HOW A10 CAN STAY RELEVANT

[Rhody74]

Some reason for concern.

It’s always reason for concern. Dayton and SLU always seem ready to jump.

[Jersey77]

Some reason for concern.

It’s always reason for concern. Dayton and SLU always seem ready to jump.

Exactly, the A10 needs to be proactive.
I like what the MVC has done adding Belmont and now probably Murray State. I wish it was us, if we continue to wait the pickings will be slim.

[ramster]

Some reason for concern.

It’s always reason for concern. Dayton and SLU always seem ready to jump.

Exactly, the A10 needs to be proactive.
I like what the MVC has done adding Belmont and now probably Murray State. I wish it was us, if we continue to wait the pickings will be slim.

VCU ready to jump too
UMASS will seek out a football conference like Conf USA, AAC or combo TBA

[Rhode_Island_Red]

It’s always reason for concern. Dayton and SLU always seem ready to jump.

Exactly, the A10 needs to be proactive.
I like what the MVC has done adding Belmont and now probably Murray State. I wish it was us, if we continue to wait the pickings will be slim.

VCU ready to jump too
UMASS will seek out a football conference like Conf USA, AAC or combo TBA

The Massholes' football program is almost as big a joke as the Storrs Leg-humpers'. Can't see any conference taking their football program under any circumstances.

[rambone 78]

Well if the A10 loses VCU, Dayton, and St. Louis along with UMass, then all we could do is try to dominate what's left, like Gonzaga does in their league....because the A10 will be a one bid league most of the time.

In our current state, what other league would want us?

[NYGFan_Section208]

Well if the A10 loses VCU, Dayton, and St. Louis along with UMass, then all we could do is try to dominate what's left, like Gonzaga does in their league....because the A10 will be a one bid league most of the time.

In our current state, what other league would want us?

Patriot?

[RhowdyRam02]

Honestly, if VCU, Dayton, St. Louis, and UMass all leave the A10 we might just be better off going to the America East. I'd rather be in a one bid conference with other New England state flagships then be in a one bid conference bunch of small private schools we have nothing in common with.

Albany, Binghamton, Maine, Maryland Baltimore County, UMass Lowell, New Hampshire, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Stony Brook, and Vermont

vs

Davidson, Duquesne, Fordham, George Mason, George Washington, La Salle, Richmond, St. Bonaventure and St. Joe's,

Yes, I did in fact just throw up in my mouth, thanks for asking....

[RhowdyRam02]

Well if the A10 loses VCU, Dayton, and St. Louis along with UMass, then all we could do is try to dominate what's left, like Gonzaga does in their league....because the A10 will be a one bid league most of the time.

In our current state, what other league would want us?

Patriot?

We don't match up academically with what they are looking for

[section(105)]

……America East……then we can get games with Vermont……

[ramster]

CAA / where we are already in along with Richmond in all important Football

Get back to a more regional conference with all sports aligned

[rambone 78]

URI has to end up in a conference where they can compete financially.

A small state school can't compete with the larger privates, plain and simple. Especially in a state that could care less about supporting us.

We can only survive with our large donors, and our large donors pale in comparison to say, UConn.

Simple fact, like it or not.

Not only this, but we need coaching staffs that can maximize results. In our history, we've only been good when we've had coaches like Penders, Kraft, Harrick, Hurley, etc. And they don't stay for long.

The only sustained success we've had, was when Harrick followed Skinner. Too many times, when we've been good and the coach left, the next coach flopped.

[Rhody15]

URI has to end up in a conference where they can compete financially.

A small state school can't compete with the larger privates, plain and simple. Especially in a state that could care less about supporting us.

We can only survive with our large donors, and our large donors pale in comparison to say, UConn.

Simple fact, like it or not.

Not only this, but we need coaching staffs that can maximize results. In our history, we've only been good when we've had coaches like Penders, Kraft, Harrick, Hurley, etc. And they don't stay for long.

The only sustained success we've had, was when Harrick followed Skinner. Too many times, when we've been good and the coach left, the next coach flopped.

We can only compete with good coaches? Gee I'm shocked, I thought for sure teams could succeed with terrible coaches.

