade prior to the split:
Memphis: 2 NCAA tournaments (both 7 seeds in 2003, 2004).  1-2 tournament record.  
DePaul:  2 NCAA tournaments (9 seed in 2000, 7 seed in 2004).  1-2 tournament record.

Since the CUSA/BE split in 2006, one of these two emerged as a national power, and one has languished.

Memphis:  6 NCAA tournaments in 7 years.
DePaul: 0 NCAA tournaments in 7 years.

There are a bunch of possible reasons.  Not sure any of them have any relevance at this point--just you trying to change the subject.

And by "a bunch of possible reasons," could you mean John and Calipari and Jerry and Wainwright?
How do you expect anyone to find you remotely credible when you suggest the difference between DePaul and Memphis over the last seven years hasn't been respective coaching hires ... but rather conference affiliation?

And, no, you haven't answered the C-USA question and apparently will not because we both already know the answer. Which, again, proves your silly theory wrong.

The question you must still be pondering is if it was truly a "no brainer" for Xavier, Memphis, Gonzaga etc. to join this new conference, where were they last Saturday?  Could it be that they actually DO have to think about this?  

Could it be they haven't been extended official invites yet?
Could it be they just have made a formal announcement yet because they're still deciding how many, and which, teams to add to the C7?
Could it be you ignored Xavier's coach saying over the weekend that he's already "on board" with the new conference?
Could it be you've ignored reports from last week that Gonzaga has reached out to the C7 asking for an invite?
Could it be you're the only person to seriously mention Memphis as a potential member?
Could it be that you're trying way too hard to save face after proclaiming for months that the A-10 was far too sweet of a deal for Xavier, Butler, etc.. to ever consider leaving it?

[GGGG]

Could it be that they only formally withdrew from the conference on Saturday...AND IT'S ONLY TUESDAY??!???

Jeez....72 hours later and people are ready to crap the bed.  Even if they were invited, schools have to do their due dilligence and get their board's approval before such a change.

[buckchuckler]

Regardless of what schools end up in the conference, I hope MU can keep some of the other games going.  I think it is imperative to keep Louisville on the schedule.  Not only are they a high quality opponent, but those were always the most fun games.

[brewcity77]

I think that Xavier and Butler are indeed no-brainers. I think that to the point that I am certain they have already accepted. I don't have insider info, I could be wrong, but I would be absolutely floored if they weren't members as soon as this league tips. To the point that I will make any site-related bet anyone wants to make. If people really think this is some difficult decision for them and that they will pass, name your stakes.

Not going for other schools, as I don't know how many will be invited and don't know which will be offered, but I will put my Internet currency where my keyboard is.

[The Equalizer]

And by "a bunch of possible reasons," could you mean John and Calipari and Jerry and Wainwright?
How do you expect anyone to find you remotely credible when you suggest the difference between DePaul and Memphis over the last seven years hasn't been respective coaching hires ... but rather conference affiliation?

And, no, you haven't answered the C-USA question and apparently will not because we both already know the answer. Which, again, proves your silly theory wrong.

First, Memphis under Calipari only made 2 of 5 tournaments before the split, 4 of 4 after.  Same coach.  Same team.  Can't blame that on a coaching change.

Second, its obvous to anyone who actually followed Wainwtigh's hiring was that the potential competition in the Big East scared away a number of better qualified coaches for DePaul.  You may recall the same thing happened with Marquette--Sean Miller and Tony Bennett didn't want to coach in the Big East either.

And that's just with Memphis.  Xavier rode easier conferences--first the MCC then the A10 to sustained success.  Butler did the same in the MCC/Horizon after Butler moved out.  I don't see any of those teams having that level of success had they been in the Big East.  

Why don't you just admit that it was a valid point instead of this silly nitpicking.

Could it be they haven't been extended official invites yet?

Doubtful.

Could it be they just have made a formal announcement yet because they're still deciding how many, and which, teams to add to the C7?

Multiple reports said the C7 most coveted Xavier, Butler & Gonzaga.  Now you're saying they haven't decided whether the C7 really want those teams? 

Could it be you ignored Xavier's coach saying over the weekend that he's already "on board" with the new conference?

No, because coaches say a lot of things but carry almost no weight. Go back and read what Pitino and Boehiem said about joining the ACC before you try to respond.

Could it be you've ignored reports from last week that Gonzaga has reached out to the C7 asking for an invite?

You just said the C7 hadn't yet extended invitations or even decided who or how many teams.   Now your'e saying that they actually went out?

