More conference realignment talk

[GoldenWarrior11]

Everything has a price.  If Fox upped the ante enough, every single BE President and BOT would approve a school like Siena if that's what the market dictated.

If adding a SLU, Dayton or Gonzaga got Marquette more value and higher payouts annually to invest in its program and the school, I'd be all for it.

[Uncle Rico]

A lot of posts for what boils down to this. The Big East would only expand if it made financial sense to do so.

We can use all kinds of other reasons to discuss what that means for the competitiveness of the league, but the decision makers aren’t going to care. The reason people talk about Gonzaga is mainly due to the fact that they might be a brand a TV Network would view as worth adding money to the deal or future offers.

I have to imagine there’s a financial benefit, or at least it’s even, for each school when UCONN joined.

UConn basketball is a brand.  UConn won 4 national titles in a 15 year span and put a bunch of players into the NBA.  That was a situation where it benefited both sides.  UConn returned to its roots and go to play natural rivals and at MSG.  The Big East got a borderline blue blood and one of the best women’s programs in the nation.

Gonzaga is a brand.  Kansas is a brand.  Notre Dame is a brand.  The rest are just inventory.  If it’s about inventory, the Big East is simply chasing dollars like the AAC.  Inventory isn’t going to move “the needle”.

Ask yourself if inventory has helped the ACC.  The league has been as low as it has been in a long time and that’s even with adding basketball schools like Syracuse and Louisville.  It’s a bloated mess.  The football isn’t any better outside the unicorn Clemson.

Adding a brand helps the Big East.  Forget what happens when Mark Few leaves.  It’s a brand now and joining the Big East will be because they earned it by becoming a brand.  Butler became a brand.  The most money comes from adding a Gonzaga or Kansas or Notre Dame. The most success for the league, a true basketball league, comes from adding great basketball brands.  Volume may add a few bucks but long term, it’s shortsighted imo

[The Equalizer]

UConn basketball is a brand.  UConn won 4 national titles in a 15 year span and put a bunch of players into the NBA.  That was a situation where it benefited both sides.  UConn returned to its roots and go to play natural rivals and at MSG.  The Big East got a borderline blue blood and one of the best women’s programs in the nation.

Gonzaga is a brand.  Kansas is a brand.  Notre Dame is a brand.  The rest are just inventory.  If it’s about inventory, the Big East is simply chasing dollars like the AAC.  Inventory isn’t going to move “the needle”.

Ask yourself if inventory has helped the ACC.  The league has been as low as it has been in a long time and that’s even with adding basketball schools like Syracuse and Louisville.  It’s a bloated mess.  The football isn’t any better outside the unicorn Clemson.

Adding a brand helps the Big East.  Forget what happens when Mark Few leaves.  It’s a brand now and joining the Big East will be because they earned it by becoming a brand.  Butler became a brand.  The most money comes from adding a Gonzaga or Kansas or Notre Dame. The most success for the league, a true basketball league, comes from adding great basketball brands.  Volume may add a few bucks but long term, it’s shortsighted imo

So if I follow the argument:
The ACC added brands and they became a bloated mess. Therefore the Big East should do the same.

[Uncle Rico]

So if I follow the argument:
The ACC added brands and they became a bloated mess. Therefore the Big East should do the same.

ACC added for football, not basketball.  The Big East is doing it only for basketball.  And likely, the only brand available is Gonzaga because Kansas isn’t giving up football like UConn and Notre Dame is resting where it wants to.

My argument is volume versus brand when it comes to basketball expansion.  Adding volume dilutes the league.  Adding a big brand like Gonzaga is a plus. 

Part of the Syracuse brand was the Big East.  Quite frankly, Pitt didn’t add anything other than being a partner in joining the ACC. Has moving to 15 teams really helped the ACC?  They did have a year where 9 schools made the dance and a year with 3 1-seeds but those were UNC, Duke and Virginia, classic ACC teams.

Adding schools like St. Louis and Dayton don’t improve the Big East other than inventory.  Gonzaga makes the Big East better immediately. 

[79Warrior]

Gonzaga certainly has enormous appeal. i do not see Mark Few wanting to trek across the country for every road game. Geography just not a fit.

[bilsu]

I'll gladly admit MU and others have greatly underperformed.  But you don't remedy that by adding other mediocre programs.  Expansion in the non network model (i.e. no BTN or SEC Network aspirations) is about improving the television content.  We're on a national network that wants national appeal.

