Missouri Valley Conference Tournament

stlbluejay · PostMar 18, 2008#1012008-03-18T15:08+00:00

dweebe wrote:I thought SLU moved out of the MVC because they were going to be required to have a football program? And supposedly the A-10 doesn't require you to have football to be a part of the conference.

Is that true?

No. Most Valley teams (i.e., Creighton) don't have football.

PostMar 18, 2008#1022008-03-18T15:11+00:00

My take is that the A-10 and MVC are fairly similar--maybe the A-10 has a slight edge at the top of the conference (on average) though I am looking for Drake to do well this year in the tourney. But I believe the MVC is deeper on average.

sshoe · PostMar 18, 2008#1032008-03-18T15:57+00:00

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:
SShoe wrote:They did it three years ago, which happened to be the year that SLU chose the A-10 over the MVC. My point is that the A-10's peak is superior to the MVC's peak.

For now. These things go in cycles.

Somewhat. But when the A-10 cycles up, it tends to be a better conference than the MVC, which generally has a lower ceiling than the A-10. I also think people have short memories. Until fairly recently, the MVC was generally a one- or two-bid league, while the A-10 had some very good teams in the 1990s and early 2000s. Both Temple and UMass were consistently in the tourney. Rhode Island made a run to the elite 8 with Lamar Odom. Lastly, Xavier is regularly a top-25 program. Lets also not forget that multiple National Players of the Year have come from the A-10.

little egyptian · PostMar 18, 2008#1042008-03-18T19:19+00:00

The A-10 has some good teams. Certainly, that is the case. Unfortunately, all those good teams are 1000 miles away. UMass is a historically good team that showed some signs of life this year. Charlotte should be performing better. Same for Richmond. But, does playing any of those teams excite you? Are playing any of those teams going to put butts in the seats of the new arena? I doubt it. And that is not even considering the baggage at the bottom of the A-10 and all those LaSalle/Fordham/Duquesne/St. Bonaventure home games.

Now, what is exciting about Missouri State? What's exciting about Drake? Wichita State? Indiana State? Well, frankly, not that much either. Except that they are closer and there are people in Saint Louis with degrees from these schools and kids from Saint Louis in these parts of the country. This is Saint Louis' region of the country. We are the dominate city for most of the Valley. From Evansville and Terre Haute to Springfield to Des Moines ... these are places that Saint Louis has a connection with. Saint Louis even sort of dominates KC in the way that Chicago dominates us so our influence is felt even in Kansas and Nebraska.

Anyway, I agree with BlueJay that these are basically similar conferences. But, one happens to be in our backyard and the other doesn't. SLU for whatever reason (arrogance) decided that it would be better to play in the league that was not in their back yard. Whether they didn't want to stoop to that level or what, they made a decision and now they are regretting it. A few years went by and no one said anything, but then a new no-nonsense coach comes in and tells it like it is ... SLU should be in the MVC. Local reporters like Bernie that have probably realized this for years now were given the opportunity to talk publicly about it without embarrassing the SLU administration (not like Bernie would have a problem embarrassing Biondi).

Anyway, remember, Saint Louis is not coming in alone (unless the Valley finds a way to force Evansville out - which has been discussed, even by some ADs). There is more and more talk of Xavier coming with them, with possibly Dayton and Butler if Dayton is necessary to get Xavier, otherwise it would only be SLU and Xavier. Bernie mentioned Western Kentucky, who is in the Dance this year, but that ain't happening. The Valley and Western Kentucky courted each other about a decade ago, but nothing became of it and the Valley is better than that now anyway (plus, Western Kentucky just spent a ton of dollars going FBS football and I am sure they don't want to drop back down and I am sure the Sunbelt wouldn't let them split basketball and football). So, the only way that SLU even gets in is if they bring another team with them. By themselves, the Valley is not even interested in SLU. Sorry if that is a shock to some SLU fans, but right now SLU is not good enough to be in the Valley. Sure, with the stadium and coach maybe you will be good enough in a few years, and with another team the Valley is willing to take that bet, but right now the Valley would not be interested in SLU by themselves. They have to bring someone else to the table. I think it is pretty clear that if they bring Xavier with them, the Valley will do it. If they bring Butler with them, it will be a close call. If they bring anyone else, the Valley probably won't bit.

I love how everyone on here talks about the SLU being too good for the Valley, but this is probably more about the Valley accepting SLU than it is about SLU accepting the Valley.

bonwich · PostMar 18, 2008#1052008-03-18T20:15+00:00

Squawk like an Egyptian.

