Power Conferences move to 20 game Conf Schedules will (purposely) hurt MidMajors

[VU2014]

ValpoPal brought this up in another thread but I thought its important enough that it warrants it's own thread because it is a very serious issue facing ALL Mid-Major Conferences.

I think there is something more important, more immediate, and more sinister than expansion in this news and other news stories that report Big Ten coaches have voted to expand their conference schedule to 20 games and the ACC is moving to 20 conference games. When the Big East, Big Ten, and ACC move to larger conference schedules, the result will be to decrease opportunities for non Power 5 conferences, especially mid-major teams, to enhance their strength of schedule or incomes with games against upper tier teams. The (un)intended consequence is to add more at-large invitations from the Power 5 conferences and shut out at-large bids to non Power 5 conferences.

"Moving to 20 league games is going to change the entire model," one Big Ten athletic director told FanRag Sports last week. "They want to wipe out the non-Power 5 schools from getting at-large bids completely. Moving to 20 games makes that more of a realistic possibility."

https://www.fanragsports.com/rothstein-big-ten-head-coaches-vote-in-favor-of-schedule-change-2/

https://www.fanragsports.com/trickle-down-impact-20-game-power-5-league-schedules/

[VU2014]

If we assume that there is a competition for at-large tourney spots between the Power 5 + 1 conferences and the other conferences, the other conferences need a concerted strategy. Here is my suggestion:

Take the top two teams from the previous year from the MVC, A10, Mountain West, WCAC, American and Conference USA (and maybe also the MAAC and MAC). Plan scheduling to include a tournament (on home courts) spaced throughout November and December. This drives up strength of schedule (assuming these games replace games with lower teams). Do the same thing with the third and fourth place teams in those conferences, fifth and sixth, etc. This increases the strength of schedule for top teams in those conferences, solves the scheduling nightmares many teams have, and still allows plenty of room to schedule Power 5 + 1 teams.

[IrishDawg]

I know it keeps being referred to as "Power 5" because of football, but in basketball with the Big East it's at least a Power 6, if not a Power 7 or 8 if you look at the AAC and A-10 who are regularly going to get multiple bids.  The only way that P5 football leagues would eat up all the bids is if they went out and started their own tournament.  Could happen in the future, but for now, it's unlikely.

While moving to 20 games can possibly make it more likely that a mid-major doesn't get an at-large bid, honestly the number of mid-major programs getting at large bids has pretty much been eliminated already.  Keep in mind with the below that there are 32 auto bids and 36 at-large bids for the NCAA tournament.

2017 tourney (non P5/Big East programs with at-large berths)
1. Cincinnati (American)
2. Dayton (A-10)
3. VCU (A-10)
4. St. Mary's (WCC)

Yes, there were 32 at-large selections from the P5/Big East last season

2016 tourney
1. Temple (American)
2. Cincinnati (American)
3. Tulsa (American)
4. Dayton (A-10)
5. VCU (A-10)
6. Wichita State (MVC)

And 30/36 the year before that, and of the two instances in which a school not from the 8 leagues I mentioned to start made it, one, Wichita State, is now in the American.  So while you may think the power leagues are moving to 20 games to get even more bids, the argument can be made that they've already accomplished that.  This move is just twisting the knife.

FYI, in 2015 there were 4 at-large bids not from those main 8 leagues.

[ml2]

I know it keeps being referred to as "Power 5" because of football, but in basketball with the Big East it's at least a Power 6, if not a Power 7 or 8 if you look at the AAC and A-10 who are regularly going to get multiple bids.

You state this as if it is an unalterable fact, when in reality it is the exact rationale for the current push to 20 games by the Power 5. They want the Power 5 to be just as dominant in basketball as football and can't stomach the reality of a Power 6, 7 or 8. Success by Big East, AAC or A-10 teams is even more of a detriment and threat to them than the 1-bid mid major leagues. I guarantee that Villanova's and UConn's recent national championships were far more galling to the Power 5 than Butler and VCU's Final Four appearances. 

So while you may think the power leagues are moving to 20 games to get even more bids, the argument can be made that they've already accomplished that.  This move is just twisting the knife.

