Possible Missouri Valley Conference Expansion

[FieldGoodie05]

But it improves your chances to add units (which is what really counts).

Fans against adding Murray, Belmont, NKU and others always site the assumption that we won't get a second bid so we will be just diluting the tournament dollars. may know hits on the key point that this is not just about bids, but about seeding and the potential for better seeding leading to more potential wins and more units. So while I would love for the MVC to get multiple bids, I think the current climate is such that mid major conferences should be looking to get more units by achieving better seeding for their one bid representatives. Adding a "Murray State" type program (or two) would help the conference continue to get multiple units on a yearly basis.

I hope that Bradley continues the MVC streak of winning first round games, but that might be a difficult chore given the seed they will most likely receive. Some of the fault for the low seed falls squarely on this year's poor conference performance.  Maybe the reduced revenue will motivate the conference presidents to look at adding an eleventh team despite the scheduling issues.

Murray State is a dominant program in a weak league comparable to the Mid Con when Valpo was a member. How that translates to the MVC is anyone's guess. If they're even middle of the pack, they add absolutely no value. If they're good to very good, they become 1 more obstacle in Valpo's way to winning the conference tournament championship and getting back to the Big Dance. While I get that they might help the conference NET/RPI, it's far from a guarantee. Even if they do help it, what kind of a trade off is that for making it that much harder for Valpo to get not only where we want to go, but where we need to go. If we don't start creating some separation soon, we are going to settle in as just another run-of-the-mill MVC program.

There are times when people try to overthink, to their own detriment. That's what I'm sensing is going on here with some of these posts. It's like switching employers, and at the same time youre trying to earn everyone's respect and position yourself for advancement, you're lobbying senior leadership to bring in top notch talent to directly compete against because it'll make the company stronger. No one with any sense of self preservation would ever do that under those circumstances. Now, once you become a seasoned veteran and a consistent outstanding performer (think Wichita State after Creighton left), recommend away without the slightest concern for your own wellbeing.

You were pro Valpo to MVC now you're against the MVC getting stronger. What's best for Valpo depends largely on how committed they are to winning and doing what's necessary to win. If they're committed this is a great move if not it's not as great. That has nothing to do with Murray State. The more tough tests and the tougher the schedule the better. Iron sharpens iron unless of course we're not really (and never were) iron.

VUgrad1314, is making the NCAA tournament your top goal each year?

[VUGrad1314]

No, winning NCAA Tournament games is. I'm not satisfied with just making it I'm not just happy to be there. I want to stay. I want to advance. I don't want another 15-16 situation. I don't want the season to come down to 3 games in March against the conference. That's why I keep pushing for and demanding more. I wish more people would join me.

[FieldGoodie05]

No, winning NCAA Tournament games is. I'm not satisfied with just making it I'm not just happy to be there. I want to stay. I want to advance. I don't want another 15-16 situation. I don't want the season to come down to 3 games in March against the conference. That's why I keep pushing for and demanding more. I wish more people would join me.

I can't disagree there, we tasted March Madness and found it wanting in the 18-years I've followed VU.

I guess the question begs, in what scenario can we best recruit players that will win opening round games or more:

A). Go to NCAAT every 4 years as 15 seed and lose (we went '02, '04, '13 and '15).

B). Go to NCAAT every 6 years as 12/13 seed and win first round game each of those times

Clearly these are just concepts, but the real issue we have is recruiting the talent first and foremost.  I wonder if a dense league with two additions and a resulting NCAAT every 6-years is enough to maintain recruiting success.

There are no definitive answers here, just conjecture but I wonder if our current climate can sustain a tournament drout of 9-years like we had from Mid-Con to HL?

Let's not kid ourselves, we aren't the same young promising (nationally recognized) coached team (Bryce) that made the HL transition.  If we argue for two top tier additions into an already sizable headwind could that not be the additional headwind that puts us into a tailspin?

Two losing seasons b2b does not equate to a tailspin.  But man it'd be tough seeing Murray and Belmont (other others better than us) enter the MVC at a time where we are reeling....no?

