|
Post by CreamCity on May 25, 2005 20:00:54 GMT -6
The Michigan schools actually are in two different systems; I think that may have made a difference in that decision.
As for us being "hyphenated," well, the official name of that campus to the west with four little lakes instead of a GREAT one is: University of Wisconsin-Madison. Yeh, they still resent having had to merge into one system, they still say they're *the* UW, they still refer to us as "the hyphenated institution," etc. See how much they just hate that little punctuation mark?
But because we're in the same system, I think that automatically works against being in the same conference. Anyone aware of an exception to that?
|
|
|
Post by Pantherholic on May 25, 2005 23:52:38 GMT -6
i don't see us having a snowball's chance in hell of getting into the Big Ten. i think the only way we can get into a more prestigious conference is if we absolutely dominant (i.e., repetitive seasons like the one we just finished) for a couple years and then maybe so. remember we have to convince other conferences of why we'd be a valuable addition to them.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2005 8:09:20 GMT -6
I agree that if we were to get into a toughter conference we would need to be dominant for seveeral more years. If we can produce the same kind of success that we had last year, then I think it's POSSIBLE that we may be able to convince a conference with tougher competition and more exposure that we are worthy of admittance. I did state in a previous post that we would have to play some exceptional b-ball for 2-3 more years at least for this to even be considered. I wasn't just shooting from the hip saying that we need to uproot now and move on, because if he hit the skids over the next few years the conversation that I mentioned would be completely irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by pnthr30 on May 26, 2005 8:51:43 GMT -6
Besides the obvious exposure and competitive differences between conferences - which has been discussed on the board, there are some significant monetary concerns that need to be considered. In a nutshell, changing conferences bears some SERIOUS $$ ramifications at the onset. There is a lot more to potentially changing conference affiliations than many think, it is by no means an easy thing to do - for a wide variety of reasons.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2005 8:58:14 GMT -6
Agreed. However, In order to make money, you have to spend money. If UWM would ever want to be able to compete at a higher level, than their mindset has to change. There is always a risk when you do anything. But always have to consider the reward.
|
|
|
Post by pnthr30 on May 26, 2005 9:07:08 GMT -6
But we need to remember that UWM DOES NOT have deep pockets. Besides the up front fees associated with joining a new conference, they will forfeit NCAA tournament purse money from previous years in the HL and future purse money from their new conference (while they are in their probationary period). In other words, there is an immediate financial hit in terms of dues, as well as an ongoing budgetary hit seeing as they do not get the income stream from NCAA appearances for several years - double hit.
I will admit, I am not 100% certain of how these things work, but that is my understanding.
To use round numbers, UWM will recieve approximately $500K from their tournament run this year and the rest of the HL schools will get about $250K (payable during the next six years).........if we jumped ship now, we would forfeit that money, and not be eligible to recieve a share of the conference pot in the new conference for several years...........all after paying a sizable entrance fee. In addition, there may be a buyout fee from the HL.
Not cheap, especially for a school with budegetary concerns like UWM.
|
|
|
Post by pnthr97 on May 26, 2005 9:13:40 GMT -6
Jpanther, don't get me wrong, I appreciate your "shooting for the stars" approach. I wish more people had the same ambition. But, what conference do you see us going to? Without a football program, our options are pretty limited. And don't expect a football team any time soon. First, our "friends" 70 miles west will do everything they can to prevent it. Second, UWM has no where near enough money, support, donations, you name it, to afford a football team. Third, Title IX pretty much prevents a football team, unless UWM terminates just about every other men's sport.
Without a football team, the only somewhat viable option is the Missouri Valley. This has already been discussed on the board.
Regarding your comment that you have to spend money to make money, and by no means am I trying to pry into your personal life, but do you donate to UWM? Are you a season ticket holder?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2005 9:37:30 GMT -6
I am a season ticket holder and would eventually like to contribute to the athletics department when some of my college finances are paid off in a year or two. So I contribute somewhat to the university by purchasing season tickets. I agree with the whole football idea and that moving into a power conference would require that we develop a competive football team which from the grassroots up could take minimum at least 20 years. I just thought maybe someone had other ideas into what we can do to remain competitive, because I don't want to see our program as a stepping stone for some other major university. We lost BP and if Jeter is as good as advertised were going to lose him unless we think out of the box and become more proactive.
|
|
|
Post by pnthr97 on May 26, 2005 9:48:28 GMT -6
Losing a good coach to a major program is simply the cards we're dealt as a mid-major program. I think our focus should be on developing strong assistants, while continuing our success. That way, when a head coach leaves for a BCS conference job, we have someone waiting in the wings to replace him.
