Welcome Loyola

[EvilleAce]

Several posters have predicted that it will take 9-10 years for Loyola to become a competitive basketball factor in the MVC. I vehemently disagree. We are not going to suck for 9-10 years. I predict a 3-5 year window. In hoops you play 5 on the floor. Loyola's location will enhance its' recruiting within the MVC. Look for a quicker renaissance and less angst among the "Loyola haters." I am looking forward to future battles on the hardwood with our new foes. I must say that regardless of opinion, I do enjoy the passion on this board.

Bring resources and effort. Win your non-con games. Almost every fan on this board will cheer their head off for your success! Once the MVC season starts, it's every man for himself and may the best team win!

Win your non-con games!

I agree with WuFan.

Two weeks ago we were ALL SHOCKERS!

The Valley is great in the fact that most fans pull for other Valley schools during non-conference games because it's all about RPI.

Keep your RPI high enough so when you SWEEP the Shox, just like the ACES did this year, you will not keep them from getting to the dance!

[rlh04d]

Several posters have predicted that it will take 9-10 years for Loyola to become a competitive basketball factor in the MVC. I vehemently disagree. We are not going to suck for 9-10 years. I predict a 3-5 year window. In hoops you play 5 on the floor. Loyola's location will enhance its' recruiting within the MVC. Look for a quicker renaissance and less angst among the "Loyola haters." I am looking forward to future battles on the hardwood with our new foes. I must say that regardless of opinion, I do enjoy the passion on this board.

And I vehemently stress that it's going to take two years before you even fire your current coach. If you then use your money to bring in a good coach, you might be able to turn it around in 5 years. I think your location is, to a large extent, going to be counteracted by you having 2,200 fans in the stands. You need to get that thing sold out as fast as humanly possible. In the near future, your only hope of doing that is if fans of Valley schools that are alumni in Chicago buy your tickets to see our teams play.

I absolutely do not think your coach is good enough to win in the Valley to the degree that it would be required to give your team momentum into becoming a better program year by year.

[rlh04d]

Keep your RPI high enough so when you SWEEP the Shox, just like the ACES did this year, you will not keep them from getting to the dance!

Exactly. Losing one game to SIU hurt us WAY more than losing two to Evansville

[saluki762]

I will admit Loyola is probably the better long-term choice but like it has been stated, as a Wichita State fan I don't give a crap about the Valley and I want it to be as good as possible right now.

What an incredibly short sighted and ignorant view. I can understand trepidation about the admission of Loyola but if you can admit that they are most likely the best long term choice but don't care because you are all about the right now, your view is quite insane.

[rlh04d]

I will admit Loyola is probably the better long-term choice but like it has been stated, as a Wichita State fan I don't give a crap about the Valley and I want it to be as good as possible right now.

What an incredibly short sighted and ignorant view. I can understand trepidation about the admission of Loyola but if you can admit that they are most likely the best long term choice but don't care because you are all about the right now, your view is quite insane.

What person here legitimately is more worried about what happens to the Valley over what happens to their own teams?

If you know that the Valley will be good for the next ten years and get three teams into the tournament every year, but SIU is absolutely going to suck and will not benefit from that at all (ignore tourney shares and conference prestige increasing to potentially benefit you long term), do you prefer that situation to the Valley being terrible but SIU making the NCAA tournament every year? Option one is great for nine schools ... option two is good for you.

What Evansville fans went into games against WSU this last season going "You know, I'm a really huge Aces fan, but we're not going to make the tournament this year. I really hope WSU beats us to improve their chances of getting a good seed in the tournament, because what really matters is that our conferences does well" ?

Yeah, we get out of conference play and we all cheer for each other's teams -- but generally we do so because the success of our conference mates benefits our own teams somehow. Even if there isn't that selfish desire to see our conference mates do well, it's never at the expense of our own teams.

We always talk about the conference, but loving the conference didn't stop Creighton from leaving to better their school -- do you really think any of their fans think twice about that decision? Of course not, because hurting the conference is perfectly fine when it helps their team. The same has been true of every other program that has ever left the Valley, or ever left any conference. I'm a fan of the Valley ... but not nearly to the extent that I am a fan of Wichita State. Don't pretend that you or anyone else here is any different regarding your own team.

[CBB_Fan]

Several posters have predicted that it will take 9-10 years for Loyola to become a competitive basketball factor in the MVC. I vehemently disagree. We are not going to suck for 9-10 years. I predict a 3-5 year window. In hoops you play 5 on the floor. Loyola's location will enhance its' recruiting within the MVC. Look for a quicker renaissance and less angst among the "Loyola haters." I am looking forward to future battles on the hardwood with our new foes. I must say that regardless of opinion, I do enjoy the passion on this board.