Actually, this one I'll believe.  And I'll add that because it was not yet accepted, its evidently not a "no-brainer"

Could it be that you're trying way too hard to save face after proclaiming for months that the A-10 was far too sweet of a deal for Xavier, Butler, etc.. to ever consider leaving it?

No, beacuse I never said that.  I have repeatedly said that Xavier etc. may well leave, but its simply not the finalncial no-brainer you and others make it out to be.   Because if it was a no brainer, they would have been part of the annocement last week.

[brewcity77]

No, beacuse I never said that.  I have repeatedly said that Xavier etc. may well leave, but its simply not the finalncial no-brainer you and others make it out to be.   Because if it was a no brainer, they would have been part of the annocement last week.

Sorry, but I think that is an absolutely false statement. The C7 has announced their intention to leave. They have not left. It is not finalized. Xavier would be absolutely idiotic to announce they are leaving the A-10 before having a formal invitation and before the C7 is ready to make an announcement. No one else was going to be part of last week's announcement because last week's announcement was merely one of intent, not of a finalized action.

When the C7 is ready to announce teams that will be joining them, Xavier will be one of those teams announced. But not until the C7 is ready.

[buckchuckler]

The more I think about it, the more I hope something can be worked out to get Gonzaga on board.  They are a high profile name, a consistently good team and would be a marquee game once (or twice) a season. When you consider all the teams that have been mentioned, the highest profile team, and the biggest attraction game would be the Zags.  Since joining the Big East, MU has played top 5 teams on a regular basis and a huge number of top 25 match ups.  While I don't think it it realistic to think any of the teams that could be added will be in the Top 5 range on a regular basis, the league needs to be filled out with teams that at least have to potential to bring those top 25 match ups to the table. 

We are going to need to replace some huge games on the schedule.  If the league is filled out with X, Bulter, Gonzaga that is a good start.  Obviously these teams don't replace games against Cuse, Louisville, UConn, but they would be attractive games, that would be good wins.  The best national brand, as well as the most exciting game.  I know I would be pumped to watch a Marquette- Gonzaga match up, much more so than Dayton, VCU, SLU, Providence, or Seton Hall. 

I know it isn't the best logistical choice, but I really hope the conference ends up with Butler, Xavier, Gonzaga, and if needed 2-4 more teams to make it work.

The 2-4, if they are needed wouldn't matter so much, Dayton, Creighton, SMC, USF, SLU.  For the sake of divisions, USF and SMC seem to make sense as 2 of them. 

[Lennys Tap]

 I have repeatedly said that Xavier etc. may well leave, but its simply not the finalncial no-brainer you and others make it out to be.   Because if it was a no brainer, they would have been part of the annocement last week.

It's a no brainier.

[brewcity77]

Can someone explain to me why we keep hearing USF mentioned? I'm assuming that's San Francisco, not South Florida. This isn't the 1950s. They aren't relevant anymore.

[The Equalizer]

Sorry, but I think that is an absolutely false statement. The C7 has announced their intention to leave. They have not left. It is not finalized. Xavier would be absolutely idiotic to announce they are leaving the A-10 before having a formal invitation and before the C7 is ready to make an announcement. No one else was going to be part of last week's announcement because last week's announcement was merely one of intent, not of a finalized action.

When the C7 is ready to announce teams that will be joining them, Xavier will be one of those teams announced. But not until the C7 is ready.

And you know this how?  

Its one thing if you were to come out and have a different opinion.  But for you to declare it not just "false" but absolutely implies that you have insider information.

I can't go with absolute knowledge--but I can make educated guesses.

1.  We know that these discussions among the C7 have been going on for months.
2.  It is inconceivable that during those months of discussions, nobody thought about discussing teams beyond 7.
3.  It is inconcievable that nobody in the C7 thought about what other teams they might invite.
4.  It is inconcievable that the C7 didn't short list Xavier, Gonzaga and Butler as potential teams to invite.
5.  It is inconcievalble that if Butler and Xavier and Gonzaga were shortlisted while discussions were private, they would have been asked to join prior to any annoucments being made. (and this is apparently consistent with the comments out of Gonzaga).
6.  If Xaiver and Butler and Gonzaga had been seriously interested or said they were on board,  the C7 would have either included them last Saturday or held of making any annoucement until everyone could be  publicly behind it.

Therefore, my best guess is that the C7 asked Butler, Xavier & Gonzaga--and were put on ice--which makes sense since Xavier would have to walk away from a ton of money. Not satisfied with the "let us think about it" the C7 made an immedeate public annoucement to put public pressure on the other three and strengthen negotiating positions.

[LAZER]

And you know this how?  

Its one thing if you were to come out and have a different opinion.  But for you to declare it not just "false" but absolutely implies that you have insider information.

I can't go with absolute knowledge--but I can make educated guesses.

1.  We know that these discussions among the C7 have been going on for months.
2.  It is inconceivable that during those months of discussions, nobody thought about discussing teams beyond 7.
3.  It is inconcievable that nobody in the C7 thought about what other teams they might invite.
4.  It is inconcievable that the C7 didn't short list Xavier, Gonzaga and Butler as potential teams to invite.
5.  It is inconcievalble that if Butler and Xavier and Gonzaga were shortlisted while discussions were private, they would have been asked to join prior to any annoucments being made. (and this is apparently consistent with the comments out of Gonzaga).
6.  If Xaiver and Butler and Gonzaga had been seriously interested or said they were on board,  the C7 would have either included them last Saturday or held of making any annoucement until everyone could be  publicly behind it.

Therefore, my best guess is that the C7 asked Butler, Xavier & Gonzaga--and were put on ice--which makes sense since Xavier would have to walk away from a ton of money. Not satisfied with the "let us think about it" the C7 made an immedeate public annoucement to put public pressure on the other three and strengthen negotiating positions.

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous and I think your assumption is quite a stretch.  Every ounce of common sense suggests Butler and Xavier would jump at this opportunity.  Also, realignment has shown that there are things going on behind the scenes for long stretches before decisions are actually made.

[GOO]

My oh my. Put the Equalizer on ice. Get this please: the C7 just announced the intention to leave the BE. they have not even formally said they are leaving. Not official. They give up voting rights once it is official. There are negotiations on going now with the BE. Lots of issues to tie up.  

Informally the C7, would have contacted targets. It will be made official soon enough. Until then chill out. Please.  If they got a bunch of not interested, they would not be planning a BE exit.

[brewcity77]

And you know this how?  

Its one thing if you were to come out and have a different opinion.  But for you to declare it not just "false" but absolutely implies that you have insider information.

You did notice I used the phrasing "I think", didn't you? That indicates this statement is my opinion.

And you can make educated guesses all you like, but I disagree with them. I have no doubt the C7 not only considered schools but have had back channel conversations. But it makes no sense to announce who is joining the conference before you've even made your departure official.

Regardless, any friendly wager you like. Signature bet, avatar bet, whatever. Xavier and Butler will be on the docket when the formal announcement of teams is made.

[The Equalizer]

My oh my. Put the Equalizer on ice. Get this please: the C7 just announced the intention to leave the BE. they have not even formally said they are leaving. Not official. They give up voting rights once it is official. There are negotiations on going now with the BE. Lots of issues to tie up.  

Informally the C7, would have contacted targets. It will be made official soon enough. Until then chill out. Please.  If they got a bunch of not interested, they would not be planning a BE exit.

I think you're confusing the two statements released last week.

Thursday was the general, non offical statement of intent that the C7 wanted to split.

Saturday was the official announcement that we filed notice with the league, which was confirmed by the Big East in thier own satement:
"The basketball institutions have notified us that they plan to withdraw from the BIG EAST Conference"

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/blog/eye-on-college-basketball/21406573/catholic-7-officially-announce-separation-from-football-playing-members

[MU Buff]

Equalizer, if you really feel there's a chance Xavier and Butler don't join up with the C7 then bet brew, he's offered twice already.  If not, than stop arguing minor details.  Who cares if it was announced Saturday or next week or next month.

[The Equalizer]

You did notice I used the phrasing "I think", didn't you? That indicates this statement is my opinion.

And you can make educated guesses all you like, but I disagree with them. I have no doubt the C7 not only considered schools but have had back channel conversations. But it makes no sense to announce who is joining the conference before you've even made your departure official.

Regardless, any friendly wager you like. Signature bet, avatar bet, whatever. Xavier and Butler will be on the docket when the formal announcement of teams is made.

Actually, we have made the departure official, and the Big East has confirmed as much:
"The basketball institutions have notified us that they plan to withdraw from the BIG EAST Conference"

Perhaps you were confused by the two different annoucments last week.  Thursday was the unofficial annoucment of intent, Saturday was the official notice. 

Butler and Xavier may well join later--but they're not on the docket today. 

[brewcity77]

So that's a "no" on the "any friendly wager you like" offer?

[Pakuni]

So, in summation, the basketball world according to The Equalizer:

1. The reason Memphis had a great run in the late 2000s isn't because John Calipari landed players like Derrick Rose, Chris Douglas-Roberts, Rodney Carney, Darius Washington and Joey Dorsey, but because they played in a weakened C-USA.
2. The reason DePaul has struggled for the past seven years isn't because of a bad coaching hire, subpar recruiting and other structural problems with the program, but because the Big East has been too darn tough for them (uniquely so, among the C-USA refugees).
3. The reason no other C-USA school rose to prominence with the weakened schedule resulting from the departures of MU, DePaul, Cincy and Louisville is ... oh, wait, he can't answer that one.
4. The reason Xavier, Butler, etc. aren't officially members of the new conference yet isn't because the conference doesn't even formally exist yet or because multimillion dollar entities sometimes take more than a few days to put together, but because they're having doubts about being on board (despite one program's coach on record as saying they're on board).
(Forgot one) 5. The reason one of Sean Miller or Tony Bennett is not Marquette's head coach today is because they are too scared to be in the Big East.

I think I ought to be done with this discussion.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Equalizer,

In theory, there is such a thing as too many good teams in a conference and having them feast on one another, and ultimately hurting each other. 

Your theory has some merit.

However, I don't think we have seen a conference approach this type of critical mass. It would take quite a few elite teams in the same conference for a number of years for any impact to be actually felt. And, given that elite players usually want to play for and against elite teams, this type of conference might actually attract a larger pool of talent which over time could become an annual type of thing. Example: SEC Football.

In theory, you have a point, but I think we are pretty far away from that with the C7.

[brewcity77]

In theory, there is such a thing as too many good teams in a conference and having them feast on one another, and ultimately hurting each other.

In theory, though that theory didn't hold up when the ACC got 6/8 (75%) teams in in 1989 or the Big Ten got 7/10 (70%) teams in 1990 or when the Big East got 7/9 (77.8%) teams in in 1991 or 11/16 (68.8%) in 2011.

If we add Xavier, Butler, and Creighton, could we see a year where 7/10 make the dance? Definitely possible. I think there's a very good chance we could put 6/10 in every now and then. And if we add two more and go to 12, could we get 8 bids? Not at all unthinkable.

If we add to the bottom to artificially inflate the top teams, what does that really do for them? Give them a false sense of superiority? No one needs that. We need the best teams possible to build the best league possible. If that means some deserving teams get missed every now and then, so be it. That already happens every single year on Selection Sunday. Better to have more quality than less.

[Lennys Tap]

Equalizer,

In theory, there is such a thing as too many good teams in a conference and having them feast on one another, and ultimately hurting each other. 

In theory? Maybe, but when 7/9 Big East teams or 7/10 Big Ten teams made it was the team that finished 8th in each instance robbed? I'd say no. Much more risky to be in a lesser conference where one bad game in the conference tourney could cost you a bid.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

In theory, though that theory didn't hold up when the ACC got 6/8 (75%) teams in in 1989 or the Big Ten got 7/10 (70%) teams in 1990 or when the Big East got 7/9 (77.8%) teams in in 1991 or 11/16 (68.8%) in 2011.

If we add Xavier, Butler, and Creighton, could we see a year where 7/10 make the dance? Definitely possible. I think there's a very good chance we could put 6/10 in every now and then. And if we add two more and go to 12, could we get 8 bids? Not at all unthinkable.

If we add to the bottom to artificially inflate the top teams, what does that really do for them? Give them a false sense of superiority? No one needs that. We need the best teams possible to build the best league possible. If that means some deserving teams get missed every now and then, so be it. That already happens every single year on Selection Sunday. Better to have more quality than less.

I don't think we have seen it in practice(as you correctly point out), but in theory, this conference would have problems:

UCLA
Indiana
Kentucky
Duke
North Carolina
Texas
Florida
Kansas
Michigan State

Now, if these teams play well in the non-conf., then a below .500 record in the conf. won't keep them out of the tourny. However, if you have a young team, or a particularly tough non-conf. schedule, you are at risk of missing out. There is no room for error.

And, this would have likely have a more long-term effect than anything else. Finishing below .500 in the conference for several years in a row might hurt a schools "brand" and perception. Do you think Kansas fans are going to like being 8-10 in conference? Even if they go to the sweet 16, they aren't going to be happy.

Again, this is all theoretical and pretty pointless. I'm just pointing out that Equalizers theory isn't entirely false, but it would take an extreme situation for it to have any long term effects.