Professional and College Basketball Forums banner
1841 - 1860 of 1882 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,761 Posts
Most of the A10 presidents are OK with the conference. It checks off the “Athletic Dept. box” on their checklist of things a University needs. They aren’t going to invest time or money to make the A-10 one of the top 6 basketball leagues in the country.

There are only three A-10 schools that have basketball budgets that are comparable to Big East budgets and these A-10 schools would rank 9th, 11th and 13th. Of these three schools only two have athletic budgets comparable to the Big East Schools. The athletic budget numbers are important because the BE spends a much larger percentage of the budget on men’s basketball than the A-10.

I get that the BE generates more revenue but the budgets between the two conferences aren’t remotely close. The BE understands that men’s basketball drives the conference.

I’m going to connect this to conference expansion now.

The logical course of action would be to resize the conference at 10 or 11 members. I‘m not an advocate of kicking members out of the league, and it would never happen anyways. As I pointed out, the Presidents are OK with the status quo.

Even if the league was reduced, there would only be three schools that spend at BE levels. The needle doesn’t move. A new conference is going to face the same problems

Expanding would only add schools that spend less than most of existing A-10 and wouldn’t move the needle in terms of media rights or NET rankings, however, I wouldn’t be surprised if the A-10 expanded in footprint for scheduling and budget reasons. Easier and cheaper travel, and adding more league games to make OOC scheduling easier including reducing the number of buy games.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,642 Posts
football is the evidence. It’s is all but done there and they are raking in the cash without sharing it with the smaller conferences. the idea that there are not discussions about why are we sharing tournament cash with all these smaller conferences when we can just play each other in the regular ooc season (tv would love that) and have our own tournament, is naive. I do not want it to happen but it is very possible If not probable. First step would be to get rid of automatic bids.
that is certainly the argument against it happening but the BCS made a lot of money, the current system makes more. The argument would be sure we are making money now but we can make more with our own tournament. I am sure there is some number crunching going on.
For 40 years, people have predicted the "Big Boys" leave the NCAA and form their own "pro sports like league" that excludes everyone else. And comparing where we were back then when we predicted the future, and where we are now and people are STILL predicting the future....

I'd argue that the separation of the Big Boys from the rest of the NCAA has ALREADY HAPPENED, we were just wrong about it's form. The P5 have 85% of the TV money, 90% of all bowl money, 99.96% of NY6/CFP/BCS at-larges; they get 76% of the NCAA Tournament spots and 72% of the NCAA unit money. They have autonomy: Every NCAA committee has 50% representation of P5, the non-P5 schools CANNOT pass legislation without them.

They don't need to LEAVE THE NCAA, THEY ARE THE NCAA


The only thing they have to gain by leaving and locking everyone else out is the percentages of money missing above, but that's actually NOT WORTH the cost of leaving.

If the BCS left the NCAA... who are they going to beat in guarantee games? How are they going to play 70% of their games at home? How are 10th place BCS teams going to finish 12-17 instead of 2-28? Nebraska basketball would have been be 2-19 last year without non-BCS guarantee games. Without non-BCS guarantee games, SEC football right now would be 13-5 instead of 32-7.

They'd sell MILLIONS LESS TICKETS playing 50/50 home and road games. They'd get MILLIONS LESS from boosters having a 3-9 football team instead of a 6-6 football team and going to the "Who Gives A Damn Bowl, Owned By ESPN Propaganda Department."


The only thing they can do is keep weaking the perception of non-BCS leagues to take ALL the at-large spots, and maybe add a round escalator to the NCAA unit payouts. But that's pretty much it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
592 Posts
1. FBS schools still play FCS schools same thing can happen if they have their own tournament.
2, Texas and OU were making a ton of money in Big 12 they wanted more. The P5 were making a ton of money in the BCS system but they wanted more so we have playoffs which will be expanded to make more money.
3. Are you seeing the patter? They do everything and anything to make more money regardless of how much they are making now.
4. with the NIL, transfer rules and potential employee status there is no better time for these schools to make the move. It is all trending that way.

I hope it does not happen but most of the programs in the A10 need a reality check on where they stand in college athletics, here is a hint: not as high up as you think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,642 Posts
1. FBS schools still play FCS schools same thing can happen if they have their own tournament.
2, Texas and OU were making a ton of money in Big 12 they wanted more. The P5 were making a ton of money in the BCS system but they wanted more so we have playoffs which will be expanded to make more money.
3. Are you seeing the patter? They do everything and anything to make more money regardless of how much they are making now.
4. with the NIL, transfer rules and potential employee status there is no better time for these schools to make the move. It is all trending that way.

