Should Gonzaga move to the Pac-12 (or some other league) for hoops?

[TarHeelNation11]

I referenced Gonzaga in the "Is Kansas a blue blood?" thread as an example of a school that shouldn't really get a ton of credit for dominating an awful conference because, well, it's an awful conference. They are a relatively big fish in a tinyyyyyyy pond.

Since 1994, Gonzaga has won the West Coast Conference regular season title every year except '95, '97, 2000, and 2012. AKA, in the last 23 seasons, they've won the regular season title 19/23 times. For WCC Conference Tournaments, in that same timespan, they've won it 16/23 times.

In the NCAAT, Gonzaga generally has the reputation of getting a high seed (1, 2, or 3), courtesy of their lousy league, and then getting knocked out very early on in the NCAAT. Obviously, there's exceptions... last year being one of them. But, you can look up the stats for yourselves: a lot of the time Gonzaga gets a good seed, they play like they don't deserve it and they get knocked out early.

So... the question is, if you were Gonzaga's AD, would you keep the status quo and continue to be a big fish in a tiny pond? Or would you consider contacting the Pac-12, Mountain West, or some other conference out there and requesting to join for hoops only? I think Gonzaga would be a fantastic fit for the Big East..... if they weren't located out in Spokane, Washington, lol. I think the Pac-12 would be perfect for Gonzaga. It's a legitimate power conference, and yet, it's generally one of the weakest of the power basketball conferences every season.

Thoughts?

 

[imajericho]

Pac 12 is going to have no interest in a basketball only school. Better off looking to the big east.

 

[Tru Blu Tar Heel]

The Zags are in a no win situation. First, being in Spokane, they would add nothing financially to the PAC 12, which I'm sure already owns most of the television market with UW and WSU. Secondly, being a private institution, they're smaller enrollment (just north of 7K currently) means a smaller endowment and less contributions to a major conference. Not many successful private universities in Power 5 conferences except for Duke in the ACC and most of the Big East, but the Big East in and of itself is a whole different beast since it's implosion and rebuild. Those are minor hurdles compared to the next (largest) hurdle: FOOTBALL. Gonzaga hasn't fielded a football team since 1941. I can't imagine the PAC 12 being super excited to bring Gonzaga in without any benefit to the rest of the league.

 

[Tru Blu Tar Heel]

Pac 12 is going to have no interest in a basketball only school. Better off looking to the big east.

And honestly, what school in their right mind would want to join a conference where their closest road games are Creighton, Marquette, and DuPaul? That's as bad as WVU in the Big 12....maybe even worse when you factor in the cross continent trips to Providence, St. John's, Seton Haul, Villanova, and Georgetown.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Not many successful private universities in Power 5 conferences except for Duke in the ACC and most of the Big East, but the Big East

Vandy, Baylor, Wake Forest, Miami, BC, TCU

The Zags are in a no win situation. First, being in Spokane, they would add nothing financially to the PAC 12, which I'm sure already owns most of the television market with UW and WSU. Secondly, being a private institution, they're smaller enrollment (just north of 7K currently) means a smaller endowment and less contributions to a major conference. Not many successful private universities in Power 5 conferences except for Duke in the ACC and most of the Big East, but the Big East in and of itself is a whole different beast since it's implosion and rebuild. Those are minor hurdles compared to the next (largest) hurdle: FOOTBALL. Gonzaga hasn't fielded a football team since 1941. I can't imagine the PAC 12 being super excited to bring Gonzaga in without any benefit to the rest of the league.

I agree with most of your other points, except for football. I'm not saying Gonzaga should start a football program. They can't, to be honest. They're too small. I would also disagree that they'd bring no value to the Pac-12 with just hoops. They just played for a national title and they're arguably as big a basketball brand as any current Pac-12 member, except UCLA.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

And honestly, what school in their right mind would want to join a conference where their closest road games are Creighton, Marquette, and DuPaul? That's as bad as WVU in the Big 12....maybe even worse when you factor in the cross continent trips to Providence, St. John's, Seton Haul, Villanova, and Georgetown.

