MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,558
Likes: 6,426
|
Post by MisterD on Feb 25, 2015 10:52:53 GMT -5
This argument was always made prior to the NIT year. It's a bad one. Aside from this penalizing successful sports, it's a lame grab to be a 14-seed in the NCAA tournament. And, in my opinion, a cowards way out. All well and good and if the Big East would invite us, we could perform even worse at an even higher level. This isn't my point and its not an emotional argument. I'm saying from a strictly financial perspective, if the expenses are what they are (which is what they have been), are revenues greater in the A-10 or MAAC.
|
|
|
Post by belfieldhappyhour on Feb 25, 2015 11:17:03 GMT -5
I've never understood the talk of possibly leaving the A10 and going back to the MAAC (or something similar). Even if we keep our current commitment to basketball at what it is, in a new league, what makes anyone think we'd automatically be a top team in that league? Our recruiting, in my opinion, would take a major blow. Maybe it would be cheaper for the school, expense-wise, but you would also get less money coming in from the conference TV deals and get less NCAA units shared around the league. Less outside money aiding the program would mean it would take more internal money to keep our levels where they are, and would as many people be interested in donating to a team that just 'dropped' down a conference whether it be forced or by choice?? I doubt it since a couple people on this board said their donations would stop if that happened.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,558
Likes: 6,426
|
Post by MisterD on Feb 25, 2015 11:23:43 GMT -5
Maybe it would be cheaper for the school, expense-wise, but you would also get less money coming in from the conference TV deals and get less NCAA units shared around the league. Less outside money aiding the program would mean it would take more internal money to keep our levels where they are, and would as many people be interested in donating to a team that just 'dropped' down a conference whether it be forced or by choice? This is my unknown. If we really draw that much from the A-10, so be it, it would be bad financially. But if the ins and outs net to +$400K by dropping down, someone who cares about financials and not basketball prestige would/should atleast look into it.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,558
Likes: 6,426
|
Post by MisterD on Feb 25, 2015 11:27:57 GMT -5
Just the expense side, unaudited but the internet has never been wrong before ...
Atlantic 10: Virginia Commonwealth $5,378,609 Dayton $4,914,069 Richmond $4,201,009 Saint Louis $4,071,872 Saint Joseph's $4,005,528 Fordham $3,985,116 Massachusetts $3,913,716 Rhode Island $3,787,724 Duquesne $3,480,230 La Salle $3,159,614 George Washington $2,929,433 George Mason $2,785,259 Saint Bonaventure $2,572,722 Davidson $1,952,326
MAAC: Siena $2,802,018 Quinnipiac $2,489,631 Fairfield $2,398,003 Iona $2,159,414 Marist $1,916,865 Manhattan $1,915,283 Monmouth $1,688,319 Rider $1,568,990 Canisius $1,546,055 Niagara $1,529,000 St. Peter's $1,263,774
(Our 2013 budget was $2.8MM. Again, without full details of conference driven and conference independent, I can't make any reasonable point either way.)
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Feb 25, 2015 11:35:06 GMT -5
So we'd move from bottom 5 to the top of the class.
I wonder what income would drop to. Nothing says exciting conference basketball like the names on that MAAC list.
|
|
|
Post by thelasallelunatic on Feb 25, 2015 11:37:54 GMT -5
I've never understood the talk of possibly leaving the A10 and going back to the MAAC (or something similar). Even if we keep our current commitment to basketball at what it is, in a new league, what makes anyone think we'd automatically be a top team in that league? Our recruiting, in my opinion, would take a major blow. Maybe it would be cheaper for the school, expense-wise, but you would also get less money coming in from the conference TV deals and get less NCAA units shared around the league. Less outside money aiding the program would mean it would take more internal money to keep our levels where they are, and would as many people be interested in donating to a team that just 'dropped' down a conference whether it be forced or by choice?? I doubt it since a couple people on this board said their donations would stop if that happened. If LaSalle went back to the MAAC, we'd win the damn thing nearly every year. We'd be the top spender, and we'd cannabalize the MAAC market of Philly recruits. However, as Joe said, we'd be a 14 seed every year, and our ceiling would probably be the round of 32, i.e. Sienna a few years back when they won games in the 08 and 09 NCAA Tourneys. As it is, our ceiling is most likely the Final 4, being that 2 Horizon League teams (well actually 1 team 2 times) and 2 CAA teams (Mason and VCU) reached that pedestal, and every 2-3 years, we seem to have an Elite 8 team in the run (Xavier, St. Joes, and Dayton last year). As far-fetched as it seems, we can realistically compete on college basketball's biggest stage as an A10 team. It's next to impossible to do that in the MAAC.