I hope it does not happen but most of the programs in the A10 need a reality check on where they stand in college athletics, here is a hint: not as high up as you think.
I get what you're saying, and I'm the first to point out that this is Darwanist Capitalism. I'm merely saying that they wouldn't make significantly more money doing that. They've already accomplished what they would hope to accomplish by the move, so why bother? Their greed is hidden in the shadows so casual sports fans just assume Penn State basketball is pretty good this year, and don't realize they only look good because they're strong-arming small schools with guarantee games to inflate their records, and the cartel overthrew the NCAA selection process to weed out the non-cartel members.

The pittance they give the non-cartel members in terms of NCAA Units and CFP hush money to pretend their system is all-inclusive is actually a better VALUE FOR THEM than making their own closed system, which will make a large amount of people point out their greed -- at a time when they are facing a PR nightmare over player compensation already.

The small schools getting those autobids and trying their hardest to upset the big boys and failing to do so 85% of the time is a massive part of the appeal of the NCAA Tournament. If they leave the NCAA, make their own tournament and cut the small schools out, far fewer people are going to tune in to see #1 UNC vs #16 Nebraska when everyone knows 9-21 Nebraska sucks. David getting bitchslapped by Goliath is charming. Goliath bitchslapping a bad Goliath is not.

The much SMARTER move for their greed is to expand the tournament and dilute the shares, and then take home a higher percentage of them. Because they can sell that as inclusive, AND get more/better TV inventory to sell at a higher price instead having worse inventory to sell for their own tournament after pissing everyone else off and drawing attention to the fact that they're money-grubbing dicks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
592 Posts
Not sure you or I have the numbers to back up if they will or wont make more money but I bet they are studying it closely and in my opinion are looking to make the break. perfect time to do it. Either now or never.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,642 Posts
Numbers wise, no matter what they do, they're always going to get "more money" based on inflation. There's no apples to apples comparison to be made.

A smaller, easier to grasp example would be the NHL. The NHL added Vegas and Seattle the last five seasons. Now, is adding those two markets enough of an increase in TV revenue to "Grow the pie" enough to make slices bigger? You can only look at the new TV deal and the old TV deal. The answer has to be "hell yes, they grew the pie." But we have no idea how much bigger the TV deal would have been WITHOUT Vegas/Seattle, because that isn't public, and it was going to be bigger regardless based solely on the concept of the last TV deal was signed in 2008 dollars, not 2021 dollars.

(Another example of Money vs Time is the new Big 12 TV contract rumors. The old deal was AAV of $20 million each, and everyone heard they'd be worth 40 to 50% of what it was with Texas/Oklahoma; expected $8 million each and were blown away by the projection was an average of $25 million per school! When $25 million IS a 40% reduction of value.)

1. They'll get "more money" period, purely from being the best of college sports, per usual. Breaking off doesn't change that.

2. They'd be free to make their own rules, but they already are with their autonomous conference status.

3. Pure monopoly of all the postseason appearances (and ensuing money), which again, probably doesn't actually get them "more money" than they can get with the current situation because they'd be selling an INFERIOR PRODUCT to television and the public.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,642 Posts
Let's be clear about the "Inferior Product" part. This isn't JP waxing sentimental about the beauty of David vs Goliath in the NCAA Tournament. This is cold, heartless facts. Game out a BCS Basketball Championship Tourney to sell to TV.

The BCS (P5 and Big East) = 80 schools as it stands right now. The NCAA tournament is 67 games sold to TV.

You're not getting MORE MONEY compared to now by selling a 32-team BCS tournament to media companies. 35 fewer games, two best days gone -- the Round of 64 is when BILLIONS of work productivity is lost, and 30% of all Vasectomies every year are scheduled!

You're not getting MORE MONEY selling your REGULAR SEASON and conference tournaments to the media companies if you have a 64-team tournament, because you just made the regular season entirely meaningless!

You're making basketball a vastly inferior product... for no good reason. The 25% of the NCAA money they let the others have isn't worth a 60% reduction in Tournament games to sell, period. Or having no interest in the regular season because 64 of 80 teams make the dance.

You max earnings by making the NCAA Tourney an all-inclusive huge deal, even if it means paying the non-BCS their guaranteed 28 of 135 shares minimum, and then Gonzaga, A-10, MWC, MVC, AAC win shares, and the shares for any first round upsets that keep people skipping work, picking that week to ice their nuggets, and make up MOST the major highlights of March Madness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,642 Posts
And "March Madness" brings us to the legal side of things. The NCAA owns "March Madness" as a trademark brand. That's a huge loss of equity.

Second legal item: When the NLRB is saying that athletes are employees and they're fighting the PR battle about their own greed... the NCAA and the BCS does not have an anti-trust exemption.