Yeah, Gonzaga joining the Big East would be untenable. They'd go broke travelling to every away game. It's a shame they're located where they are, though, because like I said in my OP, they'd be a perfect fit for the Big East.

 

[Tru Blu Tar Heel]

But, to your original question, if I were the AD at Gonzaga, yes

Vandy, Baylor, Wake Forest, Miami, BC, TCU

Okay, yeah....you could add Northwestern to that list as well. And I guess I spoke too soon. But, the point still remains that the issue is finding a home for the Zags. If I were the AD, I would definitely be shopping to move into a Power 5, but not at the expense of cross country travel every away game. What they're doing is currently working, so there's no immediate pressure to move.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Seth Davis (who is an idiot) took a stab at this question back in 2015. Here's the article.

I'm linking it simply because it provides some commentary on this thread. I happen to think most of his take on this is dumb, but hey, what do I know. It's not like Gonzaga would suddenly not make the NCAAT if they joined a better conference. And, Seth kinda throws dirt on his own argument halfway through when he starts talking about how Gonzaga struggles to out-recruit West Coast programs in power conferences.

 

[Tru Blu Tar Heel]

In a perfect world, the PAC 12 would start the final round of realignment to get to 16 by adding Texas, Oklahoma, Gonzaga, and Kansas. Adds perennial basketball power while also adding lots of football tradition. But that doesn't solve the football problem.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Okay, yeah....you could add Northwestern to that list as well. And I guess I spoke too soon. But, the point still remains that the issue is finding a home for the Zags. If I were the AD, I would definitely be shopping to move into a Power 5, but not at the expense of cross country travel every away game. What they're doing is currently working, so there's no immediate pressure to move.

Agreed that there's no immediate pressure, which would make the situation fun (IMO) if I was the AD. Gonzaga can negotiate from a position of strength. It's not as though they're caught up in a football-esque migration where you better get to a Power 5 conference or you cease to be relevant.

I mentioned Mountain West, but I'm just not sure that would be a big enough step up to really make a difference? And besides, the Mountain West is mostly schools way, way away from Gonzaga (San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico, etc.). I do not think the Mountain West is a legitimate option. So who does that leave...? lol. WAC?

 

[Tru Blu Tar Heel]

Seth Davis (who is an idiot) took a stab at this question back in 2015. Here's the article.

I'm linking it simply because it provides some commentary on this thread. I happen to think most of his take on this is dumb, but hey, what do I know. It's not like Gonzaga would suddenly not make the NCAAT if they joined a better conference. And, Seth kinda throws dirt on his own argument halfway through when he starts talking about how Gonzaga struggles to out-recruit West Coast programs in power conferences.

Yeah, Seth Davis is on crack as usual. What coach doesn't want to make it to the tournament?!? But that's not what's tying Few there. It's HIS program, built almost from the ground up by Few. Sure, he wasn't the head coach for the first couple of years, but he was there.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

In a perfect world, the PAC 12 would start the final round of realignment to get to 16 by adding Texas, Oklahoma, Gonzaga, and Kansas. Adds perennial basketball power while also adding lots of football tradition. But that doesn't solve the football problem.

In an even perfecter world, the ACC would snatch up Texas lol. It would be very difficult for Texas to ever agree to move to the Pac-12. Texas is a mash-up of socioeconomic / political leanings, with it being the flagship of a very red state with many very red rich boosters, but also being located in an extremely blue city. I'm not sure the Texas string-pullers would be thrilled about moving to the Left Coast.

Besides, the Pac-12 does not have a lot of desirability in terms of appeal. They struggle to get a football team in the playoff, and the last time one of their schools won a basketball NCAA title was Arizona in 1997 (Arizona was also the last Pac-12 school to appear in a title game, which was in 2001).

Which is why I would think Gonzaga would be absolutely salivating at joining the Pac-12. They would get the legitimacy of joining a "power conference" while getting to play in probably the least competitive of basketball's power conferences.