If you are in our conference, we want you to win every game except the ones against our school. Every game. We want you to schedule, and beat, the best of the best (ie, Indiana State versus Miami, UNI/Illinois State versus Louisville). We don't want you to suck; we want you to succeed.

You have a hard road in front of you. Your AD and President need to commit to a rebuilding process that might last decades, and cost tens of millions of dollars. Before you can be a NCAA level team, you need to be a NIT level team. Before that you need to get to the point where you can even go to the CBI. Don't forget it is has been 28 years since Loyola went to any type of postseason tournament.

So don't get the hate wrong; we don't want you to fail. But every team in the Valley has been through a down period, and they aren't easy to jump out of.

Bradley was an absolute powerhouse back in the day (you beat them for your title I believe), and they haven't won the MVC tournament or title in 17 years.
Drake had a Final Four in '69, and has made the tournament once since their Elite 8 in '71.
It took Indiana State 21 years to make it back to the tournament after Larry Bird and their national runner-up.
SIU was as dominant as any team has ever been in the MVC during the 90s and early 00s, yet they've finished in the bottom half of the conference for 4 years in a row.
Evansville had 145 wins in the 7 years before they joined the MVC (21 a season). In the 12 seasons after 2000, they got 142 (12 a season).
UNI was in the Summit League for 8 years (after moving up from DII) before they finally reached the tournament. It took them 14 years in the MVC to make it back.
Missouri State went to the tournament 5 of 6 seasons from 87-92. They've made it back once, despite being strong and even winning the conference in the 00s.
Illinois State was very strong when they entered the Valley (3 trips to the NCAA in a row). Haven't been back since '99.
And of course, Wichita State through a decade without every finishing in the top half of the conference

So when we say that it will take while, it isn't simply because Loyola hasn't been good for the better part of the last couple of decades. We've all needed to rebuild at some point, and it isn't easy to do in this conference. You need a really good coach, a stellar AD, and the right guys in your program before you'll have a shot to compete for NCAA bids or conference titles. It may take awhile before you finish with a winning record.

If you can improve faster, good for you and good for the Valley. We don't want you to be bad. We just know from experience how hard it is to improve quickly, and right now some of us want a school that instantly replace some of what we lost with Creighton. It is selfish, and impossible, but that is what we want.

[saluki762]

I will admit Loyola is probably the better long-term choice but like it has been stated, as a Wichita State fan I don't give a crap about the Valley and I want it to be as good as possible right now.

What an incredibly short sighted and ignorant view. I can understand trepidation about the admission of Loyola but if you can admit that they are most likely the best long term choice but don't care because you are all about the right now, your view is quite insane.

What person here legitimately is more worried about what happens to the Valley over what happens to their own teams?

If you know that the Valley will be good for the next ten years and get three teams into the tournament every year, but SIU is absolutely going to suck and will not benefit from that at all (ignore tourney shares and conference prestige increasing to potentially benefit you long term), do you prefer that situation to the Valley being terrible but SIU making the NCAA tournament every year? Option one is great for nine schools ... option two is good for you.

What Evansville fans went into games against WSU this last season going "You know, I'm a really huge Aces fan, but we're not going to make the tournament this year. I really hope WSU beats us to improve their chances of getting a good seed in the tournament, because what really matters is that our conferences does well" ?

Yeah, we get out of conference play and we all cheer for each other's teams -- but generally we do so because the success of our conference mates benefits our own teams somehow. Even if there isn't that selfish desire to see our conference mates do well, it's never at the expense of our own teams.

We always talk about the conference, but loving the conference didn't stop Creighton from leaving to better their school -- do you really think any of their fans think twice about that decision? Of course not, because hurting the conference is perfectly fine when it helps their team. The same has been true of every other program that has ever left the Valley, or ever left any conference. I'm a fan of the Valley ... but not nearly to the extent that I am a fan of Wichita State. Don't pretend that you or anyone else here is any different regarding your own team.

You are correct, I wouldn't care if you all had 300+ RPI's if SIU was going 32-0 and making the tourney every year.

What is short sighted is acknowledging that Loyola is the best option but saying you don't want them because the immediacy isn't there. All I am saying. Of course you care about your team first. I expect that and have no problem with it.

