Around the A10

Just saw a quick article from everyone's favorite beat writer, Jon Rothstein.

He was worried that the A10 was trending towards being a perennial one-bid league due to failures from the brass in the A10.

Aside from that statement being a bit of an overreaction, I think he did bring up some decent points and then had one contradictory idea, IMO.

First, he believes the A10 is not doing enough to create quality non-conference games for our members. He points to the A10 having five teams with 21+ wins in 2020, but only one school (Fayotn Cryers) being a lock.

Second, he believes there is a correlation with the A10 losing bids once we increased conference games from 16 to 18. He says A10 has not been a >3 Bid league since.

I know the A10 and Mountain West had the challenge scheduled for last year, but obviously that was canceled. Will this challenge start in '22-'23 or is this not going to happen? Aside from having a MVC and MWC challenge each year, not sure what else could be done.

I have to assume teams at the top would likely not go for it as it makes it harder to fit in all of the games you want to schedule. Who would Bona take off the schedule to make it work this year for one game, let alone two games? It also is hard to determine who will be going on the road...Have to imagine a neutral site is the only way to make that challenge happen. Missouri Valley isn't too deep, so I wouldn't really be interested in doing a challenge with them unless it only included the top four or five teams.

Regarding the schedule going from 16 to 18, I have to assume he would be correct if that meant teams in the conference we getting two Q1/Q2 games, but that's hardly a given. I think the conference would be better served leaving two open slots for a game home and away in Feb/March to match up some of the best and worst teams.

Instead of playing Duquesne and Joes twice, maybe that gets replaced with the best team possible. Maybe one year we play VCU/SLU three times, but at least you get more cracks at Q1/Q2 games.

Would be difficult to determine which team would play at home, but I guess you could go off A10 standings/ net rankings.
 
Conference USA uses a model close to what you describe. They tier the teams into groups of 4 for the last month of the season and you only play the teams in your tier. Their goal is to maximize seeding since they know an at large is slim to none. The A10 could do that to maximize bids and remove landmines. I think they believe they are already doing that with the pod system they determine prior to the season. They basically predict who that tier 1 group is and have them play twice. Why not make it dynamic and wait til we have a good sample set? I think the A10 is set up to never be a 1 bid league but the possibility always exists. Last year we could have been a 4 bid league in a non covid year. The 16v18 debate is an interesting case study. The move to 18 benefits us but probably hurts the Daytons and VCU's. What we really need is the bottom of the league to continue to buy wins (Duquesne is the poster child for this) and then elevate the league so we dont have so many landmines.

What is interesting from the Bonaventure perspective is we are at a crossroads. Schmidt has us on the brink of breaking through to that Dayton/VCU level where you always have benefit of the doubt from the media and can actually scheduling H-H with P5 schools. Our program can go in either of 2 directions after this season (which also depends on how successful the season ends up):

1) We make that leap and reload year after year and are cemented into the top 4. We can finally get some asshole school like Ole Miss to come to the RC or Rochester at the very least and we are always 1 good recruit from an NCAAT appearance. Honestly I think we are ever so close to this. The program wasnt able to capitalize after Nicholson and the 2012 team. They dipped for a few years until Jay and Posely...etc came aboard. It appears we are at that point where we are ready to fuck shit up on a regular basis. A deep run this year will cement that, I believe. I also think our roster is set up for a long run even if all 5 starters leave after this year.

2) Similar to the 2012-2013 team, we lose our best player(s) and the guys leftover and recruits arent quite good enough to keep us in the top 4 and we slide down. We cycle all over again and we remain a program that ebbs and flows with 2-3 NCAAT appearances per decade.

As long as Schmidt is around, I feel we are in good shape and scenario 1 is what happens. I think Curran could keep things going if/when Schmidt retires. Sorry for the word salad, this shit has been on my mind for awhile now and 3rdShay tweaked me.

tl;dr Lets fucking go!
 
I'm not (overly) worried. Schmidt's got a minimum 5 good years left. We'll be fine. The next coach, whether it's Curran or somebody else, will be left in a position I couldn't imagine happening again 30 years ago. Seriously, the program was deader then than it was when JvBK left it, or at least as dead. Resources will be limited as always, but there will be talented young coaches knocking on the door this time begging to take over. The program will be fine, absent an implosion of the current NCAA structure.
 
