ISU Hosting Exempt Tourney Next Season

[houstontxbrave]

CP,

Yes if BU has non conference wins versus MSU and Vanderbilt and the record was 19-15 I do believe those two wins would have put Bradley in atleast bubble talk. I didnt say they would be on the right side of the bubble but in bubble talk. In that seniero the bubble talk would have evaporated with the quarterfinal loss to CU, but before that with injuries and if those two wins would have occured they would have had that talk.

We are going to have to disagree on the RPI difference if it would have made any impact for ISU, I really think it would have but you dont so there you have that.

If you think Jank would not have traded a chance at a BCS, yes even at Iowa for a chance to get Chicago State off the schedule then I think that is crazy. More chance of wins v BCS the better.

I really dont know what the non conference SOS was for BU or ISU but I can read and when I read at Butler, MSU, VCU, Vanderbilt, Iowa, and Iowa State. That reads much more impressive then UMSL, Chicago State, Cinn, E Michigan, Ball State. But I must have BU red glasses on because the schedules apparently are nearly identical.

Without being able to go back to talk of the 2006 schedule I am certain no one is real happy with Chicago State on a schedule and having someone of that poor standing on a schedule is not a good thing ever. I am sure it is at times unavoidable but I can we agree it would be better for everyone to schedule Iowa rather then Chicago State even if Iowa is holding up the big ten?

Ill bow out of this also, Im BU biased and **** proud of it

 

[BU Firsty]

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.

You are absolutely correct. A DII team (one) is far better to schedule than a 300+ RPI DI team. While it does take away from the win total, it will not crush your (and the conference's) RPI and SOS.

 

[cpacmel]

Okay you boys pulled me back into this.

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.

Um, yeah ISU didn't schedule WS State and Nicholls State at home. ISU offered to host a tourney run by Basketball Travelers. They, like Bradley were at the mercy of the organizers of the tourney.

The only difference is, ISU is hosting, while Bradley played in South Padre.

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.

The tradeoff could be, they get to play Cal-SB. (22 wins and an RPI of 89 last year)

And most people I have talked to, that are ISU fans aren't thrilled with foes coming for this tourney.

Speaking of trade offs, ISU did one last year, to get a chance at Indiana and Kent State, they played UNC-WIL and SEMO.

I noticed BU scheduled SEMO. What was the trade-off for scheduling them again? Or was that contract signed when SEMO was good, with the expectation they would be good when they played BU? I think SEMO was last good in 2000. So again, a contract that was signed 7 years ago?

They will take an RPI hit, and it will affect all the other MVC schools.

Just as the MVC took a hit when BU played FLA GC and Maryland ES. This has already been covered.

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.

Maybe we shouldn't even play next season, since you already know what it is going to happen.

Weren't you one who predicted that ISU would not finish ahead of BU this past season? Did you BOOK THAT prediction?

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 didn't know you sat on the committee. Thanks for the heads up. But you will be okay if I think differently, yes?

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.

Excuse my language here, but ISU has tried to limit the amount of times it "wenchs" itself out to the Big Boys. That's why you don't see us signing 2 for 1's or going to places for guaranttee games.

Maybe that's the wrong approach to take, but that is their policy for equal footing. If there is such a thing.

 

[cpacmel]

CP,

Yes if BU has non conference wins versus MSU and Vanderbilt and the record was 19-15 I do believe those two wins would have put Bradley in atleast bubble talk. I didnt say they would be on the right side of the bubble but in bubble talk. In that seniero the bubble talk would have evaporated with the quarterfinal loss to CU, but before that with injuries and if those two wins would have occured they would have had that talk.

When was the last time a Valley team with 15 losses was even near the bubble for an AT-LARGE bid though? Maybe in a BCS conference, but not the MVC. It's sad it has to be that way, but it is.

Remember the MVC is a conference that is known for getting snubbed. No way in heck any MVC team is even considered with 15 losses. NONE.

We are going to have to disagree on the RPI difference if it would have made any impact for ISU, I really think it would have but you dont so there you have that.

Yeah. That's cool. Agree to disagree.

If you think Jank would not have traded a chance at a BCS, yes even at Iowa for a chance to get Chicago State off the schedule then I think that is crazy. More chance of wins v BCS the better.

Not without a return game.

I really dont know what the non conference SOS was for BU or ISU but I can read and when I read at Butler, MSU, VCU, Vanderbilt, Iowa, and Iowa State. That reads much more impressive then UMSL, Chicago State, Cinn, E Michigan, Ball State.

It's funny you list all of BU's best teams on their schedule, but you don't do the same for ISU. :|

ISU also played Indiana (NCAA tourney team), Kent State (NCAA tourney team)

Also on the schedule were: Wright State and Cincy. I'll include Wright State because you included VCU, even though technically you guys didn't schedule VCU. (BB return game)

Also I think most people would look at Iowa and Iowa State these days and not consider them great or even good teams. But you continue to list them proudly. Yes they have name recognition because of their conference, but use the eyeball test with them. They aren't good. Their record wasn't good. Their RPI's weren't good and their play on the court wasn't good either.

But I must have BU red glasses on because the schedules apparently are nearly identical.

Yes they are very close. I didn't make up the Non-conference SOS's #.

I'll ask you this though. ISU has an overall SOS of 71, and BU's is 77.

How can that be explained? ISU played Drake a 3rd time, but also played UNI a 3rd time, while BU played the Jays 3 times.

If BU's schedule was soooo much tougher than ISU's, why don't the numbers show that?

It's a mystery.

Without being able to go back to talk of the 2006 schedule I am certain no one is real happy with Chicago State on a schedule and having someone of that poor standing on a schedule is not a good thing ever. I am sure it is at times unavoidable but I can we agree it would be better for everyone to schedule Iowa rather then Chicago State even if Iowa is holding up the big ten?

I think every year there are a few teams on everyone's schedule that fans wish weren't there.

Ill bow out of this also, Im BU biased and **** proud of it

That's cool. Atleast your honest about it.

Thanks for the civil debate. I know I am tired of this quoting thing.

 

[Rusty 54]

With that comment, I will bow out of this debate.

We were all so hopeful.

 

[Chico]

I can't believe I sat here and read this entire thread. After doing so I have to say I have the same opinion after reading the last post as I did after reading the first one. Who cares who ISU has on their schedule?

 

[Bravesfan]

All I can say to ISU is good luck in the CBI next year!