...per Aldo. I don't have the link, but great news if true. Great quote from Kermit about looking forward to continue to build, grow enrollment at MT and shine a light on the other great aspects of our university. What a guy.
Kermit in contract talks with Massaro and McPhee...
- Thread starter MTCasey
- Start date
While I agree 100% with Kermit getting a new contract I hope it isn't built like Stock's contract
While I understand the concern regarding coach stock's contract in light of the history of coach mac's and coach wiel's contract as well. MT has a history of long term contracts to make up for lack of cash on the front end that ends up with MT programs in a bad spot of having to keep coaches due to lack of ability to buy out long after their performance had become poor.
In short, I think that is apples and oranges here. From what I can tell, that is not a fair nor apt comparison when considering Kermit's contract. For starters, Kermit has and is establishing and continuing to develop unprecedented success here at Middle Tennessee basketball. This is now 6 years of tremendous success while building the program, culture, and ties to the community for 15 years overall. That is a far cry different than a 2 or 3 year coach at MT who gets raises and long term contract because of 2 or 3 games above .500 and someone like Memphis calling on the new football coach. That situation has been problematic for MT. Kermit's situation is not a problem for MT. The two situations aren't even comparable.
While some opening may come available that is a big opportunity for Kermit that offers millions that MT just cannot compete, I think there is a reasonably decent chance that Kermit stays long term here at MT. He already has 15 years here. In D1 coaching, that is an eternity! He and his family seem to like and have good ties here in the area. As he leads the program to new levels of success, there will be added revenues coming in which the AD could tap to continue to offer appropriate pay raises for Kermit commensurate with his level of success. While I don't claim to know Kermit's wishes and desires, it's not too far outside the realm of reasonable thinking that building a national program where he could retire a legend for leading such tremendous accomplishments just might be appealing to some coaches. That's how basketball floors end up named after a coach or even an arena.
Twice this week, I've read where Kermit's most recent pay raise contract has a $500,000 buyout by Kermit if he leaves before the next couple of years. I'm heartily assured to see that compared to past MT situations. I think that is an excellent sign that the athletic dept is being wise in regards to new contracts. In my view, the athletic dept is likely going out on a limb, for MT, to come up with some big bucks. If Kermit does turn around and leave for a, say, $12 million 4 year deal, MT will have a fair amount left from the new buyout to be able to make a decent offer on hiring a replacement. I also imagine Kermit would likely have no problem with that. If he were to leave, I imagine he would like to see his legacy here at MT have a good chance to continue to have good success.
Those are just a few examples of why I think the current situation with Kermit is not even remotely close to other coaches and past MT coaches' situations. Additionally, I think Kermit continues to develop and achieve incredible success. After watching bball for over a couple of decades, Kermit's brilliance as a coach has become quite apparent. To top it off, new levels of talented recruits will just start to arrive this upcoming summer. There is a lot to be hopeful and optimistic about with Kermit at the helm of MT bball for the years to come.
Kermit is really the life blood of the program right now. There have been posts stating that this was THE year that Middle had the chance to hit the sweet 16. I am not so sure. I think the best is yet to come.
Going back just to 2012, we thought it couldn't get any better with Dendy, Hammonds, Cintron and cast...2013 had a similar cast. In 2014, Knight, Hunter, Jones. 2015 and on, we all know the players. My point is that Kermit just keeps this train rolling. We might hit some bumps but it would appear that we are just getting better and better each year. I haven't seen this type of steamrolling success in basketball or football since I was born.
Stock caught lightning in a bottle in 09 and has been able to use that to his advantage ever since. Kermit is the lighting.
Going back just to 2012, we thought it couldn't get any better with Dendy, Hammonds, Cintron and cast...2013 had a similar cast. In 2014, Knight, Hunter, Jones. 2015 and on, we all know the players. My point is that Kermit just keeps this train rolling. We might hit some bumps but it would appear that we are just getting better and better each year. I haven't seen this type of steamrolling success in basketball or football since I was born.
Stock caught lightning in a bottle in 09 and has been able to use that to his advantage ever since. Kermit is the lighting.
The difference between Kermit and Stock is that one is well respected x and o guy in the profession and the other is just a good guy resting on laurels.
Kermit should get a raise alone for us being known as Middle Tennessee.
LSU hired Will Wade. Gotta like Kermit's chances to stay put now. If he were 20 years younger he would have been gone some time ago, methinks.
SpaceRaider, you do a great job of finding and listing all these good audio clips and interviews.