|
|
|
Post by thelasallelunatic on Feb 25, 2015 11:51:22 GMT -5
Nothing says exciting conference basketball like the names on that MAAC list. That list of teams resembles our nonleague schedule...
|
|
|
Post by theneumann64 on Feb 25, 2015 12:41:42 GMT -5
It's not like if we left the A-10 (which no one is advocating), it HAS to be the MAAC. I'm not sure why that's always the automatic default when it comes to if we had to go elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Feb 25, 2015 12:48:38 GMT -5
It's not like if we left the A-10 (which no one is advocating), it HAS to be the MAAC. I'm not sure why that's always the automatic default when it comes to if we had to go elsewhere. It may have something to do with regional rivalries and keeping the travel costs down. It sucks for Temple that they travel to different regions and time zones for many conference games. We would never do that again (after the MCC mess).
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,558
Likes: 6,426
|
Post by MisterD on Feb 25, 2015 13:25:28 GMT -5
So we'd move from bottom 5 to the top of the class. Yup. Which is kind of like buying a nice new Camry rather than a used Lexus you can't even afford to have regularly serviced. I wonder what income would drop to. This would be the key point. If income is hacked away and expenses are dropped to match, obviously this ceases to make sense. Nothing says exciting conference basketball like the names on that MAAC list. Who outside of the A-10 looks at the A-10 with excitement? "Oh shit, clear your schedule, Duquesne is at Rhode Island tonight and the game is televised!" C'mon. My first choice, obviously, is to actually compete in the A-10. I'm not so sure my desire to stay no matter what is what it once was because, frankly, what joy do you get out of the regular season? Its all about the build for the postseason and if we don't care to invest in consistently doing that in a mid-major, we may as well make for a clearer path. I have plenty of friends at plenty of sub mid-major schools who have 3x and 4x and 5x the appearances I do since we all started school.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Feb 25, 2015 13:26:37 GMT -5
Nothing says exciting conference basketball like the names on that MAAC list. That list of teams resembles our nonleague schedule... Except for these teams (RPI following) Virginia (3) Villanova (5) Temple (32) So 3 of our 13 games were against top-32 RPI teams but sure it fits your argument.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Feb 25, 2015 13:34:02 GMT -5
Who outside of the A-10 looks at the A-10 with excitement? "Oh shit, clear your schedule, Duquesne is at Rhode Island tonight and the game is televised!" C'mon. My first choice, obviously, is to actually compete in the A-10. I'm not so sure my desire to stay no matter what is what it once was because, frankly, what joy do you get out of the regular season? Its all about the build for the postseason and if we don't care to invest in consistently doing that in a mid-major, we may as well make for a clearer path. I have plenty of friends at plenty of sub mid-major schools who have 3x and 4x and 5x the appearances I do since we all started school. Your first statement isn't true. Duquesne, maybe, but playing some of those teams is exciting. VCU is big time. Dayton is on the cusp of national attention as is Davidson. They aren't Duke, but still good, quality programs. La Salle does compete in the A10. In most of the last 5 years, they've competed pretty well at times. They haven't won it yet, but they definitely do compete. The problem is when you drop down and then don't win the MAAC every year. Or never win the MAAC. Then you wonder if you should move into the NEC.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,558
Likes: 6,426
|
Post by MisterD on Feb 25, 2015 13:41:29 GMT -5
The entire A-10 buzz is dependent on a singular person remaining in the A-10. I strongly disagree with you disagreeing with me on account of Dayton and Davidson.
