Great Article on the state of MAC Hoops

[orangeandbrown]

http://www.mlive.com/sports/kzgazette/i ... thispage=1

[TG1996]

If someone can give me the Cliff's Notes after midway down the second page, I'd appreciate it. It seems like a great writeup, but its about all the farther I get each time.

Unfortunately, what I've gathered so far is that the NCAA hoops tournament is closer to the BCS than I figured. Not that the MAC has necessarily deserved multiple teams year in and year out, but they deserve two more often than not, and never get it. But now it makes sense. Why would the guys from the big conferences take the side of a deserving MAC (or mid-major) school when they can line each other's pockets with "units" of a $6B payday?

Not to mention they don't have to defend big school picks beyond "Uh, tough schedule", and can get to dinner quicker on Selection Sunday.

Thanks for posting this O&B. I started to read it and thought about posting it this morning, but I've been distracted. Should be a good discussion.


EDIT TO ADD: Reading on, it gets more MAC specific about budgets and such and really is pretty interesting.

[Schadenfreude]

Nice find, O&B.

Jeez. Our schedule is 334th toughest out of 336th?

[BleedOrange]

That was those most depressing sports article that I've ever read.

I had no idea that MVC coaches were paid so well, or that MVC facilities were so much matter than those in the MAC.

Let's not just drop hockey. Let's drop football, too.

[hammb]

That was a good article. Depressing in some respects, but still a pretty well written, informative article.

As somebody who has watched at least 15 MAC games live for each of the last 7 years or so I must say that the quality of the product has gone way down. We had those years of multiple bids and we were winning games in the tourney. Then in '01-'02 KSU goes to the Elite 8, BG was a bubble casualty, and Ball State was also very good. Since that time, however, the conference has definitely taken steps back. Last year I don't thnk we had a single team that was capable of really doing anything in the tournament. I haven't watched any teams but BG this year, but I'm not convinced we have a team capable of Tourney success this year either.

Comparing the $$ committed by MVC schools to MAC schools doesn't surprise me that much. The facilities at most MAC schools seem pretty substandard. It was interesting to note how we haven't really sent many coaches on to bigger or better things. With our salaries being what they are, that's a pretty good indication that we're not finding the right up-and-comers.

I really hope that the MAC makes an improved commitment to the sport. I love football, but we will never compete with the BCS conferences in that sport with any consistency. In Basketball the tournament gives schools an opportunity to make names for themselves and become thought of as big time, even if you are still in a smaller conference (see:Gonzaga). The scheduling notes, are huge in that article. I love the MVC policy of penalties for non-D1 opponents. BG has played 2 this year, and I don't even think they should count as wins. You should NEVER, EVER play non D1 opposition for real games...exhibitions, fine, but not real games. I don't care about needing home games or whatever, don't play them.

[rangermarkb]

The MAC just has no committment to basketball from the presidents or ad's. Hambb, I understand why you would say never play non-d1 but the least amount of buy games any mvc team gets is 4 and some 6. BG gets none. It does no good to go on the road and lose games you have to teach teams how to win. The horizon is passing the mac as a basketball league. You like to talk about firing people so much hambb why dont you talk about what Cryst has done to the mac and about firing him. Here in the Horizon we are buying two and three games. Its amazing what Dan is doing there without any support, no facilities, or a budget.

[CrazyFan]

That was a good article. Depressing in some respects, but still a pretty well written, informative article.

As somebody who has watched at least 15 MAC games live for each of the last 7 years or so I must say that the quality of the product has gone way down. We had those years of multiple bids and we were winning games in the tourney. Then in '01-'02 KSU goes to the Elite 8, BG was a bubble casualty, and Ball State was also very good. Since that time, however, the conference has definitely taken steps back. Last year I don't thnk we had a single team that was capable of really doing anything in the tournament. I haven't watched any teams but BG this year, but I'm not convinced we have a team capable of Tourney success this year either.

Comparing the $$ committed by MVC schools to MAC schools doesn't surprise me that much. The facilities at most MAC schools seem pretty substandard. It was interesting to note how we haven't really sent many coaches on to bigger or better things. With our salaries being what they are, that's a pretty good indication that we're not finding the right up-and-comers.

I really hope that the MAC makes an improved commitment to the sport. I love football, but we will never compete with the BCS conferences in that sport with any consistency. In Basketball the tournament gives schools an opportunity to make names for themselves and become thought of as big time, even if you are still in a smaller conference (see:Gonzaga). The scheduling notes, are huge in that article. I love the MVC policy of penalties for non-D1 opponents. BG has played 2 this year, and I don't even think they should count as wins. You should NEVER, EVER play non D1 opposition for real games...exhibitions, fine, but not real games. I don't care about needing home games or whatever, don't play them.

