A10 Presidents call meeting - Page 7 - Basketball Forum : Professional and College Basketball Forums
BasketballForum.com is the premier basketball Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-16-2012, 09:42 AM   #91 (permalink)
6th Man
 

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

If the presidents decide to do two things, it could save the A10 by making it financially a better situation for Xavier and Butler to stay. 1) If the distribution of NCAA units changes and 2) If the bottom couple teams in the A10 are dropped.

If the tournament money is split 50% to the team that earned it and 50% to the rest of the conference this would be a huge incentive for Xavier and Butler to stay. In the new conference there will probably be 4 bids a year for an average of about 10 units (if the average team makes it to the round of 32 or sweet 16). The payout would be 5 units per team over 6 years.

The A10 as it is now is similarly a 4 bid conference for an average of 10 units per year (although it has been much higher recently considering butler and vcu's recent runs.) With the proposed split of tourney money, each team would get a base of about 2 units of payout +half of what they earned individually over the past 6 years. Butler has earned about 20 units over the past 6 years and Xavier about 16, so they would be getting 12 and 10 units of payout respectively, twice what they would get in the new conference.

Changing the distribution of tourney revenue would also encourage teams to actually improve. Fordham, LaSalle, etc would see their money get cut in half.

Cutting out the bottom 2-4 teams would do wonders for the A10s rpi which means more tournament revenue, and would also probably get us a better TV contract since there would be more marque games. Xavier, Butler and VCU could play each other twice a year. That is 6 games between household name teams, and would draw a much bigger TV contract. It is an interesting possibility, and a combination of these two changes might work.

Last edited by mm4cc; 12-16-2012 at 09:47 AM.
mm4cc is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-16-2012, 09:47 AM   #92 (permalink)
Rookie
 
DoubleJayAlum's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Omaha
Posts: 73
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by mm4cc View Post
Changing the distribution of tourney revenue would also encourage teams to actually improve. Fordham, LaSalle, etc would see their money get cut in half.
Couldn't that actually work in reverse?

The schools needing to improve the most will have even less money with which to do so... thereby making it extremely difficult, if not downright impossible, for any such improvement to take place?

Further, wouldn't they fall even further behind as the more successful programs only get richer?
DoubleJayAlum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 09:48 AM   #93 (permalink)
6th Man
 

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleJayAlum View Post
Couldn't that actually work in reverse?

The schools needing to improve the most will have even less money with which to do so... thereby making it extremely difficult, if not downright impossible, for any such improvement to take place?

Further, wouldn't they fall even further behind as the more successful programs only get richer?
It might work by encouraging them to go to a different conference where they can actually be successful if they don't want to invest in their basketball program. Also you assume these schools are taking basketball revenue and investing it in their basketball programs. Fordham certainly is not doing this, and I have no idea about the other schools.

Last edited by mm4cc; 12-16-2012 at 09:56 AM.
mm4cc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 10:12 AM   #94 (permalink)
Player
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 720
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingElvis View Post
Not sure, but my money is on Bobinski (X's athletic director) and maybe Butler already having agreements with the BE7 before the meeting.

I would not be suprised to see X make an announcement soon. That way exit fees could not be increased on them, etc. Is there a requirement for the number of seasons that an A10 must wait to exit after they announce? Maybe they would need to do it soon to meet up with the BE7 in 2015.
Athletic Director's do not vote on this in anyway shape or form...

They could advise.. but the President has final decision after a BOT votes on it..

The President (in 95%) of situations answer to the BOT before making a decision
A10BBall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 10:20 AM   #95 (permalink)
Veteran
 
uz2b-len's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,056
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Are the presidents really gonna decide this or is ESPN gonna decide this?
uz2b-len is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 10:21 AM   #96 (permalink)
REF
Veteran
 
REF's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,051
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by UD_Earl View Post
Yep, that is me. Funny story, during David West's senior year at UD, I believe he had never won at UD. My seats are in the endzone, opposite the students. Late in the game, when they were lining up for a free throw and it was pretty much over and UD was going to win - I yelled out (and I have voice that carries), "David West - You cant win here". Oh my gosh, he turned around a took a couple steps toward the stands. He was glaring and looking for whomever had yelled. Pretty funny. Good times.

So yes, that is me....

