MVC Expansion Candidate Deep Dive

[Murraygrad05]

At one time the OVC was a fairly good league. WKU, Middle Tennessee… Once they left as valley pointed out we added SEMO and Martin that were going to be projects that had potential. Along with these, we have added teams such as Jacksonville State (which was an outstanding football move but nothing else), Samford and Belmont. Belmont was the only one basketball wise that added anything at all. The “potentials” are laying in waiting 30 years later and now they are sub 300 teams. That’s what I mean by the new OVC comment. Just don’t make the same mistake we did by adding potentials that have shown no substance but “we can do better” comments.

[RacerJoeD]

Adding two more 250+ teams (possibly 4 more 250+ games) isn't going to help.


I think it would be prudent for the MVC to add UIC as Chicago is a near must have for MVC teams from a market standpoint.

Here is the crux of the bet the MVC would be making by adding Arlington, UIC, Omaha, KC, whoever for market reasons. You would be betting that these branch public schools who in most cases have no history of success or real support would be able to do what Loyola, a private school with a history of success and support, was able to do by switching conferences, has done. That isn't a good bet.

At the very least it implies that UIC, Omaha, KC have, at their disposal the resources to be successful and have made the choice, for decades in some cases, not to. What makes anyone think that if they then decided to be more successful athletically, that in the future they could choose to become mediocre again?

If however, their lack of success hasn't been a choice, then what makes anyone believe that by adding them to the MVC, that the circumstances of their lack of success for decades has fundamentally changed? If conference affiliation was enough to ensure success, why has Evansville struggled (sorry Aces fans, not trying to throw you guys under the bus. You all are basketball fans and I respect that.)

I think the issue here is that as a college basketball fan, I have sat by and watched as really good college basketball conferences have been sacrificed on the altar of mediocre at best college football. That never really affected my team, as we aren't a football school, though we have had success at times. Now, Im looking at a premier college basketball conference seemingly making decisions that will make their flagship sport worse on a bad bet.

It does rile up the Racer fans to see it, because we have seen it before. At one point, the OVC was a very good college basketball conference. Then non basketball stuff got in the way, and it has been a negative outcome for all the member schools, whether they would admit it or not. Programs were added because of their market instead of their quality. Programs were added for football, making the flagship sport worse.

Its like watching a car sliding down a hill on ice towards a busy intersection. We are stuck on the sidelines while the driver of the car locks up the wheels and closes his eyes.


The ultimate question for the presidents, but hopefully with the input of their athletic directors (if they have them), is this; What is the Missouri Valley Conference going to be? If the answer is a top tier basketball conference that is nationally respected in non revenue sports, that will mean adding one type of program. If the answer is the Missouri Valley Conference is a hail mary desperation heave to try to reverse enrollment issues caused by massive increases in post secondary education costs and nationwide demographic changes, you add a different kind of program.

I assert that the only way you can get both is choose a successful program that ensures that your conference gets games on national television regularly, building on national brand recognition year over year. I also assert that the other choice gets you neither.


But you all are aware of my bias.

[smidge34]

Lmao at the low basketball IQ it would take to mention UIC or UT-A in the same sentence with Murray State basketball. Then have the audacity to call somebody “bitter” when they call you out for your sheer level of genius! If you try and justify adding a UIC or a UT-A over Murray you’re pretty much a ron, first name mo. Good grief it’s laughable.

I am not disputing that Murray would be a good add... I am just pointing out that UIC and UTA joining aren't suddenly going to tank the league.
Seems to me that Drake, UNI, and Bradley have been fairly consistent and SIU seems to be on the way up again. Missouri State and Illinois State should be better, and will again soon (I hope!). Belmont has been a quality program ever since moving to D1.
Why would those programs decline because UIC and UT-A are added?

I just smh at the far reaching justifications for adding low major players to a good mid-major conference over a mid-major power like Murray. You’d have to either be dumb as dirt or you’ve got a personal problem with our program, a sore butt or something. That post about how we’ve peaked is a doozy too. I have to remember though, you cross paths with a lot of fools via message boards.

[Greg]

As I stated on a previous post:

There is a term in investments: Past Performance Is Not Indicative Of Future
Results

Loyola was not a world beater when they were in the Horizon League

They were 7-23 in 2011-12, 15-16 in 2012-13.

Then they were accepted in the MVC

Now look where they are

UIC has great potential and IMO UIC and the MVC could be a great symbiotic relationship

[racernation]

Couple of AWESOME points...

1. SIU fans love to troll the Racers.
2. Can we not update this thread until REAL news breaks? Everything has already been discussed.

[BEARZ77]

I have to remember though, you cross paths with a lot of fools via message boards.

The dumbest of which are non member posters on another team or league's fan board. As much as I'd like to see Murray St in the MVC , I'm already tired of listening to a few of their posters whine.

[Action10]

I am not disputing that Murray would be a good add... I am just pointing out that UIC and UTA joining aren't suddenly going to tank the league.
Seems to me that Drake, UNI, and Bradley have been fairly consistent and SIU seems to be on the way up again. Missouri State and Illinois State should be better, and will again soon (I hope!). Belmont has been a quality program ever since moving to D1.
Why would those programs decline because UIC and UT-A are added?

I just smh at the far reaching justifications for adding low major players to a good mid-major conference over a mid-major power like Murray. You’d have to either be dumb as dirt or you’ve got a personal problem with our program, a sore butt or something. That post about how we’ve peaked is a doozy too. I have to remember though, you cross paths with a lot of fools via message boards.

You didn't answer my question. You just got hateful and then simply stated points about why Murray State would be a good add.
I stated Murray State would be a good add already...

[RacerJoeD]

adding two teams ranked in the 250s of the NET will be bad for the conference.

[Action10]

adding two teams ranked in the 250s of the NET will be bad for the conference.

Have UIC and UT-A been that bad historically and over the last 5 seasons in the NET/RPI and KenPom?

[SalukiWorld]

adding two teams ranked in the 250s of the NET will be bad for the conference.

Have UIC and UT-A been that bad historically and over the last 5 seasons in the NET/RPI and KenPom?

UT Arlington was on the rise for a little bit, finishing 75th in KenPom in 2017 with a 27-9 record but fired Scott Cross the next year after going 21-13 and finishing 128 in KenPom. They took steps back with Chris Ogden and he left for an assistant job at Texas after 3 years. They were awful last year but still had decent KenPom and NET rankings his first 2 years. It's pretty clear they want to win. I think they're a good addition to the Valley outside of location but that's also a huge reason why I'm iffy about adding them.