- UConn is a near blue blood that did that
- Kansas and ND do that but they are probably not options
- Gonzaga does it

That's the list.  There is zero reason to add Dayton or SLU.  Sorry, it's not happening.

You certainly do not improve underperforming teams by adding better teams to their conference. Adding Gonzaga may raise the status of the Big East just like adding Uconn did. It also lowers MU chances of having a good season. I am not sure why MU would want Gonzaga to join the conference.

[BallBoy]

80-100?

SLU was 53 KenPom this past season, better than 8 Big East Teams. They were a top 20 team multiple years during this past decade.

Using Torvik, SLU has finished inside the top 40 three times since 08. Top 20 twice in consecutive seasons (12 and 13). They’ve finished sub 200 three times and sub 100 five times.

Mediocrity defined.

Any given year a team can be competitive or not.  It isn't about a single season or a compact string of seasons but history of success.  A history of relevancy in the national conversation makes a good conference partner.  SLU hasn't been to the sweet 16 or later since 1957.  SLU didn't make an appearance in the NCAA tournament from 1957 - 1994. By comparison, MU was in the Elite 8 in 2013.  The last time SLU was in the Top 20 MU was there the year before and in 2019. 

It isn't about whether a team can compete with the rest of conference every few years.  It is what they bring to make the conference better.   Would SLUs sub-200s make the conference better?

SLU doesn't bring the street cred for the casual fan to tune in.  Does SLU vs. any current Big East team bring in additional viewers?  No. 

You may say DePaul might be equally suspect as a member but they bring in a large market which appeals to Fox.  STL is not Chicago market.

[shoothoops]

Any given year a team can be competitive or not.  It isn't about a single season or a compact string of seasons but history of success.  A history of relevancy in the national conversation makes a good conference partner.  SLU hasn't been to the sweet 16 or later since 1957.  SLU didn't make an appearance in the NCAA tournament from 1957 - 1994. By comparison, MU was in the Elite 8 in 2013.  The last time SLU was in the Top 20 MU was there the year before and in 2019. 

It isn't about whether a team can compete with the rest of conference every few years.  It is what they bring to make the conference better.   Would SLUs sub-200s make the conference better?

SLU doesn't bring the street cred for the casual fan to tune in.  Does SLU vs. any current Big East team bring in additional viewers?  No. 

You may say DePaul might be equally suspect as a member but they bring in a large market which appeals to Fox.  STL is not Chicago market.

You are taking past results and saying those will be future results.

I explained in much detail earlier in this thread specifics as to why things are different now.

[BallBoy]

.

Marquette has made 5 NCAA Tourney 2nd weekends in 40 plus years. I wish it were a national championship annually, but it is what it is. That is 5 more second weekends than SLU.  You have to go back to 1957 for a SLU Second weekend

DePaul has made the NCAA Tourney twice in the 21st century, and you have to go back over 30 years since they made it more regularly.Great, we agree that aren't good but does SLU bring in a large metro viewing marketing

Georgetown has made the NCAA Tourney 2nd weekend 3 times in the past 25 years. Three times more that SLU in the same period. Georgetown is a marquee brand in college basketball.  Does SLU have the same creds? Does SLU bring in a large metro viewing marketing[/color]

St. John’s has made the NCAA Tourney 2nd weekend twice in 35 years. Two times more than SLU.  Does SLU bring in the largest TV market?

Seton Hall has made the NCAA Tourney 2nd weekend once in 30 years.  Two times more than SLU.  Does SLU bring in the largest TV market?

MUBB hasn’t won an NCAA Tourney game since Buzz left.Neither has SLU.  Last NCAA win was 2014.  Buzz's last year

1 National Title
1 Runner up
Three Final Fours
7 Elite 8
16 Sweet 16s
33 NCAA Tournament Appearances

Vs
0 NT
0 RU
0 FF
1 E8
2 S16 (last in 1957)
10 NCAA Tourney Appearances. 

The first is relevant across multiple generations while the latter isn't relevant to anyone.

[cheebs09]

I explained in much detail earlier in this thread specifics as to why things are different now.

Might be the understatement of the year.

[Shooter McGavin]

1 National Title
1 Runner up
Three Final Fours
7 Elite 8
16 Sweet 16s
33 NCAA Tournament Appearances

Vs
0 NT
0 RU
0 FF
1 E8
2 S16 (last in 1957)
10 NCAA Tourney Appearances. 

The first is relevant across multiple generations while the latter isn't relevant to anyone.

