American Athletic Conference

[Ta Town Shocker]

Murray State!

Please explain why Murray State wouldn't be a good option. They have a pretty good history in basketball and play in a 20 million dollar arena.

[SubGod22]

Any addition that could compete with the top 3 or 4 teams is a good add. If you define good as a team that is automatically the best in the conference, then no, there are no good options. There are teams that can help this conference and keep it in the top 8 or 9 conferences. There are teams that could be added and get at large bids. Those are good adds.

[ABC]

Please explain why Murray State wouldn't be a good option. They have a pretty good history in basketball and play in a 20 million dollar arena.

Tell me why they would be a good option. Seriously, if that is a good option, I hate to see the bad one.

Murra State's endowment is $32 million and their athletic budget is $9 million. They have 10,000 students.

WKU athletic budget is $18 million

[shox1989]

I think the Valley should only consider schools that spend around $20 million on athletics (a little less is okay if they don't have football) and at least $2 million on men's basketball. Anyone else is not committed enough to athletics to be worth going after in the long run.

[MoValley John]

To me that's like early on thinking of Creighton to the Catholic 7 was a pipe dream because they are west of the Mississippi.

I'm sorry for bringing this up, but the above comment bodes the question, is Wichita State east of the turnpike?

[RoyalShock]

9 is not a safe number for the MVC. And waiting for the A10 isn't smart. By all accounts, SLU and Dayton will both be gone. IF the A10 decides to keep a midwest presence and we wait around, we could lose out on the better options to our east. There are NO home run options. There are only schools that have good/solid programs with upside.

Denver is in a big city and would bring in a new market. They're investing heavily in basketball and have come a long way the past 5 years. It's also an easy to get to location for everyone.

ORU isn't anybody's favorite, but they're in a decent market in Tulsa and would give us a presence in OK. Solid but not great program. Wouldn't do anything to hurt the MVC.

Belmont has been tremendous and has a top 20 RPI this year. Attendance isn't great, but a Nashville presence isn't bad at all.

Arlington is much like Denver and would put us in the Dallas area. More exposure. They continue to improve and are investing in basketball.

Murray St. doesn't give you a market but they've been a pretty solid program the past 10 years or so.

Wright St is a solid but not great program in Dayton. Attendance is ok.

Valpo is a pretty solid program with ok attendance.

Point being is there are good options out there. There are a number of schools that could finish and compete in the upper half of the conference. Those are the schools we should be targeting. The MVC needs to secure at least one solid school. I do think 12 is still a good option. And some of these schools could very well improve by being in the MVC where they'll get more exposure and money.

I said a a few years ago that we should go to 12 and target Butler and another. I've heard that Butler wanted in sometime between 5-10 years ago and the MVC said no because they couldn't get SLU. Elgin would not add anyone unless SLU was involved. There's nothing wrong with expanding the footprint some. More TVs/markets can't hurt next time we're looking for a TV deal. Especially if NBC/CBS/Fox are serious about content and competing with ESPN. I think our deal goes for a few more years and it's possible that if we shopped around when that time comes, we could get more money per school, even with 12, if we add solid teams that bring in new areas. That's one reason I believe we should take a serious look at Denver, Arlington, Belmont and Wright State. Milwaukee was on my list but I am concerned about their finances right now. IF they could prove that had a good plan and were willing to build a new arena, I'd be more open to consideration.

I'm not saying 12 is a must, but it should be considered and looked into. If WSU stays or not, the MVC needs to be serious about who they add and where.

The problem with all those options is that they are, at BEST, the #2 team in their market, and in some cases even worse. Murray is in a small market and you have to wonder if they'll be very good after Canaan is gone. They aren't going to bring their markets because ESPN/Fox/CBS know there is very little interest in them.

I'm with ABC in that there just aren't three teams that will bring a net positive to the MVC. Stability, yes. Consistent money and competitiveness, no.

