WCC/Big East Scheduling

[NJZag]

I have read a number of posts on this board and on the boards of other WCC schools that suggest that the WCC should develop a "scheduling arrangement" with the new Big East conference.

I'd like for someone to explain to me what the motivation in this proposed arrangement is for Big East schools? Charity? Why in the world would Georgetown want a home and home with USF or Depaul covet a home and home with Portland?

I just don't see it ever happening.

I suggested a challenge series --

PAC-10 had one with the Big-12 -- the mismatch of numbers meant that two PAC-10 schools had to play two games, instead of one, with members of the Big-12. The series got dropped in 2010 and it might have been the PAC-10 that didn't want to renew it.

There was a Big East-SEC challenge series which has now played itself out with the BE's split into two different conferences.

The granddaddy of the challenge series is the ACC-Big 10. Like all of the challenge series, it was dreamt up by sports broadcasting industry. They're going to have fun figuring out how to get those games to match up since ACC grows to 15 members this coming year, and Big 10 will have 12.

The RPIs of our bottom-dwellers are worse than those of the Big East's, but take a look at the C7 members of the New Big East, which run from the 2nd ranked school in the Old Big East down to that league's 15th ranked school. DePaul, which had an overall RPI ranking of 202 with its 11-21 win-loss record.

2 (10) Georgetown 0.6315 25-6
3 (12) Marquette 0.6258 23-8
9 (51) Villanova 0.5772 19-13
10 (89) Providence 0.5454 17-14
11 (93) St. John's 0.544 16-15
13 (130) Seton Hall 0.5195 15-18
15 (202) DePaul 0.4771 11-21

Take a look at the Old Big East schools who won't be around anymore, though I'm sure some coaches or AD's might try to continue some historic rivalries as part of their ooc planning.

1 (3) Louisville
4 (13) Syracuse
5 (36) Notre Dame
6 (43) Pittsburgh
7 (49) Connecticut
8 (50) Cincinnati
12 (109) Rutgers
14 (151) South Florida

Are you starting to see a problem? I sure do. Some significant strength that "was" a part of the Old Big East isn't going to be there anymore. Granted, there will be the two added teams from the A-10 and one from the MVC

Moving over from the A-10
2 (20) Butler .6133 (Butler was ranked behind St. Louis in the A-10)
9 (90) Xavier .5451

Moving over from the MVC
1 (25) Creighton .6046

The idea of a challenge series is to compete for overall conference bragging rights between two conferences over a period of years. TV execs arranging these things probably wouldn't want to match a Gonzaga to DePaul. Who's going to want to watch that? If the challenge series matched all teams in each annual event, the organizers would probably try to keep the matchups somewhat comparable, from top to bottom. But the series could also cherry pick the teams participating and their matchups. Here's what the WCC looks like:

1 (6) Gonzaga 0.6368
2 (30) Saint Mary's 0.6004
3 (65) Brigham Young 0.5573
4 (97) Santa Clara 0.5405
5 (160) San Diego 0.5074
6 (166) San Francisco 0.5034
7 (207) Pepperdine 0.4733
8 (208) Loyola Marymount 0.4726
9 (231) Portland 0.4629

[NJZag]

At a lower tier from the BCS conferences, and something that our brethren at Creighton and our "good friends" the Shockers have played in ...

Mountain West v. Missouri Valley Conferences Challenge Series

[Zag 77]

Seattle?

I cannot believe the WCC was not in Seattle years ago...

Bart, unfortunately SU stinks. They finished 8-22 and dead last in the mighty Western Athletic Conference. I do not see any sign of them being serious about the committment it takes to have a decent athletic program.

At this point I think that D-III Whitworth has a stronger program.

[bartruff1]

Huge media market...shouldn't be ignored...Seattle had a national program when Gonzaga couldn't draw flies, the potential is there.

[KStyles]

Big 12 & SEC are supposedly working on a Big 12/SEC Challenge to begin next year.

[cbbfanatic]

Bart, unfortunately SU stinks. They finished 8-22 and dead last in the mighty Western Athletic Conference. I do not see any sign of them being serious about the committment it takes to have a decent athletic program.

At this point I think that D-III Whitworth has a stronger program.

getting worked up over where that (or any) program is right now is extremely shortsighted.

here are the important things about seattle U:
- top 15 market (that likes basketball)
- NBA caliber arena that is about to get a nice remodel
- perfect institutional fit
- natural rival for Gonzaga instead of revolving door of whoever else is "kinda good" at the moment in the wcc

if they truly want to get better in basketball from top to bottom, the wcc should:

- do whatever it can to increase the value of the league by adding teams in good markets (go out and get denver too)
- play in bigger, better venues, preferably nba arenas (this helps make the league a better destination for recruits)
- renegotiate a better tv deal when it becomes available
- put in guidelines for financial commitment to basketball among conference members - force them to invest increased TV $ in their programs

that is how you rise the tide of the wcc. its not about 2013 rpi #s. its not about 2014 rpi #s. any comparison on those grounds is extremely short sighted - and suggests one is looking for a band-aid. fact of the matter is, there isnt a currently good program out there that the WCC would have any ability to add.

need to think potential.

[willandi]

I think you are right CBB. And think how it would p*ss of the chicken to have west side players choosing a WCC school because of the better TV visibility and (dare I say it) better competition, at least at the top!