And we can't compete with larger private schools? I could've sworn we won an A10 tourney title, regular season A10 title, and back to back NCAA tourney games not so long ago. I could be mistaken though.

It has, and always will be, tough for non P6 teams to compete at a high level year in and year out.

Shit, Kentucky was absolutely atrocious last year, and they're a top 2 program in the sport.

Good god man, you're act is so tiring and depressing.

[Jersey77]

Hmm..., anyone care to make a guess?

[NYGFan_Section208]

Move to AAC?

[Jersey77]

Move to AAC?

That's a good guess
Could also be new facilities or a large donation.

[section(105)]

……..answering the topic question…….broaden the geographic footprint in the north east market, Capital District NY, as an example……..could plow the ground again on which basketball centric programs……..maybe league contraction is the way to go……..

[ramster]

Move to AAC?

That's a good guess
Could also be new facilities or a large donation.

Stu Durando is the man when it comes to covering SLU Basketball and SLU Sports overall

[Jersey77]

Move to AAC?

That's a good guess
Could also be new facilities or a large donation.

Stu Durando is the man when it comes to covering SLU Basketball and SLU Sports overall

Yes Ramster, not surprising.
It is good for the A10 for schools to be putting $ in their athletic program.
Also makes SLU more attractive to get poached by another conference.

[rambone 78]

URI has to end up in a conference where they can compete financially.

A small state school can't compete with the larger privates, plain and simple. Especially in a state that could care less about supporting us.

We can only survive with our large donors, and our large donors pale in comparison to say, UConn.

Simple fact, like it or not.

Not only this, but we need coaching staffs that can maximize results. In our history, we've only been good when we've had coaches like Penders, Kraft, Harrick, Hurley, etc. And they don't stay for long.

The only sustained success we've had, was when Harrick followed Skinner. Too many times, when we've been good and the coach left, the next coach flopped.

We can only compete with good coaches? Gee I'm shocked, I thought for sure teams could succeed with terrible coaches.

And we can't compete with larger private schools? I could've sworn we won an A10 tourney title, regular season A10 title, and back to back NCAA tourney games not so long ago. I could be mistaken though.

It has, and always will be, tough for non P6 teams to compete at a high level year in and year out.

Shit, Kentucky was absolutely atrocious last year, and they're a top 2 program in the sport.

Good god man, you're act is so tiring and depressing.

And yet you keep reading my posts....must suck to be you I guess.

[Jersey77]

[ramster]

UT San Antonio ranked #24 in AP this week. 1st time ever the football team has been nationally ranked.
Good time to be peaking in football with conference realignment in motion

#2 Ranked Cincinnati now has their highest ranking ever. Cincinnati has made great progress in the AAC and now propels to the Big 12

#21 SMU is another non P5 from the AAC

#14 Coastal Carolina is from the Sun Belt

#22 San Diego State represents the Mountain West

These high performing non-P5 programs are setting themselves up nicely for possible invites from higher level conferences.

[ramster]

Cost = $20 million - all privately funded. They list the donors upfront:

https://slubillikens.com/news/2021/10/1 ... enter.aspx

[Jersey77]

Cost = $20 million - all privately funded. They list the donors upfront:

https://slubillikens.com/news/2021/10/1 ... enter.aspx

Very nice facility for the athletes, also good for recruiting.
By investing in their program they also make themselves more attractive to move on to greener pastures.

[RIFan]

Another issue to consider

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-baske ... tournament

[ramster]

Another issue to consider

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-baske ... tournament

FCS and FBS for Football

Now players can depart the Cinderella type teams and move up to P5 teams

FBS runs the National Championships for FCS

Weak and getting weaker leadership from Dan Gavitt as the Conferences pull power away.

I’d guess we end up with FBS and FCS levels in Basketball just as Football.

Conferences Will prefer schools that play both Football and Basketball. URI one day could end up in a CAA type conference that plays Football and basketball.

I would not want to be in the group of Basketball only schools in the long haul.

