What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Discuss the MVC hoops season here.

What happens next?

Wichita St leaves for a better league
40
37%
Missouri St, IllinoisSt, UNI move up to FBS
27
25%
MVC expands
40
37%
 
Total votes : 107

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Postby mvfcfan » September 15th, 2017, 6:10 pm

The attitude of football on this board really irritates me though and thank goodness the public football playing universities in the MVC don't feel the same way. The Missouri Valley the past few years in football is probably the best it has ever been in history and no one on here even seems to even care. Everyone just dogs it on here because it is not FBS.

Like in the 2014 season, out of every single MVFC school, the conference only lost 2 games to other FCS opponents and one of those losses was in the playoffs (INST to Chattanooga in the second round). Then we had the MVFC / National Championship game on ESPN2 which is a pretty big deal. I'm just not too sure how you can hate football so much whenever our member schools are having a lot of success in it. I'm also not sure why people don't want NDSU and SDSU as full MVC members. Yes they are football schools, but they also have pretty good basketball. Just because you have football or don't have football doesn't mean anything. There are lots of schools out there that don't have football and are terrible at basketball.
mvfcfan
All MVC
All MVC
 
Posts: 678
Joined: March 1st, 2016, 6:05 am

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Postby glm38 » September 15th, 2017, 7:13 pm

mvfcfan wrote:The attitude of football on this board really irritates me though and thank goodness the public football playing universities in the MVC don't feel the same way. The Missouri Valley the past few years in football is probably the best it has ever been in history and no one on here even seems to even care. Everyone just dogs it on here because it is not FBS.

Like in the 2014 season, out of every single MVFC school, the conference only lost 2 games to other FCS opponents and one of those losses was in the playoffs (INST to Chattanooga in the second round). Then we had the MVFC / National Championship game on ESPN2 which is a pretty big deal. I'm just not too sure how you can hate football so much whenever our member schools are having a lot of success in it. I'm also not sure why people don't want NDSU and SDSU as full MVC members. Yes they are football schools, but they also have pretty good basketball. Just because you have football or don't have football doesn't mean anything. There are lots of schools out there that don't have football and are terrible at basketball.


I think Bearz said it best when he said if you are going to play FCS football then play it well. Most of our members (not my Bears) do play it well. And we are definitely rocking it as the best FCS conference in the country. However there is just no comparison between FCS football and NCAA basketball in terms of monetary reward and name recognition. We will continue to slide as a conference unless several Valley schools step it up in men's basketball.
User avatar
glm38
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2620
Joined: July 3rd, 2011, 2:00 pm
Location: Springfield, MO

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Postby uniftw » September 18th, 2017, 7:37 am

mvfcfan wrote:The attitude of football on this board really irritates me though and thank goodness the public football playing universities in the MVC don't feel the same way. The Missouri Valley the past few years in football is probably the best it has ever been in history and no one on here even seems to even care. Everyone just dogs it on here because it is not FBS.

Like in the 2014 season, out of every single MVFC school, the conference only lost 2 games to other FCS opponents and one of those losses was in the playoffs (INST to Chattanooga in the second round). Then we had the MVFC / National Championship game on ESPN2 which is a pretty big deal. I'm just not too sure how you can hate football so much whenever our member schools are having a lot of success in it. I'm also not sure why people don't want NDSU and SDSU as full MVC members. Yes they are football schools, but they also have pretty good basketball. Just because you have football or don't have football doesn't mean anything. There are lots of schools out there that don't have football and are terrible at basketball.

The last 7 years, or so, the MVFC - while supplying 22 less scholarships - has ranked with/a head of the MAC, CUSA, MWC and SBC

Looking at current computer models we have 5 MVFC (of the 10 teams total) in the top 100 of ALL of college football. That goes to 7 of the top 110.

There are 129 FBS teams and 255 total D1 teams.
There are 7 MVFC teams in the top 110

By comp here are the number of CUSA, MAC, SBC and MWC in the top 110
CUSA: 6
MAC: 5
SBC: 4
MWC: 4


Current Massey ratings has the MVFC tied with the MAC and MWC. A head of CUSA, SBC. Tied with the G5 as a whole in that ranking, actually.

