Valley Expansion

[TheAsianSensation]

I'll change my mind and say Bradley > Duquesne. I can be swayed. Bradley would still then be #16 in a 16-team conference, which isn't exactly a vote of confidence here.

 

[squirrelgotdead]

I do disagree with this on one front: The current Big East members that don't play FBS football (Marq, DePaul, G'town, et al) will be allowed to join the 64 football members in the liftoff. There is far too much value in some of those schools.

And Bradley's hope would be to somehow find a place in there.

And you're also assuming the NCAA is competent enough to make a power play to attempt to keep everyone in their organization.

I don't know if I would call it competence, but rather faith in that the NCAA always gets it wrong.

In other words, the NCAA immediately recognizes the threat of losing it's biggest members. Therefore, out of desperation, it alienates 2/3rds of its money-making entities at the DI level by appeasing the BCS types.

And again, there will be a caveat that will likely say "Your league or x% of your league's membership must play football at the FBS level" whereby those schools and others who are in position to make a move (such as UMass and Richmond) could make the jump.

Well, after a few years, they are faced with the same problem of more schools making the jump to FBS simply for DI basketball, and the BCS still leave.

So it's not competence, but rather a knee-jerk reaction that only prolongs the inevitable, and in the meantime reaps internal havoc among its membership.

Also, I think the NCAA still only has an interim President who has stated he was going to leave the membership decisions to his full-time successor. So I have to wonder if there will be an emergency NCAA meeting at some point this summer.

 

[thefish7]

I'll change my mind and say Bradley > Duquesne. I can be swayed. Bradley would still then be #16 in a 16-team conference, which isn't exactly a vote of confidence here.

LOL, I'm not exactly confident either... I think it really would be intersting to know about total revenues for these programs to understand better. Though I'm a little skeptical in regards to Richmond and Charlotte being > than Bradley in a basketball focused conference. Richmond most definitely unless they want to play some football, but Charlotte?

I think the thing is about Bradley, we probably don't make much with our Comcast broadcasts, but I bet viewership isn't bad. We're probably about a 350,000 person TV market (more if you include BloNo, but I don't think BU can lay claim to that market hehe) and Bradley would consistently own that market (particularly if playing on Nat TV against good opponents) and deliver strong viewership for each game. My professional trade is that of a buyer and my suppliers like to have a mix of big time cyclical customers (high peak, high margin customers who suffer from a lot of demand variability) and good consistent customers (lower margin but lower demand variability to ensure good baseline business all the time). That's how I view Bradley as a revenue stream, maybe a little unspectactular and without a chance of gaining that much significant viewership or attendance (though I think we could match Creighton with sustained success in a major league so ~14K-15K in time) but you know we're going to deliver a nice solid amount of revenue at all times.

 

[houstontxbrave]

I think one thing a little lost in this is the non revenue sports.

If you start putting all these basketball only conferences all over the place with teams from Nebraska to NC to Mass the travel costs in non revenue sports will be difficult to accept.

It has to be a huge issue right now at at place like SLU, there isnt to much direct TV revenue to suppliment costs in the A-10. And if you start moving schools around and expand conferences who is going to pay for the softball teams of the worlds to travel everywhere.

Even more if the BCS's splitter off in basketball and that NCAA tourney money/CBS/ESPN money evaporates.

This is going to be a mess for the Bradleys of the world.

 

[thefish7]

I don't know if I would call it competence, but rather faith in that the NCAA always gets it wrong.

In other words, the NCAA immediately recognizes the threat of losing it's biggest members. Therefore, out of desperation, it alienates 2/3rds of its money-making entities at the DI level by appeasing the BCS types.

And again, there will be a caveat that will likely say "Your league or x% of your league's membership must play football at the FBS level" whereby those schools and others who are in position to make a move (such as UMass and Richmond) could make the jump.

Well, after a few years, they are faced with the same problem of more schools making the jump to FBS simply for DI basketball, and the BCS still leave.

So it's not competence, but rather a knee-jerk reaction that only prolongs the inevitable, and in the meantime reaps internal havoc among its membership.

Also, I think the NCAA still only has an interim President who has stated he was going to leave the membership decisions to his full-time successor. So I have to wonder if there will be an emergency NCAA meeting at some point this summer.