UD Earl
You are a tool - the fact that you take so much pride in this and post to an internet board settles it.
REF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 10:40 AM   #97 (permalink)
Player
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 720
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Yes.. So the price of each unit will go each year by a small percentage but yes a unit will credited each year for 6 years rolling.. The A-10 will start to be getting nice increases as there has been multiple bids the past several years.. And looks to be another 4-5 bids this year..
A10BBall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 10:42 AM   #98 (permalink)
Star
 
paulxu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 2,636
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 415 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by UD_Earl View Post
Yep, that is me. Funny story, during David West's senior year at UD, I believe he had never won at UD. My seats are in the endzone, opposite the students. Late in the game, when they were lining up for a free throw and it was pretty much over and UD was going to win - I yelled out (and I have voice that carries), "David West - You cant win here". Oh my gosh, he turned around a took a couple steps toward the stands. He was glaring and looking for whomever had yelled. Pretty funny. Good times.

So yes, that is me....

UD Earl
Earl, just curious. Do you live in some sort of fantasy world?
You are not by any chance a different name for Opaque Liquid?

David West Senior Year - 2003.
Dayton lost both games to Xavier that year.
The score of the game at UD was 73-72. West led all scorers, although he was held to less than the 47 he had scored that year in the Cintas.

Dayton also lost both games to Xavier in 2002 - West's junior year.
That's as far back as ESPN's records go that I can check.

Good times. Indeed.
__________________
...he went up late, and I was already up there.
paulxu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 10:48 AM   #99 (permalink)
Player
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 720
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by RF1 View Post
It is paid out on a rolling basis to the conference and distributed annually per my understanding.

Any team leaving the A-10 will have to pay the exit penalty, give adequate advance notice, and forfeit any NCAA units it had accumulated. Xavier obviously would be leaving the most on the table.

The Big East 7 are departing their league with no penalty from what I read because of a bylaw clause whereby a bloc can leave en masse. Since they are not dissolving the league from the looks of it, they don't have clear rights to the name and MAY be giving up departure fees (from WVU, Sry, Pitt, ND, RU) and NCAA units (GU, Marquette, and Villanova would have quite a bit of units). I would think that lawyers on both side of the split will be working overtime for the next few years to divide everything up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xavierhoops View Post
The NCAA units... does the NCAA pay out to each conference once every 6 years for the previous 6 years cumulatively... or is it on a rolling basis where annual payments are paid but for the NCAA units earned 6 years prior?
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz2b-len View Post
Are the presidents really gonna decide this or is ESPN gonna decide this?
The Presidents are of course.. I honestly do think ESPN has an interest.. They balked at these schools the first time around... and let these schools walk.. There is a theory that ESPN is pissed and what to crush everyone involved they rejected their initial contract offer.. This has been mentioned by several credible posters on this board...

Maybe NBS Sports but ESPN has so many other agreements with other conferences now.. Recognize the attractive schools of the Big East are gone to other conference or not with these 7 schools.. these are pretty much the bottom barrel of the old Big East conference..

Hell if ESPN has the clout that they supposedly have UCONN would have been one of the first schools taken especially by the ACC, who is ESPN's largest conference contracts (with the Big 10). UCONN, obviously, is ESPN's college of choice due to hiring partnerships (especially in leadership) and geographic location.
A10BBall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 11:02 AM   #100 (permalink)
6th Man
 

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Each Teams Tournament Revenue/Year with equal unit sharing based on the previous 6 years
New Big East (10 teams, Xavier, Butler, Creighton): $1,825,000
New Big East (12 teams, Xavier, Butler, SLU, Dayton, Creighton): $1,600,000
Current A10 (10 teams, dropped the bottom 4):$1,375,000
Current A10 (14 teams, the conference this year except Charlotte and Temple):$975,000

Even if the A10 gets rid of its bottom 4 teams, moving to the new big east makes sense financially. If the New Big East is only 10 teams, Xavier can almost double its tourney pay. With each team keeping 30% of their units earned and sharing the rest with the conference Xavier and Butlers payout becomes

Current A10 (14 teams, 30% split)
Xavier:$1,900,000
Butler:$2,050,000
Lowest Other School:$700,000

Current A10 (10 teams, 30% split)
Xavier:$2,175,000
Butler:$2,325,000
Lowest Other School:$975,000

With each team keeping 50% of the units they earned and splitting the rest:

Current A10 (14 teams, 50% split)
Xavier:$2,500,000
Butler:$2,750,000
Lowest Other School:$500,000

Current A10 (10 teams, 50% split)
Xavier:$2,700,000
Butler:$2,950,000
Lowest Other School:$700,000

A10 without Xavier and Butler: $437,500 each
A10 without Xavier, Butler, Dayton, St. Louis: $425,000 each

