New A10 - URI Basketball's Conference Future

Gonebarongone · Unread post by **Gonebarongone** » 11 years ago

Rambone65 wrote:
BFC wrote:
Obadiah wrote:Rambone65, How can you dismiss attendance and say it is different than market. They correlate. Schools with large followings generate interest in market and that it why smallish Siena is attractive versus say big BU despite the fact that Albany is a small market and Boston is much larger. Fox cares about the numbers tuning in because that drives advertising.
If that was true, the C7 would have never happened. As has been pointed out repeatedly, most of those programs are in big markets but don't have large followings in those markets. Why are they lukewarm about adding Dayton and Creighton, two programs with huge followings?

And attendance is down across most sports. We are talking about a winter sport where you can sit and watch a game in HD on a monster TV. Or, on your ipad or even phone. People are caring less and less about making the trek, especially in the northeast, to a Tuesday night hoops game in late January. That's why market rather than arena+attendance drives the bus.

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 11 years ago

RhodyO wrote:I hate all of those teams. I hate Charleston and GMU the least but why add any teams if it is going to lower the conference even more. Why not cut the fat and focus on schools who care about bball and may go someplace.

The reality is that there are not many really attractive hoops schools left in the main A-10 geographic footprint or even along its fringes. The more attractive schools (such as Wichita State) are far away. The A-10 does not have the revenue stream to justify adding them like the big time football and Catholic CYO leagues. I think the league will look to fill its members within the Mass to Ohio/MI north and the SC/NC south.

The creation of the new CYO league and its raiding the A-10 was and will continue to be very bad for URI. I had thought we were still a long way off from this as they would never find enough tv money to justify the split. I never expected Fox to go off its rocker and totally overpay just to fill programming time.

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 11 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:BU? No way. Facilities? They play in a glorified high school gym.

BU has nicest on campus arena (Agganis) in all of New England. If they were to join, it would be mandated that it be their home for all men's hoops games.

My inclusion of BU, Northeastern, and Fairfield was tied to the possibility of losing UMass (new yet named Big East football league) and replacing them with another New England team.

Obadiah · Unread post by **Obadiah** » 11 years ago

Sorry, but I'm not obsessed with people in the stands, as all I'm saying is that a full house, an attractive facility, and a rabid fan base is TV attractive. The VCU game vs. Butler was a perfect example of that. I agree with market size as important factor, but I don't nit pick on size as Spokane and Albany attest to. Siena may not be successful this year, but in the past they have been the only MAAC school to reach national recognition. A small school like Siena can dominate a small market, just like PC and Gonzaga. And as a college basketball town big Boston doesn't rate at all and to imply that BU is better option than Siena because it is in a bigger market is silly. Who cares if the market is large if no one is tuning in. Remember this is college basketball and not the NBA.

Rambone65 · Unread post by **Rambone65** » 11 years ago

Obadiah wrote:Sorry, but I'm not obsessed with people in the stands, as all I'm saying is that a full house, an attractive facility, and a rabid fan base is TV attractive. The VCU game vs. Butler was a perfect example of that. I agree with market size as important factor, but I don't nit pick on size as Spokane and Albany attest to. Siena may not be successful this year, but in the past they have been the only MAAC school to reach national recognition. A small school like Siena can dominate a small market, just like PC and Gonzaga. And as a college basketball town big Boston doesn't rate at all and to imply that BU is better option than Siena because it is in a bigger market is silly. Who cares if the market is large if no one is tuning in. Remember this is college basketball and not the NBA.

Market + a consistent, winning basketball tradition blows away attendance. Period. So you go figure out arena size and average attendance. I';; stick to market and winning.

As for Siena, they've had some decent teams in the last 15 years, but to suggest "they have been the only MAAC school to reach national recognition" is -- simply put -- way wrong. Niagara blows them away in NCAA appearances.

Rambone65 · Unread post by **Rambone65** » 11 years ago

Obadiah wrote:Sorry, but I'm not obsessed with people in the stands, as all I'm saying is that a full house, an attractive facility, and a rabid fan base is TV attractive. The VCU game vs. Butler was a perfect example of that. I agree with market size as important factor, but I don't nit pick on size as Spokane and Albany attest to. Siena may not be successful this year, but in the past they have been the only MAAC school to reach national recognition. A small school like Siena can dominate a small market, just like PC and Gonzaga. And as a college basketball town big Boston doesn't rate at all and to imply that BU is better option than Siena because it is in a bigger market is silly. Who cares if the market is large if no one is tuning in. Remember this is college basketball and not the NBA.