The 20 years younger part is what I've been saying as well. Despite his age, I understand how the world works also. A huge program with huge bucks tends to get a lot of peoples' attention. That said, at this stage in his life and perhaps more importantly, his family, there is more to consider than just straight dollar to dollar comparisons. Don't get me wrong though, MT really needs to step up and pay Kermit what he deserves...and has earned!
It's really enlightening to listen to Kermit talk now that he is turning to the offseason and the future of the program and his possible future with the program.
Wow. The athletic dept, university admin, and community, has to take some big steps of improvement to sustain or improve upon the recent success.
Rightly so, Kermit is leveraging his success and circumstances to try to get the commitment from the university that this level of success deserves. Obviously, this is preaching the choir here, but dang, people, specifically alumni and students need to turn out for the home games big time!
Facilities and recruiting budget are a part of what the admin need to commit to for Kermit to continue to have success. Fortunately, The Murphy Center's infrastructure has recently been renovated. It's costly ($11-$12 million?) and mostly unseen to the average eye, but it's incredibly important. Now improvements to The Murph can be made that will jump out and catch the eye for the money spent. As much as I don't necessarily notice the age of the ole girl, The Murph, she can use some good improvements inside and out and all around. The upside in my opinion, the historic Murphy Center has the foundation, the infrastructure to support good improvements and modernization. At the same time, it can still retain that charm of a historic and unique facility that is practically a one of a kind, Notre Dame and the Air Force Academy notwithstanding. Just spitballing here, The Murphy Center would appear to be a good candidate for upgrades, modernization, and improvements that would be in line thematically with the tremendous success baseball has had over the last couple of decades with new or renovated newer parks while retaining that nostalgic old time classic baseball look and feel.
As far attendance, I don't know the answer. It has been improving gradually with the success on the court, but it doesn't seem to match to the overall level of success. Think 8,000 avg instead of current 6,000 avg. Really, the recent level of success would realistically suggest an avg of 10,000! I don't know if a serious commitment and investment in marketing season tickets and games can give a good return on investment. I'll have to leave that to others who are experts in that field of business in this region. I also wonder how much can the Nashville alumni be reached and tapped into to help?
So it's not just a nice huge pay increase for Kermit, it's also a commitment and investment in facilities and the program budget. It's a situation where I really hope Pres McPhee's past talk in growth and success in sports is now backed by his actions and commitment in $$$. To continue to succeed and improvement, opportunities such as these need to be seized.
The good news in my opinion, Kermit is willing to make the commitment, put in the work, and know it will be a little slower in development than at other money-loaded programs. To me Kermit sounds reasonable in that he wants to commit to Middle Tennessee success, but he has to know that Middle Tennessee is committed to him and the bball program being supported in succeeding. That's not too much to ask.
One point that seems complicated on the surface, but likely needs to be addressed in facilities is the new office space mentioned for football. Pretty much everyone is crammed into The Murphy Center. Office space, and operating space in general are needed to match the current and growing needs of an athletic dept that has grown well beyond the intended space of Murphy Athletic Center of 30 and 40 years ago. So does a new football office complex give over the needed space in the The Murphy Center to basketball? Is this fair and reasonable to Kermit (and women's bball) that mediocre football gets the new building so that basketball can have the natural fit of space in The Murphy Center? Maybe some quality office renovations for basketball helps that process make sense? Afterall, it doesn't really make sense to build Kermit an office complex away from the basketball arena.
Another key issue it seems MT has less control over, but it is a problem that Kermit is pointing out that needs to be addressed. That is C-USA has a huge college basketball problem right now. Just a few years ago, C-USA as a conference was ranked in the RPI around 11, 12, or 13. The last two seasons has seen C-USA fall to 23 or 24 out of the 31 conferences. Unacceptable! As this season demonstrated, the pressure on this MT team was ridiculous to be near perfect to get into the NCAAs due to the poor conf RPI. C-USA desperately needs to improve to get back to multiple bids so that a couple of conference losses doesn't wreck your whole season. I guess the AD and Pres McPhee could commit to put real pressure on the conference to change and improve? Perhaps Massaro and McPhee could commit to aggressively look for another conference if C-USA refuses to improve? I don't know that there is a real easy answer to that legitimate problem. Personally, I think Pres McPhee needs to challenge the conf and commish. For starters, McPhee ought to start to throw down the gauntlet within the conference and to other Presidents to the commish, get your act in gear and get this conference rolling or get out of the way so that somebody can be found who can and will.
