Conference Realignment: What Next?

[hoops22]

Although Creighton has a lot going for it geographically and basketball wise, I don't think that's where the Big 12 will turn either. They've been the best basketball conference for a few years now, and really don't need help in that department. They need to expand their visibility beyond the Texas/Oklahoma? Kansas markets. I still think the west coast is where they'll look first. The northeast is a possibility, but I think the ACC would try to subvert that. They're likely to lose Clemson and Florida St. at some point, and the ACC may decide to try to reassert itself as a premier basketball league again, once that happens. Plus an added northeast presence, plus Georgetown might convince Notre Dame to stick around. Personally, I'm sick of it all and would like to see the status quo maintained. i really like the BE as is, and hope it continues on without any major disruptions. But I don't think the realignment merry go round is over yet.

[aughnanure]

The problem is none of us have financials and can work out scenarios. Let's say for instance if Gonzaga lowers a level like they have this season, and then another level post-Few where they're a fringe Top 25 team (sometimes missing the Tournament like almost all teams do). At that point would they still improve the Big East payouts in future TV deals? Or would they actually bring our value per team down? I don't know, but if I were to guess, they wouldn't help.

.

Yes. I think you are massively downplaying the unique power the Gonzaga brand has become. They are literally a national brand, those fans are still going to be there watching even if they are fringe top-25 or whatever. And who expected every team to never go through a bumpy period? The point is Gonzaga has been so successful for so long that their brand and eyeballs they bring, even when they're having just an okay season, are worth it.

That being said, the ONLY actual reason to oppose Gonzaga is geography. All this other "how good are they gonna be post-Few" questioning is stupid. If it doesn't work well, it doesn't work - but its not because you're worried about them after Few. I used to think 25-75 it likely wouldn't work but after UCLA and USC to the B1G I'm not so sure.

[adoraz]

The problem is none of us have financials and can work out scenarios. Let's say for instance if Gonzaga lowers a level like they have this season, and then another level post-Few where they're a fringe Top 25 team (sometimes missing the Tournament like almost all teams do). At that point would they still improve the Big East payouts in future TV deals? Or would they actually bring our value per team down? I don't know, but if I were to guess, they wouldn't help.

.

Yes. I think you are massively downplaying the unique power the Gonzaga brand has become. They are literally a national brand, those fans are still going to be there watching even if they are fringe top-25 or whatever. And who expected every team to never go through a bumpy period? The point is Gonzaga has been so successful for so long that their brand and eyeballs they bring, even when they're having just an okay season, are worth it.

That being said, the ONLY actual reason to oppose Gonzaga is geography. All this other "how good are they gonna be post-Few" questioning is stupid. If it doesn't work well, it doesn't work - but its not because you're worried about them after Few. I used to think 25-75 it likely wouldn't work but after UCLA and USC to the B1G I'm not so sure.

I could be downplaying their brand, but my post was 100% about their geography. If they were located anywhere besides Washington then they would've been in the BE 15 years ago. I'm just skeptical if they'd still be beneficial to the BE even during down years.

[stever20]

Just adding 1 team would add 10 conference games to the mix(plus another 4-5 OOC games). Would get up to 120 conference games. Definitely makes things much easier to create 2 packages to sell to TV if that's what Val wants to do(which is quite possible). Also have the west coast game slot available which networks like. Even if Gonzaga doesn't show up quite like they have been before this year, them the way they are this year would still add money to the pot for sure.

[Omaha1]

PAC-12 commish is visiting San Diego State and SMU.

[butlerguy03]

and only 1.5 of the others would be dead weight (DePaul and Butler)

This is the type of comment that makes me wonder why I ever come on this forum. A couple of down years and suddenly you're dead weight, yet Georgetown and St. John's are all good but haven't accomplished anything in a generation.

[ArmyVet]

and only 1.5 of the others would be dead weight (DePaul and Butler)

This is the type of comment that makes me wonder why I ever come on this forum. A couple of down years and suddenly you're dead weight, yet Georgetown and St. John's are all good but haven't accomplished anything in a generation.

I'm glad you posted. There aren't enough Butler fans to offer counterpoints to be honest.

[Jasper67]

If there is a Big East team the Big 12 adds it is probably Creighton. On the CBS Eye on College basketball podcast, Matt Norlander suggested that the Big 12 presidents have to be sold on adding a basketball school and if they added Gonzaga, would possibly add one more school west of the Mississippi (my bet is Creighton or St. Mary's). If that happened, the Big East should stay at 10. Six of the remaining members would be original members and only 1.5 of the others would be dead weight (DePaul and Butler). An 18-game round robin schedule would also increase the possibility of getting in 7 teams.

The networks want content. Getting smaller decreases content and isn’t the way to go. Not when there’s a new contract coming up to be negotiated. Add to that the fact that some programs bring little or no value to the contract. Interest in the Georgetown and St. John’s programs has dwindled to the point where home attendance averaged in the 5000-6000 range for both programs. DePaul was down around 3000.

[stever20]

If there is a Big East team the Big 12 adds it is probably Creighton. On the CBS Eye on College basketball podcast, Matt Norlander suggested that the Big 12 presidents have to be sold on adding a basketball school and if they added Gonzaga, would possibly add one more school west of the Mississippi (my bet is Creighton or St. Mary's). If that happened, the Big East should stay at 10. Six of the remaining members would be original members and only 1.5 of the others would be dead weight (DePaul and Butler). An 18-game round robin schedule would also increase the possibility of getting in 7 teams.

The networks want content. Getting smaller decreases content and isn’t the way to go. Not when there’s a new contract coming up to be negotiated. Add to that the fact that some programs bring little or no value to the contract. Interest in the Georgetown and St. John’s programs has dwindled to the point where home attendance averaged in the 5000-6000 range for both programs. DePaul was down around 3000.

Yup. And 18 game round robin schedule does not increase the possibility of getting 7 teams in. Only once in the 6 years that there was a NCAA tourney did the league get 7 in. And that year Providence was the 4th last team in playing in Dayton.

[aughnanure]

The problem is none of us have financials and can work out scenarios. Let's say for instance if Gonzaga lowers a level like they have this season, and then another level post-Few where they're a fringe Top 25 team (sometimes missing the Tournament like almost all teams do). At that point would they still improve the Big East payouts in future TV deals? Or would they actually bring our value per team down? I don't know, but if I were to guess, they wouldn't help.

.

Yes. I think you are massively downplaying the unique power the Gonzaga brand has become. They are literally a national brand, those fans are still going to be there watching even if they are fringe top-25 or whatever. And who expected every team to never go through a bumpy period? The point is Gonzaga has been so successful for so long that their brand and eyeballs they bring, even when they're having just an okay season, are worth it.

That being said, the ONLY actual reason to oppose Gonzaga is geography. All this other "how good are they gonna be post-Few" questioning is stupid. If it doesn't work well, it doesn't work - but its not because you're worried about them after Few. I used to think 25-75 it likely wouldn't work but after UCLA and USC to the B1G I'm not so sure.

I could be downplaying their brand, but my post was 100% about their geography. If they were located anywhere besides Washington then they would've been in the BE 15 years ago. I'm just skeptical if they'd still be beneficial to the BE even during down years.

My apologies then on reading that exchange incorrectly.