With BYU In, Should Seattle Be Included Too?
by objesguy on Sep 4, 2010 11:34 AM PDT
Email
PrintI am very excited by the addition of BYU to the WCC. It's a great basketball program that undoubtedly will boost the reputation of the WCC. In my opinion, with this deal, the WCC certainly belongs in the discussion of the best basketball conferences in the West, especially with the Pac-10 (soon-to-be Pac-12) coming off an atrocious season a year ago and not much hope on the horizon, even with the addition of Utah.
That being said, with the addition of BYU, that leaves the WCC with 9 teams. The most logical decision would be to add another team, mostly for the sake of having an even number of teams.
I believe Seattle should be the logical choice to join the WCC.
Now let's look at some pros and cons of Seattle U joining the WCC.
Pros
- A team in Seattle would give the WCC a great imprint in the West Coast. Basically, every major city in the west coast (except Phoenix) would be represented, which I think would be great exposure for the WCC, and further close the gap between the Pac-10 and WCC.
- Seattle is a budding team. I saw on the BYU post that people said Seattle wasn't a good program. That's overstating it. Are they a great program? No. But they were the only independent to finish with a winning record (17-14), they had quality wins against Fresno State, Oregon State (whom they beat by 51 in Corvallis), Weber State (the regular-season Big Sky champs) and Utah (a tournament team two years ago). Also, they won 10 out of their last 13 games last season. I think the team was getting adjusted to the new coach and the fact that they were playing a full DI schedule for the first time. That being said, I think they could be ready this year, now that they have Dollar back and the first-year jitters out of their system.
- A Seattle-Gonzaga rivalry would be fun, just for the Eastern-Western Washington rivalry thing.
- They play at Key Arena, so the Zags would get two games minimum in an NBA-quality arena. (Just saying.)
Cons
- Apparently, GU's athletic department doesn't want their inclusion for fear of losing recruits in the Seattle Area (A BS excuse because Gonzaga has been starting to go more national and international for recruiting) as well as ceding some exposure (another BS excuse because Gonzaga has a huge following in Portland).
- And...well...I can't think of any other cons. I don't think Seattle would be any worse next year than Pepperdine.
So, those are some of my ideas? With BYU on-board, would you guys be gung-ho for Seattle to be included? Or should the WCC just stick to nine teams for the time being?
This post does not reflect the views of the blog authors or SB Nation.
25 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
My problem is that we will probably have to cede two good non-conference games against teams better than SU. BYU is a boost because we get two guaranteed games against a school that has averaged 24 in RPI the last 4 years and has made the tournament the past four years. It certainly will also cede exposure and recruiting from Gonzaga to Seattle.
What do we get in return?
Access to Seattle – Gonzaga has that now with an annual game there. Adding SU maybe, maybe helps the WCC as a whole but hurts Gonzaga for sure.
A good team – They aren’t high enough in RPI yet to not drag us down. It’s great that they are the best independent and I don’t doubt they could hang with and probably be better than Pepperdine, but they still would drag us down.
Cross state rivalry – I think we’d all rather reboot the cross-state matchup with a certain team that fancies itself the best team in the Pac-10.
Key Arena – Meh.
9 teams is fine. We can do a true round robin, losing two non-conference games. It’s okay because BYU twice is probably better than what we could get on our own. If we go 10 teams, what happens? We might have to drop 2 non-conference games to play Seattle twice – 2 non-conference games against teams probably better for our resume and tournament preparation than Seattle. Or we might have to play 2 conference games only once, meaning that we would end up with imbalanced schedules that could unfairly lose us the conference regular season and conference tournament seeding – not to mention we would only have one guaranteed game against BYU, which might be an away game at one of the few places more difficult to win at than our house,
SU would be a good addition
Yes, we will definitely cede two non-conference games, but they will be games that we would have otherwise played against the Lafayettes, Southerns and Augustanas of the world (at least the home game.) This will be a benefit to us, because we not have to pay for these games. Further, the Key Arena game will be another opportunity for us Seattle residents to see the Zags play.
The recruiting argument holds no water. SU is in Seattle, and will be in Seattle regardless of their conference.
I relish the notion of a cross-state rivalry with a fellow Jesuit school. If UW does not want to play us, then lets start a new tradition and leave the Huskies to celebrate that one win that they had over us in the previous nine games and move on.
