Conference Realignment - impact on MVC?

[rally]

Realignment is all about money, and the money is in football. Adding a non-football school doesn't add money to pocket books of the football schools. It's just another mouth to feed. That's why the ACC isn't looking to add another non-football school to pair with Notre Dame. Is an even number more desirable? Of course, but it's not necessary.

[CBB_Fan]

Realignment is all about money, and the money is in football. Adding a non-football school doesn't add money to pocket books of the football schools. It's just another mouth to feed. That's why the ACC isn't looking to add another non-football school to pair with Notre Dame. Is an even number more desirable? Of course, but it's not necessary.

Well, it all depends on what the money comes down to. You can't just assume that the MWC would lose money by adding a basketball team. The two sides would have to discuss what portion of the TV contract would Wichita State earn (30% of a football school is a good estimate because that is roughly the deal the Big East basketball only schools got), the size of the travel concessions, entry fees, etc.

Ultimately, Wichita State will be a worthwhile add if the money is right for the MWC. And Wichita State would definitely join if the money is right for them. The question is not "Is this possible?" but "Will the parties agree on a number?"

A lot of this will be determined by the type of media deal the MWC receives and what teams they get. If they get a much larger deal than they currently have ($1 million to all teams), then Wichita State would be willing to settle for a small percentage of that (as it would still be a step up from the MVC). If Wichita would not be able to settle for a small enough percentage, they wouldn't be candidate,

Either way, Wichita State's athletic department should be working like crazy with the MWC and Big East. If not, they should be fired. It is about the absolute financial security of athletics at Wichita State, and they won't get another chance. For Wichita State, nothing will probably happen in the next 2 years regardless of what the athletic department does, but if they plant their seeds right they may see an all-sports invite to an expanded MWC or see an invite to the C7 if they wished to expand.

Unless a miracle sequence of events transpire (C7 goes to 10 teams by adding Butler, Xavier, and VCU, then Valley adds Dayton and Saint Louis), Wichita State should not make long term plans to stay in the conference. They gain nothing by looking to stay and lose nothing by looking to leave, so they better be shopping their limited options hard.

[Redbird Ray]

The remaining Big East will never add a whole group of non-football schools again. It didn't work last time; why would it work with inferior schools again?

And Wichita does have a shot at the MWC. I'm not saying it's even remotely likely, but something's gotta be done about the Hawaii imbalance. They're either going to have to take them on as full members or find a non-football member. One of those 2 things HAS to happen.

The remaining Big East members might not have much choice if they need more than 8 bball playing members. I have to think the appeal of having Wichita and VCU as bball only members would be more appealing to keeping the likes of Memphis, Cincy, and UConn than just bringing in a bunch of CUSA schools full time.

The MWC will only be adding full time football members. If Boise comes back to the MWC you have a league that will compete with the new Big East and sometimes ACC in terms of Sagarin rating for bowls/playoff bids. You'll see New Mexico State, UTEP, UTSA, and Montana get MWC invites before Wichita.

[TheAsianSensation]

The remaining Big East will never add a whole group of non-football schools again. It didn't work last time; why would it work with inferior schools again?

And Wichita does have a shot at the MWC. I'm not saying it's even remotely likely, but something's gotta be done about the Hawaii imbalance. They're either going to have to take them on as full members or find a non-football member. One of those 2 things HAS to happen.

The remaining Big East members might not have much choice if they need more than 8 bball playing members. I have to think the appeal of having Wichita and VCU as bball only members would be more appealing to keeping the likes of Memphis, Cincy, and UConn than just bringing in a bunch of CUSA schools full time.

The MWC will only be adding full time football members. If Boise comes back to the MWC you have a league that will compete with the new Big East and sometimes ACC in terms of Sagarin rating for bowls/playoff bids. You'll see New Mexico State, UTEP, UTSA, and Montana get MWC invites before Wichita.

The Big East will add allsport members. ECU, Southern Miss...it doesn't even matter. They need more than 8 bball members, but they also need at least 12 football members (since UConn/Cincy are flight risks). So any adds for the time being are all-sport adds because they need everything. What are they going to do, ask VCU to join and then ask other schools to be football-only adds?

And the MWC has to do something about Hawaii. Power ratings, computers, football, no matter what, they need to add a non-football member (which can be Hawaii itself, of course). But they will do SOMETHING.

[rally]

And the MWC has to do something about Hawaii. Power ratings, computers, football, no matter what, they need to add a non-football member (which can be Hawaii itself, of course). But they will do SOMETHING.

No, they don't. They still have 9 full-time members, the same number they have had since 2005. There is no need to anything.

[TheAsianSensation]

And the MWC has to do something about Hawaii. Power ratings, computers, football, no matter what, they need to add a non-football member (which can be Hawaii itself, of course). But they will do SOMETHING.

No, they don't. They still have 9 full-time members, the same number they have had since 2005. There is no need to anything.

If they add Boise St, then they will have to do something. Once you cross into 11 football members from 10, that's when it matters.

[rally]

And the MWC has to do something about Hawaii. Power ratings, computers, football, no matter what, they need to add a non-football member (which can be Hawaii itself, of course). But they will do SOMETHING.

No, they don't. They still have 9 full-time members, the same number they have had since 2005. There is no need to anything.

If they add Boise St, then they will have to do something. Once you cross into 11 football members from 10, that's when it matters.

