Missouri State leaving MVC for CUSA

[BCPanther]

For me its the right geography first, we're a collection of Midwest schools with relatively similar values and academic profiles. From there i would say for the most part our collection of basketball programs share fanbases that both care and are engaged in their schools program for the long haul. We are not a collection of new comers, it seems to me we are a group of fanbases that care about the history of the league and our schools performances along with current on-court performance. This is obviously a sliding scale as some schools have more of these qualities than others.

if a prospective add doesnt have the right geography but has the right program, id say they could be a fit. If a prospective add doesnt have the right program but is regionally appropriate id say they could be a bit. but if a school has neither of those things, i wouldnt call them a good fit.

Seeing as the MVC is a top tier mid major, I would add that you have an "arena" as opposed to a "gym"

Doesn't Milwaukee at least have the geography part of it? And they have had a fair amount of basketball success the last 20 seasons or so. The arena they play in is fantastic.

Not a perfect fit of course - but they spend on MBB and the results have been there - far more than UIC for example.

This is where market comes into play. UW-Madison and Marquette just have too much of a grip on the market in Milwaukee. Marquette and Milwaukee in particular are neighbors. That being Panther Arena and Fiserv Forum are right next to each other. You could make the same case for UIC and Valpo as well. UIC is clamoring for a piece of the Chicago market. Valpo is fighting Purdue for the NWI market and the Chicago teams for the Chicago market.

A Valpo guy putting a qualifier on what constitutes an arena instead of a gym is RIIIIIIIICH.

[ReZyNeZy]

For me its the right geography first, we're a collection of Midwest schools with relatively similar values and academic profiles. From there i would say for the most part our collection of basketball programs share fanbases that both care and are engaged in their schools program for the long haul. We are not a collection of new comers, it seems to me we are a group of fanbases that care about the history of the league and our schools performances along with current on-court performance. This is obviously a sliding scale as some schools have more of these qualities than others.

if a prospective add doesnt have the right geography but has the right program, id say they could be a fit. If a prospective add doesnt have the right program but is regionally appropriate id say they could be a bit. but if a school has neither of those things, i wouldnt call them a good fit.

Seeing as the MVC is a top tier mid major, I would add that you have an "arena" as opposed to a "gym"

Doesn't Milwaukee at least have the geography part of it? And they have had a fair amount of basketball success the last 20 seasons or so. The arena they play in is fantastic.

Not a perfect fit of course - but they spend on MBB and the results have been there - far more than UIC for example.

This is where market comes into play. UW-Madison and Marquette just have too much of a grip on the market in Milwaukee. Marquette and Milwaukee in particular are neighbors. That being Panther Arena and Fiserv Forum are right next to each other. You could make the same case for UIC and Valpo as well. UIC is clamoring for a piece of the Chicago market. Valpo is fighting Purdue for the NWI market and the Chicago teams for the Chicago market.

A Valpo guy putting a qualifier on what constitutes an arena instead of a gym is RIIIIIIIICH.

I have stated many, many times that the ARC sucks. It is a gym. If you want the architectural answer, and arena consists of bowl seating spanning the circumference (or 3/4 the circumference) of the ground level. A "Center" is an arena, but with the added benefit of being able to be used for multipurpose means. Whether you tarp off a stage area, or you implement retraction on the lower bowl to accommodate a stage area makes no difference. Despite these definitions, you can name something whatever you want. A gym can have the name arena, a center can have the name gym. Ect Ect. Despite this, The Athletic Recreation Center. Is a gym. As I have stated multiple times. All I can say is that there is a new "arena" in development.

[TylerDurden]

I'll believe that there is going to be a new facility at Valpo when I see it under construction. Until then, I'll believe it was one of several fabrications they presented to get them in the league.

We can play the blame game all we want and you can pretend that your coach left the same year they joined (he didn't, we've been over this), but the fact remains that Valpo hasn't made good on any promises it made when they were added.

It was a mistake and we all have to live with it now.

[ReZyNeZy]

I'll believe that there is going to be a new facility at Valpo when I see it under construction. Until then, I'll believe it was one of several fabrications they presented to get them in the league.

We can play the blame game all we want and you can pretend that your coach left the same year they joined (he didn't, we've been over this), but the fact remains that Valpo hasn't made good on any promises it made when they were added.

It was a mistake and we all have to live with it now.

Coach left in 16. Join was in 17. This is common knowledge. Terms were agreed upon in early 2016. Coach left in mid 2016. I don't understand how this is so difficult to grasp. The conversation didn't go "Hey we want you. Can you start tomorrow? Like most conference announcements. There was a year after terms were agreed upon where the teams stayed in the league. MSU is still in the conference for the 24-25 season. This is how all conference realignments go. USC UCLA was announced 2 years ago. Did they play in the B10 last year? The only time that this wasn't the case was when Washington and Oregon agreed to join the B10 last year for the upcoming season, but a conference imploding due to a bad TV deal is a completely different circumstance to typical conference realignment.

Has Valpo made good on their promises, no. While the old admins are to blame for kicking the rock of athletics further down the line, once the MVC join was final, plans were put in place to amend the issue. However, a multitude of circumstances hit the University( either of their own volition or not) which prevented further athletic investments. To my knowledge, this is the only time in recent years where VU staff have openly stated( and put time and money investing) in overall athletic improvements. There are early renderings, but those were only shown to a private group of investors and wealthy alum as confirmed by staff members on the VU forum. Could the project not happen, sure like any project still in development, it could not happen. Should you immediately discount the effort as nonexistent and press fluff. No, that is called being a pessimist.