Here's another computer ranking that I really like - ranks D1-NAIA. MVFC is 9th
1 Big 10 Conference ( 29- 8) 149.62 0.541 1.00
2 Southeastern Confere ( 26- 6) 149.55 0.538 1.00
3 Big 12 Conference ( 19- 10) 149.30 0.454 1.00
4 Pacific 12 Conferenc ( 26- 7) 148.05 0.606 1.00
5 Atlantic Coast Confe ( 22- 9) 147.96 0.567 1.00
6 American Athletic Co ( 18- 10) 138.54 0.591 1.00
7 Division I FBS Indep ( 5- 9) 135.23 0.374 1.00
8 Mountain West Confer ( 15- 19) 135.07 0.604 1.00
9 Missouri Valley Foot ( 18- 8) 130.61 0.482 1.50
10 Mid-American Confere ( 18- 17) 129.36 0.604 1.00
11 Conference USA ( 16- 20) 125.66 0.615 1.00
12 Colonial Athletic As ( 21- 10) 122.14 0.711 1.50
13 Sun Belt Conference ( 9- 18) 121.84 0.566 1.00

The FCS, in many ways, is what it is made out to be here. However, the reality is that the G5 could easily be seen as a much bigger money waste than the FCS. They offer 22 more scholarships - meaning 44 more scholarships. They pay their coaches 3-6 times what the FCS does - with larger coaching staffs. They play in 60% empty stadiums that cost millions per year to upkeep. It is well known how much money bowl games end up losing programs.

Each fan base/school has their own feeling on football. Schools that currently have football will not see the benefits those without football assume they will by dropping the program.
uniftw
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: January 20th, 2011, 9:01 pm

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Postby uniftw » September 18th, 2017, 8:08 am

It is interesting to see schools like WSU, Dayton, Gonzaga, etc... used as examples that not having football helps in a big way.

Doing some quick research on RPIs from last year using RealtimeRPI.com

Of the final top 100
75 had football of some form - 4 FCS programs
25 had no football (I included VCU's club team as a no)

Teams 101-150
37 had football of some form
13 had no football

I decided to carry this out to see when non-football schools started to "take control" of a ranking group before we got too far into the D1 schools with no business being D1

151-200
33 had football in some form
17 had no football****
UAB was counted as a "no" here but their football program being cut is well documented and it actually restarted this year so we can call it 34 yes and 16 no just accurately

201-250
32 had football in some form
18 had no football

I cut it off there because after that it's 99% schools, football or not, that shouldn't be D1.

Interesting to see there is a direct correlation to % of a group of 50 with football to it's grouping.

1-50 - 78% had football
51-100 72% had football
101-150 74% had football
151-200 66% had football
201-250 64% had football

Does that many anything? Who knows. Just some interesting numbers
uniftw
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: January 20th, 2011, 9:01 pm

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Postby Khan4Cats » September 18th, 2017, 10:54 am

rally wrote:
Khan4Cats wrote:
I'd be curious to see the balance sheets of the private schools to see just how profitable their 'non-football' athletic departments are. I doubt they are any more profitable than the football playing publics.


If all or almost all FCS schools are losing money playing football, their overall athletic departments are going to be worse off then if they didn't sponsor football. Conversely, if you don't sponsor football, your athletic department if going to be better off than if it did because aren't losing money on it. That's one factor, and there are plenty of others in judging the performance of an athletic department. But the negative financial effect that FCS football has on an athletic department is pretty much undeniable.



Almost all or most FBS schools are losing money on football as well. Still doesn't answer the question as to whether non-football playing schools are not also losing money. As was noted, UNI did a study and it found that the university would lose a lot more money if it didn't have football than it does currently.

The same can be said for athletics in the university setting as a whole. Very few athletic departments make money for their universities, I think the last numbers I saw were something like only 25 schools nationwide. Does that mean all athletics should be cut? I know their are some elite intellectual-only types that think so.
Khan4Cats
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 1008
Joined: August 8th, 2010, 8:59 am

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Postby mvfcfan » September 18th, 2017, 3:37 pm

FBS football is a big waste of money if you are not in a Power 5 league. Does anyone really care about the Sun Belt, MAC, or the CUSA? All the former FCS powers in the Sun Belt and the CUSA have pretty much been forgotten about. If you are going to be in a G5 conference then the AAC and the MWC are the ones to be in. Anything other than that is a waste of time and money. I'd also rather compete for championships than play in some meaningless bowl game at the end of the season. Some schools like App State and Georgia Southern got too big for their britches and are now after thoughts in the college football world because they're never going to make noise in anything, while teams like North Dakota State and James Madison are still pretty well known because they can win championships.

I also predict that if/when the Power 5 breaks away from the NCAA that the remaining G5 schools will simply play football with the rest of the FCS. It would be pointless for them to try to keep their own separate thing going. The only reason they have FBS football is because they are trying to compete with the bigger schools.