Folks, this is truly a watershed moment in Middle Tennessee athletics. I think it could be argued that it is also at least partly a watershed moment for the university as a whole. Success and opportunity has been put right into the university's lap. What will the university and leadership do with it? Will the university leadership seize the opportunity for success and commit to a culture of MT standing out from just one of the rest by reaching for higher standards and achieved success?
Wow. The athletic dept, university admin, and community, has to take some big steps of improvement to sustain or improve upon the recent success.
Rightly so, Kermit is leveraging his success and circumstances to try to get the commitment from the university that this level of success deserves. Obviously, this is preaching the choir here, but dang, people, specifically alumni and students need to turn out for the home games big time!
Facilities and recruiting budget are a part of what the admin need to commit to for Kermit to continue to have success. Fortunately, The Murphy Center's infrastructure has recently been renovated. It's costly ($11-$12 million?) and mostly unseen to the average eye, but it's incredibly important. Now improvements to The Murph can be made that will jump out and catch the eye for the money spent. As much as I don't necessarily notice the age of the ole girl, The Murph, she can use some good improvements inside and out and all around. The upside in my opinion, the historic Murphy Center has the foundation, the infrastructure to support good improvements and modernization. At the same time, it can still retain that charm of a historic and unique facility that is practically a one of a kind, Notre Dame and the Air Force Academy notwithstanding. Just spitballing here, The Murphy Center would appear to be a good candidate for upgrades, modernization, and improvements that would be in line thematically with the tremendous success baseball has had over the last couple of decades with new or renovated newer parks while retaining that nostalgic old time classic baseball look and feel.
As far attendance, I don't know the answer. It has been improving gradually with the success on the court, but it doesn't seem to match to the overall level of success. Think 8,000 avg instead of current 6,000 avg. Really, the recent level of success would realistically suggest an avg of 10,000! I don't know if a serious commitment and investment in marketing season tickets and games can give a good return on investment. I'll have to leave that to others who are experts in that field of business in this region. I also wonder how much can the Nashville alumni be reached and tapped into to help?
So it's not just a nice huge pay increase for Kermit, it's also a commitment and investment in facilities and the program budget. It's a situation where I really hope Pres McPhee's past talk in growth and success in sports is now backed by his actions and commitment in $$$. To continue to succeed and improvement, opportunities such as these need to be seized.
The good news in my opinion, Kermit is willing to make the commitment, put in the work, and know it will be a little slower in development than at other money-loaded programs. To me Kermit sounds reasonable in that he wants to commit to Middle Tennessee success, but he has to know that Middle Tennessee is committed to him and the bball program being supported in succeeding. That's not too much to ask.
One point that seems complicated on the surface, but likely needs to be addressed in facilities is the new office space mentioned for football. Pretty much everyone is crammed into The Murphy Center. Office space, and operating space in general are needed to match the current and growing needs of an athletic dept that has grown well beyond the intended space of Murphy Athletic Center of 30 and 40 years ago. So does a new football office complex give over the needed space in the The Murphy Center to basketball? Is this fair and reasonable to Kermit (and women's bball) that mediocre football gets the new building so that basketball can have the natural fit of space in The Murphy Center? Maybe some quality office renovations for basketball helps that process make sense? Afterall, it doesn't really make sense to build Kermit an office complex away from the basketball arena.
Another key issue it seems MT has less control over, but it is a problem that Kermit is pointing out that needs to be addressed. That is C-USA has a huge college basketball problem right now. Just a few years ago, C-USA as a conference was ranked in the RPI around 11, 12, or 13. The last two seasons has seen C-USA fall to 23 or 24 out of the 31 conferences. Unacceptable! As this season demonstrated, the pressure on this MT team was ridiculous to be near perfect to get into the NCAAs due to the poor conf RPI. C-USA desperately needs to improve to get back to multiple bids so that a couple of conference losses doesn't wreck your whole season. I guess the AD and Pres McPhee could commit to put real pressure on the conference to change and improve? Perhaps Massaro and McPhee could commit to aggressively look for another conference if C-USA refuses to improve? I don't know that there is a real easy answer to that legitimate problem. Personally, I think Pres McPhee needs to challenge the conf and commish. For starters, McPhee ought to start to throw down the gauntlet within the conference and to other Presidents to the commish, get your act in gear and get this conference rolling or get out of the way so that somebody can be found who can and will.
