The strength of the A10 from a basketball perspective is largely dependent on the university presidents and what they are willing to spend. If the shareholders (alumni + donors) are not interested in demanding or funding improvements that lead to success, they will not happen. If A10 schools each get only $200k in TV revenue, that's little more than a rounding error in your entire athletic budget and by itself is not going to facilitate any change.
As for us demanding change, would we want to belong to a league that's direction is driven by 1 or 2 teams? Probably not. UD is striving to increase it's success in Athletics and league membership for each of it's teams and I am 100% in agreement with that direction, but unfortunately, the one piece that is missing is consistent men's basketball prowess/domination. Every other box is checked.
Our A10 men's basketball resume looks like this:
23- years of membership
1- Conference Tournament Championship (at home)
2- Regular Season Championships
8- NCAA appearances
5- One and done NCAA appearances
(1- NIT National Championship - does this matter?)
Is the combination of every other box checked, enough to get us into a more elite conference? The answer is no.
Hopefully, AG can get us over the hump and get us where we want to be, in the conference we want to be in - so we can stop relying on being know as "the most prolific NCAA Tournament venue in the world."
Originally Posted by Chris R
If I'm the A10 Commissioner and UD leaves, there is no re-admittance. That goes for anyone. Im not going to be treated like a door mat. I have my own league brand and reputation and scruples to protect.
|
I agree with your premise, but at the end of the day, if Zavier, Butler, Penn State, West Virginia,
Temple, etc. wanted back in the A10, I think they would be allowed back in.
Side note - someone eluded that
LaSalle was selling it's artwork to keep the doors open. LaSalle is the only school in the A10 to field a team in every men's and women's sport. Interesting . . .
