Catholic Basketball League

[iowactor]

By the way, St Louis is on warning for a nuclear meltdown: Xavier and Butler are the two western-most A-10 teams outside of them. If Dayton gets a spot over them, or even if they just don't get one, period, they're now extreme outliers in the A-10 and in serious trouble.

I could see the A-10 aggressively pursue Horizon/MVC teams to try and protect St Louis if it comes to it.

The A-10 isn't as attractive to an MVC school if Xavier, Butler, and (possibly) Dayton are gone, and Creighton remains. However, I concede that an MVC school or two might consider such a move if they felt Creighton's departure to the new "Catholic Conference" was inevitable. Of course, the MVC might see such a move as an opportunity to grab SLU.

[pafan]

I could see the A-10 aggressively pursue Horizon/MVC teams to try and protect St Louis if it comes to it.

Remember: the A10 doesn't sponsor football (their football teams play in the CAA). So that strikes out ISUb, ISUr, and SIU.

Evansville would not join a conference that requires sending the softball and tennis teams to the University of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.

That leaves Bradley as a geographic bridge...

[iowactor]

The difference between the Catholic 7 plus 3 or the Catholic 7 plus 5 is simply about math. If the broadcast deal and anticipated NCAA units are greater when divided by 10, I don't think Creighton gets in (if the reports are true about Butler). The only way Gonzaga is invited is if a 14 or 16 team conference is created, but I doubt the projected revenues will justify such a move. The MVC is a very good conference, but I don't see how CU says "no" if invited.

Two things:

First, one the big reasons to stay at 7 + 3 teams is control. With 3 extra teams, the original seven members have total control over the conference because of the required 2/3 majority vote for anything to happen.

Secondly, the MVC is a decent conference, not a great one. They are in the top-5 for mid-major conferences, but not better than that. The BCS conferences are better, the new Big East will be better, the A-10 is better, the MWC is better, and the WCC is arguably better. We are about C-USA level. Still better than the other 20 college basketball conferences, but not "great."

I don't follow how your post is a response to mine. I'm responding to the possibility of CU leaving the MVC. At 10 schools, CU could lose out to Dayton/SLU/etc. At 12, CU has to feel much more confident about its chances. I never write that the MVC is "great". Also, the 2/3 vote has to do with dissolving the current Big East. It is not necessarily the bylaws for the new conference.

If you think the Catholic 7 wouldn't go to 12 teams because of control issues, I think that misses the point regarding the type of conference these schools are trying to create. This is about league philosophy and sustainability. The numbers regarding sustainability would tell us a lot about 10, 12, or more teams.

[TheAsianSensation]

I could see the A-10 aggressively pursue Horizon/MVC teams to try and protect St Louis if it comes to it.

Remember: the A10 doesn't sponsor football (their football teams play in the CAA). So that strikes out ISUb, ISUr, and SIU.

Evansville would not join a conference that requires sending the softball and tennis teams to the University of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.

That leaves Bradley as a geographic bridge...

My list would be Bradley/Drake of the MVC, and Wright St/Detroit/Milwaukee/Valpo/Loyola of the Horizon. The A-10 could almost put them all in any order they want

[CBB_Fan]

I don't follow how your post is a response to mine. I'm responding to the possibility of CU leaving the MVC. At 10 schools, CU could lose out to Dayton/SLU/etc. At 12, CU has to feel much more confident about its chances. I never write that the MVC is "great". Also, the 2/3 vote has to do with dissolving the current Big East. It is not necessarily the bylaws for the new conference.

If you think the Catholic 7 wouldn't go to 12 teams because of control issues, I think that misses the point regarding the type of conference these schools are trying to create. This is about league philosophy and sustainability. The numbers regarding sustainability would tell us a lot about 10, 12, or more teams.

You implied that money was the prime motivator in staying to 10 teams or expanding. I simply stated that control may be more important at this point. 2/3 majority vote is the standard for most major conference changes, including accepting new teams. I didn't make a comment on Creighton's chances at 10 vs 12 teams, but they should hope for a 12+ team Big East.

And while you didn't say the MVC was "great", you did say it was a very good conference. And while it is a half-way decent conference, I don't know if it can be called "very good."