[MissouriValleyUnite]

I'll believe that there is going to be a new facility at Valpo when I see it under construction. Until then, I'll believe it was one of several fabrications they presented to get them in the league.

We can play the blame game all we want and you can pretend that your coach left the same year they joined (he didn't, we've been over this), but the fact remains that Valpo hasn't made good on any promises it made when they were added.

It was a mistake and we all have to live with it now.

Coach left in 16. Join was in 17. This is common knowledge. Terms were agreed upon in early 2016. Coach left in mid 2016. I don't understand how this is so difficult to grasp.

I’m happy Valpo and the MVC has a really supportive fan in you.

But this is absolutely not common knowledge. I’ve never even heard of this until you mentioned it, and I’ve been reading this board and other boards for years. I remember the 2017 expansion very well, as do many others here, and not once was this ever mentioned.

Murray St, Valpo, Milwaukee, and Omaha were the 4 finalists. There was never any leak to who would be picked. All 4 schools presented in STL. The presidents met in STL to make their decision that night (I vividly remember obsessively checking my phone during night class and nervously pacing around school). It wasn’t reported until the next morning Valpo was the pick. Norlander shortly followed with an article that it was a hotly contested debate and 2 presidents pitched hard for Murray. It’s commonly accepted one was Missouri St and believed the other was Illinois St.

Also, Doug Elgin was a massive proponent of a 10-team league with a double round robin and opposed the idea of going beyond 10.

[BCPanther]

I'll believe that there is going to be a new facility at Valpo when I see it under construction. Until then, I'll believe it was one of several fabrications they presented to get them in the league.

We can play the blame game all we want and you can pretend that your coach left the same year they joined (he didn't, we've been over this), but the fact remains that Valpo hasn't made good on any promises it made when they were added.

It was a mistake and we all have to live with it now.

Coach left in 16. Join was in 17. This is common knowledge. Terms were agreed upon in early 2016. Coach left in mid 2016. I don't understand how this is so difficult to grasp. The conversation didn't go "Hey we want you. Can you start tomorrow? Like most conference announcements. There was a year after terms were agreed upon where the teams stayed in the league. MSU is still in the conference for the 24-25 season. This is how all conference realignments go. USC UCLA was announced 2 years ago. Did they play in the B10 last year? The only time that this wasn't the case was when Washington and Oregon agreed to join the B10 last year for the upcoming season, but a conference imploding due to a bad TV deal is a completely different circumstance to typical conference realignment.

Has Valpo made good on their promises, no. While the old admins are to blame for kicking the rock of athletics further down the line, once the MVC join was final, plans were put in place to amend the issue. However, a multitude of circumstances hit the University( either of their own volition or not) which prevented further athletic investments. To my knowledge, this is the only time in recent years where VU staff have openly stated( and put time and money investing) in overall athletic improvements. There are early renderings, but those were only shown to a private group of investors and wealthy alum as confirmed by staff members on the VU forum. Could the project not happen, sure like any project still in development, it could not happen. Should you immediately discount the effort as nonexistent and press fluff. No, that is called being a pessimist.

There was no lag. Wichita announced they were leaving on April 7, 2017 for the 2017-18 academic year.

Valpo was invited May 9, 2017 for the 2017-18 academic year and accepted on May 25th. They joined July 1, 36 days after they accepted.

The publics all wanted Murray, led by MSU, IlSU and UNI but the privates got SIU to flip and we ended up with Valpo if memory serves.

[MissouriValleyUnite]

For Valpo and the MVC to have agreed to terms in early 2016, that would have meant no leaks for 15 months until the day after the Presidents officially voted in May 2017. No leaks for 15 months with the conference office and 11 different university administrations (including Wichita’s) knowing and holding the secret from all families, friends, and colleagues for 15 months.

[E-Villan]

There was no lag. Wichita announced they were leaving on April 7, 2017 for the 2017-18 academic year.

Valpo was invited May 9, 2017 for the 2017-18 academic year and accepted on May 25th. They joined July 1, 36 days after they accepted.

The publics all wanted Murray, led by MSU, IlSU and UNI but the privates got SIU to flip and we ended up with Valpo if memory serves.

From what I have been told, that is not entirely accurate. SIU was always a hard no for Murray, as was Loyola and "one of the Iowa" schools. The assumption there was it was Drake. UE's AD was very public about our support for Murray.

It isn't a coincidence that once Loyola's vote was replaced with Belmont's that Murray got in.

[MissouriValleyUnite]

There was no lag. Wichita announced they were leaving on April 7, 2017 for the 2017-18 academic year.

Valpo was invited May 9, 2017 for the 2017-18 academic year and accepted on May 25th. They joined July 1, 36 days after they accepted.

The publics all wanted Murray, led by MSU, IlSU and UNI but the privates got SIU to flip and we ended up with Valpo if memory serves.

From what I have been told, that is not entirely accurate. SIU was always a hard no for Murray, as was Loyola and "one of the Iowa" schools. The assumption there was it was Drake. UE's AD was very public about our support for Murray.

It isn't a coincidence that once Loyola's vote was replaced with Belmont's that Murray got in.

I had heard the Drake President was a hard no on Murray St in 2017, so that lines up there. Fortunately, he must’ve changed his mind come 2021. Also, Bradley’s president then supposedly joined him in opposition, but fortunately BU upgraded presidents in time for the next expansion cycle.

Another factor was Deborah Curtis hadn’t assumed office at Indiana St yet. As wildly controversial as she is there, she was massively pro-Murray, to the point she traveled to Murray for their MVFC press conference. The Deborah Curtis factor wasn’t there in 2017.

[BCPanther]

Valpo was a real shitty compromise.

Should've stayed at 9 for a year and given it time to breathe.