[VUGrad1314]

Conference success and prestige has a lot to do with recruiting. The stronger the MVC gets the better for everyone. The fact is we have 2 NCAA Appearances since 2004 and we generated nothing for the HL.  And even if we won we were a 13 14 seed. In a stronger MVC we can be 10\11 we can dream of single digits. we can find ourselves in a strong position to generate units and we have other programs who can do that when we struggle. Properly invested we can use these units to help feed recruiting success and when it's our turn we get a bunch of free publicity. Given the choice (as much as I hate losing I'd rather be where we are than back atop the HL and it's not close. We can succeed here it's just harder and requires more effort and greater commitment.

[FieldGoodie05]

No, winning NCAA Tournament games is. I'm not satisfied with just making it I'm not just happy to be there. I want to stay. I want to advance. I don't want another 15-16 situation. I don't want the season to come down to 3 games in March against the conference. That's why I keep pushing for and demanding more. I wish more people would join me.

I can't disagree there, we tasted March Madness and found it wanting in the 18-years I've followed VU.

I guess the question begs, in what scenario can we best recruit players that will win opening round games or more:

A). Go to NCAAT every 4 years as 15 seed and lose (we went '02, '04, '13 and '15).

B). Go to NCAAT every 6 years as 12/13 seed and win first round game each of those times

Clearly these are just concepts, but the real issue we have is recruiting the talent first and foremost.  I wonder if a dense league with two additions and a resulting NCAAT every 6-years is enough to maintain recruiting success.

There are no definitive answers here, just conjecture but I wonder if our current climate can sustain a tournament drout of 9-years like we had from Mid-Con to HL?

Let's not kid ourselves, we aren't the same young promising (nationally recognized) coached team (Bryce) that made the HL transition.  If we argue for two top tier additions into an already sizable headwind could that not be the additional headwind that puts us into a tailspin?

Two losing seasons b2b does not equate to a tailspin.  But man it'd be tough seeing Murray and Belmont (other others better than us) enter the MVC at a time where we are reeling....no?

I think I was too generous in Scenario B, it should read

B). Go to NCAAT every 6 years as 12/13 seed and win first round game 1/3 of the time

That's probably more realistic.

[wh]

No, winning NCAA Tournament games is. I'm not satisfied with just making it I'm not just happy to be there. I want to stay. I want to advance. I don't want another 15-16 situation. I don't want the season to come down to 3 games in March against the conference. That's why I keep pushing for and demanding more. I wish more people would join me.

I can't disagree there, we tasted March Madness and found it wanting in the 18-years I've followed VU.

I guess the question begs, in what scenario can we best recruit players that will win opening round games or more:

A). Go to NCAAT every 4 years as 15 seed and lose (we went '02, '04, '13 and '15).

B). Go to NCAAT every 6 years as 12/13 seed and win first round game each of those times

Clearly these are just concepts, but the real issue we have is recruiting the talent first and foremost.  I wonder if a dense league with two additions and a resulting NCAAT every 6-years is enough to maintain recruiting success.

There are no definitive answers here, just conjecture but I wonder if our current climate can sustain a tournament drout of 9-years like we had from Mid-Con to HL?

Let's not kid ourselves, we aren't the same young promising (nationally recognized) coached team (Bryce) that made the HL transition.  If we argue for two top tier additions into an already sizable headwind could that not be the additional headwind that puts us into a tailspin?

Two losing seasons b2b does not equate to a tailspin.  But man it'd be tough seeing Murray and Belmont (other others better than us) enter the MVC at a time where we are reeling....no?