I think the problem with that line of thinking is that the NCAA doesn't make a lot of money off of football-- the schools are who make that money. The NCAA's bread-and-butter is March Madness. I still think the best solution for everybody could be for FBS football to seperate altogether and do their own thing (heck, pay the players, who cares? except maybe the NFL hehe) leaving all other sports to the NCAA and affiliations that make more sense for the members and those other sports. I don't think that's what's going to happen this time around, but I think it's maybe the most elegant option.

 

[TheAsianSensation]

I don't know if I would call it competence, but rather faith in that the NCAA always gets it wrong.

In other words, the NCAA immediately recognizes the threat of losing it's biggest members. Therefore, out of desperation, it alienates 2/3rds of its money-making entities at the DI level by appeasing the BCS types.

And again, there will be a caveat that will likely say "Your league or x% of your league's membership must play football at the FBS level" whereby those schools and others who are in position to make a move (such as UMass and Richmond) could make the jump.

Well, after a few years, they are faced with the same problem of more schools making the jump to FBS simply for DI basketball, and the BCS still leave.

So it's not competence, but rather a knee-jerk reaction that only prolongs the inevitable, and in the meantime reaps internal havoc among its membership.

Also, I think the NCAA still only has an interim President who has stated he was going to leave the membership decisions to his full-time successor. So I have to wonder if there will be an emergency NCAA meeting at some point this summer.

So basically, we're counting on the NCAA to screw this up, we just disagree on how they'll achieve that goal.

This is the worst time in history to have an interim anything in charge of the NCAA.

 

[thefish7]

I think one thing a little lost in this is the non revenue sports.

If you start putting all these basketball only conferences all over the place with teams from Nebraska to NC to Mass the travel costs in non revenue sports will be difficult to accept.

It has to be a huge issue right now at at place like SLU, there isnt to much direct TV revenue to suppliment costs in the A-10. And if you start moving schools around and expand conferences who is going to pay for the softball teams of the worlds to travel everywhere.

Even more if the BCS's splitter off in basketball and that NCAA tourney money/CBS/ESPN money evaporates.

This is going to be a mess for the Bradleys of the world.

I totally agree with you. I think 10-12 team relatively focused conferences make the most sense. That being said, it looks like for the reasonable future the die is cast and we're going to go megaconference (all despite the unrest in the A10 and Big East over the issues you mentioned)... So, if that's how it's going to go, you need to try to get your spot at the table so that you can still be there when it swings back the other way.

It's really funny, btw, I read an article about the "Pac-16" today saying they think they ought to get 2 autobids for basketball, one for each division and non inter-div championship game. That all makes sense so that you can cut travel costs for non-football sports by putting divisionmates close together. The problem for me is, why then not just have two 8-team conferences? I suppose TV is the answer but I can't imagine these conferences all staying happy together when they're this large.

 

[squirrelgotdead]

I think the problem with that line of thinking is that the NCAA doesn't make a lot of money off of football-- the schools are who make that money. The NCAA's bread-and-butter is March Madness. I still think the best solution for everybody could be for FBS football to seperate altogether and do their own thing (heck, pay the players, who cares? except maybe the NFL hehe) leaving all other sports to the NCAA and affiliations that make more sense for the members and those other sports. I don't think that's what's going to happen this time around, but I think it's maybe the most elegant option.

Understood, I'm not saying that the NCAA is making money off of football. It is about appeasing it's biggest money-making members. Because some of that does carry over into basketball.

In other words, in an effort to preserve its membership, it will do whatever it can to keep the football schools (largely the BCS which does drive the economy of the NCAA Tournament) happy so they stay.

 

[houstontxbrave]

I think the problem with that line of thinking is that the NCAA doesn't make a lot of money off of football-- the schools are who make that money. The NCAA's bread-and-butter is March Madness. I still think the best solution for everybody could be for FBS football to seperate altogether and do their own thing (heck, pay the players, who cares? except maybe the NFL hehe) leaving all other sports to the NCAA and affiliations that make more sense for the members and those other sports. I don't think that's what's going to happen this time around, but I think it's maybe the most elegant option.

Fish, what would be the BCS conferences incentive to not go all in and form their own thing for all sports and essentially leave the NCAA?

Why do only football and stay with the NCAA for basketball. If money is the driving factor in this then it only makes sense for the BCS to form its own tourney and keep all that money for themselves and not share one dime to the other non BCS's or more importantly any to the NCAA.

 

[thefish7]

Fish, what would be the BCS conferences incentive to not go all in and form their own thing for all sports and essentially leave the NCAA?

