ISU Hosting Exempt Tourney Next Season

[houstontxbrave]

Do you see a big difference between Iowa and Chicago State?

Iowa 13-19 RPI 192 Chicago State 8-17 RPI 213

Don't get caught up in "name recognition" or conference affiliation when determining a team's power. Louisiana-Monroe beat Iowa and beat them in Iowa City too. Not that you guys are fans of KW, but wasn't he the one who said something like "IF I have one more Bradley fan tell it was Huge win beating Iowa, I am going to puke"

Ball State was a return game from the BracketBuster from 2007. Can't do anything about them. (think of it the same way you guys had to return the game with NIU back in 2005)

The D2 game is a joke. No way to even try and debate that. But just 2 years ago Bradley did play SIU-Edwardsville. And a few years past that, didn't BU play Arkansas Monticello?


That wouldn't have changed the fact that we didn't beat a single team in the NCAA field. And it wouldn't have made our record any better than what it was against the top 50 (2-5)


You think the reason ISU didn't get in was it's 117 non-conference RPI?

I guess they didn't apply that to these schools and their non-conference RPI's:

St. Joes 119
Baylor 131
Miami (FLA) 144
West Va 157
Nova 159
Oregon 167
Clemson 183
Texas A&M 224

ISU didn't get in because they didn't beat a single tourney team. I believe they were 0-5 against them. They also only had 2 wins against the top 50. (in 7 chances)

Yes I think your teams 117 RPI was a very strong factor for not getting an NCAA atlarge bid.

Fine you make all kinds of points, my orginal post was based on the fact you thought it was a great idea to come here and answer where Winston Salem State was focusing on two teams BU played in the San Padre tourney, not two teams that BU scheduled out of choice. You want to point out two weak teams BU played, but did not choose to schedule, thats fine, but I am pointing out ISU's big time weak schedule, and how much stronger BU's was.

The numbers might only be a 17 difference but it was a difference and it was a huge contibuting factor as to why ISU played in the NIT.

All of your great information is fine, the bottom line with everything is BU played a better, more competitive schedule then ISU did last season, the poor scheduling, regardless of what you think, was a major factor in why ISU played in the NIT. Ill give you the 0-5 v NCAA teams, but if ISU doesnt schedule so soft that number might not have been as big a factor.

You might not play the name card but Im a sorry but when someone looks at your schedule and sees Iowa State and Iowa they are automatically going to think thats going to be more fun to see and give you more respect then scheduling Eastern Michigan, Chicago State, UMSL etc.

And regardless of the you dont play the name game, apparently someone does if we use non conference RPI as a determining factor for NCAA at large births, because every school you named above is BCS other then St Joes and they are east coast. Dont be naive who you play or who you are in name can be extremely important.

 

[Bravesfan]

Actually scheduling D2 teams does not kill one's RPI or SOS because those games don't count toward the RPI or SOS. The only drawback is that it gives teams fewer D1 teams to play and thus fewer chances to beat quality opponents. But I would rather see Bradley or any other Valley team schedule a D2 game here or there rather than an RPI killing D1 game against Chicago St or Nichols St. Obviously it would be better to schedule more Butlers or Wisconsin's if given the opportunity, but at least a D2 game won't kill a team's rankings like playing the "quality" schedule ISU has in this tourney.

 

[Bravesfan]

Yes I think your teams 117 RPI was a very strong factor for not getting an NCAA atlarge bid.

Fine you make all kinds of points, my orginal post was based on the fact you thought it was a great idea to come here and answer where Winston Salem State was focusing on two teams BU played in the San Padre tourney, not two teams that BU scheduled out of choice. You want to point out two weak teams BU played, but did not choose to schedule, thats fine, but I am pointing out ISU's big time weak schedule, and how much stronger BU's was.

The numbers might only be a 17 difference but it was a difference and it was a huge contibuting factor as to why ISU played in the NIT.

All of your great information is fine, the bottom line with everything is BU played a better, more competitive schedule then ISU did last season, the poor scheduling, regardless of what you think, was a major factor in why ISU played in the NIT. Ill give you the 0-5 v NCAA teams, but if ISU doesnt schedule so soft that number might not have been as big a factor.

You might not play the name card but Im a sorry but when someone looks at your schedule and sees Iowa State and Iowa they are automatically going to think thats going to be more fun to see and give you more respect then scheduling Eastern Michigan, Chicago State, UMSL etc.

And regardless of the you dont play the name game, apparently someone does if we use non conference RPI as a determining factor for NCAA at large births, because every school you named above is BCS other then St Joes and they are east coast. Dont be naive who you play or who you are in name can be extremely important.