Exactly.  No one's arguing that adding programs might benefit the league (or not).  I'm sure the staff at MVC headquarters discusses it regularly, as part of larger "let's be all we can be" planning discussions. After all, that's what people at the corporate level do; they think corporate thoughts.  But that's not us.  We're the program the conference added with great fanfare only 2 years ago that quickly became the albatross that hangs firmly around the conference's neck.  There probably isn't a program in the league that has had a bigger negative impact on the conference's ranking, standing and reputation. The conference was ranked 8th last year DESPITE our pathetic contribution.  Conference ranking fell dramatically this year, in part because we failed to pick ourselves up off the mat and help offset the decline experienced by certain of the other programs.  And no, we're not like Loyola in their first 2 years. No one had any preconceived notions that Loyola was going to do anything to benefit the league anytime soon.  They picked them as part of a larger long term strategy, knowing they were going to struggle out of the gate.  They picked us because we had a longstanding national reputation as a top Mid Major program.  So far, we have been a complete flop. 

I wish people on this board would show a little humility and stop trying to tell everyone who will listen what the MVC needs to do to get better. It's like Derrik Smits telling everyone what changes need to be made on defense. If I were from another board, I would be over here in a heartbeat to put us in our place.  Can anyone imagine what would have happened had we done the same thing in our first 2 years in the HL?  Butler, WSU and Milwaukee fans would been down our throats so fast it would make your head spin.  But that would never have happened there. We were already defending ourselves against claims that we were the Horizon League's new Youngstown State.  Any advice we would have offered up about what the league needed to do would have been countered with "the biggest improvement the league could make is get rid of you."  Obviously, MVC fans are much more tolerant.           

[FieldGoodie05]

Conference success and prestige has a lot to do with recruiting. The stronger the MVC gets the better for everyone. The fact is we have 2 NCAA Appearances since 2004 and we generated nothing for the HL.  And even if we won we were a 13 14 seed. In a stronger MVC we can be 10\11 we can dream of single digits. we can find ourselves in a strong position to generate units and we have other programs who can do that when we struggle. Properly invested we can use these units to help feed recruiting success and when it's our turn we get a bunch of free publicity. Given the choice (as much as I hate losing I'd rather be where we are than back atop the HL and it's not close. We can succeed here it's just harder and requires more effort and greater commitment.

You're correct that we likely got a bump in recruiting moving to MVC, cannot debate that.

[VUGrad1314]

No, winning NCAA Tournament games is. I'm not satisfied with just making it I'm not just happy to be there. I want to stay. I want to advance. I don't want another 15-16 situation. I don't want the season to come down to 3 games in March against the conference. That's why I keep pushing for and demanding more. I wish more people would join me.

I can't disagree there, we tasted March Madness and found it wanting in the 18-years I've followed VU. I guess the question begs, in what scenario can we best recruit players that will win opening round games or more: A). Go to NCAAT every 4 years as 15 seed and lose (we went '02, '04, '13 and '15). B). Go to NCAAT every 6 years as 12/13 seed and win first round game each of those times Clearly these are just concepts, but the real issue we have is recruiting the talent first and foremost.  I wonder if a dense league with two additions and a resulting NCAAT every 6-years is enough to maintain recruiting success. There are no definitive answers here, just conjecture but I wonder if our current climate can sustain a tournament drout of 9-years like we had from Mid-Con to HL? Let's not kid ourselves, we aren't the same young promising (nationally recognized) coached team (Bryce) that made the HL transition.  If we argue for two top tier additions into an already sizable headwind could that not be the additional headwind that puts us into a tailspin? Two losing seasons b2b does not equate to a tailspin.  But man it'd be tough seeing Murray and Belmont (other others better than us) enter the MVC at a time where we are reeling....no?