|
|
|
Post by thelasallelunatic on Feb 25, 2015 14:15:07 GMT -5
That list of teams resembles our nonleague schedule... Except for these teams (RPI following) Virginia (3) Villanova (5) Temple (32) So 3 of our 13 games were against top-32 RPI teams but sure it fits your argument. I don't know that I want to deviate from a topic in this thread on facilities to scheduling, but I will just say this. Outside of the Big 5 contract, we played UVA. We usually play half of the MAAC, and half the CAA. Mix in a NEC team, and presto, that's a LaSalle OOC schedule. Forget a trip down south, forget a trip to the west coast, forget our friends in the Valley Conference, and forget our prior conference foes in X and Butler. In the past, we played Florida State and The U. This year it seems as if it's the same 10 hodge podge teams outside of the Big 5 as every other year. Additionally, the A10 screwed itself in switching to an 18 game league schedule, robbing every team 2 opportunities for a scalp, and building a conference resume for March.
|
|
|
Post by talkinbball on Feb 25, 2015 15:16:59 GMT -5
lunatic, there is little upside in pounding your head against this wall on this board. Most everyone, myself excluded, buys in to G's "strategic scheduling for RPI purposes" that has resulted in these schedules and led to nowhere. Just be thankful we are still committed to playing the local schools.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2015 15:41:25 GMT -5
Most everyone, myself excluded, buys in to G's "strategic scheduling for RPI purposes" that has resulted in these schedules and led to nowhere. Just be thankful we are still committed to playing the local schools. Really? Critique him all you want about his coaching, but without his strategic scheduling, there would not have been a Sweet 16 run or a NIT bid. And unbelievably, this year's team, despite their struggles, was a NIT lock until that disaster on Sunday. And they can still sneak in if by some miracle they are able to win four of the next five games.
|
|
|
Post by luhoopsfan on Feb 25, 2015 15:42:20 GMT -5
Everyone wants to make the NCAA tournament on here, that much we can all agree with. To make the tourney, you need a high enough RPI for an at-large bid, because otherwise you're resting your hopes on winning a conference tournament. To get a high RPI, you need to have a strong SOS and win a significant majority of your games. SOS comes from your opponents' ability to win games when they aren't playing you. Like it or not, playing (and beating), the MEAC, NEC, MAAC and CAA champions has a bigger impact on your RPI than playing and beating GA Tech, Mississippi, Florida State, Wake Forest and Penn State. Plus, you are more likely to be able to schedule the lower level teams at home than you are able to schedule the BCS teams listed especially (to remain somewhat original topic-relevant) at our facility.
In addition, in 2012, 2013 and 2014, our league counterparts held up their end of the bargain and entered league play with strong RPI's and records, which meant wins against teams we know and don't have to schedule became even greater value.
The BCS teams make for good headlines and attractions, but if you succeed under G's formula, you will qualify for the post season and in the end, you don't need BCS teams to sell tickets, you sell your own. And you become a regular hometown draw regardless of the opponent, which then solidifies the argument that a new facility is beyond necessary.
If you don't agree with that philosophy and/or formula, that's fine, but the formula does work and to G's credit, he understands the formula, for better or for worse in terms of aesthetics. The trick is, winning those games and avoiding bad losses. In this particular season, we missed opportunities against Temple, American and Vanderbilt and had poor showings against GMU and SLU. Those 5 games are the difference in being inside the bubble and not even in the discussion this season.
|
|
|
Post by talkinbball on Feb 25, 2015 15:44:39 GMT -5
Fact is, if we don't beat VCU and Butler, both in conference, we don't get a sniff of the tournament. If Butler had not been in the conference that year G would have never scheduled them, would have scheduled whoever was picked to finish first or second in some weak conference and we don't even get invited.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Feb 25, 2015 15:45:20 GMT -5
Most everyone, myself excluded, buys in to G's "strategic scheduling for RPI purposes" that has resulted in these schedules and led to nowhere. Just be thankful we are still committed to playing the local schools. Really? Critique him all you want about his coaching, but without his strategic scheduling, there would not have been a Sweet 16 run or a NIT bid. And unbelievably, this year's team, despite their struggles, was a NIT lock until that disaster on Sunday. And they can still sneak in if by some miracle they are able to win four of the next five games. This. Anybody that gets upset that we don't schedule half the ACC every year is crazy.
|
|
|
Post by talkinbball on Feb 25, 2015 15:54:46 GMT -5
Like I said, no upside. This is a copy of a previous post I made on this issue. Still, and will, hold.