Some of your points are valid. Others are plain silly: the A-10 and the Valley are relatively equal conferences as a whole, so SLU is certainly "good enough" to be in the Valley.

This year's selection process gives one clue as to why SLU chose to join the A-10: the bias towards eastern schools by those who control college basketball, aka Normal ain't Philadelphia.

The "1000 miles" thing doesn't seem to have affected Marquette too much in its conference choice.

SLU's decision, for anyone who watched it closely, was based in large part on gettting into a league of schools with similar academic and "sociological" profiles.

It's also really dangerous to say that Majerus has said that SLU "should be in the Valley." Majerus rarely strings five related sentences together -- he has acknowledged the problems with the A-10 affiliation, but that affiliation was brought about by the overall split in leagues into BCS and non-BCS tiers. The A-10 decision wasn't perfect, but it wasn't the idiocy claimed by people who make their livings on the basis of simply churning out controversy.

datawhse · PostMar 18, 2008#1062008-03-18T20:34+00:00

jlblues wrote:And, remind me again, SLU should want to be in the MVC because...?

The reasons are many. Here are just a few.

1. TV Contracts

The valley has a better T.V. contract than the A-10 and gets better exposure nationally and locally. How many A-10 games did you see locally versus vallet games? I can tell you there were 34 valley games and 3 A-10 games.

2. Travel

Road trips for the Billikens are brutal. Compare the travel schedule for the Bills versus the rest of the league schools. How many round trip miles did the Bills rack up this year? A LOT

3. MVC is better League

The Valley has been the better Basketball Conference the past 3 years and is the better Athletic conference for all sports.

These are just a few. There are many more. I concur with Little Egyptians comments as well about the number of St. Louis residents that attended the valley schools.

sshoe · PostMar 18, 2008#1072008-03-18T22:17+00:00

Little Egyptian wrote:

Anyway, remember, Saint Louis is not coming in alone (unless the Valley finds a way to force Evansville out - which has been discussed, even by some ADs). There is more and more talk of Xavier coming with them, with possibly Dayton and Butler if Dayton is necessary to get Xavier, otherwise it would only be SLU and Xavier. Bernie mentioned Western Kentucky, who is in the Dance this year, but that ain't happening. The Valley and Western Kentucky courted each other about a decade ago, but nothing became of it and the Valley is better than that now anyway (plus, Western Kentucky just spent a ton of dollars going FBS football and I am sure they don't want to drop back down and I am sure the Sunbelt wouldn't let them split basketball and football). So, the only way that SLU even gets in is if they bring another team with them. By themselves, the Valley is not even interested in SLU. Sorry if that is a shock to some SLU fans, but right now SLU is not good enough to be in the Valley. Sure, with the stadium and coach maybe you will be good enough in a few years, and with another team the Valley is willing to take that bet, but right now the Valley would not be interested in SLU by themselves. They have to bring someone else to the table. I think it is pretty clear that if they bring Xavier with them, the Valley will do it. If they bring Butler with them, it will be a close call. If they bring anyone else, the Valley probably won't bit.

You're dead wrong about the Valley not wanting SLU as Elgin has been very consistent when saying the Valley would certainly welcome SLU.

If a scenario similar to the one you're proposing were to come true, I think SLU would be very interested in the Valley. That'd be a helluva conference.

I also think SLU still holds out hope that the midwestern "Catholic" league will happen one day. In order for SLU to be apart of that, they need to maintain an alliance with certain teams that will be highly sought after. These teams happen to include Xavier and Dayton.

debaliviere · PostMar 18, 2008#1082008-03-18T22:45+00:00

datawhse wrote:How many A-10 games did you see locally versus vallet games? I can tell you there were 34 valley games and 3 A-10 games.

Wha? Where did you get those figures from? The Billikens were on Channel 11 six times and on Charter once. They were also on the ESPN networks three times and CSTV (which granted, not a lot of people get) three times. Had the Bills made it past Dayton in the first round of the A-10 Tournament, Channel 11 would have picked up the remaining games.

And I seem to remember there being an A-10 game on ESPN2 once a week as well. There had to have been more than three - SLU vs. Xavier and SLU vs. St. Joe's were two of them, and I remember watching UMASS play Fordham and Rhode Island play Charlotte(?) as well.

little egyptian · PostMar 18, 2008#1092008-03-18T23:12+00:00

On Elgin ... what do you think he would say? No, SLU is not welcome? This is a negotiation, of course you praise your negotiating partner in the media.