Folks, this is truly a watershed moment in Middle Tennessee athletics. I think it could be argued that it is also at least partly a watershed moment for the university as a whole. Success and opportunity has been put right into the university's lap. What will the university and leadership do with it? Will the university leadership seize the opportunity for success and commit to a culture of MT standing out from just one of the rest by reaching for higher standards and achieved success?
I cannot see that move happening.
However, seeing the salaries at VCU and what other similar schools can offer, it sometimes makes me wonder of MT might be better off dropping football back to FCS and focus our financial resources on programs that have shown the ability or potential to compete at a national level.
Nope.
Relegating football would destroy the athletic department:
1) Money game revenue would decrease significantly
2) Attendance and fan interest would decrease significantly
3) Overall athletic department perception would decrease significantly
MT supporters want relevency. They want to win. They want MT to drop the regional university perception ( the constant discussion about dropping the "state") and the quickest way to ensure MT would remain a regional university is by dropping to FCS. There is not one MAJOR university (outside IVY league and similar high-academia schools (Georgia Washington, American, etc) that plays FCS football.
Funny thing: When Coach Stock went 10-3 and CKD went 19-14, I don't remember anyone saying we should relegate our MBB to Division II.
Granted, there was a portion of the fan base who wanted him gone (I was one of them), but I don't recall someone proposing a relegation of our MBB program.
Granted, there was a portion of the fan base who wanted him gone (I was one of them), but I don't recall someone proposing a relegation of our MBB program.
Damn Austin, who pissed in your Cherrios?
Let's say it a different way - I wish our athletic department had more money for other non-football sports. I was thinking about the average athletic budgets (median budget for schools playing FBS is 47 million versus FCS schools 4.05 million) and all the costs it takes to subsidize the difference. Nothing to do with the Stock, Kermit, or any other particular coach.
Most likely because the basketball program has a chance to compete at a national level. That will never happen in football.
Austin's just heated because I proposed a similar idea the other day.
Relegate football.
Dump all the money and resources into hoops, and build a national powerhouse.
Football had their chance, and they've done nothing with the resources to seen them worthy. Can you imagine what KD and his staff could do with all that??
Relegate football.
Dump all the money and resources into hoops, and build a national powerhouse.
Football had their chance, and they've done nothing with the resources to seen them worthy. Can you imagine what KD and his staff could do with all that??
If money and facilities equaled success then every power 5 school would be better than every non power school in every sport.
yeah, in the non p5, latech always seems to do pretty good with a budget less than ours. Money is important, but I think coaching, quality coaching, can compensate for lack of resources.
with regards to Kermit, pay the man. He's done as good a job as any coach in the country IMO. Pay him not only to keep him, but because he's earned it and deserves it.
Last edited:
Money and facilities don't "equal" success, but they sure are a significant factor in achieving it and sustaining it. Acting like they don't matter is like saying you don't "need" bait to catch a fish. You may not "need" it, but it sure does help.
Every power 5 school is not better than every non power 5 school. Some schools overachieve relative to their resources and some schools underachieve, but in general the universities that invest the most and the wisest in their programs have a much better chance to achieve the desired results, and the programs that have true staying power without exception have made significant investments in their programs and created ways to generate the revenue required to make those investments and sustain their standing.
I'm not suggesting we just throw money around like Congress, but what is the plan to take our resources to the next level so that we don't have to wait 20 years to achieve a major facilities goal? What is the vision for how the school is going to improve its fundraising and student/alumni/community engagement, and who is out in the public selling it in a meaningful way from the university administration?
I'm not pretending to have all the answers, but we can't be lured into thinking that we are just automatically going to keep building on the success of the last 6 years without innovative leadership at the top levels of the university and athletic department.
Last edited:
Your mentioning of the topic of "vision" is something I harped on for years, but I tried to lay off of here because I figured people would get tired of me harping on it.
Admittedly, I don't get out like I used to. Maybe the leadership is doing this, but I haven't really been hearing about any real vision for the university or the athletics dept in general. I think it is desperately needed. If there is vision by the leadership, then they really need to get that vision out publicly.
In regards to a specific program, men's basketball, Kermit has been getting the message of his vision out. He is clearly wanting MT competing as a national program. He breaking through in doing that as well. Imagine that! His team and staff knew that. Dedicated fans generally knew of it. Now the national media knows it and has been spreading the message. Vision is critical in my opinion.
Regarding the university, it was like the science building was the vision and that was it. I haven't heard much of anything since. Don't get me wrong, the science building was and is a great and much needed addition to campus.