 

[Tru Blu Tar Heel]

Agreed that there's no immediate pressure, which would make the situation fun (IMO) if I was the AD. Gonzaga can negotiate from a position of strength. It's not as though they're caught up in a football-esque migration where you better get to a Power 5 conference or you cease to be relevant.

I mentioned Mountain West, but I'm just not sure that would be a big enough step up to really make a difference? And besides, the Mountain West is mostly schools way, way away from Gonzaga (San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico, etc.). I do not think the Mountain West is a legitimate option. So who does that leave...? lol. WAC?

From a geography standpoint, Mountain West is the best conference CHANGE option, but that doesn't upgrade them much. The only competition they currently have in the WCC is St. Mary's. If they move to the Mountain West, they would have San Diego St and Utah to deal with every year, but not much else.

 

[imajericho]

And honestly, what school in their right mind would want to join a conference where their closest road games are Creighton, Marquette, and DuPaul? That's as bad as WVU in the Big 12....maybe even worse when you factor in the cross continent trips to Providence, St. John's, Seton Haul, Villanova, and Georgetown.

I didn't say it. The TC did. I said if they were looking to a bigger conference that is the one to join. The honest reality is that they are fine where they are. They dominate a weak conference every year and get exposure every year in the NCAA tourney. Even got to a championship game.

 

[imajericho]

Yeah, Gonzaga joining the Big East would be untenable. They'd go broke travelling to every away game. It's a shame they're located where they are, though, because like I said in my OP, they'd be a perfect fit for the Big East.

Nobody is going broke traveling a basketball team a few times more a year. These are million dollar programs.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

I guess one point to be made about geography, and thus travel, being a factor is, keep in mind, the travelling would presumably only be for one sport: men's hoops. It wouldn't be like West Virginia where all their sports have to travel a long ass way. It would still be quite expensive (relative to their current travel budget) for Gonzaga to travel to, say, Big East schools, but at least it would only be in one sport?

Still, though, I'm with y'all that the Big East is a non-starter.

 

[imajericho]

In an even perfecter world, the ACC would snatch up Texas lol. It would be very difficult for Texas to ever agree to move to the Pac-12. Texas is a mash-up of socioeconomic / political leanings, with it being the flagship of a very red state with many very red rich boosters, but also being located in an extremely blue city. I'm not sure the Texas string-pullers would be thrilled about moving to the Left Coast.

Besides, the Pac-12 does not have a lot of desirability in terms of appeal. They struggle to get a football team in the playoff, and the last time one of their schools won a basketball NCAA title was Arizona in 1997 (Arizona was also the last Pac-12 school to appear in a title game, which was in 2001).

Which is why I would think Gonzaga would be absolutely salivating at joining the Pac-12. They would get the legitimacy of joining a "power conference" while getting to play in probably the least competitive of basketball's power conferences.

In a perfect world the ACC would snatch up Texas and ND full time. In a realistic perfect world, the ACC would snatch up Kansas and AND ND and call it a day. Texas isn't leaving all their rivalries.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Nobody is going broke traveling a basketball team a few times more a year. These are million dollar programs.

True. Good point.

I didn't say it. The TC did. I said if they were looking to a bigger conference that is the one to join. The honest reality is that they are fine where they are. They dominate a weak conference every year and get exposure every year in the NCAA tourney. Even got to a championship game.

Yes, they get exposure, but couldn't you make an argument that playing in a more legitimate league during the regular season would help "toughen up" (for lack of a better term) Gonzaga's teams and make them more battle-hardened for NCAAT play. Yes they made the final last year, but that's not their norm. Getting bounced in the early rounds is their norm.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

In a perfect world the ACC would snatch up Texas and ND full time. In a realistic perfect world, the ACC would snatch up Kansas and AND ND and call it a day. Texas isn't leaving all their rivalries.

Yeah, Texas and ND is the dream. Hell, even just bring in Texas on the same arrangement (for now) that ND has with the 5 games per season against ACC teams. This would free up Texas to create a nationwide schedule and to resume any rivalries they choose to keep, such as Oklahoma, Texas A&M (if both programs are willing), etc.