That being said, I have no doubt that Jeter will be here for at least four years. Unless he's immediately successful and Crean gets canned (which, IMHO is a huge possibility in two years).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2005 10:05:05 GMT -6
pnthr97 I hope your right about Jeter staying here at least for 4 years. I'm hoping a lot longer, because I think this guy has what it takes to be successful. I've read several articles about his ability to recruit good talent and how Bo just raved about him at UW as an assisstant coach (like any good coach would do about his assistants). I mentioned in my first post the FSU job in the mid to late 1970's that Bobby Bowden took over. FSU was a joke at best. He ended up staying. I know I'm comparing different times, conferences, and people, however if we can convince someone to stay and offer them something more lucrative than we did for BP than maybe we will be able to stay competitive for an extended period of time. Turnover isn't good at any job. It leads to uncertainty and we will eventually lose the recruits, hopefully not the fan base. I for one will always bleed black and gold so I can never leave the wagon, but others will and financially, with ticket sales, it will hurt because right now we are starting to get some decent revenue's from ticket sales that this university has never seen before.
|
|
|
Post by NeedMoreFans on May 26, 2005 10:14:36 GMT -6
This seems to be a conversation between two people, so let me jump in and throw a couple cents on to the pile.
We have made the NCAA tourney twice now, right? How does that merit a change in conference? Let's take a look another mid-major, Gonzaga. This little school was once a no name school, but a few NCAA tournament runs later (included in there an elite 8 apperance) they are nationally known. They are in the West Coast Conferences, along with such powerhouses as San Francisco, Santa Clara, Portland and St. Mary's (CA). The lone school they play that has had any bit of post-season play in recent years is Pepperdine. So, if Gonzaga has dominated the conference for the past few seasons and is the conferences representative in the NCAA tourney, consistantly have under 10 losses in a season, why haven't they jumped out of the WCC and into a better conference? I'll bet that part of the reason the don't leave the WCC is because they are almost guaranteed an NCAA berth every season because their competition is so weak. Not only that, but due to their weak conference, they have very few losses, which has inflated their seeding in the tourney, making them look even better. If they were to go to a tougher conference, they would play tougher teams, have a worse record, and may not make the tournament.
So, I ask you of UWM...would you rather have us make the NCAA tourney, do well in conference play, get media attention, increase the fan base, sell out the Cell on a regular basis in HL games, or, join a tougher conference where we may be a doormat, not making tourneys, losing, hurting attendance, losing out on ticket revenue, etc... Personally, I'd rather be at the top of the HL than at the bottom or even middle of the A-10, MVC, etc...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2005 10:26:31 GMT -6
With all do respect NMF I have no idea how being in a tougher conference would relate to lower ticket sales. Even if UWM struggled a few years in a new conference the people of Milwaukee would embrace this idea and would come out to see a more competitive level of basketball and teams. I've said all I have to say about this subject, so rather than just keep rambling on about the same thing and irritating the board members I'll end my participation on this subject and look forward to interacting with you guys about other subjects.
|
|
|
Post by NeedMoreFans on May 26, 2005 10:32:14 GMT -6
All of us in Milwaukee will see what a new conference does to ticket sales. Marquette will probably not be any better next year in the Big East, but will they sell more tix because of it? Can't get much more empty than it was this past year for them (especially in the NIT). All I'm trying to say is people pay to see good sports teams play. If a team is horrible, no one will watch them, no matter what conference they are in.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2005 10:36:56 GMT -6
fair enough
|
|
|
Post by TBone on May 26, 2005 16:35:49 GMT -6
The MVC, MAC, or new Confernce USA would be the only conferences worth taking a look, and the MVC would be the best from a travel perspective. It's not too much of a step up, so it's probably not worthwhile IMO.
|
|