If there is a reason that the Valley is ahead of the MAC, its because some of its programs are in large metro areas that generate big dollars. If that were the case in the MAC and dollars generated were siphoned off into football, you might have an argument. And the Valley hasn't surpassed the MAC. It was better 10 years ago and is better now. Stop with the revisionist history of the MAC.
I'm not so much worried about the Valley, as I am about the Colonial, Horizon, and upper echelons of the Summit overtaking the MAC. While the CAA and Horizon were competitive with the MAC historically when their strong years coincided with a down year in the MAC, today those conferences have surpassed the MAC. Particularly distressing is the fact that the Horizon has passed us by to become the premier mid-major league in our region.
For example, in 1998-99 the MAC was the 11th rated conference by RPI, while the Horizon was 15th and the Colonial 17th. In 1999-2000 the MAC was 12th, the Horizon 13th, and the Colonial 16th. Meanwhile, in the last three years we've seen a complete reversal. In 2008-2009, the Horizon was 12th, the CAA 14th, and the MAC 21st in conference RPI. In 2009-2010, the CAA was 12th, the Horizon 14th, and the MAC 16th. So far this year, the CAA is 8th, the Horizon 12th, and the MAC 17th. According to Ken Pomeroy's ratings, we haven't finished ahead of the Horizon as a conference since 2005.
I'm not sure where to readily find the historical budgetary data you'd need, but I'm willing to bet that our basketball spending simply has not kept pace with the CAA, Horizon, and upper-level of the Summit over the last decade. And I'll also bet dollars to donuts that during that same period MAC schools have increased their football budgets by an amount roughly on par (and likely more than) the gap between our basketball spending on the other mid-majors in our region.