RacerJoeD wrote:You guys are missing something. It isn’t only about bids. It’s about seeding. The swag gets a bid, but it is usually a 16. If your conference, by virtue of being perceived as a better conference and therefor the winner as a better team, gets a better seed, there is more chance of a favorable matchup in the tournament. The money in the tournament isn’t in bids, it’s in wins, because the money goes up with every round. The chances of winning go up with the better seed, and therefore the money goes up with the perception of the conference. Adding highly respected and nationally competitive teams to your conference, done correctly, makes more money per school despite the need to divide by more teams.
ptownbraves wrote:Unless we can get SLU and Murray State, I'd rather we stay at 10. NKU would be fine I guess, but they've only been a D1 school since 2013.
lime wrote:ptownbraves wrote:Unless we can get SLU and Murray State, I'd rather we stay at 10. NKU would be fine I guess, but they've only been a D1 school since 2013.
This, but I would accept Belmont with SLU or Murray State. I have no real interest in anyone else for 11/12.
VUGrad1314 wrote:lime wrote:ptownbraves wrote:Unless we can get SLU and Murray State, I'd rather we stay at 10. NKU would be fine I guess, but they've only been a D1 school since 2013.
This, but I would accept Belmont with SLU or Murray State. I have no real interest in anyone else for 11/12.
I'd take a closer look at NKU before you say that.
TheAsianSensation wrote:I am getting irrationally mad about the concept that you can't schedule for an 11-team league.
Either way, 11 or 12 is better. Ask Wichita St how their resume is being enhanced in a 12-team league with creative scheduling to avoid having to play bad teams twice. Works, doesn't it?
Whatever add we make, we have to do it with the short-term in mind. We don't have time in the changing landscape to wait for programs to grow naturally. We need a winning program, or at least a program who can throw money at the problem.
Of course, none of the prospects are powerhouse programs. So I reluctantly vote for Northern Kentucky, who we can at least rely on to throw money and resources at the problem to keep up with the rest of the league. There's no such assurances on the others from a budget standpoint. I don't trust Milwaukee or Oakland to spend long-term, and I don't trust any Dakota school, especially NDSU, given their football.
Return to Missouri Valley Conference Basketball
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 212 guests