Well said, BR. Like you mentioned, this is the year to really cash in with the media, fans, etc.

A lot on the line this year. First off, we’ve never gone to B2B NCAAs, so ending that record would be huge.

Secondly, we haven’t made in out of the first weekend in 50 years. It would be great to just get to the NCAAs, but I don’t want the label of an Iona. It’d be nice to make a run with that much returning this year.

Like we’ve all said, the more you win, the easier the scheduling will get and this year is a perfect example. We also got our biggest recruits off the backs of NCAA berths, so if we can continue that, we can separate ourselves from the typical A10 club. Three good years and then MIA until the next run.

I have to imagine we will be in a position to make the tourney again this year (obviously), but we will need to go more than six deep to make that happen. Brown, Karim + 1 more need to be A10-caliber from the get go.

Four weeks until the Saints come to the RC…
 
I'm not (overly) worried. Schmidt's got a minimum 5 good years left. We'll be fine. The next coach, whether it's Curran or somebody else, will be left in a position I couldn't imagine happening again 30 years ago. Seriously, the program was deader then than it was when JvBK left it, or at least as dead. Resources will be limited as always, but there will be talented young coaches knocking on the door this time begging to take over. The program will be fine, absent an implosion of the current NCAA structure.
While we are certainly not ripe with cash, we aren't exactly as poor as the media makes us out to be...Don't get me wrong, our budget is not huge, but not wildly off from most of the A10.

As of three years ago, we were 11th of 14th in MBB budget at about $3.9M. I've heard that has increased, perhaps someone could verify, and with UMass, Mason and URI all hiring younger and cheaper coaches within the past 3-4 four years, we could very well be around 8th in the A10.

If that is the case, we would have around a top 100 MBB in the NCAAs. Not terrible considering most schools above us are from P6ers
 
What is interesting from the Bonaventure perspective is we are at a crossroads. Schmidt has us on the brink of breaking through to that Dayton/VCU level where you always have benefit of the doubt from the media and can actually scheduling H-H with P5 schools. Our program can go in either of 2 directions after this season (which also depends on how successful the season ends up):
I think about this far too much.

You look at Butler, Wichita and VCU who were able to keep it going after great runs, despite losing multiple coaches to better gigs.

This probably has more to do with their conference affiliation than anything else, but nonetheless, Butler is last in the Big East in MBB budget, so their success is refreshing.

On the other hand, you have countless teams like Cleveland State, Kent State, George Mason, Bradley, UW Milwaukee, SIU and WKU that had good runs, but then fade away.

It’s nice to see us invest in athletics before the fact rather than after. No one knows if Joe Manhertz will be a good AD or be around to hire the next HC, but his pedigree is terrific and he’s the type of hire I would not have expected a decade ago.

Like Res said, whether Schmidt leaves today or 10 years from now, we are much better off in 2021 than we were in 2007.
 
The A10 had some meager years in the early 2000s, too. 1 bid in 2001, then a 1-2-2 bid stretch between 2005-2007. Including 2006 which would have also been a 1 bid year if not for the upset of GW in the A10 tourney. 1 loss in the A10 tourney knocked a 26-2 GW team down to an 8 seed. Say what you will about the current A10, but a 2020 A10 tourney loss definitely wasnt knocking Dayton down that low.

A critical difference between then, and now, that Rothstein and so many others seem to miss is the perception of having a team or two in the top 15-20. For such a long time, we had Temple, or Xavier, or both flirting in that range of top 5 seed/national recognition. Even if only sending 2-3 teams, having one or two of them be at that level raised what the perception of the league was. A league with 3 tournament teams and one of them being a 2 or 3 seed turns the page a lot more than, say, 2018- when it was 3 teams seeded 7, 11 play-in, and 12.

We've seen 0 A10 teams with better than a 7 seed since 2014. And no advancement to the second weekend since that time, either. Top to bottom, the number of teams in the tournament/NIT/on the bubble down the stretch hasnt changed that much, nor has the number of teams in the top 75, 100, etc. 2019 was abysmal, to be sure- and 2020 was underwhelming too. I agree with 03, last year we were a sniff and some better fortunes away from being 3-4 teams vs 2. Next year could be as low as 2 again, but I expect up to 5 to be in the discussion.

