Welcome Loyola

[valleychamp]

So strength of the conference has NO affect on the RPI of teams? And it has NO affect on bids? So the margin of error for schools in strong conferences is the same for those in weaker conferences?

This kind of small time thinking definitely belongs in the Valley......

Could you point out exactly where I said any of that?

I said schools control their own NCAA tournament destiny much more than their conference schedule dictates. I also said that the Valley is a very good league, and will continue to be.

People are freaking out about ONE school, and the mere potential of them being a low RPI team in the short term. The impact of this is overstated by many.

[unipanther99]

I'm a WSU guy. While WSU is concerned about 10 - 20 years down the road, next year is the most important year for us. "Next year" is likely to be WSU's most important year every year over the next 10 - 20 years. Anything 10 - 20 years down the road is really insignificant compared to what happens next year.

WSU is playing for seeding in the NCAA's. WSU has been getting one-and-done home buy games against teams better than Loyola. Adding two games against Loyola to the schedule eliminates two opportunities to play against schools that would improve WSU's chances at getting a decent seed.

If the Valley office and the Valley presidents were to intentionally set out on a course to damage WSU's chances in the post-season, it would be difficult for them to come up with anything more damaging than adding 2 games against any team like Loyola to WSU's schedule.

I calculated the RPI numbers of the MVC without CU and WSU, but with Loyola and compared that to the RPI of the Horizon without Loyola. Guess what - The Valley is the Horizon in that scenario. WSU could leave the Valley and join the Horizon and have approximately equivalent conference competition.

If any team in the Valley had scheduled a home-and-home against an RPI 200+ team, I would have criticized them - severely. Now the league is forcing every Valley team to do that.

The difference between what the Valley has done and "Dumb and Dumber" is that "Dumb and Dumber" was funny.

Butler didn't have too much of a problem getting decent seeds as a member of the conference Loyola is coming from. I'm impressed with what WSU has accomplished, and I would have preferred Denver over Loyola to bring some Western balance to the conference, but I don't the sky is falling. If WSU thinks it is going to dominate, let them go ahead and try. If they do, they will be just fine. If they don't, the Valley continues to be the same competitive conference it has been for some time.

[DoubleJayAlum]

I don't think the impact on RPI is as big of an issue as some are making it.

What is a problem however, is that the potential for top 50 wins and home games against top 50 teams, takes a big hit. To replace those games, teams may have to resort to being bought more often by BCS schools and playing them on their home floors (without a return game), where the chances of success are reduced.

[Mikovio]

Long-term they will turn out to be a good add. But being good in 10 years doesn't mean they're not going to suck for the next nine, and they are. So for the next nine years I expect them to be a major drain on our conference that impacts our ability to get at-large bids.

I don't think it takes them necessarily 10 years. They could easily fire Moser and throw seven figures at the next Andy Enfield or whoever and be relevant in 3-4 years. Why admit Belmont when you can admit the school who can hire away the Belmont coach?

The way I see it, the MVC had two reasonable choices:

1. Pick a school with a team that's good now but with no reasonable plan to recover if it hits hard times. Murray State is good now, but it's on its second coach in 3 years. What if after another good year its coach leaves for a Mountain West school that could double his salary? It would promote from within again, which might work or it might not. Ask SIU about that.

2. Pick a school with the resources and will to become good in the future. Loyola and Denver can hire away the best and brightest, and pay them enough so they don't jump when they taste success. Even if a BCS school gives them money they can't match, they would have a better applicant pool than Murray or ORU.

The MVC needs schools that can and will invest in order to grow, and fewer schools that hire BCS assistants with no coaching experience and hope for the best.

Endowment of candidates
UMKC $1.2b (system-wide)
Loyola $430m
Denver $380m
Creighton $375m
Bradley $237m
WSU $199m
UW-M $184m
UIC $181m
Drake $158m
Valpo $141m
Evansville $118m
SIU $100m
ISU Red $88m
Belmont $76m
ISU Blue $75m
UNI $66m
MSU $61m
Oral Roberts $38m
Murray State $33m

[jsaluki080]

Long-term they will turn out to be a good add. But being good in 10 years doesn't mean they're not going to suck for the next nine, and they are. So for the next nine years I expect them to be a major drain on our conference that impacts our ability to get at-large bids.