And then the question remains, will basketball be as important to some of you on this message board when it happens or will you all want to just drop all sports at that point? Football and basketball are the two main college sports that people care about. Some of us take pride in having both. Sports shouldn't be all about money.

And it's kind of stupid to think that we will ever actually compete with the bigger conferences again. Those days are over. No one even really knows how the selection committee chooses teams anymore. Used to it was RPI, now it's anyone's best guess (most likely money). The ACC has made over $100 Million from the past 3 years in the NCAA tournament. Please tell me how we are ever going to compete with that. Then add in their TV contract money, donors, etc and it's even worse. For smaller D1 schools FCS football is the most even playing field we have.
mvfcfan
All MVC
All MVC
 
Posts: 678
Joined: March 1st, 2016, 6:05 am

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Postby glm38 » September 19th, 2017, 10:25 am

mvfcfan wrote:FBS football is a big waste of money if you are not in a Power 5 league. Does anyone really care about the Sun Belt, MAC, or the CUSA? All the former FCS powers in the Sun Belt and the CUSA have pretty much been forgotten about. If you are going to be in a G5 conference then the AAC and the MWC are the ones to be in. Anything other than that is a waste of time and money. I'd also rather compete for championships than play in some meaningless bowl game at the end of the season. Some schools like App State and Georgia Southern got too big for their britches and are now after thoughts in the college football world because they're never going to make noise in anything, while teams like North Dakota State and James Madison are still pretty well known because they can win championships.

I also predict that if/when the Power 5 breaks away from the NCAA that the remaining G5 schools will simply play football with the rest of the FCS. It would be pointless for them to try to keep their own separate thing going. The only reason they have FBS football is because they are trying to compete with the bigger schools.

And then the question remains, will basketball be as important to some of you on this message board when it happens or will you all want to just drop all sports at that point? Football and basketball are the two main college sports that people care about. Some of us take pride in having both. Sports shouldn't be all about money.

And it's kind of stupid to think that we will ever actually compete with the bigger conferences again. Those days are over. No one even really knows how the selection committee chooses teams anymore. Used to it was RPI, now it's anyone's best guess (most likely money). The ACC has made over $100 Million from the past 3 years in the NCAA tournament. Please tell me how we are ever going to compete with that. Then add in their TV contract money, donors, etc and it's even worse. For smaller D1 schools FCS football is the most even playing field we have.


Wichita has done a pretty good job of competing with the big boys in basketball over the past 10 years or so. It's not easy but that shows its at least possible in mens basketball.
User avatar
glm38
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2620
Joined: July 3rd, 2011, 2:00 pm
Location: Springfield, MO

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Postby mvfcfan » September 19th, 2017, 3:41 pm

But once again they have the Koch Brothers giving them a lot of money. No other current MVC school has that.
mvfcfan
All MVC
All MVC
 
Posts: 678
Joined: March 1st, 2016, 6:05 am

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Postby glm38 » September 19th, 2017, 4:44 pm

mvfcfan wrote:But once again they have the Koch Brothers giving them a lot of money. No other current MVC school has that.


Money is part of it. But to me the most critical thing is hiring and retaining too notch coaches. I would argue that UNI has done the same thing as WSU to a lesser degree. They are coming off a down year but over the past 10 years they have been very good and have had some great years competing at the highest levels. They don't have a huge budget and piles of cash. Yes UNI pays him (Jacobsen) well but there are IMO several mvc schools would pay a similarly successful coach very well. There are just too many mediocre coaches in the mvc. And I include MSU in that number.
User avatar
glm38
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2620
Joined: July 3rd, 2011, 2:00 pm
Location: Springfield, MO

Re: What's the next realignment domino to fall?

Postby Drakey » September 19th, 2017, 6:47 pm

[quote="uniftw"]It is interesting to see schools like WSU, Dayton, Gonzaga, etc... used as examples that not having football helps in a big way.

Doing some quick research on RPIs from last year using RealtimeRPI.com

Of the final top 100
75 had football of some form - 4 FCS programs
25 had no football (I included VCU's club team as a no)

I think this statistic only proves the point you are trying to refute. Unless you are a FBS football school, the most likely path to success in basketball is to have no football. Top 100 consists of 71 FBS schools, 25 non-football schools and 4 FCS schools.
Drakey
All MVC
All MVC
 
Posts: 786
Joined: August 6th, 2010, 9:21 am

PreviousNext

Return to Missouri Valley Conference Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: tribecalledquest and 75 guests