[Rhody_NYCT]

I really think a new tournament with power conferences only is BS. At the end of the day, most of the Sweet 16 and beyond are made up of the PC schools anyway. Keeping the other conferences out is really only impacting the first two rounds other than a few exceptions. In my opinion, most college basketball fans enjoy the "madness" of the first two rounds, in large part because of the upsets or near upsets by small and lesser known schools. Other than Championship games and some of the greatest games of all-time, the upsets are the ones that we all remember for a lifetime. I'd rather watch an Oral Roberts take down a top seed than a mediocre Power Conference team that barely deserved to make the tourney. Power Conference teams that are on the bubble are simply not that good. They are usually not fun to watch. If enough colleges want to form an elitist tournament and make it 100% about the money, go ahead and do it. I think it would damage college hoops.

[rambone 78]

Splitting men's BB into a football style FBS and FCS will happen someday.

Hopefully not for a long time however.

Unfortunately, when it happens, we know where URI will end up.

There's no way there's enough money for the huge upgrades it would take to become FBS level, and join the big boys.

[RhodyKyle]

Cost = $20 million - all privately funded. They list the donors upfront:

https://slubillikens.com/news/2021/10/1 ... enter.aspx

Very nice facility for the athletes, also good for recruiting.
By investing in their program they also make themselves more attractive to move on to greener pastures.

Agreed. I saw one of the replies saying that this video wasn't for the fans but was a love letter to the Big East.

[Jersey77]

Once again Rothstein is expressing his desire for Temple to join the A10.
Although does it make sense for them to pay a min. $10M exit fee to join the A10?

[woodennickel1]

I really think a new tournament with power conferences only is BS. At the end of the day, most of the Sweet 16 and beyond are made up of the PC schools anyway. Keeping the other conferences out is really only impacting the first two rounds other than a few exceptions. In my opinion, most college basketball fans enjoy the "madness" of the first two rounds, in large part because of the upsets or near upsets by small and lesser known schools. Other than Championship games and some of the greatest games of all-time, the upsets are the ones that we all remember for a lifetime. I'd rather watch an Oral Roberts take down a top seed than a mediocre Power Conference team that barely deserved to make the tourney. Power Conference teams that are on the bubble are simply not that good. They are usually not fun to watch. If enough colleges want to form an elitist tournament and make it 100% about the money, go ahead and do it. I think it would damage college hoops.

I agree with you completely but unfortunately see it happening eventually. All because of greed in fact I think that was a big reason the Big East added Uconn to possibly get a seat if that goes down. With the thinking a tournament minus teams with five national championships in the last twenty years would be a farce.

[bigappleram]

TV money will drive everything. And for now the drama of the Madness drives the eyeballs so I don’t see this happening anytime soon.

[RamStock]

I really think a new tournament with power conferences only is BS. At the end of the day, most of the Sweet 16 and beyond are made up of the PC schools anyway. Keeping the other conferences out is really only impacting the first two rounds other than a few exceptions. In my opinion, most college basketball fans enjoy the "madness" of the first two rounds, in large part because of the upsets or near upsets by small and lesser known schools. Other than Championship games and some of the greatest games of all-time, the upsets are the ones that we all remember for a lifetime. I'd rather watch an Oral Roberts take down a top seed than a mediocre Power Conference team that barely deserved to make the tourney. Power Conference teams that are on the bubble are simply not that good. They are usually not fun to watch. If enough colleges want to form an elitist tournament and make it 100% about the money, go ahead and do it. I think it would damage college hoops.

Agree on the first abs second rounds of NCAA tourney. After those rounds it gets a little less interesting as it goes further on. Except for in 1998. Still hurts

[rambone 78]

Like was said, it's all about the TV money.

That drives the bus.

Whatever happens will be because of that.

[bigappleram]

From what I can gather, and to give this some context...

The ACC Tournament Final usually draws a TV audience of 3-4MM. The First Four games of the Tournament draw an audience of 7-8MM. And those games never feature marquee matchups. The common fan is still more interested in the Madness than games featuring only the creme de la creme of the sport. Cinderella drives the interest I can't see them walking away from that.

[rjsuperfly66]

Not sure where those numbers came from…

Average per game first four viewers in 2021: 1.94 million
Average per game first four viewers in 2019: 1.35 million

The UCLA-Michigan St game drew an average of 3.15 million. The previous first four single-game high was 2.23 million, a Tennessee vs Iowa matchup 7 years ago.