There are concerns/indifference among Valley members about SLU's athletics. They are not excited to add SLU because athletically, outside of soccer, they don't really add much to the league. They would be a middle of the league team in a lot of sports. There is nothing wrong with that, but if you go to the trouble to add a team, might as well be a team that is successful, especially in the sports that matter, which for the Valley is basketball and men's basketball in particular. The intangibles for SLU are what makes it attractive (media market, academics), much more than the actual product you put on the court lately.

This is not a SLU walks in and the Valley bows down thing ... they had their chance for that a few years ago. Now, the Valley is strong and you don't rock the boat for just anyone. The 10 team league allows for round robin play, which is a superior scheduling plan and helps drive attendance when you see all the same teams every year and their are payback games. Ultimately, I think SLU and the Valley would work it out and find a 12th team, whether it is Xavier or Butler (Butler as the fallback).

And yes, I agree with you that if SLU and either Butler or Xavier were to join, that would make for a terrific league, which is why I am excited about it. Both SLU and the Valley could be in a better place. That is why I ultimately think this is going to happen.

stlbluejay · PostMar 19, 2008#1102008-03-19T04:29+00:00

Huge win by Creighton over Rhode Island! Last second shot--best game of the year (for the Jays at least)! Chalk up one for the MVC.

jlblues · PostMar 19, 2008#1112008-03-19T07:29+00:00

Little Egyptian wrote:UMass is a historically good team that showed some signs of life this year. Charlotte should be performing better. Same for Richmond. But, does playing any of those teams excite you?

Yes. Playing any of those teams is a heckuva lot more exciting than playing the Middleofnowheresville Hoglickers!

Seriously, who outside of the Midwest has heard of any of these MVC schools other than SIU, or would be able to locate any of them on a map? I have lived in the Midwest most of my life and I had to look up all but 3 of them (I still get Southeast Missouri State and Missouri State confused

) . Okay, I guess it's pretty easy to figure out the name of the towns in which Wichita State and U. of Evansville are located, but that really only helps me narrow it down to somewhere in Kansas and Indiana, respectively. And I probably wouldn't know where ISU was either, if it wasn't on the way to Chicago.

Conversely, as long as I can remember being a college basketball fan, I have known the names UMass, Temple, Xavier, St. Joe's, Dayton, LaSalle, George Washington, UNC Charlotte, and the places from which they came.

Little Egyptian wrote:Now, what is exciting about Missouri State? What's exciting about Drake? Wichita State? Indiana State? Well, frankly, not that much either. Except that they are closer and there are people in Saint Louis with degrees from these schools and kids from Saint Louis in these parts of the country.

Maybe, but does SLU really want to have to depend on filling seats with people who are 35 and living with their parents?

Little Egyptian wrote:This is Saint Louis' region of the country. We are the dominate city for most of the Valley. From Evansville and Terre Haute to Springfield to Des Moines ... these are places that Saint Louis has a connection with. Saint Louis even sort of dominates KC in the way that Chicago dominates us so our influence is felt even in Kansas and Nebraska.

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. If St. Louis is the "dominate city", why would it concern itself with this, um, "connection" thing. Hmm, you seem to be kind of obsessed with domination, or maybe with being dominated?

Little Egyptian wrote:Anyway, I agree with BlueJay that these are basically similar conferences.

Of course you do, but that doesn't make it true.

Little Egyptian wrote:By themselves, the Valley is not even interested in SLU. Sorry if that is a shock to some SLU fans, but right now SLU is not good enough to be in the Valley.

I'm shocked allright...at your proclivity for self-delusion.

Bottom Line:

NCAA Tournament Appearances: A-10 = 151, MVC = 70 ( Even if you just took the 10 A-10 teams with the fewest tournament appearances, the A-10 would still have 5 more than the MVC!!! )

Of the 14 teams in the A-10, 8 have played in the Final Four, and 11 have at least played in the Elite Eight. Only 4 MVC teams have ever made it past the Sweet Sixteen.