As for adding Kansas, there's no way the ACC can do that. Yes, it would be good for basketball, but Kansas is so retched at football (and is located in a tiny market) that it just wouldn't add a dang thing for the ACC in any other area. Kansas doesn't fit the ACC profile at all, geographically, academically, or athletically (besides basketball).

In a realistic world, the ACC would add West Virginia and ND and call it a day. West Virginia doesn't fit the academic profile, but they fit everything else: geographic, athletic, built-in rivalries, strong presence in Atlanta and Charlotte and DC markets with alumni.

 

[imajericho]

True. Good point.


Yes, they get exposure, but couldn't you make an argument that playing in a more legitimate league during the regular season would help "toughen up" (for lack of a better term) Gonzaga's teams and make them more battle-hardened for NCAAT play. Yes they made the final last year, but that's not their norm. Getting bounced in the early rounds is their norm.

No. I would make the argument they would be a bubble team at best in a real conference most years and be struggling to make tournaments and working with bad seeds oftentimes.

How many times have we in the past whatever years wished Gonzaga was in our bracket as a top seed? It is overseeded pretty regularly.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

No. I would make the argument they would be a bubble team at best in a real conference most years and be struggling to make tournaments and working with bad seeds oftentimes.

How many times have we in the past whatever years wished Gonzaga was in our bracket as a top seed? It is overseeded pretty regularly.

Right, but you could also argue the other side of the coin that Gonzaga potentially is a championship-caliber team, they just don't realize their potential in a given year because they're not battle tested. They oftentimes don't face a worthy adversary for the first time until NCAAT play, and once you're there, you don't get the benefit of being able to lose a game. Think about all the tests Carolina faces during a typical season. Gonzaga doesn't get that.

Just my opinion. Your scenario seems very likely too, though. But keep in mind that theoretically Gonzaga would have better players if they moved to a better conference.

 

[imajericho]

Yeah, Texas and ND is the dream. Hell, even just bring in Texas on the same arrangement (for now) that ND has with the 5 games per season against ACC teams. This would free up Texas to create a nationwide schedule and to resume any rivalries they choose to keep, such as Oklahoma, Texas A&M (if both programs are willing), etc.

As for adding Kansas, there's no way the ACC can do that. Yes, it would be good for basketball, but Kansas is so retched at football (and is located in a tiny market) that it just wouldn't add a dang thing for the ACC in any other area. Kansas doesn't fit the ACC profile at all, geographically, academically, or athletically (besides basketball).

St Louis is the 21st biggest market in the entire country. Kansas City is the 31st. They add both into the mix. Expands footprint. Academically Kansas is an AAU school.

I mean, what are you even talking about???

 

[TarHeelNation11]

St Louis is the 21st biggest market in the entire country. Kansas City is the 31st. They add both into the mix. Expands footprint. Academically Kansas is an AAU school.

I mean, what are you even talking about???

St. Louis and Kansas City aren't major markets. Those are small in the grand scheme of things (and are behind the markets of Miami, UNC, Wake, State, Duke, GT, Syracuse, BC, Pittsburgh...and behind Chicago, which is essentially ND's home base, and keep in mind that Atlanta and Tampa is essentially FSU's two home bases, both of which are ahead of Kansas City and St. Louis). They also blow at the most important sport of football. And are you really trying to sell me that Kansas is some type of elite academic institution?

BTW, Kansas City is #33, not #31, but hey who's counting. It's just a discussion. No need to be a dick.

 

[thaUNCshow]

Kansas should go to the Big 10. They contribute absolutely nothing to the Big 12 in football,which is a football conference. At least it would be entertaining watching them compete in basketball with MSU, OSU, Wisconsin, Michigan and Purdue every year instead of competing with West Virginia and whatever other good team the Big 12 has every 5 years. I don’t see Gonzaga going to the Pac 12 just for basketball as being that big of a deal. The ACC didnt get all of Notre Dame for football, and Gonzaga is twice the bball program Notre Dame is.