I don't think it takes them necessarily 10 years. They could easily fire Moser and throw seven figures at the next Andy Enfield or whoever and be relevant in 3-4 years. Why admit Belmont when you can admit the school who can hire away the Belmont coach?

The way I see it, the MVC had two reasonable choices:

1. Pick a school with a team that's good now but with no reasonable plan to recover if it hits hard times. Murray State is good now, but it's on its second coach in 3 years. What if after another good year its coach leaves for a Mountain West school that could double his salary? It would promote from within again, which might work or it might not. Ask SIU about that.

2. Pick a school with the resources and will to become good in the future. Loyola and Denver can hire away the best and brightest, and pay them enough so they don't jump when they taste success. Even if a BCS school gives them money they can't match, they would have a better applicant pool than Murray or ORU.

The MVC needs schools that can and will invest in order to grow, and fewer schools that hire BCS assistants with no coaching experience and hope for the best.

Endowment of candidates
UMKC $1.2b (system-wide)
Loyola $430m
Denver $380m
Creighton $375m
Bradley $237m
WSU $199m
UW-M $184m
UIC $181m
Drake $158m
Valpo $141m
Evansville $118m
SIU $100m
ISU Red $88m
Belmont $76m
ISU Blue $75m
UNI $66m
MSU $61m
Oral Roberts $38m
Murray State $33m

+1 This!!

[Haha]

I would like to add one thing.

WSU doesn't really recruit Chicago, sure they offer kids out of there, etc but really recruiting that area began and ended with Dana Ford.

I imagine, only as I am ignorant to it, that Bradley, ISUr, SIU all recruit Chicago. Now there is an finite amount of MVC recruits out of the area and you are adding a 4th team. I guess you could argue there is enough to go around but still now instead of 3 schools from the Valley hitting it hard you have 4. Could this actually hurt other Valley schools that recruit Chicago area?

Just a thought.

[ahunte1]

Could someone give me the lowdown on the Valley Live network? Does it show every game? How much does it cost? How's the quality?

Thanks!

[Aargh]

Or, the Valley could wait a year and see what happens. Then, if schools want to schedule home-and-home games with RPI 200 teams, they certainly can do that. Bear in mind the strength of schedule hit you take with that can cost seedings in the NCAA tourney. (Apparently it's only WSU fans who are concerned about seedings.)

Signing a 200 rpi team so quickly appears to be an act of desperation. I would much sooner be in the 9-member MVC that existed for a few moments, than be in the 10-member MVC that now exists.

1) Loyola has all this "potential". But, they haven't been a top-100 team any time in the last 20 years.

2) The CHICAGO market..The CHICAGO market. No one in Chicago gives a rat's ass about Loyola sports. Loyola built a new stadium in 1996. They completely renovated it in 2011. It holds about 5,700 and they only average getting it a little less than half full. That should give you a good idea about Loyola's significance in the Chicago market.

3) Loyola has all this "potential". If they planned on doing anything at all with that potential, do you think they would build a 5,000 seat arena, refurbish it and leave it at that capacity?

4) They've got money. They can afford to do good stuff. Let's see. Jesuit school with solid finances and success on the court. I think we've had one of them in the league before. If you think a successful Loyola program will stay in the Valley, I believe you are mistaken.

Adding Loyola is a move to get a few athletic directors and coaches a few more wins and a little more job security, while reducing the travel expense for the sports teams. It dilutes the quality of competition in the league.

If Loyola gets a share of the MVC's NCAA money from any year prior to 2014, that would be insane.

[valleychamp]

Valley Live broadcasts very, very limited number of live sports events. They do occasionally show some of the non-revenue sports like soccer, baseball, and some volleyball if I am not mistaken.

But there will not be any basketball on there or anything like that, as the TV contracts prevent it. Most games are on FSN, Comcast, ESPN, ESPN3, ect. If games are not on any traditional TV or internet network, then you will have to rely on the schools individual streaming.

[ahunte1]

Valley Live broadcasts very, very limited number of live sports events. They do occasionally show some of the non-revenue sports like soccer, baseball, and some volleyball if I am not mistaken.

But there will not be any basketball on there or anything like that, as the TV contracts prevent it. Most games are on FSN, Comcast, ESPN, ESPN3, ect. If games are not on any traditional TV or internet network, then you will have to rely on the schools individual streaming.

Thanks. Appreciate it.