I have no dog in this fight but the above puts the Slu comparisons to MU into stark contrast.

[BallBoy]

You are taking past results and saying those will be future results.

I explained in much detail earlier in this thread specifics as to why things are different now.

Past behavior is the best predictor of future results.

You talked about how committed SLU is funding athletics and the results of that have been one NCAA tournament since 2014.  Are they willing to spend as much as or more Marquette?  Including other sports?

What happens when the current SLU administration turns over?  Are they going to continue that investment?  Historically they have not. 

What SLU done on the court, or even off for that matter, to earn a seat at the table?

[The Equalizer]

ACC added for football, not basketball.  The Big East is doing it only for basketball.  And likely, the only brand available is Gonzaga because Kansas isn’t giving up football like UConn and Notre Dame is resting where it wants to.

My argument is volume versus brand when it comes to basketball expansion.  Adding volume dilutes the league.  Adding a big brand like Gonzaga is a plus. 

Part of the Syracuse brand was the Big East.  Quite frankly, Pitt didn’t add anything other than being a partner in joining the ACC. Has moving to 15 teams really helped the ACC?  They did have a year where 9 schools made the dance and a year with 3 1-seeds but those were UNC, Duke and Virginia, classic ACC teams.

Adding schools like St. Louis and Dayton don’t improve the Big East other than inventory.  Gonzaga makes the Big East better immediately.

Gonzaga makes the Big East better only if you ignore the impact they have on the existing 11 teams. 

The extent to which they win makes every other team worse.  You wind up "improving" the league, but it comes at the expense of the 11 individual members.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Gonzaga makes the Big East better only if you ignore the impact they have on the existing 11 teams. 

The extent to which they win makes every other team worse.  You wind up "improving" the league, but it comes at the expense of the 11 individual members.

Maybe if you assume that Gonzaga would be unbeatable like adding UConn to women's basketball. But having more quality teams results in more opportunities for good wins and less chance for bad losses. It raises the whole leagues strength of schedule and results in more BE postseason bids which means more $$$ for everyone.

[WhiteTrash]

Gonzaga makes the Big East better only if you ignore the impact they have on the existing 11 teams. 

The extent to which they win makes every other team worse.  You wind up "improving" the league, but it comes at the expense of the 11 individual members.

I don't think Texas,  OU or the SEC view the world like you do. Maybe you're smarter. We'll see.

[DoctorV]

I can’t believe this means that much to people

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I can’t believe this means that much to people

My personal favorite is the dichotomy between the concepts that we must project SLUs future dominance while fearing Gonzaga’s post Few demise.

[JakeBarnes]

Gonzaga certainly has enormous appeal. i do not see Mark Few wanting to trek across the country for every road game. Geography just not a fit.

To the contrary--Mark Few is very much in favor of joining the Big East

[Billy Hoyle]

To the contrary--Mark Few is very much in favor of joining the Big East

But his president and AD are not.

[The Lens]

The last time MU was in super league, we had a season where we went 9-9 and finished in 11th place. 

We made the Sweet 16.

Rising Tides fellas…

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

The last time MU was in super league, we had a season where we went 9-9 and finished in 11th place. 

We made the Sweet 16.

Rising Tides fellas…

Exactly. We should want the conference to be a gauntlet. I don’t want any part of being a 23 win, conference tournament champion, yet ended mg up as a 13 seed like SLU did in 2019.

[UWW2MU]

You are taking past results and saying those will be future results.

I explained in much detail earlier in this thread specifics as to why things are different now.

Would it make you feel better if I told you that should Fox and the BE want a larger conference to stave off future conference re-alignment related issues, and they added 3 teams, I'd be ok with a combination of Gonzaga, Wichita State, and SLU?

[source?]

Anybody else read that Murphy post on the Holy Land and not feel particularly encouraged about Gonzaga's commitment to basketball post-Mark Few? They're "conservative" about the sustainability of the basketball program, which led them to build a 6,000 seat arena when 12,000 was on the table. It almost feels like a "basketball is important now, give Few whatever he asks for, but when he's gone whatever happens happens." Maybe Big East membership would change that attitude, maybe not.

[79Warrior]

But his president and AD are not.

Correct. Also, when has Few commented publicly about joining the BE?

[shoothoops]

Would it make you feel better if I told you that should Fox and the BE want a larger conference to stave off future conference re-alignment related issues, and they added 3 teams, I'd be ok with a combination of Gonzaga, Wichita State, and SLU?

I appreciate the sincere post.