Exactly.  No one's arguing that adding programs might benefit the league (or not).  I'm sure the staff at MVC headquarters discusses it regularly, as part of larger "let's be all we can be" planning discussions. After all, that's what people at the corporate level do; they think corporate thoughts.  But that's not us.  We're the program the conference added with great fanfare only 2 years ago that quickly became the albatross that hangs firmly around the conference's neck.  There probably isn't a program in the league that has had a bigger negative impact on the conference's ranking, standing and reputation. The conference was ranked 8th last year DESPITE our pathetic contribution.  Conference ranking fell dramatically this year, in part because we failed to pick ourselves up off the mat and help offset the decline experienced by certain of the other programs.  And no, we're not like Loyola in their first 2 years. No one had any preconceived notions that Loyola was going to do anything to benefit the league anytime soon.  They picked them as part of a larger long term strategy, knowing they were going to struggle out of the gate.  They picked us because we had a longstanding national reputation as a top Mid Major program.  So far, we have been a complete flop. I wish people on this board would show a little humility and stop trying to tell everyone who will listen what the MVC needs to do to get better. It's like Derrik Smits telling everyone what changes need to be made on defense. If I were from another board, I would be over here in a heartbeat to put us in our place.  Can anyone imagine what would have happened had we done the same thing in our first 2 years in the HL?  Butler, WSU and Milwaukee fans would been down our throats so fast it would make your head spin.  But that would never have happened there. We were already defending ourselves against claims that we were the Horizon League's new Youngstown State.  Any advice we would have offered up about what the league needed to do would have been countered with "the biggest improvement the league could make is get rid of you."  Obviously, MVC fans are much more tolerant.

So because we have sucked (even though we were a competent crunchtime gameplan away from at least third place) the MVC should refrain from adding more committed dare I say better programs with better facilities and higher administrative commitment to make itself stronger? That doesn't seem like good stewardship to me and it shouldn't matter who I'm a fan of or how we've done for me to advocate for it and point it out. I'm a fan. I want what's best for the conference. It's not my fault our facilities suck and nobody with any power to do anything cares it's not my fault we hired a coach who can only coach one side of the ball and it's not my fault this team folded like cheap furniture in the last four minutes of games. If MH or MLB was popping off like this I'd agree. They have the power to affect change. Not me. Not any of us. We can only hope we are heard someday.

[NativeCheesehead]

So with the OVC now officially a multi bid league can we put the MSU- Belmont talk to bed now? 

[justducky]

I wish people on this board would show a little humility and stop trying to tell everyone who will listen what the MVC needs to do to get better. It's like Derrik Smits telling everyone what changes need to be made on defense. If I were from another board, I would be over here in a heartbeat to put us in our place.  Can anyone imagine what would have happened had we done the same thing in our first 2 years in the HL?  Butler, WSU and Milwaukee fans would been down our throats so fast it would make your head spin.  But that would never have happened there. We were already defending ourselves against claims that we were the Horizon League's new Youngstown State.  Any advice we would have offered up about what the league needed to do would have been countered with "the biggest improvement the league could make is get rid of you."  Obviously, MVC fans are much more tolerant.           

If conventional thinking is backward thinking it should always be challenged. In one decade we rode the HL from a position of relevance to obscurity. We should understand the downward spiral of mid major basketball better than anybody in the Valley.

We joined the MVC with an equal voice and 10% of the vote. It is our obligation to point out potential opportunities to those not yet inclined to recognizing their need. I will agree that we should be polite but humility never was my strong suit.

[VUGrad1314]

It's over...

Murray's not coming...

Belmont's not coming...

We're never going to commit to athletics...

The MVC has less bids than the OVC AND a lower seed than the HL and I hate everything....

[a3uge]

It's over...

Murray's not coming...

Belmont's not coming...

We're never going to commit to athletics...

The MVC has less bids than the OVC AND a lower seed than the HL and I hate everything....

Yeah, clearly the OVC and Horizon are better conferences?

[VUGrad1314]

It's over... Murray's not coming... Belmont's not coming... We're never going to commit to athletics... The MVC has less bids than the OVC AND a lower seed than the HL and I hate everything....

Yeah, clearly the OVC and Horizon are better conferences?

Yeah all that depth has done what exactly for this conference? And don't mention Loyola's run that can't be counted on...

[a3uge]

No, winning NCAA Tournament games is. I'm not satisfied with just making it I'm not just happy to be there. I want to stay. I want to advance. I don't want another 15-16 situation. I don't want the season to come down to 3 games in March against the conference. That's why I keep pushing for and demanding more. I wish more people would join me.

I can't disagree there, we tasted March Madness and found it wanting in the 18-years I've followed VU.