Market + a consistent, winning basketball tradition blows away attendance. Period. So you go figure out arena size and average attendance. I';; stick to market and winning.

As for Siena, they've had some decent teams in the last 15 years, but to suggest "they have been the only MAAC school to reach national recognition" is -- simply put -- way wrong. Niagara blows them away in NCAA appearances.

Gonebarongone · Unread post by **Gonebarongone** » 11 years ago

Using BU is a flawed example. Why not use Emerson, then?

BC hasn't filled Conte on a regular basis (not close) even though it is under 10k and they really don't fill Alumni all that often for football. Yet, they have a pretty good tradition in hoops and football. And they are in a good market. Therefore, the ACC came knocking. And, they don't regret it. Check out their ratings compared to the rest of the ACC.

BFC · Unread post by **BFC** » 11 years ago

Obadiah wrote:Sorry, but I'm not obsessed with people in the stands, as all I'm saying is that a full house, an attractive facility, and a rabid fan base is TV attractive. The VCU game vs. Butler was a perfect example of that. I agree with market size as important factor, but I don't nit pick on size as Spokane and Albany attest to. Siena may not be successful this year, but in the past they have been the only MAAC school to reach national recognition. A small school like Siena can dominate a small market, just like PC and Gonzaga. And as a college basketball town big Boston doesn't rate at all and to imply that BU is better option than Siena because it is in a bigger market is silly. Who cares if the market is large if no one is tuning in. Remember this is college basketball and not the NBA.

I agree the overvaluing of market is silly, but it is clearly what was driving Fox's decisions.

Obadiah · Unread post by **Obadiah** » 11 years ago

I never said winning tradition was not important. I think it is very important, especially recent accomplishments. And your Niagara information is a bit off based on your comment "they blow Siena away in NCAA appearances". Huh, Niagara has been to the NCAA three times and have recorded two wins versus Florida A&M and Penn.

In comparison, Siena has been to the NCAA six times - consecutive appearance in '08, '09, '10. In the process they have beaten, Stanford, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt, and Ohio State. Also, since Siena went D-1, they hold a 41-29 record versus Niagara.

Also, I don't see where Niagara's location in remote western New York is so great, bigger maybe, but not so better in attractiveness. Yes, when considering new schools to the A-10, I think nice facilities (or convenient access to facilities) and fan support reflected in attendance are important factors. 1500 for Niagara, 6500 for Siena is significant. URI should hope to have attendance of this size.

We have a difference of opinion here, you like BU and Niagara. I believe Siena is better, but then I would take some other schools before I take Siena, also. Nothing wrong with having different views.

URIGONZO · Unread post by **URIGONZO** » 11 years ago

The conference is going to make decisions on who to invite based on money. That money come from the TV deal they get. Whether it is tradition or market size or both (I don't know exactly) the decision will be made to maximize the value of the TV contract.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 11 years ago

I doubt BU's 6.100 seat arena is better than Gampel, Ryan or Mullins.
A big NO! to Fairfield and BU.

Gonebarongone · Unread post by **Gonebarongone** » 11 years ago

I don't think BU should be part of the equation but Agganis is nicer than Mullins or Gampel. Both those are over 20 years old. Agganis is a sweet facility. Been to all three for games.

section(105) · Unread post by **section(105)** » 11 years ago

Didn't BU already intend to leave their current league and headed for the Patriot League for hoops??

Brhode Island · Unread post by **Brhode Island** » 11 years ago

Just had an outside-the-box idea for the A10 while spitballing with a buddy about the insane cost of cable television.

It's been mentioned in this thread that if the CBS TV contract were cancelled, that the top A10 schools could join like the C7 did, approach a TV network to see the best possible deal it could get if they added some schools (teams from the midwest have been mentioned).

Perhaps the A10 could secure a groundbreaking deal with one of players in the increasingly pupular streamed television companies (e.g. Hulu, Netflix, Amazon). The A10 could become the first conference to broadcast games exclusively via online stream, though on a popular platform like the ones just mentioned.

Perhaps it attracts new fans who were already customers, and (for now) at a reduced cost to purchasing cable networks.

Maybe not a long-term fix, but all options for the league should be explored. I think that would be a cool way for the league to distinguish itself and its brand.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 11 years ago

That would be imo, by FAR the best option for the A10.

Not likely to happen, unfortunately. If it did, it would have to happen FAST!

If Butler and X can't be saved, then at least try and save Dayton, StLouis, and any others who might go elsewhere.