Sure, 9 teams is fine, but 10 is better. An 18-game conference schedule including a few games that will save us money on guarantee games (at least at first) will be a positive thing all around. Seattle U is going to improve, and I look for them to be a strong program in the future. We can not expect for them to join another conference and then just switch over to the WCC when we feel that they are worthy. Lets get them now and look forward to the days of four or five WCC teams playing the in tournament.
by BKBulldog on Sep 5, 2010 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Schedule isn't excuse
Case in point: here are two non-conference games on our schedule:
Lewis-Clark State (DIII team)
Cal-State Bakersfield (A DI Independent who was worse than Seattle).
I would rather play Seattle twice (once in Key Arena) than against those cupcakes.
Supporting the Giants, Niners, Sharks, Warriors, Golden Bears and Zags since 1987
Schedule is an excuse
We are going to have to add two conference games to our schedule which means the WCC conference play is going to have to start earlier which means we will have to waive bye bye to some of our early January/December non conference games.
We play Lewis-Clark State as a warm up and Cal-State Bakersfield as a pre-tournament warm up. Few schedules those particular team for a reason. Any team that thinks they might have a good season is not gonna wanna schedule Gonzaga right before the tournament in case it breaks their bubble. And I think Few scheduled teams of that caliber very deliberately.
no no no no no a million times no
Seattle’s rpi . . . 192. That’s why they have been kept out, not recruiting.
by opooos on Sep 5, 2010 9:21 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
ideally there is no more expansion
I don’t get the tv market argument either . . . I see plenty of news about GU over here. Its not like we don’t get play, the games are on TV all of the time. Heck I can even pick them up on radio at night (I listened to the gu wisconsin game driving from seattle to portland without trouble)
If we are looking towards expansion, meaning it absolutely, gun to our head absolutely needs to be done it would make more sense to go after Denver which is a completely new market.
by opooos on Sep 5, 2010 9:44 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Seriously? RPI?
RPI rankings according to RealTimeRPI.com
USF: 205
San Diego: 230
Santa Clara: 233
Pepperdine: 303
Despite Seattle’s “Sub-Par” RPI, they still were better than half the conference last year.
Supporting the Giants, Niners, Sharks, Warriors, Golden Bears and Zags since 1987
Yeah RPI
We just added BYU who is #24. Why are we going to add a team to who is going to make the conference RPI worse? They add no actual benefit to the WCC. Like I said if we are going to expand we should go after Denver who has a better RPI and is in a completely new market.
Denver?
Denver did better last year, but I could see Seattle putting up a similar record in the Sun Belt, which isn’t very good. Furthermore, I think people in Washington would get somewhat excited for a Seattle-Gonzaga game, while nobody would care about a Denver-Gonzaga game in Colorado. Denver attracts as much attention in Colorado as Seattle U does in Washington, maybe less than Seattle U.
Remember, Seattle has some basketball tradition (Elgin Baylor) too. Denver is pretty much known for College Hockey.
Supporting the Giants, Niners, Sharks, Warriors, Golden Bears and Zags since 1987
No...not yet, anyway.
Yes we are stuck with a lot of bottomfeeders right now, why would we want another one to bring down the conference RPI? In every other aspect of the deal, bringing SU to the WCC makes sense except for the fact that their basketball program is not good. If Dirty Dollar can raise the bar like he is expected to do over the next few years then I am definitely on board. Until then it would be pointless for us to lower our profile.
One more thought: With his known recruiting prowess do you really think that Coach Dollar won’t live up to his name and jump ship if he can build a strong program? If he can build SU into a contender he will move on to a bigger program and SU will fade back into obscelence within a year when he snags all of his prized recruits and takes them with him. He’s young and has the opportunity to prove his talent in building programs, the ideal candidate for a high-major in serious need of help.
by ZagsFanatic on Sep 5, 2010 11:03 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Siena, Butler, St. Mary's, Gonzaga...
Who says Dollar automatically is going to jump ship? With how job security is these days, we are seeing more coaches spurn that bigger offer and stay at smaller schools for less money, but more job security. I mean, look at our own conference. If Bennett and Few continue to stay, wouldn’t Dollar be more compelled to stay, seeing the stability and success St. mary’s and Gonzaga are having?
Also, one coach does not make or break everything. We have seen multiple programs get new coaches year after year, and still make the tournament consistently. If Seattle is truly committed to basketball (and it seems like they are) then even if Dollar leaves, I think they could find a suitable coaching hire.
