MVCfans.com

siudawgs wrote:If evaluating by the number of NCAA bids is silly, someone should tell MVC administrators and coaches, several of whom were trumpeting these additions as a pathway to getting multiple bids more often. If that's not going to be the case, I think it's a reasonable debate whether going to 12 teams (harder to get the one bid, have to split the NCAA money 12 ways, lose the round robin scheduling, etc.) is a good move.

I do, though, agree that the current at-large landscape for midmajors is a sham.

This was always the gamble. If it leads to multiples, you've won. If not, you lost even if your league is "better"

I have to wonder the degree to which the increased travel costs and time spent away are affecting Loyola. It's one thing to compete well in a league where most of your games are bus trips\very short flights but quite another when you're flying to the East Coast for almost every road game. In addition A-10 budgets tend to be larger. I think the league is a modest step up but not a whole different weight class by any means. All of this said, that move had very little to do with basketball for either side. The A-10 if my memory serves has a better media deal than the MVC. Like SLU Loyola wanted and now enjoys the benefits of East Coast recruiting in addition to a great institutional fit while the A-10 gets a presence in Chicago for students and for athletes. The thing that really hurts the MVC here is that because the A-10 has that presence in Chicago now a lot of the basketball talent from the area that might have gone to MVC schools might end up in the A-10 instead. It all comes down to the preferences of the students vis a vis staying close to home.

The MVC will be fine though. Murray is strong historically and doing very well despite a lot of turnover. Belmont has been impressive and should only get better. UIC will grow into their new home. Hopefully Valpo gets things righted as well with a new coach in the near future. I believe the league has a great chance to realize the multibid dream more frequently especially if leagues like the AAC take a huge step back which they will. Some mids have to end up in the at large conversation. That's just how the NET supposedly works since it supposedly rewards winning. We just have to keep doing our best to make sure that at least one MVC team gets into that conversation. It's hard to do certainly but as Belmont (then in the OVC) showed in 2019 and Drake showed in 2021 it's absolutely doable. UNI and Murray State have come very close during that time as well if my memory serves.

TylerDurden wrote:

siudawgs wrote:If evaluating by the number of NCAA bids is silly, someone should tell MVC administrators and coaches, several of whom were trumpeting these additions as a pathway to getting multiple bids more often. If that's not going to be the case, I think it's a reasonable debate whether going to 12 teams (harder to get the one bid, have to split the NCAA money 12 ways, lose the round robin scheduling, etc.) is a good move.

I do, though, agree that the current at-large landscape for midmajors is a sham.

This was always the gamble. If it leads to multiples, you've won. If not, you lost even if your league is "better"

If we don't end up with more NCAA bids after realignment, we aren't a winner.

KCfan wrote:

TylerDurden wrote:

siudawgs wrote:If evaluating by the number of NCAA bids is silly, someone should tell MVC administrators and coaches, several of whom were trumpeting these additions as a pathway to getting multiple bids more often. If that's not going to be the case, I think it's a reasonable debate whether going to 12 teams (harder to get the one bid, have to split the NCAA money 12 ways, lose the round robin scheduling, etc.) is a good move.

I do, though, agree that the current at-large landscape for midmajors is a sham.

This was always the gamble. If it leads to multiples, you've won. If not, you lost even if your league is "better"

If we don't end up with more NCAA bids after realignment, we aren't a winner.

Honestly you don’t have to get many extra bids to justify it. 1 bid every 5 years or so probably justifies it, not to mention if it can somehow help our seeding. Not sure if it will, but seems worth the gamble.

There continues to be talk about the NCAA Tournament expanding to 90+ teams. If that happens, the next question is do they guarantee regular season champions bids. My guess is the power conferences will do everything they can do prevent that from happening. Regardless, the Valley should be well positioned to get 2 if not 3 bids in an expanded Tournament.

My senior year at GW the team took the DC metro to an away game at Mason. It was literally a four-stop, ten minute, metro ride that was marketed as a chance to travel with the team and do an "away" tailgate. I bring this up because nine of the fifteen teams in the A10 have extremely easy travel to those other schools. Taking a bus isn't really that big of a deal when the road game is up the street.

Obviously SLU, and to a lesser extent Dayton, has made the disadvantage in travel work for them with success. And teams around the country have made long distance travel work. But when 2/3 of a conference is a "bus ride" league, then you have to be ready to cope with that disadvantage. I think Loyola will figure it out, but they are going to have some real growing pains.

Being a multi-bid league in the tourney is good, but winning in the tournament keeps bringing in the dough as well I believe.

Bulldog2323 wrote:There continues to be talk about the NCAA Tournament expanding to 90+ teams. If that happens, the next question is do they guarantee regular season champions bids. My guess is the power conferences will do everything they can do prevent that from happening. Regardless, the Valley should be well positioned to get 2 if not 3 bids in an expanded Tournament.

We currently have one team (Bradley) in the top 90 in the NET Rankings.

Bradley - 76
Drake - 91
SIU - 106
Belmont - 115
Indiana State - 128

Expanding to 90 is going to allow teams like Texas Tech with a NET ranking of 73, who is 10-9 overall and 0-7 in conference play into the dance. Or a better example is Colorado with a NET ranking of 65, who is 12-9 overall and 4-6 in conference into the dance

This is why I have said if UE and Valpo can't figure it out, they must drop down to OVC or Summit league. Those two have consistently been at the bottom of this league and continue to weigh the conference down. SIU should have beaten UE by 15+ the other night, however, they played all 13 scholarship players and were giving more minutes to bench guys even in the first half when we were up 20. Credit to UE because those bench guys were horrendous defensively and UE connected on a lot of threes. I mention this because SIU won by 7 and their NET ranking went down 8 spots. That should never happen!


If the NCAA expands to 90 teams, our universities have to find more ways to play BCS schools in higher-end MTEs and even do 2/3-for-1 deals with them. Problem is, this will give the BCS schools more reason to only play other BCS schools.

Some joker on the UIC board just called my Bears "Mizzou State". So UIC is now officially my least favorite fanbase on the conference, although he might be their only fan, not sure.

ValleyFAN wrote:Some joker on the UIC board just called my Bears "Mizzou State". So UIC is now officially my least favorite fanbase on the conference, although he might be their only fan, not sure.

At least UIC has an active board. Looking at you Belmont. With as much success as that program has had, it is mind boggling that there isn't a fan message board. What's the deal Belmont fans?