I guess the question begs, in what scenario can we best recruit players that will win opening round games or more:

A). Go to NCAAT every 4 years as 15 seed and lose (we went '02, '04, '13 and '15).

B). Go to NCAAT every 6 years as 12/13 seed and win first round game each of those times

Clearly these are just concepts, but the real issue we have is recruiting the talent first and foremost.  I wonder if a dense league with two additions and a resulting NCAAT every 6-years is enough to maintain recruiting success.

There are no definitive answers here, just conjecture but I wonder if our current climate can sustain a tournament drout of 9-years like we had from Mid-Con to HL?

Let's not kid ourselves, we aren't the same young promising (nationally recognized) coached team (Bryce) that made the HL transition.  If we argue for two top tier additions into an already sizable headwind could that not be the additional headwind that puts us into a tailspin?

Two losing seasons b2b does not equate to a tailspin.  But man it'd be tough seeing Murray and Belmont (other others better than us) enter the MVC at a time where we are reeling....no?

The conference was ranked 8th last year DESPITE our pathetic contribution.
   

You realize out of conference record is the only contributor to conference strength. We finished 7-4 OOC last season, which was a better contribution than 5 teams. Get mad at Indiana State who finished 3-7 out of conference. Even this year at 5-6 wasn't the worst. UNI finished 3-8 OOC. 12-10 in the past two years isn't killing this conference. Loyola was 12-9 in their first two years and took 5 years to finish above .500 in conference.

[a3uge]

It's over... Murray's not coming... Belmont's not coming... We're never going to commit to athletics... The MVC has less bids than the OVC AND a lower seed than the HL and I hate everything....

Yeah, clearly the OVC and Horizon are better conferences?

Yeah all that depth has done what exactly for this conference? And don't mention Loyola's run that can't be counted on...

Are you saying the 4th place Horizon or OVC teams would also get 14 seeds?

[VUGrad1314]

What are you talking about? Who cares?

[UNIfan]

Belmont is very lucky to get in, I don't think they would almost any other year.

Ja Morant is gone next year for Murray, and the rest of the conference is steaming garbage.

I'd honestly be surprised if OVC gets multiple bids ever again.

[VUGrad1314]

The problem is that the very fact that it happened is enough for a university president to say with the full backing and support of everyone we don't need the MVC. This is a disaster.

[FieldGoodie05]

No, winning NCAA Tournament games is. I'm not satisfied with just making it I'm not just happy to be there. I want to stay. I want to advance. I don't want another 15-16 situation. I don't want the season to come down to 3 games in March against the conference. That's why I keep pushing for and demanding more. I wish more people would join me.

I can't disagree there, we tasted March Madness and found it wanting in the 18-years I've followed VU. I guess the question begs, in what scenario can we best recruit players that will win opening round games or more: A). Go to NCAAT every 4 years as 15 seed and lose (we went '02, '04, '13 and '15). B). Go to NCAAT every 6 years as 12/13 seed and win first round game each of those times Clearly these are just concepts, but the real issue we have is recruiting the talent first and foremost.  I wonder if a dense league with two additions and a resulting NCAAT every 6-years is enough to maintain recruiting success. There are no definitive answers here, just conjecture but I wonder if our current climate can sustain a tournament drout of 9-years like we had from Mid-Con to HL? Let's not kid ourselves, we aren't the same young promising (nationally recognized) coached team (Bryce) that made the HL transition.  If we argue for two top tier additions into an already sizable headwind could that not be the additional headwind that puts us into a tailspin? Two losing seasons b2b does not equate to a tailspin.  But man it'd be tough seeing Murray and Belmont (other others better than us) enter the MVC at a time where we are reeling....no?

