American Athletic Conference

[Shocker1976]

That league u just listed is an absolute pile of crap.

Three questions:

1. Is the league I listed better than the Missouri Valley Conference?
2. Does the league meet Bardo's vision of "like-minded " universities?
3. Does that league contain schools who are currently trying to remain competitive in basketball?

How about you providing an alternative that is more attractive for basketball fans while meeting President Bardo's vision.

[Shocker1976]

That table offers a list of no-name schools that have had some recent success. If there is to be a new conference formed, it better have some name brand teams and not just a bunch of no-names that have recently had rpi's below 150.

"...no-name schools that have had some recent success"; you mean like the Shockers? Checkout the teams with which Gavitt started the Big East, you might discover some similarities with the schools you just disparaged.

Please provide a listing of those "brand name teams" that have a history of rpi's below 150 that would be interested in working with WSU to form a new conference.

[Shocker1976]

@Shocker1976, while I like your addition of UALR (another non-football school), you have 5 schools listed that are currently FBS, 3 in your first 10 and 2 of your 4 alternates. Unless the P5 pulls away, I don't see any way these schools drop out of that division, even if it would make good sense to do so.

I stayed with non-FBS football schools and I have no problem with private schools if they're committed. I'm also OK with going 12-14 schools and having divisions if it is a cost savings for the schools. If you have the numbers handy, how does Sam Houston St, Belmont, Murray St, Denver, Valparaiso, SIU, Youngstown St, and South Dakota look with your schools. These are the schools I came up with that we do not have alike and would make a pool of 22 schools.

Regards football, I am biased and do not want it to return to WSU athletics; I included football for information purposes only, as some posters on here are very interested in reinstating it.

Adding private schools jeopardizes Bardo's vision of like-minded public universities. I do not have the data with me for the schools you listed but will post when I return if posters remain interested.

[Shocker1976]

Not disagreeing with your premise, but where are these brand name schools coming from and why would they leave their current situation?

Maybe that's your point. There isn't any or too few in number. My thinking is to banned together those schools who are committed to certain levels of funding and competition who are the "best of the rest" that are not already in as good or better situation.

That is also my point, the future for WSU to join a superior conference is bleak (read non-existent); IMO for WSU to improve its conference membership it must think outside of the box and become aggressively proactive with likeminded universities.

[Shocker1976]

Thus my post on the previous page.

As football revenue shrinks, schools may look to improve basketball to add to their pot of funds. Schools may continue football, others may not. Regardless, WSU (and the Valley) need to be on the right side of this potential move. The Valley appears to be content to stay the course and watch the conference drop lower and lower in relevance. I'm somewhat surprised that all the other Valley schools appear to be OK watching other conferences pull ahead of them in basketball when many of them could be apart of improving the MVC, getting us back into the top 7 or 8 basketball conferences, and have the Valley a conference quality players want to go to.

School	Enrollment	Athletic Budget	Football	KenPom Rank
Wichita State	~ 15,000	~ $25 million	No	8
Stephen F Austin	~ 13,000	~ $16 million	Yes	27
UA Little Rock	~ 12,000	~ $10 million	No	51
UNI	~ 10,000	~ $20 million	Yes	66
South Dakota State	~ 12,000	~ $16 million	Yes	76
Louisiana Lafayette	~ 17,000	~ $23 million	Yes	109
Louisiana Monroe	~ 9,000	~ $13 million	Yes	121
North Dakota State	~ 15,000	~ $22 million	Yes	143
UN Omaha	~ 15,000	~ $16 million	No	148
Louisiana Tech	~ 12,000	~ $22 million	Yes	152
Alternates
Valparaiso	~ 5,000	Private	Yes	40
Dayton	~ 8,000	Private	Yes	59
Akron	~ 22,000	~ $34 million	Yes	91
UT Chattanooga	~ 12,000	~ $17 million	Yes	113
UA Birmingham	~ 12,000	~ $31 million	Yes	114
Illinois State	~ 18,000	~ $26 million	Yes	116
Belmont	~ 7,000	Private	No	136
SIU	~ 17,000	~ $25 million	Yes	141
Murray State	~ 11,000	~ $15 million	Yes	162
Denver	~ 11,000	Private	No	186
Sam Houston	~ 20,000	~ $15 million	Yes	210
South Dakota	~ 10,000	~ $15 million	Yes	221
Youngstown State	~ 15,000	~ $15 million	Yes	272

[Aargh]

"...no-name schools that have had some recent success"; you mean like the Shockers?

