Sounds like Wichita St to the AAC... Who gets an Invite?

[Snaggletooth]

Because it's interesting watching people dream up inventive ideas of how to improve the conference after accepting and excusing mediocrity (or let's be honest, worse) for a decade. Everyone is listing things they want the league and their schools to do in order to improve the league once WSU leaves. Elgin is walking around like a giant sadsack. It would be pretty entertaining if it wasn't so sad.

You can already see the sense of relief in the tone of different MVC teams media coverage. They knew there was no way they could compete resource wise against WSU, but now with WSU Possibly leaving they don't have to try and compete. They can see the light at the end of the tunnel and they don't have to change a thing. It is a win-win for everybody (except the fans) - but looking at attendance numbers they don't care anyway.

[Stickboy46]

The shares belong to the league no matter what. That's who the NCAA makes the check out to.

I'd make Wichita ineligible for the auto bid, therefore ensuring being a two bid league.

If the MVC kicks them out or WSU exits immediately (due to being made in eligible for the auto bid), they would not be part of the MVC, so the MVC would get NOTHING of WSU's tourney run this upcoming year. Would make a lot more sense to not risk that and get a cut of 2-6 games rather than the 1 game that would be pretty much guaranteed from whoever else got the auto bid.

WSU stays - MVC Splits 2-6 games

Kick WSU out/WSU exits immediately - MVC Splits 1 game, WSU gets all of 2-6 games.

[All-MVC Fan]

Because it's interesting watching people dream up inventive ideas of how to improve the conference after accepting and excusing mediocrity (or let's be honest, worse) for a decade. Everyone is listing things they want the league and their schools to do in order to improve the league once WSU leaves. Elgin is walking around like a giant sadsack. It would be pretty entertaining if it wasn't so sad.

You can already see the sense of relief in the tone of different MVC teams media coverage. They knew there was no way they could compete resource wise against WSU, but now with WSU Possibly leaving they don't have to try and compete. They can see the light at the end of the tunnel and they don't have to change a thing. It is a win-win for everybody (except the fans) - but looking at attendance numbers they don't care anyway.

While collegiate sports attendance has been down across the board for several years, no doubt the struggles of MVC teams to attract decent crowds has as much to do with lack of on-court success as with Netflix and X-Box. I am continually amazed at the inability, or unwillingness, of MVC administrators to see how much money they are leaving on the table in ticket sales alone if they just invested a bit to put a high quality product on the floor. And that's not even taking into account the possibility of raising ticket prices once the success "takes hold." What would it mean to the average MVC school if they could sell 5,000 more tickets per game at an average of $15 a ticket? That's roughly $1M for a 13 or 14 game home schedule. Do that consistently, and you can raise prices. And you'll get more donations. And you'll get more merchandising money. Could any of the MVC programs use an extra $1M? And it really is an extra $1M, because your fixed costs per game remain the same...

Maybe you don't get 5,000 extra tickets sold per game. Maybe it could be half that. Any MVC program need an extra $500,000? If a donor came to give that check it would warrant a newspaper article. So, I'm pretty sure it would be a good thing for all the schools in the Valley.

Sometimes, you need to find a way, any way, to invest in your program to make it a winner. It seems like a fairly predictable formula. I'm surprised that more schools don't follow it.

I doubt that there is really a lack of "trying" at MVC schools. I just think that sometimes, they're "trying" at the wrong things...

[tribecalledquest]

Because it's interesting watching people dream up inventive ideas of how to improve the conference after accepting and excusing mediocrity (or let's be honest, worse) for a decade. Everyone is listing things they want the league and their schools to do in order to improve the league once WSU leaves. Elgin is walking around like a giant sadsack. It would be pretty entertaining if it wasn't so sad.

You can already see the sense of relief in the tone of different MVC teams media coverage. They knew there was no way they could compete resource wise against WSU, but now with WSU Possibly leaving they don't have to try and compete. They can see the light at the end of the tunnel and they don't have to change a thing. It is a win-win for everybody (except the fans) - but looking at attendance numbers they don't care anyway.

While collegiate sports attendance has been down across the board for several years, no doubt the struggles of MVC teams to attract decent crowds has as much to do with lack of on-court success as with Netflix and X-Box. I am continually amazed at the inability, or unwillingness, of MVC administrators to see how much money they are leaving on the table in ticket sales alone if they just invested a bit to put a high quality product on the floor. And that's not even taking into account the possibility of raising ticket prices once the success "takes hold." What would it mean to the average MVC school if they could sell 5,000 more tickets per game at an average of $15 a ticket? That's roughly $1M for a 13 or 14 game home schedule. Do that consistently, and you can raise prices. And you'll get more donations. And you'll get more merchandising money. Could any of the MVC programs use an extra $1M? And it really is an extra $1M, because your fixed costs per game remain the same...

Maybe you don't get 5,000 extra tickets sold per game. Maybe it could be half that. Any MVC program need an extra $500,000? If a donor came to give that check it would warrant a newspaper article. So, I'm pretty sure it would be a good thing for all the schools in the Valley.

Sometimes, you need to find a way, any way, to invest in your program to make it a winner. It seems like a fairly predictable formula. I'm surprised that more schools don't follow it.

