WWW.PANTHERNATION.COM
GO PANTHERS!
welcome

Welcome to the best UNI Panther forum on the net!

Become a PN Supporting Member! Get exclusive access to the Panther Den forum and more. Click here for info.

30-minute show exclusively highlighting UNI Athletics. Click here for info.

  • You need to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
  • To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the help page by clicking this link.
  • If you have any questions please use the Contact Us form.
This website is not affiliated with the University of Northern Iowa or the UNI Panther Athletic Program.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Belmont to the Valley

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • sevelev711
    replied
    Well shoot. This wasn't completely out of nowhere, but it is pretty surprising. I'll take it, though.

    As for the "do we want UALR/UTA question," I will point out that the MVC brand expanding into the Dallas market is not just good for recruiting, but also for the school. The "potential college students" pool in Texas is growing at a very large rate, and with our numbers being what they are, that would be incredibly helpful to put the UNI name in that market. "UALR" is more of an "eh," but I would love to see the MVC being represented in both the 3rd and 4th biggest metro areas in the country.

    Leave a comment:


  • BCPanther
    replied
    Originally posted by UNIAlum95 View Post

    Bringing in closer regional teams that are not going to elevate the level of Valley play is not going to keep MSU for shopping around to FBS level conferences though. You are right they've felt ignored for a long time by the state favoring Missouri. If they get a shot at the WAC, they are gone and then we are stuck without MSU and adding those schools has done nothing for us. You don't get to chose who falls off your schedule each year. You are stuck on whatever rotation you are on and maybe two bottom dwellers fall off in favor of the top teams which only hurts your case as a mid-major. It's a double edged sword.

    I'm in favor of expansion because its that or the conference dies a painful death. I just hope we get quality along with the quantity. Hope for the best.
    Who said anything about a rotation? You do what the Big Ten and ACC do and game your schedule to maximize what you need to maximize every year.

    Leave a comment:


  • UNIpanther99
    replied
    Learning that MSU is thinking of bolting makes me hesitant toward ULAR/UTA. If the Bears leave, we would have a couple of real geographic outliers down there.

    Leave a comment:


  • UNIAlum95
    replied
    Originally posted by clenz View Post
    Another thing that needs to be thought about

    Missouri State is on an Island. Not just a bit of an outlier, they are an extreme outlier and Murray and Belmont don't do a lot to fix that. UALR gives MSU someone in their region.UTA, while not exactly next door, also adds someone in the south that can bring a regional similarity. MSU is very different institutionally from the rest of the Valley. UALR and UTA are more similar and would bridge that gap.Leave MSU alone on that island and we likely lose them sooner than later. The WAC is going to go through some membership changes as football becomes a focus there, and MSU is square in that footprint with Tarleton State, SFA, SHSU, ACU, Lamar, and whatever other schools they go for. In terms of regional institutional ideologies that move could make sense. The WAC has also been clear they are going to attempt an FBS move as a conference, which MSU wants. That would also keep NMSU from looking for another conference somehow, and losing their basketball program. Is it Valley level basketball? No, but it's a decent conference that MSU would do very well in, and would get them football at an FBS level.

    That puts the Valley back down to 11. Still not a bad number to be at by any means, but putting some partners around MSU could take all of that off the table. In addition to, what BC pointed out, as far as being able to game the schedule to have your top teams avoiding the dregs of the league twice. Imagine dropping one game against Valpo and Evansville for an additional game against a Bradley, Drake, Murray, Belmont, etc. Makes a world of difference.
    Bringing in closer regional teams that are not going to elevate the level of Valley play is not going to keep MSU for shopping around to FBS level conferences though. You are right they've felt ignored for a long time by the state favoring Missouri. If they get a shot at the WAC, they are gone and then we are stuck without MSU and adding those schools has done nothing for us. You don't get to chose who falls off your schedule each year. You are stuck on whatever rotation you are on and maybe two bottom dwellers fall off in favor of the top teams which only hurts your case as a mid-major. It's a double edged sword.

    I'm in favor of expansion because its that or the conference dies a painful death. I just hope we get quality along with the quantity. Hope for the best.