How many schools on the lists you've provided for a potential conference have 5 consecutive NCAA appearances, a F4, a S16, victories over Gonzaga, Ohio State, KU, Pittsburg, Arizona, annual mentions of various players as All-Americans?

Perhaps you haven't heard, but Wichita State is a national name brand. We graduated 2 players who've had considerable mention as All Americans, our 2-year starting PF, the guy who was supposed to be our starting center, and we're still getting mention as a top-25 team for next year.

The flash-in-the-pan schools who've managed to get a top-50 or top-100 rpi don't get or deserve the kind of respect WSU gets in the national fan base. It's really common for mid-majors to get a top-50 rpi, or maybe even a top-25 ranking for a season and then drop back into mediocrity. That's the norm. WSU broke out of that norm, and the public knows all about it.

Referring to WSU as a no-name school that has had some recent success, which you did, is kind of insulting to the program, especially coming from someone claiming to be a WSU fan.

[Shocker1976]

Referring to WSU as a no-name school that has had some recent success, which you did, is kind of insulting to the program, especially coming from someone claiming to be a WSU fan.

You took a cheap shot at the schools I listed and I demonstrated how easy one can "turn your words" on you. I do not want to get into a discussion with you of which of us is the true Shocker fan but will say I have been a Shocker fan since 1960, were you even alive then?

When do you anticipate posting that list "...of those "brand name teams" that have a history of rpi's below 150 that would be interested in working with WSU to form a new conference."?

[ShockTalk]

How many schools on the lists you've provided for a potential conference have 5 consecutive NCAA appearances, a F4, a S16, victories over Gonzaga, Ohio State, KU, Pittsburg, Arizona, annual mentions of various players as All-Americans?

Perhaps you haven't heard, but Wichita State is a national name brand. We graduated 2 players who've had considerable mention as All Americans, our 2-year starting PF, the guy who was supposed to be our starting center, and we're still getting mention as a top-25 team for next year.

The flash-in-the-pan schools who've managed to get a top-50 or top-100 rpi don't get or deserve the kind of respect WSU gets in the national fan base. It's really common for mid-majors to get a top-50 rpi, or maybe even a top-25 ranking for a season and then drop back into mediocrity. That's the norm. WSU broke out of that norm, and the public knows all about it.

Referring to WSU as a no-name school that has had some recent success, which you did, is kind of insulting to the program, especially coming from someone claiming to be a WSU fan.

I think the frustration is that WSU is not attracting any attention from potential conferences that have room for and/or that we could be an asset to. 1) AAC has an odd number of basketball schools, could use more stability for their conference, we would be an asset RPI/NCAA appearance wise, have a rival school in that conference, and are a regional fit. 2) MWC has an odd number of basketball schools, they could definitely use the RPI/NCAA appearance bump, we are on the eastern edge of their conference and would be a good fit if they do divisions. 3) Big East has a strong rival school of WSU, we are a non-football school, would add to the overall basketball strength of the conference. Yet, not even a nibble.

We see the MVC going down the shitter behind conferences like the Summit, Mid-American, and Colonial and without WSU, the conference would be a lot worse. The thought is: are there any Valley teams concerned about this as well as other schools from other conferences who feel they are being held back by too many bottom-feeders in their conference, but don't see a solution out there. Is there a possibility for an A-10 type conference in the mid west and plains area? Many of these schools have done well considering the difficulty of attracting quality players due to their conference as well as the drag their conference puts on the RPI. How much better could these schools be in a stronger conference?

The best way for this to work is to have the best of the Valley schools part of this movement. "Replacing" schools who appear to only want to "suck the teat", drag on the conference, don't have the funds even if they wanted to do better, and/or have maxed out at a mediocre level. Are there schools on those lists that would make improvements and help be better than a double digit RPI conference?

