(02-28-2013 05:31 PM)MU88 Wrote:  10 in 2013, 12 in 2014. Certain east coast schools are against VCU. I have heard Creighton for over a month, and I am still hearing Creighton.

You just might have it right, ESPN updated their article and it now says:

Creighton has emerged as the favorite to become the 10th team, and would also join next season, according to sources.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...ng-sources

(02-28-2013 08:45 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 08:41 PM)thegalen Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 08:01 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  Actually I suspect that concerns with VCU would have a lot to do with academics. That is the one major problem with their candidacy.

By academics, I do n or mean academic standing or prestige. I mean eligibility for athletes Most of the C7 and the potential candidates are relatively small universities (< 10,000) with very strong student bodies and with limits to their curriculum range. It's much harder to find a program for elite basketball players with academic limitations in which they can maintain eligibility. So, do they really want to bring in VCU, a school where it is much easier to keep marginal students eligible? That puts the rest of the league at a serious competitive disadvantage and positions VCU to eventually take a dominant position in the league the way that UConn eventually did in the Big East.

It may well be that the VCU option is the last thing that the C7 wants. That could very well tip the direction of the league to the Midwest because Richmond and the rest of the East simply are not viable candidates.

Yes and no. There's the matter of being admitted in the first place. Admissions at state schools are set by...the state. There's room to wiggle, but again you're dealing with state employees acting on guidance from their state legislatures. Privates, on the other hand, can admit whoever they want as long as they meet and maintain NCAA minimum standards. Ever hear of Harvard's "Z list"? As a Hampton native, I have two words for you: Allen Iverson....

This was much more about hegemony in recruiting territory and fear of football than anything else.

I've never ever heard of state legislators setting admissions criteria - especially for athletes.

Example...
"This Guide is designed to help you understand Massachusetts Department of Higher Education (DHE) minimum standards for admission to the Commonwealth’s four-year public institutions and equip you with the knowledge you need to effectively counsel students about them."
http://www.mass.edu/shared/documents/adm...ndards.pdf

The legislatures don't set the standards, but the people who do (DOE equivalents) act on general guidance from them. Point being you can get in actual trouble for fudging around with stuff like this as a state employee.

(02-28-2013 08:50 PM)thegalen Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 08:45 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 08:41 PM)thegalen Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 08:01 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  Actually I suspect that concerns with VCU would have a lot to do with academics. That is the one major problem with their candidacy.

By academics, I do n or mean academic standing or prestige. I mean eligibility for athletes Most of the C7 and the potential candidates are relatively small universities (< 10,000) with very strong student bodies and with limits to their curriculum range. It's much harder to find a program for elite basketball players with academic limitations in which they can maintain eligibility. So, do they really want to bring in VCU, a school where it is much easier to keep marginal students eligible? That puts the rest of the league at a serious competitive disadvantage and positions VCU to eventually take a dominant position in the league the way that UConn eventually did in the Big East.

It may well be that the VCU option is the last thing that the C7 wants. That could very well tip the direction of the league to the Midwest because Richmond and the rest of the East simply are not viable candidates.

Yes and no. There's the matter of being admitted in the first place. Admissions at state schools are set by...the state. There's room to wiggle, but again you're dealing with state employees acting on guidance from their state legislatures. Privates, on the other hand, can admit whoever they want as long as they meet and maintain NCAA minimum standards. Ever hear of Harvard's "Z list"? As a Hampton native, I have two words for you: Allen Iverson....

This was much more about hegemony in recruiting territory and fear of football than anything else.

I've never ever heard of state legislators setting admissions criteria - especially for athletes.

Example...
"This Guide is designed to help you understand Massachusetts Department of Higher Education (DHE) minimum standards for admission to the Commonwealth’s four-year public institutions and equip you with the knowledge you need to effectively counsel students about them."
http://www.mass.edu/shared/documents/adm...ndards.pdf

The legislatures don't set the standards, but the people who do (DOE equivalents) act on general guidance from them. Point being you can get in actual trouble for fudging around with stuff like this as a state employee.