BU's situation was different though. BU played these teams to get a shot at Vanderbilt. Plus they had a difficult schedule otherwise, which in all fairness, maybe ISU does too. We just have to wait and see what the rest of their non-conference schedule looks like.

 

[Da Coach]

They also only had 2 wins against the top 50. (in 7 chances)

It didn't help that those only 2 wins against top 50 teams were the 2 wins against Creighton, who was just barely inside the top 50.

 

[dogsrus]

They are located near Marlyand-Eastern Shore and Florida Gulf Coast.

Yes in SOME tournaments you have to "give a little" to get something bigger. Most tourneys include some cupcakes.....few have ALL cupcakes.

 

[dogsrus]

Do you see a big difference between Iowa and Chicago State?

IF ISU had a 2 games on a Saturday nite, one being Chicago State and one being Iowa which one would draw better in Normal?

Aren't you guys trying to bring the fans back......thats MY only beef. Actually I don't care who you play...its your schools perogative. But if BU was drawing 4-5-6 K like ISU has for several years I would be less then thrilled for a tournament like this.

 

[cpacmel]

Yes I think your teams 117 RPI was a very strong factor for not getting an NCAA atlarge bid.

Fine you make all kinds of points, my orginal post was based on the fact you thought it was a great idea to come here and answer where Winston Salem State was focusing on two teams BU played in the San Padre tourney, not two teams that BU scheduled out of choice. You want to point out two weak teams BU played, but did not choose to schedule, thats fine, but I am pointing out ISU's big time weak schedule, and how much stronger BU's was.

Well my orginal point was to show that Winston-Salem State and Nicholls State would not bring down the Conference's RPI anymore than Fla Gulf and Maryland ES did. And that was to answer BRAVESFAN (see post #6 in this thread)

Also if Bradley's schedule was soo much stronger as you claim, why was it only 21 spots higher than ISU's?

The numbers might only be a 17 difference but it was a difference and it was a huge contibuting factor as to why ISU played in the NIT.

All of your great information is fine, the bottom line with everything is BU played a better, more competitive schedule then ISU did last season, the poor scheduling, regardless of what you think, was a major factor in why ISU played in the NIT. Ill give you the 0-5 v NCAA teams, but if ISU doesnt schedule so soft that number might not have been as big a factor.

ISU played 5 tourney teams to Bradley's 5.

ISU played - Kent State, Indiana, Drake (3)
BU palyed - Michigan State, Butler, Vandy and Drake (2)

You might not play the name card but Im a sorry but when someone looks at your schedule and sees Iowa State and Iowa they are automatically going to think thats going to be more fun to see and give you more respect then scheduling Eastern Michigan, Chicago State, UMSL etc.

I have seen Iowa and Iowa State play last year. They were no more fun to watch than EMU or Chicago State.

You give them respect because they are from a BCS conference. That doesn't make them better.

In a way, it's sad that you think that.

And regardless of the you dont play the name game, apparently someone does if we use non conference RPI as a determining factor for NCAA at large births, because every school you named above is BCS other then St Joes and they are east coast. Dont be naive who you play or who you are in name can be extremely important.

Had ISU played Iowa and Iowa State instead of Chicago State and say Bowling Green, do you really think that would have made a difference in the eyes of the committee? All of the teams were around 200 in the RPI. When they are that bad, even in their BCS names can't help them. If you think beating Iowa and Iowa State is big because of their names, you my friend are the naive one.

 

[cpacmel]

It didn't help that those only 2 wins against top 50 teams were the 2 wins against Creighton, who was just barely inside the top 50.

Barely inside the top 50 doesn't matter. They were still inside the top 50.

BU had a non-conference SOS of 96. That is top 100 right? Or should it be *** because it is just barely inside the top 100?

 

[cpacmel]

Yes in SOME tournaments you have to "give a little" to get something bigger. Most tourneys include some cupcakes.....few have ALL cupcakes.

I don't think ISU has any control over who is in this tourney. They are simply hosting it. Basketball Travelers sets the field. Cal-SB was a pretty good team last year. (22-8 RPI of 89)

When did you guys host Iowa?

Sure people would rather see Iowa over Chicago State. There is doubt about that. BUT in term's of their strengths and resume building is there much difference between the 2? Looking at the #'s, I don't think so.

And I don't think ISU fans are really thrilled with this tourney. But that wasn't the debate here. The debate here was how these games would hurt the Valley's Conference SOS.