[SubGod22]

I'm not saying market is a huge thing, but being in those markets will put games on TVs in that market. That leads to more exposure in new areas. That can count for something. And good basketball is the biggest thing. Murray has been pretty solid for more than just the last couple years. I have more concerns about Belmont than any of the others I've seen mentioned. Once Byrd is gone, what happens to that program? A lot more looking has to go into all of these programs other than just what we see on the surface, but the options aren't as bad as some think. Most are better than at least half of the conference and some could now or in the near future be better than most in the conference. I really do believe that. Every possible addition is easily better right now than SIU, Drake, Evansville and Missouri State without a doubt. I believe all could be competitive and maybe better right now than Bradley, Illinois State, UNI and Indiana State.

Being able to compete with or maybe surpass the last group is what makes them potentially good adds. If you're looking for a no-brainer home run type add, the MVC will never add another school and never have a chance to sustain itself. And you have to consider what each new school could do with more exposure and money coming in from being in the MVC. As bad as we feel our TV deal is, it's better per school than most, if not all, similar conferences.

[shockmonster]

I'm not saying market is a huge thing, but being in those markets will put games on TVs in that market. That leads to more exposure in new areas. That can count for something. And good basketball is the biggest thing. Murray has been pretty solid for more than just the last couple years. I have more concerns about Belmont than any of the others I've seen mentioned. Once Byrd is gone, what happens to that program? A lot more looking has to go into all of these programs other than just what we see on the surface, but the options aren't as bad as some think. Most are better than at least half of the conference and some could now or in the near future be better than most in the conference. I really do believe that. Every possible addition is easily better right now than SIU, Drake, Evansville and Missouri State without a doubt. I believe all could be competitive and maybe better right now than Bradley, Illinois State, UNI and Indiana State.

Being able to compete with or maybe surpass the last group is what makes them potentially good adds. If you're looking for a no-brainer home run type add, the MVC will never add another school and never have a chance to sustain itself. And you have to consider what each new school could do with more exposure and money coming in from being in the MVC. As bad as we feel our TV deal is, it's better per school than most, if not all, similar conferences.

But at least with Belmont, you have a school on the rise. They are pretty new to Div. I athletics and at least with Byrd, they are showing a commitment to being willing to pay for excellence. I don't know what their entire athletic budget is, but they pay Byrd over 500K. That's a pretty good commitment to trying to win basketball games.

[Ta Town Shocker]

Tell me why they would be a good option. Seriously, if that is a good option, I hate to see the bad one.

Murra State's endowment is $32 million and their athletic budget is $9 million. They have 10,000 students.

WKU athletic budget is $18 million

Taking into account Men's basketball alone I think they would be very competitive in the MVC. They have a strong history in the OVC finishing first or second in the conference the last 9 seasons. They also boast 26 consecutive winning seasons. It has been projected that nearly 6 million of the WKU budget is spent on football. After doing more research on their attendance #'s and all I'm not sure they are ideal but they should be considered as an option.

[SubGod22]

But at least with Belmont, you have a school on the rise. They are pretty new to Div. I athletics and at least with Byrd, they are showing a commitment to being willing to pay for excellence. I don't know what their entire athletic budget is, but they pay Byrd over 500K. That's a pretty good commitment to trying to win basketball games.

I didn't know what his pay was. 500k does show a willingness to pay for success and is more than MSU, UE, ISUb, DU and SIU I believe. I believe UNI pays a bit more, BU is paying around 700k or a little more. Not sure what ISU is paying.


As far as whoever mentioned WKU, they play FBS football and are probably headed to CUSA to replace Tulsa when they head to the other BE schools.

[Shocker-maniac]

According to this article, Belmont's budget/resources are in line with Evansville or slightly better.

http://ovcball.net/2013/03/does-belmont-to-the-missouri-valley-make-sense/

[ABC]

And Evansville has not been a success, generaly, in the MVC.

[DUShock]

Evansville = Perpetual Spoiler

[calfan]

I don't know all the specifics, but what do you think of Belmont, Middle Tennessee State, and Akron?
Here are the RPI's of these three teams:

Belmont-20
Middle Tennessee State-31
Akron-47

http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html

[SubGod22]

MTSU plays FBS football and may end up in CUSA.
Akron also play FBS football and isn't leaving the MAC.