I'm confused, so first State Legislatures set the Admission standards, then they don't? the employees from the Department of Education do?

Anyways, what is your knowledge of the Harvard Z list? From my understanding these are kids who were wait listed but if they were willing to wait a year (by not accepting another schools offer) that they could be admitted into Harvard the following year. Guess whats funny about this system though;

But if you talk to enough of these students whom the admissions office makes a special effort to bring to Cambridge, you’ll find they do have something in common: Their parents went to Harvard.

The Crimson obtained information about the legacy status of 36 of the approximately 80 Z-list students at Harvard in 2001-02. Though McGrath Lewis insists the Z-list is “not a legacy list,” 26—or 72 percent of the 36-student sample—were legacies, compared with 12 to 14 percent of the class as a whole.

The Crimson

Iverson wasn't a Z-list, your telling me his parents were Georgetown alums?

While Iverson was in prison, his mother visited Georgetown basketball coach John Thompson in December 1993. "She was the reason why I helped her child," Thompson said.

Iverson

I guarantee states set minimums standards for public schools. All three major Kansas public schools have the same minimums, and KU is going through a lot of work to try and just slightly raise them. Basically anyone can go to college here (and it is cheap).

(02-28-2013 10:10 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  I guarantee states set minimums standards for public schools. All three major Kansas public schools have the same minimums, and KU is going through a lot of work to try and just slightly raise them. Basically anyone can go to college here (and it is cheap).

So, you're suggesting that VCU has the same admissions standards as William & Mary and UVA?

Okay, I'll try to walk you through it ivet. There are multiple branches of state government. One branch is the executive side. This includes political appointees like state school BOVs, DOE administrators, and then line civil servant staff (think admissions office state employees) that execute under said appointees and administrators. Another branch of state government is the legislature. So when I say that states establish state school admission standards (i.e. minimums), and say in the next breath that they do so with guidance from state legislatures, there is no contradiction.

As for the Z list stuff, that was an illustrative example of what we were discussing, and not a literal description of how Allen Iverson got into Georgetown. Do I think Iverson's parents were Georgetown alumni? Do I think Georgetown is actually Harvard? Does anyone think Iverson met Georgetown's nominal admissions standards? No to all of these things! I hope this helped clear things up. If you have more questions, you can PM me. Also, salty as I am, and even though 90% of the posters on Hoyatalk disagree with you, I gotta say congrats on getting your wish for a new league without VCU. We'll keep doing our thing, and I'm sad we won't get to embarrass the Hoyas more regularly on national TV, but I will be rooting for the conference.

(02-28-2013 08:48 PM)Jet915 Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 05:31 PM)MU88 Wrote:  10 in 2013, 12 in 2014. Certain east coast schools are against VCU. I have heard Creighton for over a month, and I am still hearing Creighton.

You just might have it right, ESPN updated their article and it now says:

Creighton has emerged as the favorite to become the 10th team, and would also join next season, according to sources.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...ng-sources

If Creighton is in, they better make the tournament. Other than that, damn happy to have them,

(02-28-2013 10:20 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 10:10 PM)College Basketball Fan Wrote:  I guarantee states set minimums standards for public schools. All three major Kansas public schools have the same minimums, and KU is going through a lot of work to try and just slightly raise them. Basically anyone can go to college here (and it is cheap).

So, you're suggesting that VCU has the same admissions standards as William & Mary and UVA?

From I hear, it has nothing to do with admission standards, its bball related. If I say why, its just going to tick of the VCU fans on this board. It will turn into a peeing contest.

That said, not all pubic schools have the same admission standards in most states. Maybe Kansas is the exception.

(03-01-2013 10:56 AM)MU88 Wrote:  From I hear, it has nothing to do with admission standards, its bball related. If I say why, its just going to tick of the VCU fans on this board. It will turn into a peeing contest.

I would think it is very hard to ignore an otherwise suitable candidate who averages 17,000 fans per game playing against a meh schedule.