Would they stay, with money admittedly less than what they would get in the BE, but more than what they would get now? Saving them would also make it much more likely the A10 could add a couple more Midwestern schools. Without D and SL, the Midwest is out for A10 expansion I would think.

Obadiah · Unread post by **Obadiah** » 11 years ago

Section(105) is correct in that BU will be joining the Patriot League next year. There has been a controversy in the America East because the conference officials banned both their women's and men's basketball team from the America East tournaments as a consequence.

BFC · Unread post by **BFC** » 11 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:If Butler and X can't be saved, then at least try and save Dayton, StLouis, and any others who might go elsewhere.

There is no saving Dayton and St. Louis, they either get the invite or they don't.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 11 years ago

Does anyone realize that neither Butler, nor Xavier, has formally informed
the A-10 that they're leaving?

Rambone65 · Unread post by **Rambone65** » 11 years ago

Obadiah wrote:I never said winning tradition was not important. I think it is very important, especially recent accomplishments. And your Niagara information is a bit off based on your comment "they blow Siena away in NCAA appearances". Huh, Niagara has been to the NCAA three times and have recorded two wins versus Florida A&M and Penn.

In comparison, Siena has been to the NCAA six times - consecutive appearance in '08, '09, '10. In the process they have beaten, Stanford, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt, and Ohio State. Also, since Siena went D-1, they hold a 41-29 record versus Niagara.

Also, I don't see where Niagara's location in remote western New York is so great, bigger maybe, but not so better in attractiveness. Yes, when considering new schools to the A-10, I think nice facilities (or convenient access to facilities) and fan support reflected in attendance are important factors. 1500 for Niagara, 6500 for Siena is significant. URI should hope to have attendance of this size.

We have a difference of opinion here, you like BU and Niagara. I believe Siena is better, but then I would take some other schools before I take Siena, also. Nothing wrong with having different views.

Yup, Obi,. you're right... had the NIT and NCAA #'s backward. My bad. Doesn't change my opinion, however. I never said I liike BU, I would die if we had to take BU in the A10. It would be horrible. I don't really like Niagara either. I used them as a comparison to Siena. I loathe the fact that we're in a position to have to think about either....back to my ioriginal point from many posts ago...we are becoming an MAAC-like conference. In that case, URI should try to go.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 11 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:Does anyone realize that neither Butler, nor Xavier, has formally informed
the A-10 that they're leaving?

I don't believe they can until "The New Big East" is actually formed. Still working on negotiations about name and conference tournament location. Rumored to be done by the middle of this week.

wakefield · Unread post by **wakefield** » 11 years ago

66,
http://www.nj.com/college-basketball/in ... er_default

3wisemen · Unread post by **3wisemen** » 11 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:Does anyone realize that neither Butler, nor Xavier, has formally informed
the A-10 that they're leaving?

Reading this is akin to watching the Stuart Smalley skits from SNL.
"Butler and Xavier won't leave the A-10 because we're good enough, we're smart enough and...gosh darn it, people like us."

Rambone65 · Unread post by **Rambone65** » 11 years ago

wakefield wrote:66,
http://www.nj.com/college-basketball/in ... er_default

amazing that they were sitting on $100 million.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 11 years ago

READ WHAT I SAID!
FACT! Why the smartassed comment?

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 11 years ago

Rambone65 wrote:
wakefield wrote:66,
http://www.nj.com/college-basketball/in ... er_default

amazing that they were sitting on $100 million.

I'm just waiting for the follow-up lawsuits ... Schools like Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Boise are likely going to want their money back seeing as how they are going to argue the league was seperating anyway. It would be interesting to see how their arguement would hold up in a court room. It would also change the pot/negotiations, especially if the C7 need to find a way out of pocket to make up the difference.

Part of me feels whatever deal is hashed out now doesn't hold up.

3wisemen · Unread post by **3wisemen** » 11 years ago

It might be a fact but it's not reality. They're gone, formally declared or not. They're not going to say no to the reported $4 million per year in television money. Turn the page.

Unread post by **ATPTourFan** » 11 years ago

Rod, calm man. What was the purpose of your post up there? Are you suggesting that the rumors of X and Butler leaving are unfounded because they haven't formally announced anything? As was said above by Superfly, there is no destination for them to "formally" announce their defection.