Why do only football and stay with the NCAA for basketball. If money is the driving factor in this then it only makes sense for the BCS to form its own tourney and keep all that money for themselves and not share one dime to the other non BCS's or more importantly any to the NCAA.

I think it's the reasons people give for Bradley being unattractive... Why get rid of markets you're already in that make you money, like Peoria? If the BCS were to totally split off in all sports then you're going to have haves and have-nots in the BCS also and you're going to lose a bunch of geographical reach and smaller markets you're already in. I think football is a weird animal because it requires so many players and there really is a huge difference between a power team and any other team (there are no cinderellas) but one of the huge appeals of March Madness is that it's madness because there are cinderellas. You completely lose that if you restrict March Madness to 65 out 71 teams or whatever. It might make those teams a bit more money for a couple of years but it would ruin their product in the long term.... That's how I think of it anyway.

 

[squirrelgotdead]

Fish, what would be the BCS conferences incentive to not go all in and form their own thing for all sports and essentially leave the NCAA?

Why do only football and stay with the NCAA for basketball. If money is the driving factor in this then it only makes sense for the BCS to form its own tourney and keep all that money for themselves and not share one dime to the other non BCS's or more importantly any to the NCAA.

It's not a matter of "if" but "when" and to the non-revenue sports question, you will likely see a further reduction of those offered on the men's side due to Title IX.

And fish, I've asked the same question about the NCAA simply stopping the sanctioning of football. That seems to be the most logical option.

The question then would be however, the ability to do so because of Title IX.

 

[thefish7]

Understood, I'm not saying that the NCAA is making money off of football. It is about appeasing it's biggest money-making members. Because some of that does carry over into basketball.

In other words, in an effort to preserve its membership, it will do whatever it can to keep the football schools (largely the BCS which does drive the economy of the NCAA Tournament) happy so they stay.

Yeah, that would certainly be the reason you'd be worried about it. There are other members though with voices... For example, I'm pretty sure schools like Kansas, Duke, and Michigan St make more money off their basketball ventures and are more interested in basketball than football. So there are going to be voices arguing both sides. That's all kind of why I'm not against a weird football solution that ignores everyone else while other sports stay similar to what we understand today. I really think the football model doesn't gel with the NCAA model.

 

[SFP]

The realignment is not a shock and all I can say is that I hope that the administration is right now taking out their contingency plan and updating it and making the calls to their fellow trusted affiliates in order to create a package deal for a basketball first super conference. The schools with some kind of football aspiration non-BCS, will have to quickly join forces to see if they can stem the tide upon them in order to get public opinion on their side. If I was in charge I'd have a meeting with Creighton, SLU and Butler to see what could be worked out prior to the mess hitting the MVC. The football teams in the MVC will have to either move to another conference completely or give up on football. This maybe an option on the table right now for a few schools with financial problems anyway.

 

[basketball nut]

For all of you talking about basketball being bigger the football read the following that I just found on line and you quickly see why these conferences are going to MEGA BCS conf.
SEC football and basketball: The revenue breakdown (or: How the Pac-10 and Big 12 have fallen behind)

Posted by Jon Wilner on June 4th, 2010 at 1:15 pm | Categorized as Big 12 football, Big Ten football, Pac-10 Conference, Pac-10 football, SEC football
The Southeastern Conference will distribute approximately $209.0 million to the 12 league institutions in the revenue sharing plan for the 2009-10 fiscal year, which ends Aug. 31, 2010, according to league commissioner Mike Slive.
The $209.0 million is the highest total ever distributed in SEC history and represents a 57.7 percent increase from the $132.5 million distributed to the schools in 2008-2009.
The revenue sharing plans include money generated by football television, bowls, the SEC Football Championship, basketball television, the SEC Men??™s Basketball Tournament and NCAA Championships.
Broken down by categories and rounded off, the $132.5 million was derived from $109.5 million from football television, $26.5 million from bowls, $14.5 million from the SEC Football Championship, $30.0 million from basketball television, $5.0 million from the SEC Men??™s Basketball Tournament and $23.5 million from NCAA Championships.
The average amount distributed to each school was $17.3 million.
Just got this piece of news from the SEC office ??” the revenue distribution for the 2009-10 fiscal year. It will make every conference save the Big Ten jealous ??¦ or depressed.
Total: $209 million.
According to the league, that??™s the highest total in SEC history and represents a 57.7 percent increase from the $132.5 million distributed in 2008-2009.
Average per school: $17.3 million.
That??™s about double (maybe a bit more than double) what the Pac-10 distributes to its schools and does not include what the schools generate from their local media deals.

