Originally Posted by longtimefan
I'm not sure that is true. The conference could place certain requirements on schools (facilities, attendance, monetary support, etc.) and give them, say, five years to meet them. If the schools don't meet the requirements they could be asked (told) to join a conference that is more suitable to their commitment to basketball.
|
I agree. Conferences don't dump members. Many years ago when the Big East FB conference was relatively strong...well before the realignment era,...the conference put
Temple on probation of sorts. Certain criteria were established and TU was given 5 years to comply. They did not and out they went.
If the A10 established reasonable criteria for facilities and gave schools not meeting those criteria five years to do so....and after five years one or more schools had not invested appropriately, the offending schools are essentially withdrawing from the conference. They are not being booted out.
Attendance should not be one of the criteria. A school could invest heavily and meet all the requirements for top notch facilities...but still not meet an attendance requirement. That's an unlikely scenario. If a school invests heavily in facilities it also would be doing all in can to recruit well and elevate its program. Usually that produces results and attendance takes care of itself.
Back to A10 facilities. I have not seen
Fordham's Rose Hill Gym or
LaSalle's Gola Arena....but Priders have said they are awful and do not meet even minimum standards. If that is true both schools are saying f*** you to the conference and its members. How can that be tolerated? Recruits are very impressed by facilities, understandably. Schools with poor facilities will not be able to compete at the level expected of the A10.
Time to play hardball, I think. How can UD/Neil not exert a bit of pressure in this area? Loss of UD would be devastating for the A10. Surely we must have some clout. UD is the crown jewel of the A10.