"Other than that "lightening in a bottle" year there has not realistically been any other year where we were even "on the bubble". Have to admit, I had no idea that recruits were being attracted by our OOC schedule. I must have missed all the 4 and 5 star recruits that attended the Colgate game and had no idea there are 4 and 5 star recruits that are salivating at attending the American game on their upcoming recruiting trip. Since we don't already have a new arena, I am assuming that the none of the 15 people that regularly post to the board don't intend to provide the funding for it. What this program needs more than strategic scheduling is money.
Since getting a real opponent to play us is always brought up as an issue here is a strategy to draw them. Look at where the most recent big time recruits from the greater Phila. area have gone and approach those schools. Or, try to schedule those schools that are after the current big time recruits. There are coaches that will schedule games near their home area for their recruits. This not only provides an incentive for those schools but also gives us exposure to those players should they be looking to transfer closer to home at a later time.
To not want to schedule a game, or two (i.e. 1 or 2) against an opponent because you will most likely lose is ridiculous. If you are recruiting players who, either, don't want to play against the best teams, or, are going to be demoralized by losing a game, or two, to them then you are not recruiting winning A10 level players in the first place.
Also, if the general belief on the board is that we don't need to grow the fan base and interest in the program (translation: Money) more than we need to strategically schedule then would one of you PLEASE donate the funding so we can finally build a damn arena. "
|
|
|
Post by talkinbball on Feb 25, 2015 16:05:50 GMT -5
Really? Critique him all you want about his coaching, but without his strategic scheduling, there would not have been a Sweet 16 run or a NIT bid. And unbelievably, this year's team, despite their struggles, was a NIT lock until that disaster on Sunday. And they can still sneak in if by some miracle they are able to win four of the next five games. This. Anybody that gets upset that we don't schedule half the ACC every year is crazy. Would someone PLEASE go back and find such a post. PLEASE!
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Feb 25, 2015 17:59:37 GMT -5
I used to agree with you. But then you see the science and the math behind what is done. You can't ignore that La Salle has to schedule Villanova and Temple every year. They are built-in, top-50 teams almost yearly.
Throw Virginia in there and you see a Strength of Schedule that isn't bad. Not flashy, sure, but not bad.
|
|
|
Post by lsubluegold on Feb 25, 2015 21:48:18 GMT -5
The school is too cheap and too stupid to realize that the basketball program is the face of the school.
|
|
|
Post by aswjr on Feb 26, 2015 9:44:14 GMT -5
I don't really want to get into the science of scheduling not my strong point but there are a reason lesser teams schedule big schools, exposure on a big stage ability to sell it to a recruit but also experience against a higher quality opponent. Nova and temple are great, Virginia was nice but who was their Virginia 2 years ago...scheduling 1-2 acc/big 10/big 12team a year would not hurt. Yes you have to travel there but you don't think a recruit wouldn't mind being on ESPN....not nbcsn or ESPN 12...also you guys do know the SEC is known for college football not college basketball right? Sorry I see some of you mention sec like its the ACC. There is one team in the top 25 from the sec.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2015 10:11:17 GMT -5
There is no question that Gola is subpar. However, I wonder what Jay Wright or Fran Dunphy would do if they were the coach here. I would bet they would put together successful programs despite the facility. What we have here is a combination of a bad facility and a mediocre coach. What does that lead to? .500 basketball over an 11 year period. We need a dynamic coach who can get the job done. Even if he was here for only a few years on his way to the big time. That would make the team more successful and hopefully lead to a new facility.