I want to give a perspective that I have not seen on this message board.
Does Kermit deserve a contract re-negotiation and a raise? I'm not sure.....
I think it is really ironic that many have recently called for Massarro's head because of coach Stockstill's contract yet you are advocating the same treatment for Kermit. With ideas that he should receive all the NCAA tournament income and he deserves to retire here.
Kermit's current contract was renegotiated last summer and increased his base by >20%. The contract currently goes through 2024 and includes performance bonuses for things like winning seasons, conference titles, NCAA tournament appearances, etc....
His base salary is $465,000 per year and is supplemented by another $100,000 for TV & Radio obligations.
Stockstill's contract currently goes through 2023 and currently includes a base of $721,704 that will automatically increase to 821,704 in 2019. I'm sure his contract includes various performance bonuses as well.
I really enjoy basketball and the recent success, but Football revenue and potential revenue is much greater. There is a lot more responsibility, moving parts, and stake holders involved around the football program than basketball.
If we do anything for Kermit, I think a small base addition (within 10%) with a focus on increasing the performance bonuses. Anything more than an 8 year contract for any coach really terrifies me and the ability for the University to assure high performance over the long term.
I know I'm not the only one that, just 6 years ago had sentiments for Kermit as many have for Stockstill now. He had 9 seasons of mediocrity (around .500 win %) in the Sun Belt before ever reaching a .700 win %. He has been compensated for the teams recent performance and I hope we can mantain Kermit here and the team highly competetive, but I sure would hate for history to repeat itself.
Kermit Davis Contract
Rick Stockstill Contract
Kermit Davis History
Does Kermit deserve a contract re-negotiation and a raise? I'm not sure.....
I think it is really ironic that many have recently called for Massarro's head because of coach Stockstill's contract yet you are advocating the same treatment for Kermit. With ideas that he should receive all the NCAA tournament income and he deserves to retire here.
Kermit's current contract was renegotiated last summer and increased his base by >20%. The contract currently goes through 2024 and includes performance bonuses for things like winning seasons, conference titles, NCAA tournament appearances, etc....
His base salary is $465,000 per year and is supplemented by another $100,000 for TV & Radio obligations.
Stockstill's contract currently goes through 2023 and currently includes a base of $721,704 that will automatically increase to 821,704 in 2019. I'm sure his contract includes various performance bonuses as well.
I really enjoy basketball and the recent success, but Football revenue and potential revenue is much greater. There is a lot more responsibility, moving parts, and stake holders involved around the football program than basketball.
If we do anything for Kermit, I think a small base addition (within 10%) with a focus on increasing the performance bonuses. Anything more than an 8 year contract for any coach really terrifies me and the ability for the University to assure high performance over the long term.
I know I'm not the only one that, just 6 years ago had sentiments for Kermit as many have for Stockstill now. He had 9 seasons of mediocrity (around .500 win %) in the Sun Belt before ever reaching a .700 win %. He has been compensated for the teams recent performance and I hope we can mantain Kermit here and the team highly competetive, but I sure would hate for history to repeat itself.
Kermit Davis Contract
Rick Stockstill Contract
Kermit Davis History
There are a few problems with aforementioned statistics:
1: The problem with the numbers ( 47 million vs 4 million) is you have 24 P5 schools with budgets in excess of 100 million dollars (TAMU is almost 200 million)
2: Athletic department budget does not account for cost-of-living-adjustment or regional inflation (i.e. Average income in LA is higher than average income in Murfreesboro).
Like it or not, football keeps the lights on for most FBS schools (some schools also rely on heavy subsidies from student fees and sometimes direct contribution from institutional budgets).
FB money games help pay for track cleats, baseball bats, etc. In some ways, the FB program (even at schools other than MT) serves as the sacrificial savior to the athletic department budget, blugenoning itself against P5 opponents for the sake of the non-revenue producing sports
Here's the thing (and I know we went over this in the writer chat the other day, but I figure I'll ruffle a few feathers here too) - Relegating MT FB to FCS would have a significant impact on the athletic department bottom line. Here's how :
1) Money game revenue would decrease by 75%. (FBS money games against P5 opponents top 1 million; FCS teams who play money games earn a paycheck of 200,000-300,000)
2) TV revenue would decrease. If you think the C-USA tv deal is low? Join the OVC.
3) Academic prestige would decrease. If you think MT has perception issues? Drop football to FCS and then get back to me. Outside of the Ivy and Ivy-types (American, George Washington, etc), I can not think of one major university that plays FCS football AND division I basketball.
MT MBB has done its part to raise expectations. It's time for MT FB to step up, not step down to FCS
CKD has earned his payday, but I'm with you. Let's not hamstring our athletic department with another lifetime contract.
While I get the concerns about MT generally being stuck with lengthy contracts and mediocre performance, it seems rather apparent Kermit has achieved a sustained level of success that is far removed from mediocrity of past situations.
In light of the sustained level of incredible success of Kermit at MT, I see a long term contract as entirely appropriate. As I commented elsewhere in these threads, there is a huge difference between a big long term contract based on a few wins above .500 after coaching here for 3 seasons and the level of success under Kermit after 15 years. Particularly when the last 6 years of that 15 years has seen MT basketball achieve unprecedented levels of success here at MT.
To compare coach mac, coach wiel, or even coach stock contracts to the type of contract discussed regarding Kermit is really comparing apples and oranges. To make it a more fair and logical comparison, one would have to argue for a massive contract increase and program expenditures as rewards when Kermit was in his 3rd or 4th year with 17-19 wins total. The present situation is not even remotely close.
In my opinion, Kermit deserves and has earned a greatly increased in pay long term contract based on his unprecedented levels of success and established successful culture in the men's basketball program.
In light of the sustained level of incredible success of Kermit at MT, I see a long term contract as entirely appropriate. As I commented elsewhere in these threads, there is a huge difference between a big long term contract based on a few wins above .500 after coaching here for 3 seasons and the level of success under Kermit after 15 years. Particularly when the last 6 years of that 15 years has seen MT basketball achieve unprecedented levels of success here at MT.
To compare coach mac, coach wiel, or even coach stock contracts to the type of contract discussed regarding Kermit is really comparing apples and oranges. To make it a more fair and logical comparison, one would have to argue for a massive contract increase and program expenditures as rewards when Kermit was in his 3rd or 4th year with 17-19 wins total. The present situation is not even remotely close.
In my opinion, Kermit deserves and has earned a greatly increased in pay long term contract based on his unprecedented levels of success and established successful culture in the men's basketball program.
I have to add, I think this talk of football back to FCS is really pretty far out there. Using the idea as an argument for support of the basketball program just isn't making much sense to me either.
For one, you are essentially talking about taking MT back to the OVC. How long do you think MT will sustain basketball success if MT were back in the OVC? While C-USA may be having a down year or two in bball, the brand recognition and cachet of C-USA is not even remotely close to that of the OVC as a whole.
How long do you think MT will be able to attract and keep recruits and quality coaches if MT went back to the OVC?
I'm sure there are plenty on here who also remember the step up in quality of play in basketball when MT went from the ovc to the SunBelt. The coaches talked for a few years about the improved quality of recruits with open doors to MT after the move to the SunBelt. More recently, it has been similar with the jump from the SunBelt to C-USA. Again, the coaches have openly talked of the improved quality and amount of open doors in recruiting in the jump from the SunBelt to C-USA. Can C-USA teams lose some games to the SunBelt of OVC? Sure. This difference is in general or as a whole. Plus that's the nature of out of conference play. MT of C-USA beats one or two SEC teams in out of conf play, but that doesn't make C-USA in general or on the whole a better conference than the SEC.
When it comes to major NCAA D1 athletics, college football has and is pretty much the driving force in most matters.
For one, you are essentially talking about taking MT back to the OVC. How long do you think MT will sustain basketball success if MT were back in the OVC? While C-USA may be having a down year or two in bball, the brand recognition and cachet of C-USA is not even remotely close to that of the OVC as a whole.
How long do you think MT will be able to attract and keep recruits and quality coaches if MT went back to the OVC?
I'm sure there are plenty on here who also remember the step up in quality of play in basketball when MT went from the ovc to the SunBelt. The coaches talked for a few years about the improved quality of recruits with open doors to MT after the move to the SunBelt. More recently, it has been similar with the jump from the SunBelt to C-USA. Again, the coaches have openly talked of the improved quality and amount of open doors in recruiting in the jump from the SunBelt to C-USA. Can C-USA teams lose some games to the SunBelt of OVC? Sure. This difference is in general or as a whole. Plus that's the nature of out of conference play. MT of C-USA beats one or two SEC teams in out of conf play, but that doesn't make C-USA in general or on the whole a better conference than the SEC.
When it comes to major NCAA D1 athletics, college football has and is pretty much the driving force in most matters.
Similar threads