Here are my sources:

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2021/0 ... four-game/

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv ... 53676/amp/

[RhodyKyle]

Not sure where those numbers came from…

Average per game first four viewers in 2021: 1.94 million
Average per game first four viewers in 2019: 1.35 million

The UCLA-Michigan St game drew an average of 3.15 million. The previous first four single-game high was 2.23 million, a Tennessee vs Iowa matchup 7 years ago.

Here are my sources:

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2021/0 ... four-game/

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv ... 53676/amp/

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-me ... udience-76

I think the 7 million was the total/collective viewership of all four games.

[rjsuperfly66]

Not sure where those numbers came from…

Average per game first four viewers in 2021: 1.94 million
Average per game first four viewers in 2019: 1.35 million

The UCLA-Michigan St game drew an average of 3.15 million. The previous first four single-game high was 2.23 million, a Tennessee vs Iowa matchup 7 years ago.

Here are my sources:

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2021/0 ... four-game/

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv ... 53676/amp/

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-me ... udience-76

I think the 7 million was the total/collective viewership of all four games.

Which still makes it mostly inaccurate. Last years game between non-traditional ACC powers Georgia Tech and Florida St drew 1.8 million, so slightly less than the average of the play-in games. The 2019 game between Duke and Florida St drew 4.06 million, more than 3x the average playin game. 2018 between Virginia and UNC was 3.44 million, almost 3x the average playin. So the idea is really not accurate.

[Rhody_NYCT]

My opinion, people aren't interested in the play-in games unless you are affiliated with the school or you have money on the those games. Bottom line, the tourney starts in the round of 64. Play-in is not really a good indicator.

[Seawrightspostgame]

I really think a new tournament with power conferences only is BS. At the end of the day, most of the Sweet 16 and beyond are made up of the PC schools anyway. Keeping the other conferences out is really only impacting the first two rounds other than a few exceptions. In my opinion, most college basketball fans enjoy the "madness" of the first two rounds, in large part because of the upsets or near upsets by small and lesser known schools. Other than Championship games and some of the greatest games of all-time, the upsets are the ones that we all remember for a lifetime. I'd rather watch an Oral Roberts take down a top seed than a mediocre Power Conference team that barely deserved to make the tourney. Power Conference teams that are on the bubble are simply not that good. They are usually not fun to watch. If enough colleges want to form an elitist tournament and make it 100% about the money, go ahead and do it. I think it would damage college hoops.

I think there would be less money overall for a power conference tournament . Just they would be able to get the NCAA out of the way, which pulls money out of the pot.

[bigappleram]

Not sure where those numbers came from…

Average per game first four viewers in 2021: 1.94 million
Average per game first four viewers in 2019: 1.35 million

The UCLA-Michigan St game drew an average of 3.15 million. The previous first four single-game high was 2.23 million, a Tennessee vs Iowa matchup 7 years ago.

Here are my sources:

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2021/0 ... four-game/

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv ... 53676/amp/

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-me ... udience-76

I think the 7 million was the total/collective viewership of all four games.

Which still makes it mostly inaccurate. Last years game between non-traditional ACC powers Georgia Tech and Florida St drew 1.8 million, so slightly less than the average of the play-in games. The 2019 game between Duke and Florida St drew 4.06 million, more than 3x the average playin game. 2018 between Virginia and UNC was 3.44 million, almost 3x the average playin. So the idea is really not accurate.

Yeah my bad tried to do quick research while working and missed that the 7-8mm was the cumulative for all the play in games across all networks. It looks like the first round games last year drew in that same 3-4mm average that the highest rated conference tourney (ACC) typically draws.

[steviep123]

My opinion, people aren't interested in the play-in games unless you are affiliated with the school or you have money on the those games. Bottom line, the tourney starts in the round of 64. Play-in is not really a good indicator.

Count me in as someone who is interested in the opening round First Four. I watch all four games if I can, though this old timer probably falls asleep sometime in the 2nd game.

[Rhode_Island_Red]

Sooner or later, the Cartel will get tired of sharing with the riffraff and break away from the NCAA. They'll use football as leverage to take all the best television time with them.