Poll: Would Missouri State accept a Sun Belt invite?

[mvfcfan]

Our buddy (D1 360) that makes the awesome realignment videos has once again made his realignment predictions for the 22-23 school year. He nailed Belmont and Murray State to the MVC. He also nailed Southern Indiana to the OVC.

Now his latest prediction that involves the MVC is that Georgia State will replace SMU in the AAC, and that Missouri State will replace Georgia State in the Sun Belt. He also predicts that UMKC would replace MSU in the MVC which would be very underwhelming.

There's also some other MVFC realignment he has projected. His prediction is that the B1G adds 4 more from the Pac-12 and that the Big XII also takes 4. He predicts that the Pac-12 will raid the MWC for 7 schools and that the MWC will backfill with multiple schools including North Dakota State.

https://youtu.be/Mb8GQvlBNNk

[IWokeUpLikeThis]

When MO St released those Plaster renderings years back, it was always curious the on-field logo was listed as “conference affiliation logo”. To me, that was an obvious sign MO St has planned to move up whenever the timing was right.

[PretzelDawg]

Is the Sun Belt really a step up? If the Valley and Sun Belt matched up with each other in hoops and football, I believe the Valley would hold their own and probably be better overall.

[BCPanther]

Is the Sun Belt really a step up? If the Valley and Sun Belt matched up with each other in hoops and football, I believe the Valley would hold their own and probably be better overall.

The new Sun Belt will be a better football league than the Valley. The Valley will remain a much better basketball league.

All the money is in football so....

[Drakey]

What is the upside of being a low level FBS program? There must be some perceived advantage. It is my understanding that they all lose money Do they lose less money than FCS programs? i don't think they get any better publicity or coverage do they?

It seems to be their goal so I assume they would jump at it. Are there other viable candidates?

[E-Villan]

What is the upside of being a low level FBS program? There must be some perceived advantage. It is my understanding that they all lose money Do they lose less money than FCS programs? i don't think they get any better publicity or coverage do they?

It seems to be their goal so I assume they would jump at it. Are there other viable candidates?

I am curious to this as well. Granted, I don't have a dog in the football fight, but I don't get the advantage of moving to low-level FBS.

I would be curious the thoughts of any Western KY fan. They built their reputation and notoriety on basketball success in a basketball crazy state. Football has always taken a backseat there and will probably always will. I don't see where Western has increased their relevancy one iota, and based on the state's love of college hoops, it could be easily argued that Murray has passed them up in the Kentucky pecking order.

I can't imagine too many alums or fans get any more excited about playing Florida Atlantic or North Texas than they would Illinois State.

[VUGrad1314]

I have very little doubt that Missouri State would accept a Sun Belt invite. Given the expected quality of the conference in football and the (if I remember reading correctly) $2million annual media deal that is a package the Valley can't match. However as much as UMKC offers a market and a strong academic institution while keeping Missouri in the footprint I would be against their inclusion on athletic grounds. I would rather see South Dakota State added if we were to only add one. They could very well be a like for like addition that keeps the conference where it is while adding a state flagship. Sure there are budgetary concerns (can they spend enough to compete at this level? But we need a school that has some brand recognition athletically if we're going to lose one of (if not our best)athletic departments in Missouri State. If we're going the potential route (which is UMKC's only real selling point I find St Thomas far more intriguing with their market and large endowment. Even though the MVC doesn't need them to recruit Minneapolis it would certainly help. Bellarmine could be interesting but I think they might be too new and their fundamentals aren't as strong as St Thomas even though the performance aspect has been there so far. If we're looking solely at athletics and are willing to ignore institutional fit\culture\academics Oral Roberts could be a strong addition and keep the conference in the same general area but I strongly doubt after all the hemming and hawing over Murray State's academics (which aren't even that bad compared to the rest of the MVC) that they would be willing to accept ORU. Moreover even though I think this issue is overblown somewhat as evidenced by the MVC's willingness to go to a 7\5 split to admit UIC, we probably still have to consider the public\private balance somewhat even though I think that probably has more to do with FB\non-FB in which case we'd be fine adding almost anyone we could realistically hope to add. Of course all of this assumes that none of the HL schools the MVC has courted in the past have changed their minds about making the commitments the MVC asked of them in the last round of expansion. The only way I could stomach a UMKC addition is with a firm commitment from them to get better athletically and also only if they come alongside two (or more) strong or high potential additions like SDSU St Thomas ORU Bellarmine etc. As a standalone add I have no interest as it would not be good for the conference's future standing. One has to wonder whether realignment might force some schools that we aren't considering to potentially consider the MVC or if the MVC will consider a bold footprint stretching move. For instance, does Wichita State want to continue playing in an AAC that loses SMU and\or Memphis? Would Loyola stay in the A-10 if Dayton and\or SLU are gone? Would the MVC look to expand to Texas and actually do it this time (A very interesting option if SFA is on the table but SFA might be looking FBS too). I think it's unlikely that we see a former school return or a big geographic shift for the conference but if you had told me that the Big 10 would be playing conference games in California this decade I would have laughed at you so I guess anything can happen. I know this is a rambling post heavy on speculation and light on substance but that's where we are right now. We have to see what moves (if any) the conferences ahead of the MVC in the pecking order make and then make our own move based on the information available at that time. We should be firmly in wait and see mode unless South Dakota State is ready to move now in which case a preemptive expansion to 14 with St Thomas or maybe Oral Roberts might be prudent. Our goal should be to emerge from all of this realignment with the title of "Best of the Rest" if at all possible. Our goal should be to firmly surpass the A-10 MWC AAC WCC etc. Some of this will be taken care of as a natural consequence of realignment if all goes as expected but some of this will involve the MVC making the right moves and seizing the right opportunities as they did with Belmont and Murray State.