[Shocker1976]

@Shocker1976, while I like your addition of UALR (another non-football school), you have 5 schools listed that are currently FBS, 3 in your first 10 and 2 of your 4 alternates. Unless the P5 pulls away, I don't see any way these schools drop out of that division, even if it would make good sense to do so.

I stayed with non-FBS football schools and I have no problem with private schools if they're committed. I'm also OK with going 12-14 schools and having divisions if it is a cost savings for the schools. If you have the numbers handy, how does Sam Houston St, Belmont, Murray St, Denver, Valparaiso, SIU, Youngstown St, and South Dakota look with your schools. These are the schools I came up with that we do not have alike and would make a pool of 22 schools.

ShockTalk I posted the data on the schools as you requested. Drawing teams from the larger pool of schools do you think a conference could be created that would rank in the Top 5 Basketball Conferences?

IMO a conference could be built that would be superior to the New Big East and SEC; which of the remaining conferences currently ranked among the strongest conferences in NCAA basketball do you think such a new Heartland Conference could be competitive or superior?

[WstateU]

I do not want to get into a discussion with you of which of us is the true Shocker fan but will say I have been a Shocker fan since 1960, were you even alive then?

I'm guessing @Aargh: has you beat... and I'm not too far behind. :)

[ShockTalk]

ShockTalk I posted the data on the schools as you requested. Drawing teams from the larger pool of schools do you think a conference could be created that would rank in the Top 5 Basketball Conferences?

IMO a conference could be built that would be superior to the New Big East and SEC; which of the remaining conferences currently ranked among the strongest conferences in NCAA basketball do you think such a new Heartland Conference could be competitive or superior?

I think you're too high. Year in and year out, I would not expect top 10 teams out of this conference, 2 in the top 20-25 might regularly happen, 3 in good years. I'd think A-10, AAC good is much more likely. The minimum is to get into the Top 10 conferences annually and more like 7-8th. Don't forget, the WCC and MWC had a bad year and I expect them to average higher. Key will be trying to keep all schools better than 200 RPI. The Mid-America's 2 bottom RPI school's were around 200-203, however, I'd expect more top 50 and 100 teams than they had (3 total). Bradley and Drake killed the Valley this year and losing Creighton will probably keep the Valley out of the top 8 if not top 10 conferences from here on out. Get rid of those 300+ RPIs with a top 50 and top 100 and the Valley looks altogether different.

Normally, I'd say these are the top conferences today: P5s, Big East, A-10, AAC, MWC, and WCC, probably close to that order. A conference needs to be closer to the P5s and Big East than any conference not named in this group and among the top 2 of those bottom 4. Do that and you'll have a successful conference that you can recruit to. I'm not expecting a P5 comparable conference, just one that's not going to get left behind.

[Shocker1976]

I think you're too high. Year in and year out, I would not expect top 10 teams out of this conference, 2 in the top 20-25 might regularly happen, 3 in good years. I'd think A-10, AAC good is much more likely. The minimum is to get into the Top 10 conferences annually and more like 7-8th. Don't forget, the WCC and MWC had a bad year and I expect them to average higher. Key will be trying to keep all schools better than 200 RPI. The Mid-America's 2 bottom RPI school's were around 200-203, however, I'd expect more top 50 and 100 teams than they had (3 total). Bradley and Drake killed the Valley this year and losing Creighton will probably keep the Valley out of the top 8 if not top 10 conferences from here on out. Get rid of those 300+ RPIs with a top 50 and top 100 and the Valley looks altogether different.

Normally, I'd say these are the top conferences today: P5s, Big East, A-10, AAC, MWC, and WCC, probably close to that order. A conference needs to be closer to the P5s and Big East than any conference not named in this group and among the top 2 of those bottom 4. Do that and you'll have a successful conference that you can recruit to. I'm not expecting a P5 comparable conference, just one that's not going to get left behind.