A much more succinct way to say it is the top to bottom hasn't changed all that much, only the ceiling has. The fact that we have a huge opportunity to be the type of team to raise the ceiling for the league this year is pretty fuckin' awesome.
 
Also, on a separate note- I hate to say I feel bad for VCU, but I do. Going into the tournament you had a young team seeded 10. They dont even get to play their game. Bones leaves. Baldwin hurt. Now Watkins out for the year.

Last March they looked like another team returning virtually everyone. They would have been right on the cusp of top 25, too, and the A10 could have been looking at 2 solidly top 25 teams by years end for the first time in a long time. As it is now, they're looking like matching last year's success is maybe best case for them. I hope they do. As much as their fans make you hate them, as a program they have been a dream replacement for Temple since 2012.
 
The A10 had some meager years in the early 2000s, too. 1 bid in 2001, then a 1-2-2 bid stretch between 2005-2007. Including 2006 which would have also been a 1 bid year if not for the upset of GW in the A10 tourney. 1 loss in the A10 tourney knocked a 26-2 GW team down to an 8 seed. Say what you will about the current A10, but a 2020 A10 tourney loss definitely wasnt knocking Dayton down that low.

A critical difference between then, and now, that Rothstein and so many others seem to miss is the perception of having a team or two in the top 15-20. For such a long time, we had Temple, or Xavier, or both flirting in that range of top 5 seed/national recognition. Even if only sending 2-3 teams, having one or two of them be at that level raised what the perception of the league was. A league with 3 tournament teams and one of them being a 2 or 3 seed turns the page a lot more than, say, 2018- when it was 3 teams seeded 7, 11 play-in, and 12.

We've seen 0 A10 teams with better than a 7 seed since 2014. And no advancement to the second weekend since that time, either. Top to bottom, the number of teams in the tournament/NIT/on the bubble down the stretch hasnt changed that much, nor has the number of teams in the top 75, 100, etc. 2019 was abysmal, to be sure- and 2020 was underwhelming too. I agree with 03, last year we were a sniff and some better fortunes away from being 3-4 teams vs 2. Next year could be as low as 2 again, but I expect up to 5 to be in the discussion.

A much more succinct way to say it is the top to bottom hasn't changed all that much, only the ceiling has. The fact that we have a huge opportunity to be the type of team to raise the ceiling for the league this year is pretty fuckin' awesome.

That's what I don't get about our conference. We should be bare minimum three locks every year with one or two on the bubble. Some years it'll be three, and then others five.

Instead, it seems, we are one lock with 1-2 at larges. It doesn't make sense.

In my opinion, Dayton, SLU and VCU should be locks every year. With their facilities, budget and ability to schedule, they have zero excuse.

Rhode Island and Richmond are very close to the three mentioned above, but to a slightly lesser extent. They should be in the mix every year without question.

The next heap would be Saint Joe's, Bona and Davidson. SJU has nice facilities, typically schedules very well and recruits well. I think Lange will turn around SJU soon. People loved Martelli, but his teams were pretty inconsistent year to year. To be fair, for three or four years they had no luck with injuries.

Bonaventure is in a great position with Schmidt, but much like with Davidson, who knows if that changes once Schmidt and McKillop leave town.

People love Davidson, but they usually don't schedule well, and if it were not for their A10 runs in 2018, they'd be looking at one NCAA berth in the last eight seasons.

I have more confidence in SBU than Davidson as it seems we are more invested into our program than Davidson. Let's just hope we continue to move forward with any success we have this year or next.
 
Absurdly well done. I hope you in the very least keep that as a work sample for a consulting side business of some kind. That's too well done to not notice that you have a skill set that you could profit off of in some way.

I also saw that Perkins is hurt. That really sucks. That takes them from an NCAA bubble team to an NIT bubble team most likely. I thought this year's St Louis team had potential to be every bit as good, maybe better, than last year's.

What kind of bizarro world are we living in where I'm legitimately feeling bad for VCU and Travis Ford at the same time.
 
Back
Top