Men's Basketball Wrap

The nice thing about having a fan blog that is purely a hobby is the lack of a hard deadline or need to post something to meet a monetary goal. After the UT Arlington Mavericks played in a travesty of a Western Athletic Conference men's basketball tournament championship game, I was defeated. I've never been so embarrassed to be a part of a conference before, and I'll bring some receipts in a bit. Also, not long after, my Dad had a stroke, there's been some work milestones that needed to be met and the kids are in full on spring sports season.

I don't like posting about officials, particularly in basketball as that is a game where officials have a big impact and get a lot of attention. I usually feel they do their best and like any other job, there are those good at what they do and those that are not. I usually feel UTA plays against the other team and win or lose based on those merits. Sure a call in a close game draws attention, but was every shot made before that, every assignment kept or no blown defensive adjustments?

But after this year's basketball season, I've never been so disgusted before. It is also not related to the outcome, as when I watched California Baptist beat the women counterparts, I left feeling the ladies had a good season and went up to a team that was just better. They gave it their best shot but came up short and a better team won. After watching the Grand Canyon game in Arlington in person and the conference final on TV, I don't feel Grand Canyon was markedly better and I don't feel the Mavericks will have a fair shot in the WAC.

In the title game, UTA, a team that went to the free throw line often (except when they played GCU), saw less than half of its opponent. Factor out the four garbage free throws at the end when tempers flared and UTA got two technical fouls, UTA could still double their attempts and GCU would have had more. The fouls were not evenly called and when UTA got close, here came a whistle.

In the following picture, GCU gets a break-away steal, but the GCU star trips over his own feet and the Maverick trailing gets called a foul. I took a screenshot of the moment the Antelope lost his footing. Who sees that in real time and says yup, that's a foul...?

DaJuan Gordon was called foul a foul here. I can't find this one in the rule book.
Announcers direct quote: "Grant-Foster with the steal. But he trips, lost his footing. Ouch! ... They are calling a foul...?

GCU watched the Mavs get whistled 50 times to their 22. While the captioned picture doesn't make or break that total or the game, I can recall two other instances like this where there was an obvious play where a Mav didn't commit a foul (or in one case the 'lope was the obvious rule violator) and there were none in reverse. 

I posted the following to the WAC message board in the days following the game, I'll leave it in its entirety and quote it:

Conference FT stats total, sorted by percentage:
Teams, games, FTM, FTA, %
1. Tarleton St. 33 462 609 .759
2. Grand Canyon 33 625 830 .753
3. UT Arlington 34 549 747 .735
4. Seattle U 33 470 643 .731
5. Southern Utah 31 491 674 .728
6. Abilene Christian 33 542 746 .727
7. SFA 33 562 796 .706
8. UTRGV 31 513 728 .705
9. California Baptist 33 478 700 .683
10. Utah Valley 32 443 655 .676
11. Utah Tech 31 451 699 .645

Conference FT stats WAC games only, sorted by percentage:
Free Throw Percentage
Team G FTM FTA Pct.
1. Grand Canyon 20 373 489 .763
2. Tarleton St. 20 292 385 .758
3. UT Arlington 20 359 481 .746
4. Abilene Christian 20 321 437 .735
5. Seattle U 20 283 390 .726
6. Southern Utah 20 320 441 .726
7. UTRGV 20 317 441 .719
8. SFA 20 353 497 .710
9. California Baptist 20 276 397 .695
10. Utah Valley 20 288 428 .673
11. Utah Tech 20 295 465 .634

Your stats on the surface is accurate....BUT. the two WAC tournament games go in the non-conference category. 32 FT against Seattle is a high number but looks downright pedestrian next to 50. GCU in true NON-WAC games, averaged a free throw to a free throw and a half less in both attempts and makes per true non-conference games than in games against WAC teams.

Further, here's all WAC games with GCU's FTA numbers first:
@ UTRGV 37-34
UTA 36-18
@SUU 15-23
@ UTU 24-21
ACU 22-17
TSU 17-6
UVU 26-30
@ SU 44-34 (loss)
@ SFA 23-13
@ UTA 36-20
SU 25-17
@UVU 29-19
SUU 29-22
UTU 20-13
CBU 25-11
@ TSU 17-40 (loss)
@ ACU 24-36 (loss)
UTRGV 9-3
SFA 22-27
@ CBU 9-15
vs. SU 32 - 20
vs. UTA 50-22

The bold represent double-digit wins. In three losses, GCU shot more free throws once. In the three other games where GCYU had less free throws, the game was well into double-digits.

As a guy who has a good understanding of statistical analysis, that's a red flag. Those numbers are on the fringe of the bell curve.

Look at just the conference games alone, UTA had 481 total free throws and GCU had 489. But in the two games combined, GCU was 72-38, almost 2-1. So in the other 18 games, UTA went to the line far greater. That's also far outside the standard deviation. Add in the third game where a team that goes to the line at a greater rate against common opponents and the total disparity is 122-60. As my stats instructor would say, that's not gonna pass a peer review.

SFA went to the line more than any other WAC school in conference play. GCU won the overall stat 45-40. And the second game was a 22-point win.

UVU and Utah Tech were also high free throw attempts per game teams. The only time UVU had more free throws, UVU lost by 13, so the game wasn't in doubt. Despite double digit wins each time, and despite Utah Tech shooting a high number of free throws, GCU out did them each time.

Somehow, in close games, GCU got to the line more and in blowouts, they did not. Really interesting....

As a true statistical analysis, not just looking at sports stats, every single one of these are beyond a standard deviation. One is explainable by standard deviation. All of them indicate something other than true-in-game factors.

It seems to me, the more I look at it, GCU was the pre-determined winner and the conference did everything they could to help out. This isn't a smoking gun, but sure is hard numbers that don't lie.