(03-01-2013 11:37 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 10:56 AM)MU88 Wrote:  From I hear, it has nothing to do with admission standards, its bball related. If I say why, its just going to tick of the VCU fans on this board. It will turn into a peeing contest.

I would think it is very hard to ignore an otherwise suitable candidate who averages 17,000 fans per game playing against a meh schedule.

Who averages 17,000? VCU is around 7600. That said, there were strong feelings against VCU by some east coast schools led by Georgetown.

BTW, wasn't Georgetown supposed to be alpha dog whose support was supposed to get Richmond in the conference. I head some fans saying Richmond would be in simply because Georgetown wanted them in. Didn't someone suggest Georgetown was forming the conference because the other schools weren't interested in doing the heavy lifting?

(03-01-2013 12:01 PM)MU88 Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:37 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 10:56 AM)MU88 Wrote:  From I hear, it has nothing to do with admission standards, its bball related. If I say why, its just going to tick of the VCU fans on this board. It will turn into a peeing contest.

I would think it is very hard to ignore an otherwise suitable candidate who averages 17,000 fans per game playing against a meh schedule.

Who averages 17,000? VCU is around 7600. That said, there were strong feelings against VCU by some east coast schools led by Georgetown.

BTW, wasn't Georgetown supposed to be alpha dog whose support was supposed to get Richmond in the conference. I head some fans saying Richmond would be in simply because Georgetown wanted them in. Didn't someone suggest Georgetown was forming the conference because the other schools weren't interested in doing the heavy lifting?

Rumors and spec. If Georgetown had truly wanted Richmond in, it would have been done. If they do want them in it will be done.

(03-01-2013 12:01 PM)MU88 Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:37 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 10:56 AM)MU88 Wrote:  From I hear, it has nothing to do with admission standards, its bball related. If I say why, its just going to tick of the VCU fans on this board. It will turn into a peeing contest.

I would think it is very hard to ignore an otherwise suitable candidate who averages 17,000 fans per game playing against a meh schedule.

Who averages 17,000? VCU is around 7600. That said, there were strong feelings against VCU by some east coast schools led by Georgetown.

BTW, wasn't Georgetown supposed to be alpha dog whose support was supposed to get Richmond in the conference. I head some fans saying Richmond would be in simply because Georgetown wanted them in. Didn't someone suggest Georgetown was forming the conference because the other schools weren't interested in doing the heavy lifting?

I think that was a misinterpretation of GTown pres being selected to head the expansion.

NY Post confirming what ESPN said:

Sources confirmed to The Post the Catholic 7, which announced in mid-December it was withdrawing from the Big East Conference, will expand to 10 schools, adding Butler, Creighton and Xavier, and begin play next season.

http://m.nypost.com/p/sports/college/bas...9AiafuJtrO

The reports of the split occurring on 07/01/2013 instead of 07/01/2014 is good news for all parties concerned, although I admit I am surprised by it. I thought there were many issues to be worked out in time for the split to occur this year, and I said that more than once on different boards. But anyway, it's better for everyone to get this done sooner rather than later. Glad to hear that it (apparently) will be.

Also glad to hear that the non-FBS schools will retain the Big East name and identity. That makes sense and is only "fair", although I think it is also only fair that the Aresco Group be compensated for that loss. It's not yet clear to me if any such compensation is actually going to be paid or not. ESPN seems to be working on the assumption that compensation will be paid, but for an unidsclosed amount. We shall see.

(03-01-2013 12:52 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  The reports of the split occurring on 07/01/2013 instead of 07/01/2014 is good news for all parties concerned, although I admit I am surprised by it. I thought there were many issues to be worked out in time for the split to occur this year, and I said that more than once on different boards. But anyway, it's better for everyone to get this done sooner rather than later. Glad to hear that it (apparently) will be.

Also glad to hear that the non-FBS schools will retain the Big East name and identity. That makes sense and is only "fair", although I think it is also only fair that the Aresco Group be compensated for that loss. It's not yet clear to me if any such compensation is actually going to be paid or not. ESPN seems to be working on the assumption that compensation will be paid, but for an unidsclosed amount. We shall see.