I doubt that there is really a lack of "trying" at MVC schools. I just think that sometimes, they're "trying" at the wrong things...

You are assuming that investing upfront will give you the proper return. Most college budgets, WSU included, went up once the success happened. It wasn't a ton of $$$ first then followed by success. It was success followed by $$$.

[unipanther99]

Kick WSU out/WSU exits immediately - MVC Splits 1 game, WSU gets all of 2-6 games.

Already assuming at least round two through possibly National Championship next year? And assuming the rest of the teams are incapable of multiple bids or winning a game? I mean, yes... The Shockers should be good again, but the braggadocios stuff is just never a good look for a fan base and more often than not turns around to bite you.

Congrats on the success of the team you follow. I wish WSU future success either here or elsewhere.

[All-MVC Fan]

You are assuming that investing upfront will give you the proper return. Most college budgets, WSU included, went up once the success happened. It wasn't a ton of $$$ first then followed by success. It was success followed by $$$.

I'm not talking about all the spending happening all at once. I'm merely saying that MVC schools need to figure out, any way they can, to invest in their programs. Yes, you are correct, $$$ comes after success, but if you're not having success and it's because of money, you have to find a way to jump start investment so that you can take advantage of the upward trajectory of the dollars.

While you're not wrong, sometimes you have to spend money to make money. I'm not talking about Indiana State (or anyone else) quadrupling their basketball budget, but they could start by finding a way (once again, any way) to pay a better, more competitive salary to their next basketball coach. That would at least help them hire a more proven winner, rather than just taking another longshot on a guy who has never run a program before. That's just one that stands out to me seeing as how their basketball budget is so much smaller than everyone else's...

And I think you'll find that most colleges that have sustained success from a position of non-success, increased their budgets to start with. That generally happens because of an institutional commitment to basketball as a marketing program. They don't go from spending very little and sucking, to going to the Sweet Sixteen without making some changes in their program's budget. I'm talking on a sustained level, not that one-off special team that captures lightning in a bottle (ahem...Drake...ahem).

Just my two cents...

[unipanther99]

I think better pay for assistants is a worth-while investment. Create a pool for merit-based bonuses that can be distributed by the head coach.

[glm38]

You are assuming that investing upfront will give you the proper return. Most college budgets, WSU included, went up once the success happened. It wasn't a ton of $$$ first then followed by success. It was success followed by $$$.

I'm not talking about all the spending happening all at once. I'm merely saying that MVC schools need to figure out, any way they can, to invest in their programs. Yes, you are correct, $$$ comes after success, but if you're not having success and it's because of money, you have to find a way to jump start investment so that you can take advantage of the upward trajectory of the dollars.

While you're not wrong, sometimes you have to spend money to make money. I'm not talking about Indiana State (or anyone else) quadrupling their basketball budget, but they could start by finding a way (once again, any way) to pay a better, more competitive salary to their next basketball coach. That would at least help them hire a more proven winner, rather than just taking another longshot on a guy who has never run a program before. That's just one that stands out to me seeing as how their basketball budget is so much smaller than everyone else's...

And I think you'll find that most colleges that have sustained success from a position of non-success, increased their budgets to start with. That generally happens because of an institutional commitment to basketball as a marketing program. They don't go from spending very little and sucking, to going to the Sweet Sixteen without making some changes in their program's budget. I'm talking on a sustained level, not that one-off special team that captures lightning in a bottle (ahem...Drake...ahem).

Just my two cents...

It hasn't worked that way for Bradley though has it? They spend a pretty decent amount of $$ but success definitely hasn't followed.

In my backyard I think if msu could just find some on court success similar to what uni has done recently we would start consistently selling out our games and our budget for coaching, recruiting, etc would go up accordingly. But alas we've made a couple of very poor hires over the past 15/20 years.

[All-MVC Fan]

It hasn't worked that way for Bradley though has it? They spend a pretty decent amount of $$ but success definitely hasn't followed.

In my backyard I think if msu could just find some on court success similar to what uni has done recently we would start consistently selling out our games and our budget for coaching, recruiting, etc would go up accordingly. But alas we've made a couple of very poor hires over the past 15/20 years.

Good point. The AD has to make good hires. No question.

[Stickboy46]

Kick WSU out/WSU exits immediately - MVC Splits 1 game, WSU gets all of 2-6 games.

Already assuming at least round two through possibly National Championship next year? And assuming the rest of the teams are incapable of multiple bids or winning a game? I mean, yes... The Shockers should be good again, but the braggadocios stuff is just never a good look for a fan base and more often than not turns around to bite you.

Congrats on the success of the team you follow. I wish WSU future success either here or elsewhere.

I'm pretty sure every fact available right now leads me to think that everything I said is the most likely scenario

WSU is returning EVERYONE from a team that won a game in the NCAA, and has won at least 1 game in the NCAA the last 5 years. That seems reasonable to think that will happen again considering what's returning.

The rest of the Valley minus ISU wasn't anywhere close to getting in the NCAA or being the type of team that would be likely to beat an NCAA caliber team. ISU is a wild card next year, They lose alot, but have the most talent returning. There isn't another school that screams "NCAA Caliber" team.

You can call it "braggadocios". I can call it realistic. Both are right I guess?