You are right, they have already accomplished taking bids from the mid-majors - but you are wrong about it just being a way to twist the knife. This is about taking YOUR bids (BE, AAC, A10). They still want more bids, and you guys are the only ones with any left. Look for the Gavitt Games to disappear as soon as contractually possible.

The Big East is looking to fight fire with fire by floating the story of going to 20 games themselves, but the reality is that all potential expansion candidates have at least one major issue. So the Big East is in a tough spot unless Gonzaga relocates a thousand miles to the east, SLU finds another Rick Majerus or Xavier finally gets over their fear of adding Dayton. You guys are the ones in the cross hairs now. With the resources and tradition of the Big East you are in a better position to fight back, but ultimately, the balance of resources and clout is still on the other side. Just ask Chris Holtmann.

[IrishDawg]

You state this as if it is an unalterable fact, when in reality it is the exact rationale for the current push to 20 games by the Power 5. They want the Power 5 to be just as dominant in basketball as football and can't stomach the reality of a Power 6, 7 or 8. Success by Big East, AAC or A-10 teams is even more of a detriment and threat to them than the 1-bid mid major leagues. I guarantee that Villanova's and UConn's recent national championships were far more galling to the Power 5 than Butler and VCU's Final Four appearances. 

You are right, they have already accomplished taking bids from the mid-majors - but you are wrong about it just being a way to twist the knife. This is about taking YOUR bids (BE, AAC, A10). They still want more bids, and you guys are the only ones with any left. Look for the Gavitt Games to disappear as soon as contractually possible.

The Big East is looking to fight fire with fire by floating the story of going to 20 games themselves, but the reality is that all potential expansion candidates have at least one major issue. So the Big East is in a tough spot unless Gonzaga relocates a thousand miles to the east, SLU finds another Rick Majerus or Xavier finally gets over their fear of adding Dayton. You guys are the ones in the cross hairs now. With the resources and tradition of the Big East you are in a better position to fight back, but ultimately, the balance of resources and clout is still on the other side. Just ask Chris Holtmann.

I'm not saying it can't happen, because when you have the money and the power, all you want is more.  What I will say is that it's going to take several things happening beyond the P5 moving to a 20 game schedule for that to eventually happen.  The Big 12 can't move to a 20 game schedule because they only have 10 teams, and they couldn't agree on adding anyone the last time they tried.  Realignment has also caused the consolidation of bids as well, and not just at the P5 level.  Even Rothstein in his article said "with the exception of the Big East and the American" when talking about non-Power 5 leagues to lose at-large bids.

I did enjoy the jab you threw in at the end.  Ohio State has had success with former Butler coaches, as they just canned one to hire one.

[wh]

Lots of high-browed posts on this board. Reading them is as educational as it is entertaining.

[IrishDawg]

Lots of high-browed posts on this board. Reading them is as educational as it is entertaining.

Season can't start soon enough, I think all boards (including ours) are ready for this year to get going.  I think Valpo will do well in the MVC, just as they did in the Horizon.

[vufan75]

Lots of high-browed posts on this board. Reading them is as educational as it is entertaining. [emoji106]

Season can't start soon enough, I think all boards (including ours) are ready for this year to get going.  I think Valpo will do well in the MVC, just as they did in the Horizon.

Thanks to you as a fan of another MVC team in recognizing that Valpo as the new kid in the conference should be competitive in MBB right away. I love the move to the MVC and think both Valpo and the MVC will benefit. #ValpointheValley #GoValpo

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[wh]

Lots of high-browed posts on this board. Reading them is as educational as it is entertaining. [emoji106]

Season can't start soon enough, I think all boards (including ours) are ready for this year to get going.  I think Valpo will do well in the MVC, just as they did in the Horizon.

Thanks to you as a fan of another MVC team in recognizing that Valpo as the new kid in the conference should be competitive in MBB right away. I love the move to the MVC and think both Valpo and the MVC will benefit. #ValpointheValley #GoValpo

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Wrong dawgs, '75.

[vufan75]

Lots of high-browed posts on this board. Reading them is as educational as it is entertaining. [emoji106]

Season can't start soon enough, I think all boards (including ours) are ready for this year to get going.  I think Valpo will do well in the MVC, just as they did in the Horizon.

