-
Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.
Bradley schedule- BU to play Eastern Tennessee and SEMO
- Thread starter Da Coach
- Start date
Bradleyguy10
New member
Just a question...
I agree and understand that if we keep winning it'll be harder to schedule big guys like evansville just landed, but aren't there plenty of consistently good mid-majors that are exactly like us that wouldn't mind playing us. Or are we not scheduling those types of games because the big boys are going to boost us up a little even if we lose, and that won't be the case if we lose to another midmajor. Basically what I'm asking is would it be really terrible to schedule other mid-majors who are consistently good. Does the risk of losing outweigh the reward of winning, and thats why we don't ever schedule games like that? I'm genuinely asking...because I wouldn't mind seeing some good mid on mid games. I'd like playing VCU to continue. Shoot get Davidson in there, they have a good SOS. I like that we got Butler, but why can't we do more of this if its so tough to get BCS schools to play us....i'm curious
I agree and understand that if we keep winning it'll be harder to schedule big guys like evansville just landed, but aren't there plenty of consistently good mid-majors that are exactly like us that wouldn't mind playing us. Or are we not scheduling those types of games because the big boys are going to boost us up a little even if we lose, and that won't be the case if we lose to another midmajor. Basically what I'm asking is would it be really terrible to schedule other mid-majors who are consistently good. Does the risk of losing outweigh the reward of winning, and thats why we don't ever schedule games like that? I'm genuinely asking...because I wouldn't mind seeing some good mid on mid games. I'd like playing VCU to continue. Shoot get Davidson in there, they have a good SOS. I like that we got Butler, but why can't we do more of this if its so tough to get BCS schools to play us....i'm curious
It's a good question, but if it becomes widespread, I think the risk is creating a de facto mid-major league that feasts on each other, while the big boys remain unscathed....but as many have said, which bears repeating:
Play the best competition available. Anybody, Anywhere, Anytime.
I agree with your post.. Scheduling is difficult, by why not try to get a Davidson with a Curry,or a Gonzaga, Butler...et al.... My main concern would be to schedule mid-majors from a variety of conferences though...
Bradleyguy10
New member
Yeah I'm not saying only do this year in and year out...if we CAN get a BCS school then believe me I'm all for an upset (because we all know that's what it will be
), but if they are looking for a good team to play this season..my first thought would be to schedule a mid that you know to be good, and have 2-3 of them each year out of a 6-7 game nonconf. schedule.BradleyBrave
New member
BU is doing the best they can to put together a good schedule. Jim Les has never 'scheduled down' or loaded up with cupcakes to get an inflated record. While I did make mention last year that I wouldn't mind BU scheduling another winnable home game or two, I don't think that BU is taking that approach. There simply isn't much out there to schedule. I am confident that we'll land another decent game or two before it's all said and done.
Lakeview Brave
New member
The main point of a strong non-con is to get the team ready for the regular season and to have a strong resume for the NCAA. If we win the confernce season then we are in the NCAA and thats what we all want. Winning at home against the SEMO's of the world does nothing for us. Winning against Creightons,ISU, ect does.
chitown fanatic
New member
I am not at all confident we'll land another quality game....and by quality, I mean top 50 RPI...none of this 145rpi and 3rd in the 28th conf. cr*p!
BradleyBrave
New member
Trying to predict whether or not a team is going to be a Top 50 RPI team next year is impossible. I think most folks (myself included) would be content with a BCS 'name' program. Whether or not they were in the RPI top 50 or will end up there isn't that big of a big deal to me. Case in point - I don't think there would be anyone upset if we landed a series with DePaul (160) or Illinois (102), and neither of those programs were near the RPI top 50 last year. Indiana will be nowhere near the RPI top 50 this year, yet I think we'd take a series with them in a heartbeat. This regime has never intentionally 'scheduled down', and I don't think they're doing it this year.
You can look at Utah to see how a mid-major can get a great nonconference schedule:
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700241115,00.html
So what was Boylen's secret to producing such a strong home schedule in 2008-09?
"You have to go there first," he said. "We weren't afraid to do that ..."
Last year, the Utes went to Oregon, Cal and Gonzaga, and this year all three schools are returning to play at the Huntsman Center. This year, the Utes play at Oklahoma, and next year, the Sooners come to Utah. In 2009, the Utes go to Michigan, and the following year the Wolverines come to Utah. The Utes are hoping Gonzaga becomes an annual opponent.
