WCC to have 30 games on ESPN2/U in 2010-11

[Hsaru]

Indy Coug do you realize that Gonzaga gets more exposure from just one of their 13 ESPN games than BYU gets all year on the MTN? Going from zero games on the ESPN networks to 8-14 next year will be night and day as far as BYU's exposure on the national stage.

[Indy Coug]

Indy Coug do you realize that Gonzaga gets more exposure from just one of their 13 ESPN games than BYU gets all year on the MTN? Going from zero games on the ESPN networks to 8-14 next year will be night and day as far as BYU's exposure on the national stage.

You're talking ESPN. I'm talking the WCC. The WCC is Mickey Mouse from a competitive standpoint.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

You're talking ESPN. I'm talking the WCC. The WCC is Mickey Mouse from a competitive standpoint.

So we play weaker competition on a more viewed media platform?

[LiveCoug]

So we play weaker competition on a more viewed media platform?

Correct.

[Indy Coug]

So we play weaker competition on a more viewed media platform?

Yep

[KillerDog]

You're talking ESPN. I'm talking the WCC. The WCC is Mickey Mouse from a competitive standpoint.

If we compare the current MWC and WCC pre-season rankings and consider what those rankings will look like with BYU in the WCC, we have a situation where Gonzaga is ranked for the WCC, BYU and St. Mary's are receiving votes for the WCC. In the MWC, SDSU, UNM, and UNLV are receiving votes. At the top, the WCC would be better than the MWC. Where the WCC sucks is at the bottom. The MWC regularly has very few teams below the 200 rpi level. The WCC regularly has two or three. That difference kills SOS. As a result, Gonzaga, BYU, and St. Mary's will really need to focus on using their exposure advantage to get quality early season opponents. It is also more important to get that third game against the top teams in your league in conference tournament. If possible, it would help to avoid playing the bottom teams in conference an extra time. Basically, the WCC could really help its top teams by going to a bye based tournament schedule (if they don't do that already, I'll do some research).

[jay santos]

If we compare the current MWC and WCC pre-season rankings and consider what those rankings will look like with BYU in the WCC, we have a situation where Gonzaga is ranked for the WCC, BYU and St. Mary's are receiving votes for the WCC. In the MWC, SDSU, UNM, and UNLV are receiving votes. At the top, the WCC would be better than the MWC. Where the WCC sucks is at the bottom. The MWC regularly has very few teams below the 200 rpi level. The WCC regularly has two or three. That difference kills SOS. As a result, Gonzaga, BYU, and St. Mary's will really need to focus on using their exposure advantage to get quality early season opponents. It is also more important to get that third game against the top teams in your league in conference tournament. If possible, it would help to avoid playing the bottom teams in conference an extra time. Basically, the WCC could really help its top teams by going to a bye based tournament schedule (if they don't do that already, I'll do some research).

The more I think about the WCC I'm not all that upset about it. Upset about how our situation changed for the worse generally from current to future state but not so much about the MWC to WCC move.

Compared to the 2010 MWC, it sucks. 16 conference games against 8 other programs including four solid programs UNLV, SDSU, UNM, Utah (you can make a case they're solid if you go back more than 10 years).

But the MWC we were left with is not that MWC. Take out Utah and add Boise, UNR, and Fresno. Now you have divisions where you're not playing the other powers twice and you're diluted with more mediocre programs.

Conferences are judged by the top teams and Gonzaga's the best program in either conference.

Going to ESPN also helps.

[KillerDog]

The more I think about the WCC I'm not all that upset about it. Upset about how our situation changed for the worse generally from current to future state but not so much about the MWC to WCC move.

Compared to the 2010 MWC, it sucks. 16 conference games against 8 other programs including four solid programs UNLV, SDSU, UNM, Utah (you can make a case they're solid if you go back more than 10 years).

But the MWC we were left with is not that MWC. Take out Utah and add Boise, UNR, and Fresno. Now you have divisions where you're not playing the other powers twice and you're diluted with more mediocre programs.

Conferences are judged by the top teams and Gonzaga's the best program in either conference.

Going to ESPN also helps.

Well said, especially the bolded item above. Basketball is not football (I know that sounds obvious but it is true). Stadium size is irrelevant compared to tournament cachet. The MWC has some tournament cachet in UNLV and Utah. Utah is leaving. Thus, the New MWC ("NMWC") has only UNLV's cachet. That is not insignificant but it is a touch dated. Outside of UNLV, the MWC has no tournament cachet. UNM and SDSU have less tournament success and history than BYU. The New WCC ("NWCC") has Gonzaga with tournament cachet less than UNLV but more recent and definitely significant. Add in St. Mary's recent cachet and BYU and it is a better league in than the MWC in the most important metric. Also, adding BYU to the mix could create a critical mass at the top that can help lift up the lower tier schools.

I just don't see how this hurts basketball substantially in the short run. In the long run, I think it might help.