[shocker3]

Some Creighton fans have been very vocal about wanting to move the MVC tournament out of St. Louis and closer to Omaha, and I'm guessing some of those same fans would jump at the chance to join a league where St. Louis was the closest team.



(I'd also add that there may be a segment of the fanbase and school that feels taken for granted by the MVC. We'll make you travel the farthest despite bringing the most fans to the tourney year in and year out for over a decade. We'll award non bball conference tourneys to schools that don't show the same level of investment in their programs and/or facilities. We'll award the soccer tourney to schools that don't have anywhere near the same level of success nationally. And when you lodge your concerns, we'll ignore them completely, despite the fact that you've been one of the most successful programs in the conference for over a decade. That might make one feel a touch under appreciated, dontcha think?)

It is funny reading this. I think most WSU fans feel the same way just substitute soccer for baseball and you are describing a lot of the Shocker nation.

[iowactor]

Some Creighton fans have been very vocal about wanting to move the MVC tournament out of St. Louis and closer to Omaha, and I'm guessing some of those same fans would jump at the chance to join a league where St. Louis was the closest team.

Of course we would! If the projections are correct, it is possible that there could be a 12 team league with CU in a division with Butler, DePaul, Marquette, SLU, and Xavier. That's not too far off the current MVC footprint. Further, you can fly out East a few times per sport, and with the added conference revenue, why not?

[3ontheway]

the mvc is a good basketball conference. it is not a "very good" basketball conference which, imo, would be defined as a perennial 3 bid at minimum league with the top 2-3 teams clear top 20 teams and seeded 4 or better in the dance and at least 1 legit elite 8 caliber team and the valley is obviously not that or ever has been.

as a cu fan i would be very happy to see cu enter this new league as it would be a step up in quality of basketball conference. with that comes some potential bad for cu as well as good. would cu enjoy the same recruiting advantages they might have now compared to the other mvc programs? not so much. the rather unreal run over the last 15 years ( too lazy to look it up, but think they have won the auto bid 6, 7 times?) in the conf. tourney in st louis would be gone. on the other hand, could they lose more than 4 conference games and not be borderline screwed by the committee? yes. could it make non conference scheduling easier? yes.

should be interesting to see how things play out.

[iowactor]

the mvc is a good basketball conference. it is not a "very good" basketball conference which, imo, would be defined as a perennial 3 bid at minimum league with the top 2-3 teams clear top 20 teams and seeded 4 or better in the dance and at least 1 legit elite 8 caliber team and the valley is obviously not that or ever has been.

Your definition of a "very good" NCAA basketball conference leaves a lot to be desired. There are 32 Division I conferences with 347 schools. According to conference RPI and average NCAA bids, the MVC ranks in the top 9 conferences by strength and 11th in bids. Now, it's silly to argue between the qualitative "excellent, very good, good, average, below average, poor, awful" but the numbers reflect a conference that is clearly in the top 1/3 of the country.

I agree that the new conference will be even better than the MVC--that is why the MVC's best basketball program would leave to join it. As a result, CU gets to engage with higher level competition from top to bottom, and they can finish in the middle of the pack and still have a shot at an at-large bid.

[CBB_Fan]

Your definition of a "very good" NCAA basketball conference leaves a lot to be desired. There are 32 Division I conferences with 347 schools. According to conference RPI and average NCAA bids, the MVC ranks in the top 9 conferences by strength and 11th in bids. Now, it's silly to argue between the qualitative "excellent, very good, good, average, below average, poor, awful" but the numbers reflect a conference that is clearly in the top 1/3 of the country.

I agree that the new conference will be even better than the MVC--that is why the MVC's best basketball program would leave to join it. As a result, CU gets to engage with higher level competition from top to bottom, and they can finish in the middle of the pack and still have a shot at an at-large bid.

The problem is that the bottom 2/3s of college basketball are absolutely horrible. It goes:

Power conferences: 3-10 bids, chance for national title (excellent)
Strong midmajors: Consistent 2-4 bids, teams that can contend every year for Sweet 16s and Elite 8s (great)
Average midmajors: 1-2 bids, rarely get up to Sweet 16 (decent)
Everyone else: 1 bid, very rarely advance to second round (trash)

Your strong midmajors right now would be the A-10, WCC, and MWC. We are not in that category. We are above the Patriot leagues of the world, but that doesn't make us nationally competitive as a conference.