(02-27-2018 12:42 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 12:20 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  2) The best non-power basketball programs need to coalesce. The best non-power basketball programs can improve their schedule and RPI (and their ability to make the tournament) by grouping together. This has economic value as you indicated before by building teams that can win in the tournament (more credits) or by addint at large bids (even more credits). It may even have some TV value (see Big East). So, it may be worth expanding the footprint somewhat--so that one "picks and chooses" a conference that has a very strong basketball core---strong enough to attract a few key basketball only members to supercharge the league.

The current NCAA rules strongly discourage forming new D-I conferences. No one is going to start up a new conference that won't have NCAA autobids for 8 years. And no one (not even UConn) is going to leave an FBS conference for a conference that doesn't sponsor FBS football.

Even if you just look at conferences that don't have FBS football, there isn't enough there to justify any new "collection" that makes sense -- best you can do is something like 4 or 5 from the A-10, 2 or 3 from the MVC, plus, I don't know, Murray State, Belmont, Northern Kentucky. It doesn't pencil out when you have to go without autobids for 8 years and each of those schools has to pay an exit fee to its current conference. It also doesn't help that much to add a couple of good programs to an existing conference unless you also jettison a few of that conference's teams that are never competitive in hoops.

No need for a new conference. My feeling is the AAC (in the east) and MW (in the west) would be the place for non-FBS playing high profile basketball programs (outside of the P5) to gravitate toward. Talking maybe 2-4 adds here in the AAC at most. Maybe the same number in the west. Adds that play football are possible---cant say UMass, W Kentucky, or MTSU might not be worth considering. Two of those 3 offer good basketball along with quite competent football programs. NMSU in the west might be worth a look by the MW. This is a very limited strategy at the top level of non-power basketball.

For the rest of the G5, it would be part of any reorganization that might occur if the G5 conferences decided TV money had completely dried up and regional low travel cost conferences were more viable. Such conferences would be primarily based on location---but building solid basketball would probably be a major driver in how they coalesce. These moves would likely not be true "new" conferences---but rather reorganizations of the schools within the existing shells of the SB and CUSA (and perhaps even the AAC).