And in reality, they shouldn't hurt anymore than Fla Gulf Coast or UM-ES

 

[dogsrus]

Sure people would rather see Iowa over Chicago State. There is doubt about that.

Thats my point......ISU could draw 10k for Iowa where as they get 4-5k for C. State. And when you are struggling for butts in the seats......

 

[cpacmel]

Sure people would rather see Iowa over Chicago State. There is doubt about that.

Thats my point......ISU could draw 10k for Iowa where as they get 4-5k for C. State. And when you are struggling for butts in the seats......

You think Iowa would play at Redbird Arena?

 

[houstontxbrave]

Well my orginal point was to show that Winston-Salem State and Nicholls State would not bring down the Conference's RPI anymore than Fla Gulf and Maryland ES did. And that was to answer BRAVESFAN (see post #6 in this thread)

Also if Bradley's schedule was soo much stronger as you claim, why was it only 21 spots higher than ISU's?

The numbers might only be a 17 difference but it was a difference and it was a huge contibuting factor as to why ISU played in the NIT.




ISU played 5 tourney teams to Bradley's 5.

ISU played - Kent State, Indiana, Drake (3)
BU palyed - Michigan State, Butler, Vandy and Drake (2)


I have seen Iowa and Iowa State play last year. They were no more fun to watch than EMU or Chicago State.

You give them respect because they are from a BCS conference. That doesn't make them better.

In a way, it's sad that you think that.


Had ISU played Iowa and Iowa State instead of Chicago State and say Bowling Green, do you really think that would have made a difference in the eyes of the committee? All of the teams were around 200 in the RPI. When they are that bad, even in their BCS names can't help them. If you think beating Iowa and Iowa State is big because of their names, you my friend are the naive one.

I think if ISU would have played anyone with a name that was recognized and was not chicago State, etc then yes they would have both had a better RPI and a better chance to have been an atlarge selection.

But the more I think about this back and forth, its really no business of mine to talk about ISU's schedule. If they choose to schedule the sisters of the poor or whomever thats their choice. But that type of scheduling in the MVC not only effects the overall perception of their program but also that of the Valley's in the eyes of the National Media.

I dont respect Iowa State or Iowa because they are BCS, what I respect is that they have a name program that is recognized nationally. Sorry but nearly anyone will look at Iowa State and Iowa and immediately recognize the names, even if RPI doesnt care, those who talk about non conferences schedules are less likely to critize a schedule with Iowa and Iowa State then they are to with a schedule made up of Chicago State, UNC Wilmington etc. Even it the RPI does not care about names the media certainly does as do most fan bases. And no matter what anyone says, the media does influence the selection of NCAA teams. Theres a reason the teams you previously mentioned with higher RPI's the ISU got in as atlarges and ISU didnt.

If ESPN sits and talks about ISU's non conference schedule and see who they played, they are more likely to hammer about how soft it was, but if there are names, regardless of the names overall record, that schedule probably will be critized but it will be noted that ISU went out and played teams that were from BCS conferences and they would atleast be congratulated for attempting to play name teams. The name on the front of a jersey matters bigtime.

 

[Da Coach]

Another factor is that these games are scheduled 1 or sometimes 2 or 3 years ahead of when they are played. But the RPI that counts against you is that team's RPI the season you play them. That is sometimes hard to predict, and sometimes it's not.

When you schedule Chicago State, or the like, you know they will have a poor RPI, no matter how for into the future you play them. When Bradley scheduled Iowa State, and when they agreed to the SPI Tournament against Iowa, there was an expectation those teams could be good and have good RPIs. That's why it's silly to compare Bradley playing Iowa State, with ISU scheduling Nicholls State and Winston-Salem State next year.

 

[cpacmel]

I think if ISU would have played anyone with a name that was recognized and was not chicago State, etc then yes they would have both had a better RPI and a better chance to have been an atlarge selection.

RPI means very little anymore. It's silly to even bring that up. Mo State (#21) proved that.

But the more I think about this back and forth, its really no business of mine to talk about ISU's schedule. If they choose to schedule the sisters of the poor or whomever thats their choice. But that type of scheduling in the MVC not only effects the overall perception of their program but also that of the Valley's in the eyes of the National Media.

Houstontxbrave, we are just having a friendly debate. There is no anger or ill will in our replies.

ISU didn't schedule much different than Bradley last year. You fail to see this and fail to realize it. The numbers don't lie. We can go back and forth and go *** for tat, but in the end, the numbers are not much different in regards to the 2 team's schedules of last season.