[MissouriValleyUnite]

What is the upside of being a low level FBS program? There must be some perceived advantage. It is my understanding that they all lose money Do they lose less money than FCS programs? i don't think they get any better publicity or coverage do they?

It seems to be their goal so I assume they would jump at it. Are there other viable candidates?

I am curious to this as well. Granted, I don't have a dog in the football fight, but I don't get the advantage of moving to low-level FBS.

The benefit is more national exposure for your school. Think of it as marketing. In a given year, the number of viewers for a bottom-3 bowl is around 1 million, which is equal to an A10/MVC Final.

So all Missouri St has to do is go 6-6 and they’re rewarded with a 4-hour infomercial with 1 M viewers.
Conversely, they have just a 2-in-12 shot at making the MVC Final for a 2-hour infomercial with 1 M viewers.

Not only is the former a lot easier to achieve than the latter, it’s also an infomercial that’s twice as long as the latter.

Also, football is very effective at reconnecting and reengaging alums for donations.

We just live in a football country. It’s why Charlotte left the A-10 for C-USA and why Missouri St would leave the MVC for the Sun Belt. High enrollment public schools want as much awareness as possible.

[Mikovio]

What is the upside of being a low level FBS program? There must be some perceived advantage. It is my understanding that they all lose money Do they lose less money than FCS programs? i don't think they get any better publicity or coverage do they?

It seems to be their goal so I assume they would jump at it. Are there other viable candidates?

I am curious to this as well. Granted, I don't have a dog in the football fight, but I don't get the advantage of moving to low-level FBS.

The benefit is more national exposure for your school. Think of it as marketing. In a given year, the number of viewers for a bottom-3 bowl is around 1 million, which is equal to an A10/MVC Final.

So all Missouri St has to do is go 6-6 and they’re rewarded with a 4-hour infomercial with 1 M viewers.
Conversely, they have just a 2-in-12 shot at making the MVC Final for a 2-hour infomercial with 1 M viewers.

Not only is the former a lot easier to achieve than the latter, it’s also an infomercial that’s twice as long as the latter.

Also, football is very effective at reconnecting and reengaging alums for donations.

We just live in a football country. It’s why Charlotte left the A-10 for C-USA and why Missouri St would leave the MVC for the Sun Belt. High enrollment public schools want as much awareness as possible.

You’re comparing the MVC title game with the FBS postseason (minor bowl). But wouldn’t it be more appropriate to compare a minor bowl to the NCAAB postseason (NCAA Tournament)?

St. Peter’s vs Murray State had 6.69 million viewers and Murray State-SF got 3.01 million, for 10 million total for making the Round of 32.
An average of 10 million people were watching the NCAAT at any given time.
Tens of millions of people fill out brackets with your school’s name on it.
Nobody really cares about low level bowl games except gamblers.

There’s no comparison. We’re a football nation but we’re also a March Madness crazy nation. And MM is the best most cost efficient way to get awareness. Losing more money in low FBS football to chase the Dollar General Bowl at the expense of your basketball doesn’t make much sense, considering basketball is a midmajor’s best shot by far to make a name for themselves.

[MissouriValleyUnite]

The problem is that’s super hard. The Murray State’s and Northern Iowa’s are rare.

For every Murray St and Northern Iowa, there’s the 5 other MVC publics (MSU/ISU/ISU/SIU/UIC) who’ve made 1 NCAA Tournament combined over the last 15 years. That’s a collective 1-for-75.

It’s much easier to go a mediocre 6-6 and get your free 1 million viewers for 4 hours. There’s more marketing certainty in the FBS route.