Hammb, I think you should be put in charge of scheduling for the team for the next two years. Then come back and argue that you would NEVER play any school that was below D1. We would be playing 2-3 home non-conference games a year. Then go back and explain to the AD and the university president why your program isn't making any revenue from home games; "Well sir.....It's because I REFUSE to schedule anyone non D1 program because it's just wrong and doesn't count as a win. But I can't get anyone to come here and play us!" I would have to guess you wouldn't make it to long.

[orangeandbrown]

Crazy, I think you missed the point. He was contrasting the approach one conference uses to avoid playing non-D1 games (and it can be done, apparently) with our scheduling approach, based on an article that contained actual facts.

The article actually says that it takes a commitment from the schools and the conference, and that they have built in sanctions (in the MVC). The article also implies that a lack of investment in basketball in the MAC is partly related to also having D1A football, unlike the MVC or the Horizon.

[hammb]

Crazy, I think you missed the point. He was contrasting the approach one conference uses to avoid playing non-D1 games (and it can be done, apparently) with our scheduling approach, based on an article that contained actual facts.

The article actually says that it takes a commitment from the schools and the conference, and that they have built in sanctions (in the MVC). The article also implies that a lack of investment in basketball in the MAC is partly related to also having D1A football, unlike the MVC or the Horizon.

Thanks O&B.

As the article mentioned it was not that long ago that MAC hoops was considered better than the MVC without debate. However, the MVC has made a commitment to the sport. Quite possibly it's a commitment that we cannot afford, while still fielding D1A football, I don't know the financials of our conference well enough to say. Still, I would like to see the MAC make a similar commitment...if it is not possible then I'd like to see some justification as to why.

[CrazyFan]

I love the MVC policy of penalties for non-D1 opponents. BG has played 2 this year, and I don't even think they should count as wins. You should NEVER, EVER play non D1 opposition for real games...exhibitions, fine, but not real games. I don't care about needing home games or whatever, don't play them.

I was responding to this part. If I took it out of context I apologize, but I stick to above post just by reading this part. My main point is we need to schedule a couple non D1 teams AT HOME because we can't get anyone to come in to play us. We have to generate our revenue some how.

[orangeandbrown]

Ok, I get it. But you could get people to come play us. The article says that MVC members get teams to come play them by "buying games," ie, paying guarantees, and that is a result of fining teams and also of institutional commitment to basketball. That's the only point.

[hammb]

As O&B and the article outlined you CAN get those games scheduled. It takes a willingness to give return games (in some cases more than one). It also takes a willingness to pay a guaranteed sum to the opposing school. At first those things are going to dip into your budget, but it takes money to make money. If this is done on a conference scale you will see your RPI & your respect go up. When that happens you get more tourney bids. That gives you more "units" and more money to be spread out.

That is a conference wide commitment to the sport. Something that the MVC is doing that we clearly are not. Now if the MAC front office people want to tell me that it's financially not possible due to us playing football fine, prove it.

I'm sorry, I don't buy the whining that we cannot get anyone to come here. There are lot of D1 teams that are lower than us that would likely take a home & home with anyone. No reason why we cannot get 2-for-1 or 3-for-1 games with major conference opponents. Yes, we may have fewer home games, but when you're bringing in DII teams you're not exactly breaking the box office. I would bet that if you bring in a MSU, UM, or OSU type team you're going to make more in that one meeting than you'd make in 2-3 home games against DII teams.

Sure you'd have to give multiple return games and end up playing less home games on some other years, but I think it's worth it. It makes you look better. It makes the conference look better. I think a game against most Big10 teams would be a near sellout as opposed to the 1000-1200 that view the games against DII teams, as well...so if you split that revenue over a couple seasons you're in good shape.

Also, why can't we gain revenue like the football team does? I'm not as familiar with basketball scheduling, but couldn't we get deals for road games at major colleges w/o a return trip, but they give us a cut? In football you play "payday" games. Do those not exist in hoops?

I just don't like to hear things like "we can't schedule those teams" or "nobody will play us" when I see other "mid-majors" like the MVC doing just that. They made a conference-wide commitment to the sport, and it is now starting to pay off for them. No doubt it hurt them financially for a few years at first, but in the long run they're better off for it. If you'll notice the article mentioned that they've actually dropped the policy now, because the teams got the point and try to schedule as good an OOC schedule as possible now.