 

[Tru Blu Tar Heel]

Even got to a championship game.

To be fair, they beat South Dakota St., Northwestern, West Virginia, Xavier, and South Carolina to get there. Not taking ANYTHING away from them, but they weren't exactly beating high major conference teams either.

 

[imajericho]

St. Louis and Kansas City aren't major markets. Those are tiny in the grand scheme of things. They also blow at the most important sport of football. And are you really trying to sell me that Kansas is some type of elite academic institution?

BTW, Kansas City is #33, not #31, but hey who's counting.

They absolutely are major markets.

St Louis is bigger than over three quarters off the ACC markets.

Though I guess it is arguable if Kansas brings St Louis' market or not.

The highest nc market is Charlotte at 24th.

http://www.stationindex.com/tv/tv-markets

And yes an AAU school is a good academic school. Leagues above Louisville.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

They absolutely are major markets.

St Louis is bigger than every single market in the ACC besides Boston and Miami.

Though I guess it is arguable if Kansas brings St Louis' market or not.

The highest nc market is Charlotte at 24th.

http://www.stationindex.com/tv/tv-markets

Not correct. See my above post. You left out many ACC schools. St. Louis and Kansas City are ranked lower than the majority of current ACC markets. If you don't want to count Wake as being in the Raleigh area, than that's fine with me. Still leaves 8 ACC schools directly in bigger markets, as well as schools like ND, FSU, and Syracuse who have home bases in way bigger markets than St. Louis / KC.

And yes, I do think it may be a stretch to say Kansas brings in St. Louis. But to be fair, I'm stretching as well a bit when I say ND pulls in Chicago, for instance (but it does.)

 

[imajericho]

Not correct. See my above post. You left out many ACC schools. St. Louis and Kansas City are ranked lower than the majority of current ACC markets.

I edited mine but your wrong. St Louis is higher than a lot of those you listed.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

@imajericho appreciate you calling me out though if/when I write things that aren't true / you think aren't true! Not being sarcastic either. It makes me double check my facts and stuff.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

I edited mine but your wrong. St Louis is higher than a lot of those you listed.

You are correct on St. Louis at #21. I was looking at Kansas City at #33, which is behind all the ones I listed. My fault.

I guess the argument would then be, does Kansas capture the St. Louis market? And is St. Louis even a "college sports" type city?

 

[imajericho]

You are correct on St. Louis at #21. I was looking at Kansas City at #33, which is behind all the ones I listed. My fault.

I guess the argument would then be, does Kansas capture the St. Louis market? And is St. Louis even a "college sports" type city?

I dunno.

But even by basically every metric, Kansas is a better addition than Louisville. So go by that barometer.

Better market even if Kansas City only. Better academics by a mile. More prestige. I am willing to bet a better endowment and enrollment. Probably better than UL over the long run in football. Just not recently.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

I dunno.

But even by basically every metric, Kansas is a better addition than Louisville. So go by that barometer.

Better market even if Kansas City only. Better academics by a mile. More prestige. I am willing to bet a better endowment and enrollment. Probably better than UL over the long run in football. Just not recently.

Louisville is a much better add on the field than Kansas, and I'm not sure it can be debated. Louisville excels at multiple sports and brings in great facilities, including for Olympic sports like field hockey (UofL has incredible facilities for field hockey).

Off the field, yes, Kansas is a much better fit as a university. Obviously Louisville is not a good school. Enrollment is ~28K for Kansas and ~23K for Louisville.

 

[imajericho]

Looks like they don't venture out to St Louis.


Kansas City
Topeka
Wichita
Tulsa
Clearwater


Still better than UL

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Athletically, besides basketball, Kansas doesn't really do anything in sports. In the most recent Learfield Director's Cup standings, Louisville is #32 nationally. Kansas didn't even make the Top 79 schools. They aren't on the list. Schools such as Abilene Christian are ranked in the top 79, but Kansas isn't.