I know I've posted about Utah before, but I'm really interested to watch them this season. They lose a great scorer in Johnnie Bryant, but they've otherwise got a nice team returning. I could realistically see them winning two out of three in those high-profile home games - Oregon, Cal, and Gonzaga - and you can be sure that wins like that would get them some national attention.
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700241115,00.html
So what was Boylen's secret to producing such a strong home schedule in 2008-09?
"You have to go there first," he said. "We weren't afraid to do that ..."
Last year, the Utes went to Oregon, Cal and Gonzaga, and this year all three schools are returning to play at the Huntsman Center. This year, the Utes play at Oklahoma, and next year, the Sooners come to Utah. In 2009, the Utes go to Michigan, and the following year the Wolverines come to Utah. The Utes are hoping Gonzaga becomes an annual opponent.
I know I've posted about Utah before, but I'm really interested to watch them this season. They lose a great scorer in Johnnie Bryant, but they've otherwise got a nice team returning. I could realistically see them winning two out of three in those high-profile home games - Oregon, Cal, and Gonzaga - and you can be sure that wins like that would get them some national attention.
MacabreMob
New member
So Utah is a Mid-Major.
I know they aren't BCS. But I thought many considered them a 'tweener in a 'tweener conference. But that's good to know now. Utah and the Mtn West Conference teams are Mid-Majors. Can the A10 and CUSA teams be called Mid-Majors too?
But seriously. When BCS schools schedule games with non-BCS schools, does anyone think Utah is considered Mid-Major? Going off and playing at Utah is higher profile than going off and playing at Murray St (for example).
I believe it is easier for Utah to get equal return games from BCS schools than someone like a Murray St. So to say Utah has the model of how a Mid-Major should schedule is kinda laughable to me. Yea, just tell the BCS schools you are willing to play there first and whalla - they'll schedule a return game no problem. Yea... right.
Macabre, I don't really understand what you are getting at. To me, Murray State isn't revelant to this discussion at all - wouldn't you consider them a low-major? I know the definition of "mid-major" is different to all people, so let's not get too hung up on the semantics.
I think Bradley and Utah are probably at similar levels in terms of program profile and quality. Do you think Utah is that much higher profile than Bradley? Is the Mountain West a better conference than the MVC?
You last point does stand, that you can't just wave a wand and get BCS teams to do a home-and-home with you. Still, Utah is an example of a non-BCS team that was able to get multiple high profile teams to come to their building. I'm not implying that it's easy, just that it's possible.
I think Bradley and Utah are probably at similar levels in terms of program profile and quality. Do you think Utah is that much higher profile than Bradley? Is the Mountain West a better conference than the MVC?
You last point does stand, that you can't just wave a wand and get BCS teams to do a home-and-home with you. Still, Utah is an example of a non-BCS team that was able to get multiple high profile teams to come to their building. I'm not implying that it's easy, just that it's possible.
MacabreMob
New member
I'd say Utah is on the higher end of Mid-Majors, so I used Murray St which is on the lower end of Mid-Majors. If they ain't BCS, they be Mid-Majors.
Now, when asking about Utah vs Bradley and MWC vs MVC - I was approaching it more of what BCS fans/ESPN/etc think of the comparisons. Going into Utah is higher profile and acceptable to lose to than going into and losing to Bradley..... to "them". It would show up on the ESPN screen as a "bad loss" losing at Bradley but not get a mention if a loss at Utah.
So... it is easier IMO for Utah to get Home-n-Home series than Bradley. Saying Bradley just needs to follow Utah's model for scheduling is kinda laughable to me.
IMO there are 6 main scheduling strategies coaches use to varying degrees:
1) Confidence-building. Your program's a trainwreck or your team is very young. Schedule abnormally light to instill confidence early through experiencing success. Everyone's favorite punching back Eustachy has used this to turn Southern Miss into an upper-divison CUSA team over the last couple years.
2) Murderous. You think you have a pretty good team. Throw them up against the best to see what you're made of. Temple under John Chaney fell into this category.
3) Styles. You seek out a wide variety of styles of play or try to emulate styles you will see in conference play.
4) Coffer-padding. The U. expects you to bring in a certain $ amount in gate receipts. You are forced to find teams willing to play buy games at your place. