C7 teams struggling mightily this weekend

[ChicosBailBonds]

So BYU would be 3rd out of 8 or in other words middle of the pack/38th percentile.

It's more about the raw number since we know certain RPI ratings (according to history) are likely to make it into the dance.  Right now, C7 looks pretty bad but masked in the Big East by superior play by the rest of the schools in our conference.

Here's another way to look at the proposed conference with expected RPI finish....I've updated it now to include yesterday's games. C7 Schools in Blue.  A-10 Schools in Red.  WCC in Green.  MVC in black.  Again, still too early right now as the numbers can swing big.  They really start to settle down in about another 3 weeks or so, toward the end of January.  February offers some movement, but not much.  By March, it's difficult to move much at all.  Lots of golf left...fortunately.

10.5  Gonzaga
16.3  VCU
27.8  Creighton
33.2  Butler
55.5  Georgetown
55.9  BYU
58.3  St. Mary's
58.4  SLU
59.3  Marquette   
69.3  Dayton
75.8  Seton Hall
95.0  St. John's
97.4  Xavier
98.1 Providence
106.1 Villanova
139.1 DePaul

[forgetful]

Chicos, you have to remember though that you are using RPI.  A methodology known by everyone to favor the mid-majors.  All of the C7 have been playing in power conferences.  The mid-majors have to boost their chances of making the dance by manipulating the RPI system.

[Pakuni]

You don't think those executives are looking at the performance of the product when they guess how many eyes the programs and potential matchups can attract?   Is our new commissioner really going to be able to credibly claim that you can ignore the five-year track record of DePaul, St. Johns, Seton Hall, and Providence?  Ideally, we'd claim these programs have turned the corner.  But nobody can make that claim--not this year.  And unfortunately, this year is what the contract will likely be based on.

Ugh.
First, performance on the court matters only inasmuch as it affects viewership. A network would much rather have a bad team that has viewership potential than a good team without any. This is why, for example, a crappy DePaul team is still more valuable from a TV standpoint than a really good Bucknell. Or a mediocre Seton Hall squad is preferable for a TV network than a quality squad from North Dakota State.

Edit: Just to add to that point, DePaul - despite its well-documented woes on and off the court - still averaged 7,740 fans per home game last year. That's more than all but three A-10 teams, and more than more competitive power conference programs like Texas A&M, Georgia and Northwestern. Seton Hall averaged nearly 7,000 per game. Providence averaged nearly 7,900. this tells TV networks that even when these teams fare poorly on court, plenty of people still care enough to show up at games and watch on TV. That matters way way more than a non-conference loss in December.

And when we're talking performance, we're talking 5-10 year performance over full seasons, not a single season, much less a single weekend in December 2012.  

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chicos, you have to remember though that you are using RPI.  A methodology known by everyone to favor the mid-majors.  All of the C7 have been playing in power conferences.  The mid-majors have to boost their chances of making the dance by manipulating the RPI system.

If the last two years didn't finally confirm the notion of how important the RPI is for the NCAA tournament, I don't know what is.  I'm using a system that the NCAA uses to help select teams.  It's not 100% foolproof, nothing is.  On the other hand, the correlation is very strong and we ignore it if we wish only to be surprised each and every March when the higher RPI teams make it and the lower ones don't (yes, insert examples of outliers here...conceded...don't need to do it).

Right now, the RPI of the C7 schools is not good and those are predictions actually using the Sagarin predictor method.  Hopefully the C7 can get it going because right now we're a big drag on the Big East and we have a conference we are trying to create. 

[JD]

So what i'm getting from CBB and Equalizer is that Creighton is the most important school.

They have a stud on their team this year and should do well, even though i'm sure they'll be nothing much next year, this is the only year that matters.....

I guess the National Championships between G-town, Nova, Quette don't mean much along with there usual Top 25 program ranking not to mention Xavier and Butler's recent success.

So because every school this year *including Georgetown* in the C7 is down, they should be concerned about not getting a decent TV deal?  I find that hard to believe.

[The Equalizer]

Ugh.
First, performance on the court matters only inasmuch as it affects viewership. A network would much rather have a bad team that has viewership potential than a good team without any. This is why, for example, a crappy DePaul team is still more valuable from a TV standpoint than a really good Bucknell. Or a mediocre Seton Hall squad is preferable for a TV network than a quality squad from North Dakota State.

This would be nice if the original point had anything to do with Bucknell or ND State vs DePaul or Seton Hall.  But its not. For better or worse, we're stuck with DePaul (and St. Johns and Seton Hall and Providence).

It should be obvious, but a stronger DePaul would be better than a weak DePaul.  Ditto for St. Johns, Seton Hall, etc.   Saying they're better than Bucknell really doesn't maximize the value of DePaul, does it?

Think about it logically--which was worth more to the Networks--the DePaul of the 1980's that was ranked in the top 10 each year, fed players to the NBA, and made the tournament regularly?  Or the DePaul of today?

So DePaul stands up and says they're going off in a new conference, and one of the first things they do to demonstrate their value to networks is to lose to Loyola.    

Can you really disagree with the concept that a solid and improving DePaul team (and not to pick on them--ditto for Seton Hall, Providence, St. Johns, etc.) would be worth more than a lousy one that currently shows no sign of improving? Going into negotiations from a position of strengith is always better than going in from a position of weakness.

And can you really disagree with the concept that continuing success of Villanova and Marquette would be more valuable than at least opening up the question as to whether the success of the past several years is sustainable?

Right now, we're going into those negotiations from a position of weakenss.

Let me ask you this:  If all seven C7 teams were ranked, and we had a collecitve 77-7 W/L record, would there be a lot more interest (and more viewers) right now?   Would there be more weight to the argument that the moves of DePaul (hiring Purnell),  St. Johns (Lavin), Seton Hall (Willard) and Providence (Cooley) were paying off?   The answer is "OF COURSE!".

Instead, we're left with not only questions about wether Purnell, Lavin, Willard and Cooley can get the job done, but whether Villanova and Marquette are trending downward or whether current performance is an aberration.

And when we're talking performance, we're talking 5-10 year performance over full seasons, not a single season, much less a single weekend in December 2012.  

Fine. Talk 5-10 year performance.  Since joining the Big East, DePaul has exactly zero NCAA appearances (and doesn't appear to show any signs of getting their in the near future).  Ditto for Providence.  Seton Hall and St. Johns have one each over the same period of time (and Seton Hall's was in 2006--nothing since).  

To counter this, you could have argued that MU and Villanova and Georgetown were solid teams year-in and year-out--and you get them along with the others.  But those same networks can put legitimate questions over MU and Villanova on the table as well.

Nonetheless, on December 15th, the C7 annouce they're going to break off and form their own conference--that would really be the first time when people would start to pay attention to the potential contract value.  At a time when most of our teams need to shake the 5-10 year image--in the first weekend out as a standalone entitiy, almost every team--the good and the bad--laid an egg.

[The Equalizer]

So what i'm getting from CBB and Equalizer is that Creighton is the most important school.

They have a stud on their team this year and should do well, even though i'm sure they'll be nothing much next year, this is the only year that matters.....

I guess the National Championships between G-town, Nova, Quette don't mean much along with there usual Top 25 program ranking not to mention Xavier and Butler's recent success.

So because every school this year *including Georgetown* in the C7 is down, they should be concerned about not getting a decent TV deal?  I find that hard to believe.

This isn't about Creighton or Bucknell or Xavier or Butler or any other team.

Its about the teams of the C7 making the strongest case that maximizes their OWN value--which they should be doing regardless of who else may or may not join the conference.. 

Loyola and Holy Cross have national championships as well. Nobody outside a school's own fans care about championships dating back 28 to 36 years--least of all network exectutives.  Its what you can bring to the table today. 

Can you credibly make the case to the networks that DePaul, St. Johns or Providence have turned the corner and are now worth a premium contract? 

Can you make the case that you can count on Villnova and Marquette to be solid top 25 programs every year? 

And what you seem to be getting at is that we'll do whatever it takes to get Butler and Xavier into the conference to give the networks something of value--which means THOSE programs will be able to negotiate stronger incentives. Watch for some 10 year deal to rotate the C7 tournament between Cintas and Hinkle.  And/or for the C7 to pay millions on behalf of Butler and Xavier to make them whole for leaving the A10.  Two things we wouldn't have to do if the C7 were collectively stronger. 

[Pakuni]

And what you seem to be getting at is that we'll do whatever it takes to get Butler and Xavier into the conference to give the networks something of value--which means THOSE programs will be able to negotiate stronger incentives. Watch for some 10 year deal to rotate the C7 tournament between Cintas and Hinkle.  And/or for the C7 to pay millions on behalf of Butler and Xavier to make them whole for leaving the A10.  Two things we wouldn't have to do if the C7 were collectively stronger.  

Xavier has losses to Pacific and Wofford this year. They're barely .500, and are coming off a season in which they lost 12 games, tied for the most since 1996. They couldn't possibly be in a worse position to negotiate a TV deal. Heck, they'll be lucky to get an invite to the new conference.
At least that's what a certain someone's logic dictates.

You clearly are unable or unwilling to get the point. TV networks care about eyes on television screens, not wins and losses. DePaul doesn't demonstrate its value by how it performs in a game against Loyola. It demonstrates its value by somehow drawing more than 7,000 people to their lousy arena 15 miles from campus for early season games against the likes of Northern Illinois and Austin Peay. They demonstrate their value by being the largest Catholic school in the nation with a large national alumni base that very much wants a successful basketball program. They demonstrate their value by pointing out that they're the largest and best known college basketball program in a market with 3.5 million television households (nearly four times as many as Cincy and Milwaukee).
Again, if you think the loss to Loyola is important, especially compared with these other factors, you don't understand how this works or what matters.

And you're higher than a kite if you believe the new conference is going to base its tournament in Cincy and a 10,000-capacity arena in Indy with bleacher seats and limited suites.

[Dr. Blackheart]

One note with most of the conferences seemingly down, it is important to remember that the NBA strike kept lottery picks in school and extra year and then we saw them all declare or go last draft.  I think we are seeing some of this hangover this season.

[The Equalizer]

Xavier has losses to Pacific and Wofford this year. They're barely .500, and are coming off a season in . . .  blah blah blah . . .

You are going FAR out of your way to avoid agreeing with the common sense point that if DePaul (and St. Johns and Providence and Seton Hall) showed signs of becoming a good teams anytime soon, the C7 television contract would be more valuable.

[Pakuni]

You are going FAR out of your way to avoid agreeing with the common sense point that if DePaul (and St. Johns and Providence and Seton Hall) showed signs of becoming a good teams anytime soon, the C7 television contract would be more valuable.

Except that wasn't your point.
Or at least not until you finally (apparently) recognized that your initial point - that non-conference struggles this past week would cause TV networks devalue the conference since its teams "are barely competitive with low-major programs" - was indefensible.
You then argued that it wasn't just last week's struggles, it was the whole season's struggles. Then it wasn't this season's struggles, it was the past five years' struggles (an argument in which you absurdly suggested Marquette could be on a "downward trend.")
And now it's not that the struggles are making the conference less valuable, it's just that it would be more valuable if the teams were better.
Congrats on mastering the obvious.
Though it is ironic that the guy who vehemently argues how the conference needs bottom feeders is now vehemently arguing about how much bottom feeders will hurt the conference.

You've changed your position with every post. and still refuse to recognize the fact that audience size, market size and public interest are far more important considerations for TV networks than the won-loss records.