One poster said that GCU's game was built around drawing fouls. I don't disagree. But as noted, so was UTA. I for the life of me can't figure out how both are true, UTA was vastly in the negative in all three games and beat GCU in free throw attempts in all other WAC games played. The rest of the number analysis above stand on their own, but those two really stick out to me.

Tarleton was similar to UTA. They did beat GCU and got calls. In the loss it was a two-to-one disadvantage.

The second factor that many people may not be aware of is the controversy and unconventional business model/financial set up GCU has. I also posted this to the WAC message board recently:

Problem is GCU is run by a for-profit entity, using a subsidiary under the for-profit organization as a disguise to appear as a non-profit.

Grand Canyon Education, or GCE, ran GCU for years, but sold off GCU in 2018. Except not really. The school's president is Brian Mueller. The for-profit GCE's CEO is Brian Mueller. Part of the contract of the sale stipulates that GCE provides many of the school's daily operations, in exchange for 60 percent of GCU's tuition and fee revenue. GCE is essentially getting the same revenue from GCU that it did when it owned the U as enrollment has climbed.

GCU homers point to the sale to say they aren't for-profit, but either have no clue GCE still controls the school or conveniently ignore that fact. It matters little to me.

Now the problem with being a for-profit school versus traditional brick and mortar, is they can make athletics a loss leader. Grocery stores sell popular items for less than it cost them to bring customers into the door and mark up other items to make up the difference. Athletics is artificially marked up. As money that their "peer" public schools HAVE to use on education, gets shuffled to athletics.

GCU's budget for all of athletics is just over $30 million. Men's basketball's budget is $7.6 mil.

Ironically, California Baptist is first overall at $32.7 million and but trails in MBB at $3.9 mil.

There's a big gap between those two and the rest. SFA is $24.9 and $3.2. ACU is $23.8 and $2.3 mil. Tarleton is $21.1 and $1.6. Seattle is $20 and $3.2 mil. UVU is $17.4 and $2.3. SUU equals $16.5 and $1.5. Utah Tech budgets $16.2 and $1.6. UTRGV (even though they are on the way out) is $15.9 and $1.9.

Finally, my alma mater, despite having a larger on-campus enrollment than GCU and a similar online presence, maybe a bit smaller, spends $17.4 million on athletics and $2.4 mil on basketball.

You could double CBU's men's basketball budget and they'd barely be ahead of GCU. You can double everyone else's MBB budget and they still trail by over a million.

So where does that money come from? How do they outspend every single one of their conference peers? Unlike the public institutions, private schools don't have to report their revenue numbers. No one but institution staff will know that number. But the reality is that because of their for-profit business entity, the money comes from being a diploma mill.

California Baptist is likely first in overall budget just based on being in an expensive metro area in the most expensive state in the country. The rest of the sports at GCU are on par with common budgets, usually in the higher end of the conference.

The Antelope Athletic Department is one of two WAC Universities to sponsor every men's sport and offers men's volleyball, and one of two to offer every women's sport, as well as beach volleyball. Seattle, ironically, is the other school to offer every sport, but only have one non-WAC sport, women's rowing.

That raises a big question as to why men's basketball is funded so far ahead of their peers. I've heard rumors that Jerry Colangelo is a reason, but call me skeptical. I don't know either way, but a now-former NBA owner doesn't seem likely to fork over millions every year to fund a non-Power 5 school in the same market.

Of course, there's the obvious answer. The online school sends a lot of money to the basketball team. 

Kudos to GCU on several things, not the least of which is student attendance. Somehow, they achieve that despite being in large metro area with all four major professional sport teams and two large P5 influences. In fact, it is such an outlier, that one has to wonder why they've succeeded where others have failed, especially one so new to Division I.

However, as it stands now, the funding mechanism gives GCU a huge advantage that is just not replicable. Add in the fact that there was such a huge bias in the whistles and my enthusiasm for the WAC is quite low. 

Let's look at it this way. What if UTA had never left the Southland Conference? Would volleyball have won a title and played in an NCAA Tournament match on the last decade? Their last one was in the early 2000's. Baseball made zero after winning the last season in the SLC. Softball won the NIVC but is still looking at one NCAA in their history. Only women's basketball has played in the NCAA postseason. Men's basketball made a great run in the middle of the teens, but fell short of the NCAA goal. 

At this point, is it far-fetched to think that the five team sports would have made more than one combined NCAA? Hard to believe UTA's chances are better going against a non-profit, diploma mill school. I've enjoyed renewing the rivalry with Stephen F. Austin and playing against very old former rivals in Tarleton State and Abilene Christian has pleased the older alums. I miss what we had w0ith Texas State, but SFA's renewal has been helpful in filling that void.

This post may have better been served in the summer, but the ending of the season was a bitter pill to swallow. I even toyed with the idea on Twitter of a hybrid conference of ten like-minded schools with a good travel pairing that historically could put the conference in the top half of men's basketball conferences. UTA/ACU, SFA/Northwestern State, Lamar/McNeese State, UT Rio Grande Valley/Texas A&M-Corpus Christi and Southeastern Louisiana/Nicholls St or New Orleans. Regional rivalries, no inherently unfair advantages. no obvious anchors or DII call-ups. I would have liked Tarleton in the mix, but they've made it clear that playing in the Bowl Subdivision is the end goal. 

As for the basketball team. K.T. Turner proved he could do it at the higher level. Given the state of the NCAA with the transfer portal and NIL, every year will likely be a rebuilding-type year and he proved his chops in the first year. I will miss watching Shemar Wilson, a household favorite in my household. Aaron Cash's smile and highlight dunks. 21 wins leads to anticipation of what's to come.

Now whether that means the Mavs can get over the hump remains to be seen.