As you can see, having a 30% split, and even a 50% split and keeping Xavier and Butler is better for EVERYONE than keeping unit distribution equal and letting Xavier and Butler go. If you factor in TV money, I think the A10 must drop some teams to be a good option financially for Xavier and Butler.
mm4cc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 11:30 AM   #101 (permalink)
Player
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 720
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by mm4cc View Post
Each Teams Tournament Revenue/Year with equal unit sharing based on the previous 6 years
New Big East (10 teams, Xavier, Butler, Creighton): $1,825,000
New Big East (12 teams, Xavier, Butler, SLU, Dayton, Creighton): $1,600,000
Current A10 (10 teams, dropped the bottom 4):$1,375,000
Current A10 (14 teams, the conference this year except Charlotte and Temple):$975,000

Even if the A10 gets rid of its bottom 4 teams, moving to the new big east makes sense financially. If the New Big East is only 10 teams, Xavier can almost double its tourney pay. With each team keeping 30% of their units earned and sharing the rest with the conference Xavier and Butlers payout becomes

Current A10 (14 teams, 30% split)
Xavier:$1,900,000
Butler:$2,050,000
Lowest Other School:$700,000

Current A10 (10 teams, 30% split)
Xavier:$2,175,000
Butler:$2,325,000
Lowest Other School:$975,000

With each team keeping 50% of the units they earned and splitting the rest:

Current A10 (14 teams, 50% split)
Xavier:$2,500,000
Butler:$2,750,000
Lowest Other School:$500,000

Current A10 (10 teams, 50% split)
Xavier:$2,700,000
Butler:$2,950,000
Lowest Other School:$700,000

A10 without Xavier and Butler: $437,500 each
A10 without Xavier, Butler, Dayton, St. Louis: $425,000 each

As you can see, having a 30% split, and even a 50% split and keeping Xavier and Butler is better for EVERYONE than keeping unit distribution equal and letting Xavier and Butler go. If you factor in TV money, I think the A10 must drop some teams to be a good option financially for Xavier and Butler.
Very good post and it shows the power of getting percentages to schools of unit shares:

Remember for the power A-10 schools you are talking about moving from a now annual 5-6 bid conference to a new conference that is projected to be a 5-6 bid conference so if the quality is similar, then this is about money which seems to be the biggest factor anyways of all schools.

A couple questions though:

You are not assuming the schools keep the units with them (because that is grossly incorrect)? Where do you get the data for the "new big east" funds? Remember they are starting from scratch and schools do not keep them. The money still goes to the conferences but then the conference splits them up to the schools. It would easy to adjust the numbers to the according percentages.
A10BBall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 11:34 AM   #102 (permalink)
6th Man
 

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by A10BBall View Post
Very good post and it shows the power of getting percentages to schools of unit shares:

Remember for the power A-10 schools you are talking about moving from a now annual 5-6 bid conference to a new conference that is projected to be a 5-6 bid conference so if the quality is similar, then this is about money which seems to be the biggest factor anyways of all schools.

A couple questions though:

You are not assuming the schools keep the units with them (because that is grossly incorrect)? Where do you get the data for the "new big east" funds? Remember they are starting from scratch and schools do not keep them. The money still goes to the conferences but then the conference splits them up to the schools. It would easy to adjust the numbers to the according percentages.
Well, this sort of assume those things. This isn't the actual payout schools would receive when the conference forms (they would get much, much less money for the first couple years), but a theoretical payout for teams this year if these conferences had existed for the past 6 years. It is meant to predict average payout in future years based on each team's recent performance. Even though it is theoretical, I think it shows we can make the A10 more attractive in the long run then the New Big East.

Last edited by mm4cc; 12-16-2012 at 11:43 AM.
mm4cc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 11:49 AM   #103 (permalink)
Player
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 720
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by mm4cc View Post
Well, this does assume all of those things. This isn't the actual payout schools would receive when the conference forms, but a theoretical payout for this year if these conferences had existed for the past 6 years using each teams record for the past 6 years. It is meant to predict average payout in future years based on each team's recent performance. Even though it is theoretical, I think it shows we can make the A10 more attractive then the New Big East.
Correct there is a way that Bernie can make it very attractive to basketball programs..
A10BBall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 12:04 PM   #104 (permalink)
Star
 
paulxu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 2,636
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 415 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Well, I got lost in the numbers. It seems to say earnings per year, per team.
X has 15 units in the last 6 years, or 2 and 1/2 units average per year. If it kept all that money it would only be 2.5 x $250,000 per year, or $625,000/year.

If they got 50% of that (and they were responsible for 1/2 the league's total credits during that time) how do they ever get to $2,500,000/year?
__________________
...he went up late, and I was already up there.
paulxu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 12:10 PM   #105 (permalink)
6th Man
 

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Re: A10 Presidents call meeting

Xavier has 16 units over the last 6 years * 1/2 for the split * $250,000/unit/year = $2,000,000 per year. The other money comes from their part of the shared money.
mm4cc is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:08 AM.



User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2002 2013 BasketballBoards.net.

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1