[m-v-c]

I'm a fairly neutral visitor here as someone that writes a blog focused on conference realignment (Frank the Tank's Slant). To the extent I have any personal connection to the MVC candidates, it's that my parents attended UIC. However, I'm an Illinois alum and Big Ten guy, so that's where my viewpoint is really rooted. So, here are some outside thoughts on what I observe with the MVC:

(1) Demographics, demographics, demographics - Perusing this message board over the past few weeks, I don't know if a lot of MVC fans quite realize that the #1 problem for their conference is NOT about replacing Creighton on-the-court, but rather addressing its demographics problem off-the-court...

Most of your points agree with. But personally think a lot of the demographics stuff, while it holds some truth overall in higher education, in the case of the MVC is overanalysis. Think it's just as likely the MVC picked Loyola/Chicago because 1) it was a bigger city, 2) it was a city in the conference's footprint already, 3) it's a city where the league has a TV partner, 4) Loyola is a private school similar to Creighton, and most importantly 5) of the schools they looked at, they feel Loyola is clearly the best one in terms of its academics, finances and facilities, and they feel the school has tremendous potential. Don't think it had anything to do with trying to push the conference further east so they can compete for the same kids A-10 and CAA schools are recruiting. The MVC and its members know their niche; occasionally a member may outgrow the conference, but overall this is a Midwest basketball-first conference, and the best Midwest basketball-first conference. As far as D-I athletics go, pretty much every school already casts its recruiting nets nationally to a degree and also recruits in areas where its assistants have contacts. Changing conferences has little to no effect on this for any school.

It is true, schools in the Midwest in particular are worried about a population drain in their areas hurting their local recruiting population in the future. But this is felt most at the small college level, where schools are fighting to survive and are battling cheaper Juco options and state schools. And in the case of leagues like the Big 10 claiming they're expanding because of 'demographics'...giant smokescreen. Demographics=the further they expand, the more homes they can get their cable network on basic cable and reap the monies from it. Big 10 schools are national brand names, it doesn't matter if they have a few less recruitables in their backyard, they will always have plenty of kids throwing themselves at them from across the country. The Big 10 never 'needed' to add Rutgers and Maryland. Ohio can slice itself in half in the next 20 years and Ohio State will survive just fine. They 'wanted' to because Delany's goal is to continue growing his TV network.

The main reason for much of the expansion, it doesn't come down to demographics. It comes down to TV contracts for a few. For the rest, it's simple monkey-see, monkey-do. Colleges and conferences see the 'big boys' do it, so they think they need to too. It has trickled right down to the small college level, NCAA II & III and the NAIA, even these schools are all shopping themselves around. It doesn't even have anything to do with TV contracts there, but this is what schools have been conditioned to do-always be on the lookout for what they might think is the slightest bit better and go for it. Much of it is panic and reactionary, and not thinking 20 years down the line. For some it has worked, for others it hasn't, but the failures of some hasn't deterred anyone from thinking 'don't worry, WE'LL be the one to succeed beyond everyone's wildest dreams'.

[rlh04d]

I really hope adding a baseball team is not a condition the Valley is requesting for membership. I would much rather the money be put into the sport that drives this conference.

http://www.valley-football.org/

[rlh04d]

What is short sighted is acknowledging that Loyola is the best option but saying you don't want them because the immediacy isn't there. All I am saying. Of course you care about your team first. I expect that and have no problem with it.

I fully acknowledge that my point of view on Loyola is short-sighted. It's also based on not believing a promise without evidence, though ... I'm a very analytical person, and other than spending in facilities upgrades (Loyola has very nice facilities, actually) I don't see many statistical measures that imply any effort to realize their theoretical potential.

That said, I would support a short-term solution that benefited my team immediately rather than a long-term solution that hurts my team immediately without a doubt.

I don't know that anyone knows Loyola is the best option. Even he had the caveat of admitting they were "probably" the better option. They have the potential to be long-term, but ... it's just potential. I've used the Miami Marlins example before ... they have tons of potential, and they've made tons of promises to spend more. Their commitment lasted one mediocre season and their lies were exposed. We chose the one with the highest ceiling, but with absolutely no idea how committed they are to reaching that ceiling, or what time frame it would take.

I know we keep talking about their endowment, but are we expecting them to be okay losing money with their basketball program? Many of the teams in this conference are losing money from their basketball teams despite averaging more than double the amount of fans Loyola does. How are they going to turn a profit? Are they going to be okay losing money for the next decade? I think it's going to take a lot of investment in basketball to turn Loyola into what their potential is hoping for ... including significant arena upgrades, a significant raise in coaching salary (to a coach who deserves it; their current coach might, but it hasn't been proven yet), and years and years of filling in budget shortfalls with money from outside sources, either their endowment, academic revenue, or donors that I'm not sure are interested in basketball.