Exactly.  No one's arguing that adding programs might benefit the league (or not).  I'm sure the staff at MVC headquarters discusses it regularly, as part of larger "let's be all we can be" planning discussions. After all, that's what people at the corporate level do; they think corporate thoughts.  But that's not us.  We're the program the conference added with great fanfare only 2 years ago that quickly became the albatross that hangs firmly around the conference's neck.  There probably isn't a program in the league that has had a bigger negative impact on the conference's ranking, standing and reputation. The conference was ranked 8th last year DESPITE our pathetic contribution.  Conference ranking fell dramatically this year, in part because we failed to pick ourselves up off the mat and help offset the decline experienced by certain of the other programs.  And no, we're not like Loyola in their first 2 years. No one had any preconceived notions that Loyola was going to do anything to benefit the league anytime soon.  They picked them as part of a larger long term strategy, knowing they were going to struggle out of the gate.  They picked us because we had a longstanding national reputation as a top Mid Major program.  So far, we have been a complete flop. I wish people on this board would show a little humility and stop trying to tell everyone who will listen what the MVC needs to do to get better. It's like Derrik Smits telling everyone what changes need to be made on defense. If I were from another board, I would be over here in a heartbeat to put us in our place.  Can anyone imagine what would have happened had we done the same thing in our first 2 years in the HL?  Butler, WSU and Milwaukee fans would been down our throats so fast it would make your head spin.  But that would never have happened there. We were already defending ourselves against claims that we were the Horizon League's new Youngstown State.  Any advice we would have offered up about what the league needed to do would have been countered with "the biggest improvement the league could make is get rid of you."  Obviously, MVC fans are much more tolerant.

So because we have sucked (even though we were a competent crunchtime gameplan away from at least third place) the MVC should refrain from adding more committed dare I say better programs with better facilities and higher administrative commitment to make itself stronger? That doesn't seem like good stewardship to me and it shouldn't matter who I'm a fan of or how we've done for me to advocate for it and point it out. I'm a fan. I want what's best for the conference. It's not my fault our facilities suck and nobody with any power to do anything cares it's not my fault we hired a coach who can only coach one side of the ball and it's not my fault this team folded like cheap furniture in the last four minutes of games. If MH or MLB was popping off like this I'd agree. They have the power to affect change. Not me. Not any of us. We can only hope we are heard someday.

Curious, what was your major in college?

[VUGrad1314]

Chinese and Japanese Studies I stayed to get a masters in Chinese Studies which took an extra year hence the two numbers in my Username. Why do you ask?

[FieldGoodie05]

Chinese and Japanese Studies I stayed to get a masters in Chinese Studies which took an extra year hence the two numbers in my Username. Why do you ask?

I'd have pegged you for an English Major.

[VUGrad1314]

Chinese and Japanese Studies I stayed to get a masters in Chinese Studies which took an extra year hence the two numbers in my Username. Why do you ask?

I'd have pegged you for an English Major.

I'll interpret that remark as complementary... Please tell me if I'm wrong. My major was extremely language intensive though and my understanding of English has grown\continues to grow as I've studied\continue to study languages. I thought maybe you had me pegged as a deep cover Murray State plant. That is far too epic a troll job for me to undertake. Nope what you see is what you get a stressed out bummed out lifelong Valpo\ old school HL\MVC\mid major fan letting off steam.

[Just Sayin]

It's over...

Murray's not coming...

Belmont's not coming...

We're never going to commit to athletics...

The MVC has less bids than the OVC AND a lower seed than the HL and I hate everything....

I'd have pegged you for an English Major.

An English major wouldn't have written "less."

Your friendly grammar Nazi.

[bbtds]

It's over...

Murray's not coming...

Belmont's not coming...

We're never going to commit to athletics...

The MVC has less bids than the OVC AND a lower seed than the HL and I hate everything....

Yeah, clearly the OVC and Horizon are better conferences?

Not yet but it is moving in those directions.

[bbtds]

It's over...

Murray's not coming...

Belmont's not coming...

We're never going to commit to athletics...

The MVC has less bids than the OVC AND a lower seed than the HL and I hate everything....

I'd have pegged you for an English Major.

An English major wouldn't have written "less."

Your friendly grammar Nazi.

Again, not our jobs. A friendly reminder that there are moderators who have the power to permanently kick all of us non-moderators off the message board. No one else but the moderators have that power.