Still better than UL

As an academic institution, yes. Athletically, I'm not sure how you can argue Kansas is a better ad than UofL. Especially given Louisville being decent at football.

 

[imajericho]

Athletically, besides basketball, Kansas doesn't really do anything in sports. In the most recent Learfield Director's Cup standings, Louisville is #32 nationally. Kansas didn't even make the Top 79 schools. They aren't on the list. Schools such as Abilene Christian are ranked in the top 79, but Kansas isn't.

Olympic sports mean nothing at all for moves.

It is all about New TV Markets, Geographic footprint, Academics, and football. Nothing else matters the slightest.

They could not even field a single olympic team and it would not matter at the end of the day.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Olympic sports mean nothing at all for moves.

It is all about New TV Markets, Geographic footprint, Academics, and football. Nothing else matters the slightest.

They could not even field a single olympic team and it would not matter at the end of the day.

I know. It's mostly about football. Which I keep telling you Kansas sucks at and Louisville is decent at and just had a Heisman Trophy winner. Louisville wins the battle over Kansas.

But in addition to football, like it or not, it is a fact that the ACC has a strong tradition of dominant success in Olympic sports and 100% takes into account a prospective new member school's entire athletics department profile before agreeing to add them. While football and market (and basketball) are the main criteria, entire athletic department profile definitely sweetens the pot and adds a nice cherry on top.

Kansas would not be a good addition to the conference, athletically (nor are they as good of an academic institution as you're hyping them to be. They're #115 in U.S. News' ranking of national universities. Louisville is #165 FYI, but we aren't arguing that Louisville is a good school). Kansas' two best qualities are:

1) basketball --> ACC doesn't need any help here. We're good in basketball.
2) brings the #33 Kansas City market and maybe (but probably not) brings the 21st market in St. Louis.

That's it. And they are probably the worst football program in all of P5. AND, geographically, they're way out in damn no-man's-land, even further isolated than Louisville and Notre Dame currently are. They're not a good addition, man.

 

[imajericho]

I know. It's mostly about football. Which I keep telling you Kansas sucks at and Louisville is decent at and just had a Heisman Trophy winner. Louisville wins the battle over Kansas.

But in addition to football, like it or not, it is a fact that the ACC has a strong tradition of dominant success in Olympic sports and 100% takes into account a prospective new member school's entire athletics department profile before agreeing to add them. While football and market (and basketball) are the main criteria, entire athletic department profile definitely sweetens the pot and adds a nice cherry on top.

Kansas would not be a good addition to the conference, athletically (nor are they as good of an academic institution as you're hyping them to be. They're #115 in U.S. News' ranking of national universities. Louisville is #165 FYI, but we aren't arguing that Louisville is a good school). Kansas' two best qualities are:

1) basketball --> ACC doesn't need any help here. We're good in basketball.
2) brings the #33 Kansas City market and maybe (but probably not) brings the 21st market in St. Louis.

That's it. And they are probably the worst football program in all of P5. AND, geographically, they're way out in damn no-man's-land, even further isolated than Louisville and Notre Dame currently are. They're not a good addition, man.

They are. But, obviously we will never agree.

They are a better addition than Syracuse, Boston College, Louisville, and possiblyprobably Pittsburgh.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

They are a better addition than Syracuse, Boston College, Louisville, and possiblyprobably Pittsburgh.

Don't get me started on Syracuse and Pittsburgh. Those are two awful, awful additions to the conference lol. Especially once Syracuse hoops dries up when Boeheim retires. They're both terrible. Syracuse brings a great men's lax program. Other than that, neither school provides anything worth a damn. So we agree on something! Lol.

Boston College is a necessary evil because of the Notre Dame link. That's literally all they provide is that and a big market (which they don't capture because Boston is pro sports heavy).

 

[TarHeelNation11]

ANYWAY, enough about Kansas lol. Would love other's thoughts on Gonzaga.

 

[thaUNCshow]

Boston college was such a waste. VA Tech and the U were added for football reasons but at least theyve built respectable bball teams