blzhrpmd2 · PostMar 19, 2008#1122008-03-19T13:17+00:00

Having watched the Bills for years and been an A-10 follower for the last 8, I think I would much rather watch SLU develop with wins over XU/Dayton/Umass/St Joe's as well as expand their out of conference schedule. This option seems better than being expected to dominate other teams in the Valley game in and game out; it's a lot of pressure to always be Goliath. I understand geography is not in their favor, but Rhode Island/ UMASS have to go to STL/CIN/Dayton as well. And how much worse can the flight from STL to RI be than CIN to RI? Geographic rivalries are hard to come by in the conference for SLU, but XU/STJ is a big rivalry because they play each other tough, not because they are anywhere near one another. In their short tenure in the A-10 SLU has shown they can play with the big guns of the conference with a roster that is only going to improve. Rivalries will come if you give teams a good game every time.

little egyptian · PostMar 19, 2008#1132008-03-19T14:31+00:00

Blzhrpmd2 wrote: This option seems better than being expected to dominate other teams in the Valley game in and game out; it's a lot of pressure to always be Goliath.

And SLU fans are not arrogant? If you think SLU would dominate the Valley ... well, you really should talk to someone about that ego and your grip on reality.

And jlblues ... funny post. I'll give you that. Wrong on basically every point, but funny.

brickandmortar · PostMar 19, 2008#1142008-03-19T14:32+00:00

meh. Arguing over two mid-majors. I'll take Big Ten anyday.

little egyptian · PostMar 19, 2008#1152008-03-19T14:54+00:00

brickandmortar wrote:meh. Arguing over two mid-majors. I'll take Big Ten anyday.

The Big 10 is basically a mid-major these days in basketball anyway (and football with the exception of Ohio State) and have clearly been the lowest of the BCS leagues for a number of years. A couple good teams and a bunch of fluff. I am not picking one big 10 team to advance to the sweet 16. I am picking one Missouri Valley team and one A-10 team. The Big 10 is starting to become the Ivy League of the BCS. All academics and little sports. Not that there is anything wrong with that because that is a much better distinction than what the SEC has which is a great sports league but a little light on academics.

shimmy · PostMar 19, 2008#1162008-03-19T15:31+00:00

The Big Ten will rebound. It's like someone else said, things go in cycles. Last year Ohio State played for the title and three years ago, when the FInal Four was here, we had two teams in the Final Four(Illinois and Michigan State). I have Wisconsin in the Final Four. Now, that might be some wishful thinking, but I would at least expect them to go deep.

And jlblues, you seem to be implying that just because a school is not in a major city that it doesn't matter, and it's coming across as big city arrogance/ignorance. Using this logic, non-flagship schools such as Clemson and Auburn don't matter because they are from a nowheresville, hick town.

There's intelligent life outside the cities, ya know.

blzhrpmd2 · PostMar 19, 2008#1172008-03-19T15:37+00:00

Egyptian, I do not think SLU would dominate the Valley at all (hence, Goliath; and if you don't get that, well...you should really talk to someone about your grip of Biblical allegory). And I'm not arrogant, thank you. SLU lost to Bonaventure for crying out loud, how could anyone be arrogant about SLU's current status? My point is they also beat XU twice last year, STJ this year and played the other conferences leaders fairly strong. I would rather see them keep putting up strong performances against regular tourney-bound teams.

little egyptian · PostMar 19, 2008#1182008-03-19T15:58+00:00

Blzhrpmd2 wrote:Egyptian, I do not think SLU would dominate the Valley at all (hence, Goliath). And I'm not arrogant, thank you. SLU lost to Bonaventure for crying out loud, how could anyone be arrogant about SLU's current status? My point is they also beat XU twice last year, STJ this year and played the other conferences leaders fairly strong. I would rather see them keep putting up strong performances against regular tourney-bound teams.

But, under that logic, for the previous 5 years you would have preferred the Valley because they had more NCAA teams.

So, SLU is Goliath and the Valley is David and David would regularly beat Goliath? I guess I just don't follow, if Goliath regularly loses, doesn't he cease to be Goliath?

You may not call the fact that you still consider yourself a Goliath arrogance ... but that kind of thinking is what leads to outsiders calling SLU arrogant. What exactly makes SLU a Goliath to the Valley teams?

shimmy · PostMar 19, 2008#1192008-03-19T16:10+00:00

stlbluejay wrote:Huge win by Creighton over Rhode Island! Last second shot--best game of the year (for the Jays at least)! Chalk up one for the MVC.

And SIU pulled away from Oklahoma State in the second half. But now they have to travel to Tempe (barring a major upset) to take on and Arizona State team that many felt should have been in the NCAA tournament. All of this without Mullins.

stlbluejay · PostMar 19, 2008#1202008-03-19T16:37+00:00

Shimmy wrote:
stlbluejay wrote:Huge win by Creighton over Rhode Island! Last second shot--best game of the year (for the Jays at least)! Chalk up one for the MVC.

