Another Expansion/Realignment Thread

[TylerDurden]

I think some of you are falling for a fallacy of composition, thinking that more teams is better.

[BEARZ77]

All jokes aside, If you are a conference in the MBB world that wants to survive now a days, you need to get up to 12 members at a minimum, 14 is the happy medium, and 16 is the perfect world. Obviously you aren't going to go up to 20 like the big 10 has, but going up to 14 is a realistic ideal for mid major survival

I’m honestly asking why 14 is a good number

If every conference member splits the revenue from Tournament appearances, isn’t smaller better?

I can get good w 16 actually, maybe even 20, but I’d like to understand the logic

There were a lot of comments early in these expansion threads [ starting back a couple years] about expansion helping get multiple bids come NCAA time. Never felt that , but some did and possibly still do. Never quite understood the rationale .

[Aces44]

The way I understand the economics, it’s only better to add if you expect another bid.
Therefore 1 divided by 10 is worse than 2 divided by 16, but better than 1 divided by 11+

I’d love to learn if there is something I’m missing

[FunchessonPopcorn]

I’ll admit right up front there are a lot of items decisions makers value that I don’t prioritize as much, maybe even flat out just don’t truly understand. I don’t see the point of playing the same game as the big guys and getting into this expansion as a good in itself mindset. Getting one Weds and one Sat game on Bally Sports Ohio or Southwest is better than not having it, by itself, but it’s not like having the SEC or Big 10 Network as a fully functional propaganda arm with deep roots into the major networks as well.

In isolation, I prefer smaller, and really the only thing that gives me any pause on that is the reality that I have no idea if we can actually keep the band together….and that if we get busted up from 11 or 10, then it gets into a panic situation where poor additions have high risk of being made.

Otherwise there is the splitting the pie thing. I know they dangle the NCAA expansion bringing additional bids, but I assume we’ll more or less be playing the Charlie Brown kicking the football while Lucy holds it role, when that play gets executed.

I think zigging while those above us zag is wise, because we are in fact mostly a bunch of regional schools in less than desirable locations, but ones that have a history of valuing basketball and being pretty good at it. I value a structure that produces a true champion in our bubble, that maybe only we really care about, unless there is a ton of evidence that the other benefits tossed around are more tangible than the marketing talking points I kinda assume them to be, in large part.

[BEARZ77]

The way I understand the economics, it’s only better to add if you expect another bid.
Therefore 1 divided by 10 is worse than 2 divided by 16, but better than 1 divided by 11+

I’d love to learn if there is something I’m missing

There are plenty of other arguments for expansion ,so it comes down to at what level do you value them. But the "increased bid" argument was always a pipe dream given the current dynamics in college basketball.

[tribecalledquest]

The way I understand the economics, it’s only better to add if you expect another bid.
Therefore 1 divided by 10 is worse than 2 divided by 16, but better than 1 divided by 11+

I’d love to learn if there is something I’m missing

There are plenty of other arguments for expansion ,so it comes down to at what level do you value them. But the "increased bid" argument was always a pipe dream given the current dynamics in college basketball.

All adding teams does is make it harder to win. Going from a one bid league to a harder one bid league is really dumb. Schools do it all the time. Of course these decisions rarely come from the athletic departments in the end. Presidents worry about stuff that doesn't matter as it relates to winning in sports.

I was talking to someone affiliated with Liberty University the other day. They went from a one-bid basketball league to a harder one-bid league while also having to spend more money. What a deal!!!

[ReZyNeZy]

The way I look at it is it gives you a better share of the market if you have more teams. Obviously the MVC is a midwest conference first and foremost, but better markets = better exposure. That is why Arlington, even though its out of the way, is being considered. The texas market is really desirable. Gotta keep those televised games.

[TylerDurden]

The way I look at it is it gives you a better share of the market if you have more teams. Obviously the MVC is a midwest conference first and foremost, but better markets = better exposure. That is why Arlington, even though its out of the way, is being considered. The texas market is really desirable. Gotta keep those televised games.

The Texas market is not delivered by UTA, just like the Detroit market is not delivered by Detroit Mercy, the Cleveland market is not delivered by Cleveland State, the Indianapolis market is not delivered by IUPUI, and the Pittsburgh market is not delivered by Robert Morris.

University presidents always talk about things that sound good in theory, but in reality don't pan out. For instance, you'll hear them talk about being in XYZ market to help out-of-state student recruitment in those areas...yet when you look at the student demographics you see that ~90% of the student population is from the home state and immediate surrounding area.

Television market size matters when you have lucrative TV deals. We aren't playing the same game as the B1G or SEC. MVC revenue streams are not the same type or amount.

We can't operate the same way the B1G does just like we can't operate the same way the Horizon League does.

[ReZyNeZy]

The way I look at it is it gives you a better share of the market if you have more teams. Obviously the MVC is a midwest conference first and foremost, but better markets = better exposure. That is why Arlington, even though its out of the way, is being considered. The texas market is really desirable. Gotta keep those televised games.

The Texas market is not delivered by UTA, just like the Detroit market is not delivered by Detroit Mercy, the Cleveland market is not delivered by Cleveland State, the Indianapolis market is not delivered by IUPUI, and the Pittsburgh market is not delivered by Robert Morris.

University presidents always talk about things that sound good in theory, but in reality don't pan out. For instance, you'll hear them talk about being in XYZ market to help out-of-state student recruitment in those areas...yet when you look at the student demographics you see that ~90% of the student population is from the home state and immediate surrounding area.

Television market size matters when you have lucrative TV deals. We aren't playing the same game as the B1G or SEC. MVC revenue streams are not the same type or amount.

We can't operate the same way the B1G does just like we can't operate the same way the Horizon League does.

Where did I imply you get the entirety of a market from one school. Not even the powers get that. I am just going off of the material about markets presented by d1 360

[TOPSTRAIGHT]

I'm just a guest on this board--but IMHO...

Twelve is the perfect number for many conferences.

--enough so that you are not in panic mode if you lose one

--small enough to not divide up revenue in too many pieces

If you go to 14 or 16--it will be difficult to make room for a future candidate who becomes available and---- might be VERY desirable.