Football TV: $109.5 million.
(Big 12 is in the $60 million range, I believe, while the Pac-10 in the 40s.)
Bowls: $26.5 million.
Football championship game: $14.5 million.
(You can see why Pac-10 commish Larry Scott is looking into a title game of his own.)
Basketball TV: $30 million
SEC tournament: $5 million
NCAA tournament: $23.5 million
As you can see BB only brought in 58.5 million of the 209 million total which works out to 28% of the total revenue received w/ football bringing in 72%. Now one can easily see why power football conferences are going to be the future rage.
I heard 1 person the other day on ESPN (can't remember the name) state that by joining the B10 Nebraska will double their revenue immediately. Do we have to state more.
The next question becomes does the SEC make a big move also? I only bring this up because it has been reported that individual schools are talking. A lot like we have said about BU-right now everyone needs a contingency program just in case.

 

[JMM28]

The realignment is not a shock and all I can say is that I hope that the administration is right now taking out their contingency plan and updating it and making the calls to their fellow trusted affiliates in order to create a package deal for a basketball first super conference. The schools with some kind of football aspiration non-BCS, will have to quickly join forces to see if they can stem the tide upon them in order to get public opinion on their side. If I was in charge I'd have a meeting with Creighton, SLU and Butler to see what could be worked out prior to the mess hitting the MVC. The football teams in the MVC will have to either move to another conference completely or give up on football. This maybe an option on the table right now for a few schools with financial problems anyway.

My thoughts exactly. Hopefully Cross, Glasser and the gang are getting into the mystery machine and meeting up with at least 2 of those 3 schools. Creighton/SLU/Butler plus Dayton and Xavier are the most similar schools in the midwest. It will be an interesting few weeks at least. Hopefully the leadership in place will maintain or improve the situation for all sports.

 

[ph]

BU, Butler, SLU, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Creighton, WSU, UNI, isu, SIU, with maybe ISUblue and Drake could be a very interesting basketball conference, I realize that it does not take football into account and so it ultimately may not realistic at all.

Unfortunately, I fear that if a conference doesn't look at Bradley's history, we haven't done much in the past couple years to prove that we add anything to any potential conference.

Kansas would only join if the conference also included Bucknel?. The only way KU can be guaranteed to avoid those pesky early upsets is joining the upsetters conference where they cannot be matched up in the early rounds, and where a final 4 loss is not so bad.

 

[LG281]

I say we just bring football back to the hilltop and stop all this talk.

C'mon, Bradley back on the gridiron would be AWESOME!

 

[SFP]

I say we just bring football back to the hilltop and stop all this talk.

C'mon, Bradley back on the gridiron would be AWESOME!

The financial resources with Title IX on top of that would make playing football on the Hilltop a complete drain on the athletic department. It will not happen unless some alumni steps in to pay for it. My bet is that we will see quite a few programs step back and jettison their football aspirations and not see one school add it to their program.

The cost alone in scholarship to make it a competitive team would be astronomical for a school like Bradley. Would you want to have a football team like Drake? I'd rather have our resources put into our basketball and soccer program first before even contemplating this whale.

 

[LG281]

It was more of a joke than anything...but one can dream can't they?

 

[squirrelgotdead]

The financial resources with Title IX on top of that would make playing football on the Hilltop a complete drain on the athletic department. It will not happen unless some alumni steps in to pay for it. My bet is that we will see quite a few programs step back and jettison their football aspirations and not see one school add it to their program.

The cost alone in scholarship to make it a competitive team would be astronomical for a school like Bradley. Would you want to have a football team like Drake? I'd rather have our resources put into our basketball and soccer program first before even contemplating this whale.

I agree, but only when considering schools that fit Bradley's profile or reside in the north. But there have been more startup programs in the south than lost programs in the north.

Keep in mind programs like UAB and South Florida have been in existence overall less than 20-25 years.

Campbell, South Alabama, Stetson, Texas-San Antonio, Old Dominion, Ave Maria (FL) etc. have all launched or announced programs in the last few years.

You will probably see others in Texas (A&M Corpus Christi) and Florida (FGCU) do the same.