letsgoAces wrote:I don't know, I guess I am just not smart enough to understand how a high school senior in Dallas wakes up thinking they would like to attend a MVC school, because he/she knows somewhere in Arlington there is a school, whose names escapes them, is a member of that league. Understand, I know there is a rational in looking at UTA, but I just don't get it. Further, how much does the "Missouri Valley Conference" brand actually mean? That is not a slam at all on a league that I love. Do you really have to have a team in Texas to recruit there students - how much does that really help??? I remember when I was graduating from high school in Evansville IN in the late 70's I was considering SIU and ISU-blue...they were close by and I heard of them and liked them both. They being in the MVC was of no consequence to me at all. I ended up staying at home.
It just seems if we as a league want name recognition I don't know of any better way than getting multiple teams in the NCAA tournament. You make money, play before a national audience, and we are all happy. Holding out on Murray State is just plain stupid....lots of Evansville kids attend there by the way. The Racers move the basketball needle, we all know that. Yeah, there are other considerations. But they have proven themselves on and off the court. I do understand the need for a Chicago presence, and I am fine with UIC coming on board. A new beginning with a school that has money can maybe change there fortunes.
I do like the earlier post about a mix of good basketball programs and playing in a viable market. Obviously there has to be a balance in all of this. Yes, college attendance for most places is going down and populations are trending up down south. Agree or disagree, I still think the smartest strategy in bringing in revenue is making the MVC the best mid-major basketball conference in the country - that is my goal for this league.
I agree. Get the best on the court product you can and put up a few billboards in select markets.