No, they still wouldn't have to do anything. There is no need to have the number of teams match. I'm not sure why you think it matters when you cross into 11 football schools, see the MAC or the future Big East.

[TheAsianSensation]

No, they still wouldn't have to do anything. There is no need to have the number of teams match. I'm not sure why you think it matters when you cross into 11 football schools, see the MAC or the future Big East.

(warning: math ahead)

You can get away with 9 teams in a basketball conference because that's a 16-game regular season. If everyone takes 2 bye weeks in a 16 game season, that's 18 slots, that's a 9 week schedule. You can start conference play in early January and get it in.

With 11 teams in a basketball conference, they could do 16 or 18 games. Let's assume 18 since most conferences do 18. At least one team has to take a bye every time out - the math is ugly, but, you need a 10.5 week schedule to get everyone their 18 games (you would need the old B10 scheduling model with an extra week and a half to get everyone 2 more games). Now you're starting conference play before Christmas in all likelihood, which won't work for a big conference like the MWC. Now, you can do 16 games instead of 18 and cram it in. edit: and I forgot to mention, travel is key too. The old B10 scheduling model is contingent on teams being able to fly everywhere instantly. That's how it can work. That won't be the case in the MWC.

And if it's 13 teams in the conference, it just gets harrowing, no matter the number.

Bottom line, having teams with forced byes causes big problems. And this is just basketball. Without admittedly knowing the precise numbers, how would a soccer conference work? You might not actually have a chance to have everyone play the same number of games until you really rig things.

With 9 it's ok because you have a round robin set up anyways and you have time. With more, it's an issue.

On the surface, it seems like no big deal, but it's a logistics thing, not a "oh, we need to take the team with the big market" kind of thing.


Also, MAC has 12 basketball members, so it's football that comprimises, not the other sports.

[rally]

No, they still wouldn't have to do anything. There is no need to have the number of teams match. I'm not sure why you think it matters when you cross into 11 football schools, see the MAC or the future Big East.

(warning: math ahead)

You can get away with 9 teams in a basketball conference because that's a 16-game regular season. If everyone takes 2 bye weeks in a 16 game season, that's 18 slots, that's a 9 week schedule. You can start conference play in early January and get it in.

With 11 teams in a basketball conference, they could do 16 or 18 games. Let's assume 18 since most conferences do 18. At least one team has to take a bye every time out - the math is ugly, but, you need a 10.5 week schedule to get everyone their 18 games (you would need the old B10 scheduling model with an extra week and a half to get everyone 2 more games). Now you're starting conference play before Christmas in all likelihood, which won't work for a big conference like the MWC. Now, you can do 16 games instead of 18 and cram it in. edit: and I forgot to mention, travel is key too. The old B10 scheduling model is contingent on teams being able to fly everywhere instantly. That's how it can work. That won't be the case in the MWC.

And if it's 13 teams in the conference, it just gets harrowing, no matter the number.

Bottom line, having teams with forced byes causes big problems. And this is just basketball. Without admittedly knowing the precise numbers, how would a soccer conference work? You might not actually have a chance to have everyone play the same number of games until you really rig things.

With 9 it's ok because you have a round robin set up anyways and you have time. With more, it's an issue.

On the surface, it seems like no big deal, but it's a logistics thing, not a "oh, we need to take the team with the big market" kind of thing.


Also, MAC has 12 basketball members, so it's football that comprimises, not the other sports.

Well of course if you want to play 18 games instead of 16 it is going to add an additional week, but you also have 2 less non-conference games to schedule.

With 11 teams, you can still play a 16 game schedule in 9 weeks. That doesn’t change with 13 or 15 teams either. If you want to play 18 games (which you don't need to), it's going to take another week which isn't a big deal since you have 2 less non-conference games to play. It’s going take 10 weeks regardless if it is 11, 13, or 15 teams. An odd number of teams is just going to add another week in either case. It's actually easier to get 18 games in then the current Valley format because we lose 1.5 weeks because of holding the conference tourney the week before and bracketbusters.

Expanding past 10 teams doesn't create a need to do anything. The forced byes already exist with 9 teams, so if it's not an issue now, it shouldn't be an issue going forward.

[TheAsianSensation]

Well of course if you want to play 18 games instead of 16 it is going to add an additional week, but you also have 2 less non-conference games to schedule.

With 11 teams, you can still play a 16 game schedule in 9 weeks. That doesn’t change with 13 or 15 teams either. If you want to play 18 games (which you don't need to), it's going to take another week which isn't a big deal since you have 2 less non-conference games to play. It’s going take 10 weeks regardless if it is 11, 13, or 15 teams. An odd number of teams is just going to add another week in either case. It's actually easier to get 18 games in then the current Valley format because we lose 1.5 weeks because of holding the conference tourney the week before and bracketbusters.

Expanding past 10 teams doesn't create a need to do anything. The forced byes already exist with 9 teams, so if it's not an issue now, it shouldn't be an issue going forward.

I could probably get more bogged down with math. But nah. I think we obviously disagree on the impact an odd number of teams have in logistics.

I do think the numbers above are accurate (for some reason I'm getting 10.5 instead of 10 in my handwritten calculations, but still). It's just that for practical purposes, it creates a lot of stress. Which I probably should have made clearer above. It may be mathematically possible to fit everything in, but in doing so, what travel stress are you introducing? The loss of flexibility is big here.