And to prove that, let's look at overall SOS:

Illinois State #71
Bradley #75

Try if you can, to spin that one, my friend.

Theres a reason the teams you previously mentioned with higher RPI's the ISU got in as atlarges and ISU didnt.

Yes there is. They all beat teams in the tourney and had more wins against the top 50 than ISU did.

If ESPN sits and talks about ISU's non conference schedule and see who they played, they are more likely to hammer about how soft it was, but if there are names, regardless of the names overall record, that schedule probably will be critized but it will be noted that ISU went out and played teams that were from BCS conferences and they would atleast be congratulated for attempting to play name teams. The name on the front of a jersey matters bigtime.

During the weeks leading up to selection Sunday, I probably watched more ESPN and other college basketball, than humanly possible. I also read online more articles from every corner of the globe on bubble team's chances of making the Big Dance than I should have.

I didn't see much talk about ISU being hammered for playing a soft schedule. I did see them get hammered for not beating teams that would be dancing. (kent state, indiana, Drake) or having enough top 50 wins to compare positively to other bubble teams. (2 top 50 wins in 7 chances)

I am curious how Bradley could have scheduled soo tough, especially as compared to ISU, but than their SOS #'s are only 96 and 117 respectively.
You would think that there would be a HUGE margin between the 2 to prove that point, but there isn't. Weird.

 

[cpacmel]

When you schedule Chicago State, or the like, you know they will have a poor RPI, no matter how for into the future you play them.

Did Bradley play Chicago State a few seasons go? Same with Bowling Green? Loyola (IL)? UIC? SEMO? Seems over the recent past, we have played a lot of the same foes.

When Bradley scheduled Iowa State, and when they agreed to the SPI Tournament against Iowa, there was an expectation those teams could be good and have good RPIs.

Why is that? Iowa just got a new coach (alford didn't leave much either for lick) and Iowa State really hasn't been good since 2001. Is that when the contract was signed? 7 years ago?

That's why it's silly to compare Bradley playing Iowa State, with ISU scheduling Nicholls State and Winston-Salem State next year.

But it isn't silly to compare them to Fla Gulf Coast or Maryland ES.

 

[houstontxbrave]

I agree cp that the RPI numbers are not that far apart but would you not agree that a 96 non conference RPI would have looked much better then a 117?

Regardless of the numbers though I still believe Bradley played a much more difficult non conference schedule. Bradleys biggest problem is they didnt win any of the games that they played. If BU goes and wins versus MSU, Vanderbilt that makes them 19-15 overall and possibily still in bubble talk.

I sincerely believe if ISU would have had Iowa and Iowa State on their schedule instead of Chicago State and UMSL. If they would have won both the Iowa games, even with the 0-5 versus the top 50 they would have been an NCAA participant. Even if the numbers would not have varied much, the eyeball test so to speak would have looked better. I think teams even if the BCS opponent is not of record quality, the fact the non BCS played the BCS even if likely it is on the road says a lot and says a heck of a lot more then playing weak D 1 schools. Especially by choice.

I just believe that ISU really hurt themselves this past season by scheduling so softly, and with the announced tourney and its teams it appears they still are leaning towards a softer schedule.

I completely understand that D1 scheduling is very difficult especially in the MVC where few if any BCS's will venture, and I do not completely agree with all the Horizon league teams BU played this season but that type of scheduling kept the Chicago States off of the schedule. Teams like ISU and BU have to do what they can to get the BCS's but I think have to look at scheduling teams from like conferences.

I would bet in retrospect if Jank was asked he would have even played a couple of buy games versus the home games that were scheduled non conference last season, he would take a buy at Iowa rather then take a home win versus Chicago State. Losing one BCS on the road competitively I think speaks volumnes over one home win versus a weak non competitive team.

 

[real fan]

The major problem with this tour. comes more from the fans as you hate to pay $$$ for games against opponents that if you don"t beat by a huge margin it does not look good plus I as a fan hate to see games against teams you know that you should win by 30 points; I know it is hard to schedule big name teams but it is a lot more exciting game day to know your opponent is a Michigan State then a Chicago State or Western Illinois.

 

[houstontxbrave]

The major problem with this tour. comes more from the fans as you hate to pay $$$ for games against opponents that if you don"t beat by a huge margin it does not look good plus I as a fan hate to see games against teams you know that you should win by 30 points; I know it is hard to schedule big name teams but it is a lot more exciting game day to know your opponent is a Michigan State then a Chicago State or Western Illinois.

