Murray is nowhere near a must add. They have a decent basketball history that’s it. One bad coach hire and then what ? We have seen what that does. SIU when done still has a huge Chicago alumni base. What does Murray have ?
I will ask the question again. If Murray is do great why does nobody else want them ?
Murray is nowhere near a must add. They have a decent basketball history that’s it. One bad coach hire and then what ? We have seen what that does. SIU when done still has a huge Chicago alumni base. What does Murray have ?
I will ask the question again. If Murray is do great why does nobody else want them ?
I think Murray's best fit is in the MVC if leaving the OVC. Yes, of course, if they make the wrong coaching hire and basketball tanks, that's a risk, but they've shown a substantial history now of sustained success through multiple coaches. They also have an already established rivalry with Belmont and SIU. If you're speaking basketball first, the upside is undeniable.
Maybe a better, more relevant question; what does UTA or UMKC bring to boost the prestige of this traditionally basketball-first league that makes them a better choice than Murray?
--Insert something witty here--
Murray is nowhere near a must add. They have a decent basketball history that’s it. One bad coach hire and then what ? We have seen what that does. SIU when done still has a huge Chicago alumni base. What does Murray have ?
I will ask the question again. If Murray is do great why does nobody else want them ?
I think Murray's best fit is in the MVC if leaving the OVC. Yes, of course, if they make the wrong coaching hire and basketball tanks, that's a risk, but they've shown a substantial history now of sustained success through multiple coaches. They also have an already established rivalry with Belmont and SIU. If you're speaking basketball first, the upside is undeniable.
Maybe a better, more relevant question; what does UTA or UMKC bring to boost the prestige of this traditionally basketball-first league that makes them a better choice than Murray?
Besides giant markets ?
UMKC is a non issue anyway
It is not about filling seats at Arch Madness its about television revenue and that's all that matters no television no money
It is not about filling seats at Arch Madness its about television revenue and that's all that matters no television no money
Fun.
Pretty sure the MVC's reputation would be nowhere near what it is today without Arch Madness having been a fantastic tournament for the past three decades. And filling the seats was certainly part of that.
Ok full discloser here.
we don’t know anything solid. I am pretty sure most of the UIC talk is coming from 69’s Easter egg.
UIC is a near lock due to the TV contract and that is fact.
the commissioner is all aboard the UTA train and has been since the beginning.
when I heard they were only adding two that is where we went. Since we said that everybody seems to have a scoop. We had a ton of guests look at us yesterday. If they are taking our guess as the gospal it’s on them 🤣
I don’t see either UIC or UT-Arlington EVERY having a large fan base and bringing a large contingent of fans to ST Louis. They are both in Major Metro areas and are way down the pecking order in those respective Cities. Look at Loyola for example they have had Major success and they can’t even average over 3,000 for there home game’s. I can see adding UIC, the Chicago market is VERY important to a lot of the Valley schools. UT-Arlington does have potential, they have a great on campus arena and it is a good academic school. I am hoping for the best.
This sounds a lot like Loyola when they came in.
I don’t see either UIC or UT-Arlington EVERY having a large fan base and bringing a large contingent of fans to ST Louis. They are both in Major Metro areas and are way down the pecking order in those respective Cities. Look at Loyola for example they have had Major success and they can’t even average over 3,000 for there home game’s. I can see adding UIC, the Chicago market is VERY important to a lot of the Valley schools. UT-Arlington does have potential, they have a great on campus arena and it is a good academic school. I am hoping for the best.
This sounds a lot like Loyola when they came in.
I’ll admit, I was against the Loyola add when it happened. It turned out well, although I don’t think trying to catch lightning in a bottle is likely to happen again, which makes it hard to see why adding them is better than adding a known basketball commodity.
Even still, with all their successes since they joined, they never developed a true rivalry with any other program and seemed to kinda stand alone on an island. Loyola jumping ship makes sense.
A Murray addition immediately makes the MVC feel more like what we became accustomed to when Creighton and WSU were still around; a league of quality basketball driven by passionate fans and heated rivalries. I didn’t see that with Loyola and I have an even harder time seeing it with UTA.
--Insert something witty here--
I'm in the middle on Murray. I love the regional rival. After all, I almost went to Murray, but chose SIU. Overall, I'd probably prefer we add them. But...My main question to some: Why would Murray be a "must add?"
This conference has been competitive for 100 years without them. Why must our survival be on them? We already added Belmont, which is almost as good as having Loyola, and possibly better in the future. Who knows?