HC3G influences my thinking significantly; IMO he has the Shocker program at the "reload" level and this year will be telling in this regard. I agree that a Top Ten team each year in this potential conference is unlikely and that 2 or 3 teams in the Top 25 could be a regular occurrence resulting in 3/4 NCAA Tournament invitations per year.

IMO year-in-year-out the ACC is the best basketball conference followed by the B1G, then Big 12, PAC12, SEC, Big East, A-10, AAC, MWC and WCC. Should the Shockers play in a conference with SFA, Valparaiso, UALR, Dayton, UNI, South Dakota State, Akron, Louisiana Lafayette and Illinois State; such conference year-in-year-out will fall in the second half of the aforementioned Top Ten conference ranking. Surpassing the New Big East and the SEC occasionally IMO would be a real possibility.

[Shockerman]

Should the study commissioned by WSU conclude that no viable option exists for the Shockers to move from the MVC and given Bardo's public comments that he would like the University to be a member in a conference with public universities that share a common mission and research orientation; I hope that he will engage Jim Schaus to mimic Dave Gavitt's dream of a basketball focused conference to compete with the P5 conferences. Gavitt invited nine schools to be founding members (Providence, St John's, Syracuse, Georgetown, Seton Hall, UCONN, Boston College, Holy Cross and Rutgers; the last two declined and were replaced by Villanova and Pittsburgh).

Think BIG and outside the box President Bardo; the following table offers a possible new Heartland Conference for which Jim Schaus could serve as the initial Commissioner:

School	Enrollment	Athletic Budget	Football	KenPom Rank
Wichita State	~ 15,000	~ $25 million	No	8
Stephen F Austin	~ 13,000	~ $16 million	Yes	27
UA Little Rock	~ 12,000	~ $10 million	No	51
UNI	~ 10,000	~ $20 million	Yes	66
South Dakota State	~ 12,000	~ $16 million	Yes	76
Louisiana Lafayette	~ 17,000	~ $23 million	Yes	109
Louisiana Monroe	~ 9,000	~ $13 million	Yes	121
North Dakota State	~ 15,000	~ $22 million	Yes	143
UN Omaha	~ 15,000	~ $16 million	No	148
Louisiana Tech	~ 12,000	~ $22 million	Yes	152
Alternates
Akron	~ 22,000	~ $34 million	Yes	91
UT Chattanooga	~ 12,000	~ $17 million	Yes	113
UA Birmingham	~ 12,000	~ $31 million	Yes	114
Illinois State	~ 18,000	~ $26 million	Yes	116

This might be the worst proposal in the history of conference fantasy realignment. The only schools on your list that have any slight appeal are

UL- Excellent baseball program, a joke in basketball, football but improving.
UNI-Because we already hate them
NDSU- because they remind me of Missouri State as an up and comer. Except they actually win...a lot.

[Shocker1976]

This might be the worst proposal in the history of conference fantasy realignment. The only schools on your list that have any slight appeal are

UL- Excellent baseball program, a joke in basketball, football but improving.
UNI-Because we already hate them
NDSU- because they remind me of Missouri State as an up and comer. Except they actually win...a lot.

I am not advocating this Conference; I am trying to stimulate a discussion regards the plight the Shockers currently face regards conference realignment. As I asked Aargh, please post your idea regards a better option for Wichita State.

Must we resign ourselves to enjoying membership in the Valley??

[1972Shocker]

Must we resign ourselves to enjoying membership in the Valley??

That is one of the things the current study will allegedly address. However, Dr. Bardo has state that the answer to that question may well be that the Valley is our best option at this point. I don't think that is the answer they really want to hear but Dr. Bardo has stated that it is a possible answer.

The biggest problem the WSU seems to have at this point when it comes to conference realignment is that opportunities are more dependent on what the target conferences and their institutions desire and not on what WSU may desire. In other words, WSU is not driving the bus at this point. The best they can do is position themselves to be at the bus stop should the bus every come along.

I do think that the Valley could take some steps to strengthen itself overall if they were more proactive but they don't seem to be of a mind to do that. Perhaps, a couple of schools on your list could figure in to that if the Valley ever decided to make some moves. Hard to put a lot of faith in that considering the Valley's history of being on the wrong side of conference realignment.