The Supreme Court created this environment of "Conferences are TV Rights Groups." Those Conferences forming a system PURPOSELY TO EXCLUDE others in their industry violates anti-trust laws (or it's collusion. I'm not a lawyer, my terms could be wrong, the point is: it's an illegal business practice and they can be sued over it and they'd lose).

THAT is the reason that the CFP includes a G5 auto bid process. Because if the G5 signs the agreement, then there's nothing anti-competitive about a voluntary setup that was bargained among all the FBS conferences.


The BCS Breakaway probably COULDN'T be "the P5 and the Big East only" because the Big East being invited indicates they colluded to form an anti-competitive group.

The Big Boys absolutely CAN break away and form their own entity legally; but it has to be based on criteria that can be met:

"Have FBS Football" is a perfect breakaway criteria.
"X number of scholarships in X sports" (that's basically the NCAA Division criteria)

They can decide to form a new governing body, have super jacked up scholarship standards that ONLY THEY can afford, but they'd have to let in anyone who could meet those requirements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,279 Posts
Slightly off topic, but back to JP's original scheme of scheduling.
The recommendation has been to schedule more OOC games you can win, to help the entire league with good
win totals as the RPI was calculated and maybe part of the new NET.
When the P5 (and I guess the Big East) go from 16, to 18, to now 20 conference games, don't they in effect, lower their chances to create good win percentages by NOT playing those OOC games they use to play?
Or...said another way...the leagues have more of the 50/50 results in their totals than they did before?

Also, it's high time you should have reverse engineered the NET 😁
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,177 Posts
I can see that making sense for Wichita. I still agree that Gonzaga doesn’t need to move. It would have to take a lot of extra money for them to do it.

I am still a proponent of the A10 going to 15 for Wichita.
 

·
Piker
Joined
·
10,321 Posts
I can see that making sense for Wichita. I still agree that Gonzaga doesn’t need to move. It would have to take a lot of extra money for them to do it.

I am still a proponent of the A10 going to 15 for Wichita.
Well, the main reason that the Zags would think about it is that one of the two other best teams in the conference is leaving. BYU is out and the MW is a better basketball conference. It is rumors but it makes sense that Gonzaga might think about it. They only really have St Mary's as competition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JonBoy

·
Registered
St. Bonaventure
Joined
·
6,809 Posts
Wichita? Yes. The MWC is a perfect fit for them. Gonzaga? Hell no. Even with BYU leaving, how does a move really benefit the Zags? Their OOC is always loaded, and then they plow their way to a 30-win season with a top 1-4 seed. How does that improve in the MWC?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,177 Posts
Wichita? Yes. The MWC is a perfect fit for them. Gonzaga? Hell no. Even with BYU leaving, how does a move really benefit the Zags? Their OOC is always loaded, and then they plow their way to a 30-win season with a top 1-4 seed. How does that improve in the MWC?
It’s like a reverse P5 schedule. They get all of their “good wins/losses” OOC and the “cupcakes” in conference. If it’s a year SMC is good, then there’s a bonus.
 

·
Piker
Joined
·
10,321 Posts
Wichita? Yes. The MWC is a perfect fit for them. Gonzaga? Hell no. Even with BYU leaving, how does a move really benefit the Zags? Their OOC is always loaded, and then they plow their way to a 30-win season with a top 1-4 seed. How does that improve in the MWC?
Yeah. These are Mountain West slanted rumors. Gonzaga would be better suited for the Pac12
 

·
Registered
St. Bonaventure
Joined
·
6,809 Posts
It’s like a reverse P5 schedule. They get all of their “good wins/losses” OOC and the “cupcakes” in conference. If it’s a year SMC is good, then there’s a bonus.
Exactly. They only play 16 league games, so they have 15 OOCs to load up with plenty of whetstone games.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
592 Posts
JP: Inflation? You are really reaching and literally don’t have one actual number to support your position. It is also evident you are not an antitrust lawyer. For the P5 the OOC season is already meaningless. That is why they are increasing the conference games and neutral sight games against other p5 teams (also to hurt mid majors). Also with less teams sharing in the tournament they can get less tv money but still make more. Tv may pay more for OOC games. You literally have no idea what the numbers are. But we do know that the big conferences continue to do everything they can to separate themselves. If you don’t think they are looking at this you are naive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
592 Posts
As an addendum to my post above: here is quote from a mid major coach to Matt Norlander on why he thinks the move of Texas and OU to SEC is bad for College Basketball:
  • "It concerns me as a mid-major coach in that I believe we are headed to the Autonomy Five attempting to break off."
 
1841 - 1860 of 1882 Posts
Top