Sports Illustrated says we will give up almost if not all of the exit fees and NCAA credits.

(03-01-2013 01:12 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 12:52 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  Also glad to hear that the non-FBS schools will retain the Big East name and identity. That makes sense and is only "fair", although I think it is also only fair that the Aresco Group be compensated for that loss. It's not yet clear to me if any such compensation is actually going to be paid or not. ESPN seems to be working on the assumption that compensation will be paid, but for an unidsclosed amount. We shall see.

Sports Illustrated says we will give up almost if not all of the exit fees and NCAA credits.

Sounds reasonable, if true.

(03-01-2013 12:01 PM)MU88 Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:37 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 10:56 AM)MU88 Wrote:  From I hear, it has nothing to do with admission standards, its bball related. If I say why, its just going to tick of the VCU fans on this board. It will turn into a peeing contest.

I would think it is very hard to ignore an otherwise suitable candidate who averages 17,000 fans per game playing against a meh schedule.

Who averages 17,000? VCU is around 7600. That said, there were strong feelings against VCU by some east coast schools led by

I'm referring to Creighton. I was saying some may be against vcu because they cannot ignore what Creighton has to offer.

(03-01-2013 03:22 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 12:01 PM)MU88 Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 11:37 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-01-2013 10:56 AM)MU88 Wrote:  From I hear, it has nothing to do with admission standards, its bball related. If I say why, its just going to tick of the VCU fans on this board. It will turn into a peeing contest.

I would think it is very hard to ignore an otherwise suitable candidate who averages 17,000 fans per game playing against a meh schedule.

Who averages 17,000? VCU is around 7600. That said, there were strong feelings against VCU by some east coast schools led by

I'm referring to Creighton. I was saying some may be against vcu because they cannot ignore what Creighton has to offer.

My guess is that the support for VCU was largely driven by athletic directors (which is why there seemed to be a lot more talk about them in the beginning when reporters are talking to sports people), while the presidents gave much more weight to institutional fit. When speaking to stakeholders about expansion, coaches generally want recruiting areas, athletic directors want to sell tickets and university presidents want to form prestigious clubs.

Have seen posts from both Xavier and Villanova insiders saying that what ESPN has been reporting regarding the final membership is incorrect.

From the Nova guy
"the ESPN reports aren't entirely accurate, and were likely leaked by someone hoping to manipulate the process. Xavier and Butler are definitely IN next year b/c they were the only 2 schools where there was a consensus. Despite what is being reported, Creighton and RICHMOND are likely next in line, in part b/c of a recent compromise between the eastern and western C7 schools. The last spot is undecided, but Fox has been pushing for SLU, which would leave Dayton out of the mix."

From the Xavier guy
"I'm being told by someone I trust implicitely that the schools could only agree on Butler and Xavier. That is why they are definitely coming in next year. I have also heard that Georgetown gave Creighton to Marquette and in return, Marquette is going to give Georgetown Richmond for school number 11. The schools are at odds about who should be team #12"

(03-01-2013 04:33 PM)bostonspider Wrote:  Have seen posts from both Xavier and Villanova insiders saying that what ESPN has been reporting regarding the final membership is incorrect.

From the Nova guy
"the ESPN reports aren't entirely accurate, and were likely leaked by someone hoping to manipulate the process. Xavier and Butler are definitely IN next year b/c they were the only 2 schools where there was a consensus. Despite what is being reported, Creighton and RICHMOND are likely next in line, in part b/c of a recent compromise between the eastern and western C7 schools. The last spot is undecided, but Fox has been pushing for SLU, which would leave Dayton out of the mix."

From the Xavier guy
"I'm being told by someone I trust implicitely that the schools could only agree on Butler and Xavier. That is why they are definitely coming in next year. I have also heard that Georgetown gave Creighton to Marquette and in return, Marquette is going to give Georgetown Richmond for school number 11. The schools are at odds about who should be team #12"

I guess the other five schools had no say.