Supporting the Giants, Niners, Sharks, Warriors, Golden Bears and Zags since 1987
Coach Dollar staying depends on a few things
First they have to be successful (which they aren’t yet). Second the school administration needs to demonstrate a commitment to the basketball program (which they haven’t, their facilities are miserable, and the school spirit is lacking to say the least). Third once successful Coach dollar must be willing to turn down jobs at much more established programs in better conferences (Yes Bennett and Few have bucked the trend, but just this year you had coaches leaving smaller schools to coach elsewhere i.e. Dana Altman, Steve Donahue). Is that going to happen? Nobody knows. But it is much more likely that it won’t than it will.
Also who is to say that SU will get better? There have been plenty of coaching changes in the WCC and most of them don’t work.
You have to keep things in context
Point one: In their first full year of DI play, they went 17-14. I would consider that successful, especially when every other independent finished with a losing season. Second, they were successful in DII before, and they have basketball tradition (Elgin Baylor went to Seattle U).
Point two: The school IS making a commitment to basketball, as evidenced by hiring Dollar (He was a top assistant to Romar, so why would he leave UW for a school that wasn’t making a commitment to basketball) and the deal they signed with Key Arena (an NBA arena mind you) to play their home games there until they build their own arena. Yes, the facilities aren’t great and school spirit is rampant yet, but, this commitment is recent, since the previous administration didn’t value sports at all before.
Point three: That’s a good point, but schools like Tulsa and Siena have proved that you can be successful, even if there are changes. Also, with BYU and the already solid reputations of Gonzaga and St. mary’s, the conference is enticing for coaches to stay. Look at the CAA and MVC. The coaches have stayed because the conferences got better. The WCC could be better than those conferences, so what would that mean?
P.S. As far as Altman leaving, I think he left mainly because he was feeling some pressure. Creighton has been disappointing the past three years, and I think he left mainly because he might have felt the program was on the downswing. Remember, Altman turned down the Arkansas job to return to Creighton when Creighton was still doing well.
Supporting the Giants, Niners, Sharks, Warriors, Golden Bears and Zags since 1987
Siena?!?
Last I checked they are on their fourth coach in a decade and McCaffery jumped ship to coach at Iowa this year. There is something to be said for job security, but it seems like for every Brad Stevens or Randy Bennett there are 10 coaches who are constantly on the lookout for the next big break.
That was the point
A good program will continue to be a good program despite coaching changes. Tulsa was the same way for a while (Good teams year after year despite turnover). So, even if Dollar leaves, it’s not impossible that they won’t still be good. Even in DII, Seattle won under the previous coach, and the city makes Seattle very enticing to under the radar recruits.
Supporting the Giants, Niners, Sharks, Warriors, Golden Bears and Zags since 1987
It's OK to have 9 teams
I’m not sure why having 10 teams is better than 9, other than it’s a nice round number. BYU’s coming from the MWC where they’ve been playing with 9 teams for the last 5 years. It hasn’t hurt them at all, and they even sent 4 teams to the dance last season. Stick with 9 for the next few years and see if SU can’t keep improving.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
By the way
Great stuff, objesguy. Thanks for the post. This is exactly what we love seeing out of our FanPosts. Well thought out, reasonable posts that address both sides of an argument. Keep em’ coming!
The Slipper Still Fits - SB Nation's home for the Gonzaga Bulldogs!
SU
In the WCC would like kissing your Sister! Blahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! BYU coming to the WCC might just present some better opportunities for some better teams to come over also. Don’t settle for SU, Plenty of time to get a better team! Ufdah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What other teams though?
Unfortunately, the West Coast isn’t flush with teams that can jump conferences easily (Unlike the East Coast where as long as your East of the Mississippi, you can join the Big East.)
Let’s face it, U of O and UW aren’t coming to the WCC. So who else?
Supporting the Giants, Niners, Sharks, Warriors, Golden Bears and Zags since 1987
Thats the thing
I honestly don’t think we need to expand. Yeah it would be nice for the people of Washington, but that isn’t reason enough to add them right now. SU can get better no doubt. They are in a great city and they play in a great arena (relatively speaking). But they are not there and there is no guarantee of them getting there. USF has won a national title but they are not a top program, they even hired a big name coach in Eddie Sutton at one point and didn’t improve. Once they get there then bring them on board. I don’t think the WCC should be their first step in D1.
"They play at Key Arena, so the Zags would get two games minimum in an NBA-quality arena"
Not good enough for the NBA apparently.
Gonzaga
would have more fans there then SU would.
I don't hate many things, but i do hate Boise State.
by spokanistan22yuh on Sep 8, 2010 8:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