And SIU pulled away from Oklahoma State in the second half. But now they have to travel to Tempe (barring a major upset) to take on and Arizona State team that many felt should have been in the NCAA tournament. All of this without Mullins.

Yeah, I was impressed w/ how the Dawgs handled OSU without him. The Jays have a likely showdown at Florida. 2 tough games for the Valley. But I think SIU will be a tough matchup for ASU as well. Not that it necessarily means anything, but ASU was beaten pretty easily by Nebraska this year (who in turn was beaten quite easily by Creighton). It would be great to see another SIU/Creighton matchup but my prediction: SIU pulls out a close one at ASU; Creighton loses at Florida. (CU has been too inconsistent this year). But I hope I am wrong. Go Valley! And BTW, Go Drake in the NCAA--they will be a tough matchup for anyone.

brickandmortar · PostMar 19, 2008#1212008-03-19T16:56+00:00

Little Egyptian wrote:
brickandmortar wrote:meh. Arguing over two mid-majors. I'll take Big Ten anyday.

The Big 10 is basically a mid-major these days in basketball anyway (and football with the exception of Ohio State) and have clearly been the lowest of the BCS leagues for a number of years. A couple good teams and a bunch of fluff. I am not picking one big 10 team to advance to the sweet 16. I am picking one Missouri Valley team and one A-10 team. The Big 10 is starting to become the Ivy League of the BCS. All academics and little sports. Not that there is anything wrong with that because that is a much better distinction than what the SEC has which is a great sports league but a little light on academics.

That's a bit of a stretch considering the talent level is far superior in the Big Ten. This year was a bit down from in the past with only 4 selections. I have a ton of respect for Drake, Keno Davis. That program was in the dumps for years, hopefully they can get out to the Sweet Sixteen for my bracket's sake. The Valley has definitely improved over the last ten years as have other conferences. There is a lot more parity in the NCAAs than the past. When the Valley and A-10 teams make it to the Final Four on a regular basis, then I might change my mind concerning their 'mid-major' label. Hey it beats being in the Southland Conference.

blzhrpmd2 · PostMar 19, 2008#1222008-03-19T21:59+00:00

I didn't mean to get this involved in this. I can see the argument to join either conference. In terms of 'Goliath', it seems from my limited perspective that St Louis U would seem to have a certain "name" recognition more so than some of the other teams in the valley. That does not speak to their talent. Geography obviously favors the valley. There seems to be a certain bias against the valley that I guess I have fallen subject to for no good reason. I know much more about the A10 having graduated from XU so I'm sure that clouds an objective opinion. Whether it's in the A10 or the Valley, I just want to see SLU put a consistently solid team together and reestablish some national recognition.

little egyptian · PostMar 20, 2008#1232008-03-20T02:11+00:00

Blzhrpmd2 wrote:I didn't mean to get this involved in this. I can see the argument to join either conference. In terms of 'Goliath', it seems from my limited perspective that St Louis U would seem to have a certain "name" recognition more so than some of the other teams in the valley. That does not speak to their talent. Geography obviously favors the valley. There seems to be a certain bias against the valley that I guess I have fallen subject to for no good reason. I know much more about the A10 having graduated from XU so I'm sure that clouds an objective opinion. Whether it's in the A10 or the Valley, I just want to see SLU put a consistently solid team together and reestablish some national recognition.

Agreed.

So, what are y'alls picks?

I got Louisville, Georgetown, UCLA and Memphis in the Final Four with Memphis winning it all.

Bart Harley Jarvis · PostMar 20, 2008#1242008-03-20T03:03+00:00

Little Egyptian wrote:

Agreed.

So, what are y'alls picks?

I got Louisville, Georgetown, UCLA and Memphis in the Final Four with Memphis winning it all.

My Coppin State theory did NOT pay off well! Luckily I only had them in the Elite Eight. KU, Louisville, Texas, UCLA (I actually hate the B12) KU-UCLA with KU winning by 8

shimmy · PostMar 20, 2008#1252008-03-20T03:44+00:00

I don't have one number 1 seed making it to the Final Four. I got Wisconsin(as said, maybe a little wishful), Tennessee, Duke, and Pittsburgh. With Duke over Tennessee in the championship by 13 or so. So, mine's maybe a little weird bracket. But then again, I do suck at this.

Missouri Valley Conference Tournament

Choose Display Mode