Thanks to you as a fan of another MVC team in recognizing that Valpo as the new kid in the conference should be competitive in MBB right away. I love the move to the MVC and think both Valpo and the MVC will benefit. #ValpointheValley #GoValpo

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Wrong dawgs, '75.

My bad!! Sorry for my misinterpretation. Thanks for catching it wh!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[valpo04]

Big Ten to play 20-game conference schedule next season

The Big Ten announced plans Thursday to play a 20-game conference schedule for men's basketball, starting next season. The expanded calendar will put a premium on creating more matchups between in-state and regional rivals.

The league has been considering a move from 18 to 20 games for the past several months. Commissioner Jim Delany told reporters in New York for Big Ten media day on Thursday morning that the new schedule should create more excitement for fans.

"We think, in general, people respond more to the conference games than the nonconference [games]," he said. "... We just thought playing against each other more was good for the Big Ten and good for college basketball generally."

Read more: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/21076233/big-ten-play-20-game-conference-schedule-next-season

[valpo95]

There is a simpler way to fix the at-large bid issue:

For any team, if they do not have a winning record in conference play, they are not eligible for an at-large bid. Of course, they could still win their conference tournament and get an automatic bid, and I might even concede that if they played in their conference tournament championship game they might be eligible. What this would do is stop the 9-9 Big East team that loses in the first round from getting an at-large bid. It would force the selection committee to take the second or third place team from a non-P6 conference. The best teams from the power conferences would still get in. 

Remember, the NCAA tournament is not about getting the absolute best 64 (or 68!) teams in, because that would mean some of the very low rated conferences would never get a spot.  It is about having the tournament that brings in the most fan interest and revenues over the long term. 

[wh]

Break selection into 2 groups- P5 plus BE (Majors) and everyone else (Mids) - and fix the number of bids for each group.

6 Major Conferences   36 bids (38 in 2017)
26 Mid Conferences    32 bids (30 in 2017)

Note: The ACC received 9 bids in 2017, almost all of which lost in the opening weekend. Ridiculous.

[bbtds]

Break selection into 2 groups- P5 plus BE (Majors) and everyone else (Mids) - and fix the number of bids for each group.

6 Major Conferences   36 bids (38 in 2017)
26 Mid Conferences    32 bids (30 in 2017)

Note: The ACC received 9 bids in 2017, almost all of which lost in the opening weekend. Ridiculous.

Here is a novel idea for the NCAA selection committee: actually select teams that can win or do well in the tournament! Picking the better mid-majors instead of the .500 power conference teams would do that. The answer is simple. The reasons for not doing it are complicated.

[IrishDawg]

Here is a novel idea for the NCAA selection committee: actually select teams that can win or do well in the tournament! Picking the better mid-majors instead of the .500 power conference teams would do that. The answer is simple. The reasons for not doing it are complicated.

This is not me arguing for or against this concept.  Just reporting results from the last 3 tourneys.

.500 (or worse) major conference teams to get in and their results (I will include the Big East and American, because despite them not being quite as "major" as other leagues, schools like Cincinnati and UConn are less mid-major than most of the schools in the Big East)

2017
Kansas St. - Round of 64*
Oklahoma St. - Round of 64
Wake Forest - L in Play-in-game
Xavier - Elite 8
(8 tourney shares, 2 per team)

2016
USC - Round of 64
Oregon St. - Round of 64
Syracuse - Final 4
Pitt - Round of 64
Texas Tech - Round of 64
(9 tourney shares, 1.8 per team)

2015
Texas - Round of 64
Oklahoma St. - Round of 64
Xavier - Sweet 16
Indiana - Round of 64
(6 tourney shares, 1.5 per team)

In total - 23 tourney shares, average of 1.77 per team

At-large schools not from these 7 leagues and their results

2017
VCU - Round of 64
Dayton - Round of 64
St. Mary's - Round of 32
(4 tourney shares, 1.33 per team)

2016
VCU - Round of 32
Dayton - Round of 64
Wichita State - Round of 32*
(6 tourney shares, 2 per team)

2015
Wichita State - Sweet 16
Dayton - Round of 32*
Davidson - Round of 64
Boise St. - L in Play-in-game
San Diego St. - Round of 32
BYU - L in Play-in-game
(11 tourney shares, 1.83 per team)

In total - 21 tourney shares, average of 1.75 per team