Nothing happens publicly or formally from the A10 side until 1) New Big East is announced with B7 as the core and 2) X and Butler are announced as full members of this new Big East starting 2013-2014.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 11 years ago

ATP, all you just did was sum up what I posted.
What, now I need a purpose to state a fact?
Nothing is done until the papers are signed.
The C7 schools stated their intent, while still members of the Big East
and during the season. Maryland announced their move to the Big 10, November 19th, during the season.
What would keep Butler and Xavier from doing the same?
With all the back and forth and jumping around, anything is possible.

adam914 · Unread post by **adam914** » 11 years ago

I think the difference there is that those other schools had conferences to announce the move to. Xavier and Butler can't announce a move to a conference that doesn't exist yet. As soon as the conference is officially announced, then the Xavier/Butler announcement will follow I am sure.

Of course anything can happen, but it sure seems like its going to be finalized very soon.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 11 years ago

So, what was the announcement Saturday by the C7, if not to announce a
new conference? Everyone sure seemed to view it as such.
All very confusing.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 11 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:ATP, all you just did was sum up what I posted.
What, now I need a purpose to state a fact?
Nothing is done until the papers are signed.
The C7 schools stated their intent, while still members of the Big East
and during the season. Maryland announced their move to the Big 10, November 19th, during the season.
What would keep Butler and Xavier from doing the same?
With all the back and forth and jumping around, anything is possible.

Why should they though?

It's in their best interest to make sure they have all the facts in place. How much will they make via the TV contract (which cannot be finalized until a new conference is official), what is the conference name, where is the conference tournament being held, how many teams, when they are actually leaving, etc.

They don't get an award for breaking away first or quickest. The C7 needed to announce their split in order to gain the ability to negotiate a separation. Maryland was already going to a known commodity. What do Butler and Xavier get from announcing to split now?

Different situations all around.

Gonebarongone · Unread post by **Gonebarongone** » 11 years ago

At this point the lawyers are involved telling all parties EXACTLY when to announce what to best maximize exit fees, avoid whatever litigation they can, etc. There are things written into schools' charters where certain dominoes have to fall in a certain order. Maybe the pres/ADs have decided but the board of trustees of these schools still have to rubber stamp.

Unread post by **SGreenwell** » 11 years ago

Gonebarongone wrote:At this point the lawyers are involved telling all parties EXACTLY when to announce what to best maximize exit fees, avoid whatever litigation they can, etc. There are things written into schools' charters where certain dominoes have to fall in a certain order. Maybe the pres/ADs have decided but the board of trustees of these schools still have to rubber stamp.

I agree with this. I mean, you don't have to look any further than how Rhode Island politics works to realize what a mess this extraction process is going to be with all of the various boards of trustees, board of governors, presidents, ADs, etc. Pretty much everything out there says Butler and Xavier are gone, and outside of hope from some A-10 fan bases, there doesn't seem to be any reporting suggesting that they'll stick around.

RIFan · Unread post by **RIFan** » 11 years ago

Why did the C7 have to publicly state their intention to leave in order to negotiate a deal? Why couldn't they just have negotiated with all parties behind the scenes, and then announce the deal/new conference when it was done? there is no reason that X and Butler couldn't state their intention is to join the C7 in the new conference. That is not a formal resignation...just a statement of intent. ND says they would join the C7 for a year if offered...

Unread post by **ATPTourFan** » 11 years ago

Maybe A10 Commish has asked all members to wait for the formal announcement before going on record regarding their intent or NOT to leave?

Either way, not changing the extremely high likelihood that X and Butler are outta here after this season.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 11 years ago

RIFan wrote:Why did the C7 have to publicly state their intention to leave in order to negotiate a deal? Why couldn't they just have negotiated with all parties behind the scenes, and then announce the deal/new conference when it was done? there is no reason that X and Butler couldn't state their intention is to join the C7 in the new conference. That is not a formal resignation...just a statement of intent. ND says they would join the C7 for a year if offered...

RIFan,

I think the problem is that there is no such thing as "quiet" negotiations anymore. Blame technology I suppose. All of these rumors were coming out about a split and negotiations, so rather than just fuel the rumors and allow for increased speculation, after a week or so of rumors, they just made if official. I suppose they could have tried to keep it quiet, but wasn't the train already off the tracks?

Let's be real, Rod kind of hit it on the head. Butler and Xavier haven't formally done anything yet. No one knows their true intentions. Yet based on "all of the reports," you would think we all know everything about every discussion.

There is way to much speculation on every single thing since everyone has a different opinion. I just think it's hard to keep it quiet since everyone knows someone "in the know." However, I do think there are somethings better off stating to end rumors, and some better off leaving be. If the C7 conference fell apart and the Fox TV deal was only $1 million annually, don't you think Butler and Xavier would think twice?