Also, no better conference than the MVC will take them, so I'm pretty sure that we could always add them in the future. And yes, they WILL take an invite regardless if they are sour about this. We are way too good of a fit and upgrade for them not to. It isn't like they are getting offers from the AAC, A-10, etc... They'll take the MVC in a heartbeat. And they still will 5 years from now.
I like adding them, but I just don't get the desperation that some people have.
I'm in the middle on Murray. I love the regional rival. After all, I almost went to Murray, but chose SIU. Overall, I'd probably prefer we add them. But...My main question to some: Why would Murray be a "must add?"
This conference has been competitive for 100 years without them. Why must our survival be on them? We already added Belmont, which is almost as good as having Loyola, and possibly better in the future. Who knows?
Also, no better conference than the MVC will take them, so I'm pretty sure that we could always add them in the future. And yes, they WILL take an invite regardless if they are sour about this. We are way too good of a fit and upgrade for them not to. It isn't like they are getting offers from the AAC, A-10, etc... They'll take the MVC in a heartbeat. And they still will 5 years from now.
I like adding them, but I just don't get the desperation that some people have.
I’ve made my arguments. Murray is a must add if quality basketball, regional rivalries, and solid fan support are driving forces behind the decision.
My biggest concern is what does UTA or UMKC add from a basketball standpoint that’s impactful? What aside from large markets makes them attractive at all? Even if they end up being good in a few years, do their fans care enough to make a difference? I certainly don’t see them trekking to the Arch in droves no matter how good they are. Is there a solitary reason outside of TV market revenue only that they should be chosen over Murray?
--Insert something witty here--
I'm in the middle on Murray. I love the regional rival. After all, I almost went to Murray, but chose SIU. Overall, I'd probably prefer we add them. But...My main question to some: Why would Murray be a "must add?"
This conference has been competitive for 100 years without them. Why must our survival be on them? We already added Belmont, which is almost as good as having Loyola, and possibly better in the future. Who knows?
Also, no better conference than the MVC will take them, so I'm pretty sure that we could always add them in the future. And yes, they WILL take an invite regardless if they are sour about this. We are way too good of a fit and upgrade for them not to. It isn't like they are getting offers from the AAC, A-10, etc... They'll take the MVC in a heartbeat. And they still will 5 years from now.
I like adding them, but I just don't get the desperation that some people have.
I’ve made my arguments. Murray is a must add if quality basketball, regional rivalries, and solid fan support are driving forces behind the decision.
My biggest concern is what does UTA or UMKC add from a basketball standpoint that’s impactful? What aside from large markets makes them attractive at all? Even if they end up being good in a few years, do their fans care enough to make a difference? I certainly don’t see them trekking to the Arch in droves no matter how good they are. Is there a solitary reason outside of TV market revenue only that they should be chosen over Murray?
Specifically for Northern Iowa and Drake, an easier trip. Now that may sound stupid, but they probably fly to almost every game. It is easier and probably cheaper to get to UTA than it is to get to Murray. For all of the eastern schools in the conference (Such as SIU), this isn't a factor. There are things that also matter. I'm not trying to validate those arguments, but just pointing out that yes, there is more.
“As we get to the end of December, it appears UIC is "done deal"; with UMKC on the outside looking in and still TBD on UTA & Murray State”
per Matt Brown
Is there a link to this? Not saying it's not legit, but I can't find the Tweet.
I'm in the middle on Murray. I love the regional rival. After all, I almost went to Murray, but chose SIU. Overall, I'd probably prefer we add them. But...My main question to some: Why would Murray be a "must add?"
This conference has been competitive for 100 years without them. Why must our survival be on them? We already added Belmont, which is almost as good as having Loyola, and possibly better in the future. Who knows?
Also, no better conference than the MVC will take them, so I'm pretty sure that we could always add them in the future. And yes, they WILL take an invite regardless if they are sour about this. We are way too good of a fit and upgrade for them not to. It isn't like they are getting offers from the AAC, A-10, etc... They'll take the MVC in a heartbeat. And they still will 5 years from now.
I like adding them, but I just don't get the desperation that some people have.
Add Murray for the same reason why the A10 is grabbing Loyola: you want as many quality basketball programs as possible to increase your chances of getting teams into the tournament.
“As we get to the end of December, it appears UIC is "done deal"; with UMKC on the outside looking in and still TBD on UTA & Murray State”
per Matt Brown
Is there a link to this? Not saying it's not legit, but I can't find the Tweet.
I copied and pasted of Twitter and now it seems to be gone
OK I used to own a rabbit hound and I can't find that darn egg (I'm assuming it came from the Easter Bunny - not a chicken) - driving me crazy!! LOL
I need a hint!