    Leave a comment:


  • clenz
    replied
    Another thing that needs to be thought about

    Missouri State is on an Island. Not just a bit of an outlier, they are an extreme outlier and Murray and Belmont don't do a lot to fix that. UALR gives MSU someone in their region.UTA, while not exactly next door, also adds someone in the south that can bring a regional similarity. MSU is very different institutionally from the rest of the Valley. UALR and UTA are more similar and would bridge that gap.Leave MSU alone on that island and we likely lose them sooner than later. The WAC is going to go through some membership changes as football becomes a focus there, and MSU is square in that footprint with Tarleton State, SFA, SHSU, ACU, Lamar, and whatever other schools they go for. In terms of regional institutional ideologies that move could make sense. The WAC has also been clear they are going to attempt an FBS move as a conference, which MSU wants. That would also keep NMSU from looking for another conference somehow, and losing their basketball program. Is it Valley level basketball? No, but it's a decent conference that MSU would do very well in, and would get them football at an FBS level.

    That puts the Valley back down to 11. Still not a bad number to be at by any means, but putting some partners around MSU could take all of that off the table. In addition to, what BC pointed out, as far as being able to game the schedule to have your top teams avoiding the dregs of the league twice. Imagine dropping one game against Valpo and Evansville for an additional game against a Bradley, Drake, Murray, Belmont, etc. Makes a world of difference.

    Leave a comment:


  • BCPanther
    replied
    Originally posted by vbfan19 View Post
    if the end result is the loss of a double round-robin regular season conference schedule, then it is lame.
    Disagree. The less that your top teams and at large contenders have to play the bottom of your league, the better off you are numbers-wise. There are tons of advantages to rigging your schedule and a double round robin doesn't allow for that.

    Now, if we were a Power league that got 6 or 7 bids every year, I'd completely agree but we just aren't in that position.

    Leave a comment:


  • UNIAlum95
    replied
    Originally posted by vbfan19 View Post
    if the end result is the loss of a double round-robin regular season conference schedule, then it is lame.
    Which is why 12 is perfect unless there are more name brand teams to come along with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • vbfan19
    replied
    if the end result is the loss of a double round-robin regular season conference schedule, then it is lame.

    Leave a comment:


  • CyCarp
    replied
    Originally posted by UNIAlum95 View Post
    12 solid teams is better to me than 14 with two more bottom tier teams. I really don't see Arlington opening up valley recruiting very much and can't believe that Little Rock would be a valuable addition.
    I kind of agree with this. Arlington has only been to the big dance once (2008) and Little Rock has only been there twice in the last 30 years - one of those years they were in the 16 seed play in game. Maybe they fit in the mid-lower end of the Valley, but adding those teams shouldn't be a priority imo. Maybe expanding to Texas helps, but overall, I'm not completely sold.

    Leave a comment:


  • DownGoesKansas
    replied
    Originally posted by DownGoesKansas View Post

    This seems like extreme optimism to me. Like I hope its true but I would be worried about watering down our payouts with minimal return.
    Although really just need to make sure we always get at least 2

    Leave a comment:


  • UNIAlum95
    replied
    12 solid teams is better to me than 14 with two more bottom tier teams. I really don't see Arlington opening up valley recruiting very much and can't believe that Little Rock would be a valuable addition.

    Leave a comment:


  • UNIpanther99
    replied
    If it helps to open up Texas recruiting a bit, I'm all for it.

    Leave a comment:


  • ofpantherandman
    replied
    Does anybody really want Arlington and Little Rock? I get that they'll try to apply the Loyola formula there - ok - but is 14 better than 12 at this level, with these schools? I'm not sure. If you get to 14 with Murray, Wichita and SLU, that's one thing, but getting there with Murray, Little Rock and Arlington is quite another.

    Leave a comment:


  • DownGoesKansas
    replied
    Originally posted by clenz View Post

    This is going to be a top 7/8 league with 3 or 4 bids yearly. A head of the MWC and par/ahead of A10.
    This seems like extreme optimism to me. Like I hope its true but I would be worried about watering down our payouts with minimal return.

    Leave a comment:


  • clenz
    replied
    Originally posted by UNIAlum95 View Post
    Well let's not get ahead of ourselves yet. We have one critical piece but we don't know when or if any of those other chips will fall our way.
    UTA has been known for months. That smoke started back in January and it's not just a small thing of smoke. It's been a pretty thick cloud.

    UALR also doesn't have a home, and while there hasn't been a ton of them being linked to the Valley there isn't much else out there for them. The ASUN is so big at this point with their football expansion it doesn't make a ton of sense. OVC is dead and needs FB schools. American won't touch them. Their best bet is either the HL expands their geography big time (seems unlikely) or the SLC is real desperate (though they OVC and SLC seem destined to merge).

    Belmont plus those 2 is 13. We aren't running a 13 team league. A 14th is needed and from rumors current, and past, it's either Murray or ORU. I think the choice between the two (assuming both would say yes) is pretty clear

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X