CTRamfan · Unread post by **CTRamfan** » 11 years ago

Has anybody proposed an 18 team, 3 division merge of the C7 and top 11 from the A10..............??

RIFan · Unread post by **RIFan** » 11 years ago

I think that idea was shot down early by the Marquett AD.

wakefield · Unread post by **wakefield** » 11 years ago

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/18674836 ... tions.html

"LeCrone said he has been in regular contact with commissioners from the Missouri Valley, A-10, Colonial Athletic and the Summit League ``to figure out how we can work together to the betterment of all.’’"

Obadiah · Unread post by **Obadiah** » 11 years ago

Not much new information in this Sun-Times article, other than to say several leagues are talking together. Each conference is in this game in order to protect their self interest. There are not enough quality teams out there for each of these conferences to improve themselves without hurting another. One remedy to this dilemma would be for say, three leagues to get together and re-organize into two. Lots of obstacles in getting this done, least of which are egos. As such I am not hopefully this idea would get any traction.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 11 years ago

True. As in the C7 deal, there will be winners and losers.

If the A10 and CAA were to merge for example, some teams would most likely be left out.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 11 years ago

Membership rules (just speculation) probably require a 75% or so vote on all measures.

So including UMASS, Dayton, and St. Louis, that would be 12 teams, meaning likely 9 teams could kick out 3.

If you take out Dayton and St. Louis, that would leave 10 teams, so likely 8 could kick out 2.

And if you take UMASS out, 7 could also kick out 2 teams.

If you turn to the CAA, the CAA will have 9 teams. They have added COC which would give them 10.

If would likely be the same situation where they could kick out 2 teams.

Just pure speculation, but you could probably combine into a 16 team conference, 8 from the A-10, 8 from the CAA without having to bend the rules too much.

I would say it would also be more of a natural pairing, not just location-wise, but most of the football roots are there as well.

adam914 · Unread post by **adam914** » 11 years ago

Well at least now we have some confirmation from that article that they have been talking for months about this. That means they must have some idea of how they want to react to all this.

Unread post by **ATPTourFan** » 11 years ago

On the A10 board it was stated there is no provision in A10 bylaws for involuntary removal of a school from the conference.

BFC · Unread post by **BFC** » 11 years ago

ATPTourFan wrote:On the A10 board it was stated there is no provision in A10 bylaws for involuntary removal of a school from the conference.

If there is no provision allowing it, does that mean there is no provision disallowing it?

Either way, the hope that the A-10 could drop and add doesn't seem likely. It needs to be blown up but without TV pushing for it, it would take some very bold college presidents and ADs to get it done.

wakefield · Unread post by **wakefield** » 11 years ago

Does the A10 add 4/5 teams now or only add two teams because it is uncertain for a while who the C7 will add later?

Unread post by **ATPTourFan** » 11 years ago

I think A10 should be very selective and not rush into anything. It's not bad to play a season with 12 teams or even 10, imagine that, A10 teams. We need to be very careful about locking in new programs. And despite what we have seen with this C7 thing with all of Fox's money, schools don't leave immediately like this. There should be no changes for next season other than the teams we know and expect will leave. Then the following year, perhaps additions will take place with the standard 1-year in advance notice to their current conferences.

wakefield · Unread post by **wakefield** » 11 years ago

ATP.. I think your right and as I might of mentioned earlier this would mean more money for URI. The A10 has 37 million in units which gets divided by 6 years. Plus we get more TV money because it will be divided by fewer teams. In short, the avg A10 team will receive 1.1 million/per year if there is only 10 teams.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 11 years ago

wakefield wrote:ATP.. I think your right and as I might of mentioned earlier this would mean more money for URI. The A10 has 37 million in units which gets divided by 6 years. Plus we get more TV money because it will be divided by fewer teams. In short, the avg A10 team will receive 1.1 million/per year if there is only 10 teams.

That's assuming the TV contract doesn't get scaled back.

Does your estimate for units, are those just the NCAA Tournament ones?

Didn't know if that was including money from exit fees, in which you can basically pencil in an extra $8-$10 million in the pot, which in theory probably makes up any differences lost short-term.

Unread post by **ATPTourFan** » 11 years ago

Also, the NCAA units distribution will be much higher per remaining A10 team. All exiting teams leave behind their many (thanks, Xavier) NCAA Units.

This is why I believe Rhody has plans to implement facilities upgrades to Ryan Center such as scoreboard, floor, LED ribbon, etc, since with the 4 definite teams gone after this season, NCAA units payouts per team will be UP big time -- even for teams like Rhody who get the smallest % due to not earning a dime themselves.