A few years ago I drove over to ISU to watch them play Utah St. Knowing Utah St was a good team and it was a competitve basketball game. And it was not a bad crowd. People will come out to watch good basketball, die hards come out to watch Chicago State.

Your not going to get Michigan State every night but getting Butler, University of Houston, Utah State, Pepperdine etc is obtainable and much better for your fan base and for the strength of your program.

 

[cpacmel]

I agree cp that the RPI numbers are not that far apart but would you not agree that a 96 non conference RPI would have looked much better then a 117?

Of course 96 looks better than 117, but it's not much better. It's marginally better.

Regardless of the numbers though I still believe Bradley played a much more difficult non conference schedule. Bradleys biggest problem is they didnt win any of the games that they played. If BU goes and wins versus MSU, Vanderbilt that makes them 19-15 overall and possibily still in bubble talk.

I think this is where BU Bias comes in. And all one has to do is look at the numbers to see as much.

First of all, and I don't mean this literally, but you are completely Delusional if you think Bradley is ANYWHERE near the bubble at 19-15. BU plays in the MVC, not the SEC.

Do the numbers all of a sudden lie? I know numbers can be used in any way to show your side of things, but I don't know how it applies here, when both team's SOS for the year are nearly identical and their non-conference #'s are 21 spots away from one another.

I sincerely believe if ISU would have had Iowa and Iowa State on their schedule instead of Chicago State and UMSL. If they would have won both the Iowa games, even with the 0-5 versus the top 50 they would have been an NCAA participant. Even if the numbers would not have varied much, the eyeball test so to speak would have looked better. I think teams even if the BCS opponent is not of record quality, the fact the non BCS played the BCS even if likely it is on the road says a lot and says a heck of a lot more then playing weak D 1 schools. Especially by choice.

We will have to agree to disagree here. Beating the cellar dwellars, even from the BCS conferences doesn't help much. As Jay Bias says "everyone in their conferences are beating Iowa and Iowa State, why is such a big deal when Drake or UNI does it"

I just believe that ISU really hurt themselves this past season by scheduling so softly, and with the announced tourney and its teams it appears they still are leaning towards a softer schedule.

I completely understand that D1 scheduling is very difficult especially in the MVC where few if any BCS's will venture, and I do not completely agree with all the Horizon league teams BU played this season but that type of scheduling kept the Chicago States off of the schedule. Teams like ISU and BU have to do what they can to get the BCS's but I think have to look at scheduling teams from like conferences.

You guys just played Chicago State in 2006. They are not all that far removed from BU's schedule.

I would bet in retrospect if Jank was asked he would have even played a couple of buy games versus the home games that were scheduled non conference last season, he would take a buy at Iowa rather then take a home win versus Chicago State. Losing one BCS on the road competitively I think speaks volumnes over one home win versus a weak non competitive team.

There you ago again with the BCS thing.

Losing to Iowa would have done wonders over a home win over Chicago State?

With that comment, I will bow out of this debate. I just can't see how losing to a school with an RPI of 192 is better for the resume than pounding a team with an RPI of 213 at home. Sorry.

 

[Da Coach]

Did Bradley play Chicago State a few seasons go? Same with Bowling Green? Loyola (IL)? UIC? SEMO? Seems over the recent past, we have played a lot of the same foes.



Why is that? Iowa just got a new coach (alford didn't leave much either for lick) and Iowa State really hasn't been good since 2001. Is that when the contract was signed? 7 years ago?



But it isn't silly to compare them to Fla Gulf Coast or Maryland ES.

Come on, now you are the one acting delusional.

There is only 1 reason a school schedules WS State or Nicholls State at home. You want an easy win, and you don't care if it hurts your RPI.

Florida Gulf Coast and Maryland ES were not scheduled by Bradley. They were scheduled by the SPI people. And there was a tradeoff- Bradley got to play teams like Iowa and Vanderbilt from conferences rated higher than the MVC. Tell me what ISU's tradeoff is for playing the cupcakes they are getting.... there isn't one. They will take an RPI hit, and it will affect all the other MVC schools. Maybe Jankovich doesn't care. He won't have 25 wins next year, so maybe it won't keep them out of the NCAA like it did last year. The lack of quality wins and the RPI hit from playing too many non-conference cupcakes was the reason ISU played in the NIT. Sorry, but the truth hurts.

I know it's hard for MVC teams to get anyone from power conferences to play them at home. But to add extra exempt games against these high-RPI teams, with no benefit of a chance to play a better team is going to hurt ISU. They would be better off just playing fewer games.