|
|
|
Post by thelasallelunatic on Feb 26, 2015 10:21:40 GMT -5
I used to agree with you. But then you see the science and the math behind what is done. You can't ignore that La Salle has to schedule Villanova and Temple every year. They are built-in, top-50 teams almost yearly. Throw Virginia in there and you see a Strength of Schedule that isn't bad. Not flashy, sure, but not bad. Here's what gaming the RPI system doesn't do. It doesn't get us ready for the A10 season. I've said it time and time again, and its a philosophy I lived by during the brief 4 year period in which I coached, you don't get better playing cupcakes. You get better being tested. John Chaney's teams weren't dangerous in March by accident. They got asses beat on every November and December, so that when the A10 season can into play, Temple was ready. When March came around, they were ready. You don't become ready having 8 games vs. Towson, Fairfield, Quinnipiac and Hartford. For the record, of the 12-13 game OOC schedule, I'm not saying to play 10 studs. I'm saying you have Nova, Temple, and Penn, which gives us 9-10 games to schedule. I'd play 5 high majors or good mid-major schools (St. Marys, N. Iowa, Wichita State) and I'd play 4 or 5 tune up games. I don't want to be 6-7 come New Years Day, but if I'm going to be 8-5, I'm going to be 8-5 against some decent competition.
|
|
|
Post by aswjr on Feb 26, 2015 10:29:58 GMT -5
I used to agree with you. But then you see the science and the math behind what is done. You can't ignore that La Salle has to schedule Villanova and Temple every year. They are built-in, top-50 teams almost yearly. Throw Virginia in there and you see a Strength of Schedule that isn't bad. Not flashy, sure, but not bad. Here's what gaming the RPI system doesn't do. It doesn't get us ready for the A10 season. I've said it time and time again, and its a philosophy I lived by during the brief 4 year period in which I coached, you don't get better playing cupcakes. You get better being tested. John Chaney's teams weren't dangerous in March by accident. They got asses beat on every November and December, so that when the A10 season can into play, Temple was ready. When March came around, they were ready. You don't become ready having 8 games vs. Towson, Fairfield, Quinnipiac and Hartford. I agree completely. Playing those teams may even give a team a false sense of confidence. If you're playing a couple Virginia, Wisconsin or even some of the lesser teams in those divisions you're then getting a taste of what it will be like in the tournament. If you get lucky and beat one of them in the regulars season(happens all the time) the you have only bolstered you're standings, lose and it doesn't look nearly as bad even a blow out as losing to American or having an ot game with one of these scrubs
|
|
|
Post by talkinbball on Feb 26, 2015 10:43:03 GMT -5
I used to agree with you. But then you see the science and the math behind what is done. You can't ignore that La Salle has to schedule Villanova and Temple every year. They are built-in, top-50 teams almost yearly. Throw Virginia in there and you see a Strength of Schedule that isn't bad. Not flashy, sure, but not bad. Here's what gaming the RPI system doesn't do. It doesn't get us ready for the A10 season. I've said it time and time again, and its a philosophy I lived by during the brief 4 year period in which I coached, you don't get better playing cupcakes. You get better being tested. John Chaney's teams weren't dangerous in March by accident. They got asses beat on every November and December, so that when the A10 season can into play, Temple was ready. When March came around, they were ready. You don't become ready having 8 games vs. Towson, Fairfield, Quinnipiac and Hartford. For the record, of the 12-13 game OOC schedule, I'm not saying to play 10 studs. I'm saying you have Nova, Temple, and Penn, which gives us 9-10 games to schedule. I'd play 5 high majors or good mid-major schools (St. Marys, N. Iowa, Wichita State) and I'd play 4 or 5 tune up games. I don't want to be 6-7 come New Years Day, but if I'm going to be 8-5, I'm going to be 8-5 against some decent competition. Stop making sense. It does not fit in the RPI calculation.
|
|
|
Post by luhoopsfan on Feb 26, 2015 11:15:18 GMT -5
you need an OOC school that's willing to play you as well. It's not like if you call they are somehow obligated to play you.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Feb 26, 2015 11:20:22 GMT -5
you need an OOC school that's willing to play you as well. It's not like if you call they are somehow obligated to play you. This. Virginia had no incentive to play La Salle. The win bumped them up almost nothing. The loss would have set them back tremendously. G and Tony Bennett have a relationship, hence the game. You may not like Giannini's style of scheduling, but it is effective at putting your team in a position to get into the tournament without having to win 24 games a year. Finding beatable teams that will have a lot of wins puts you in position to sneak into the tournament. For the most part, that is what La Salle is going to do. They will likely never be (or very rarely will be) Villanova or even VCU where they are, as Seth Davis would put it, "sharpie."
|
|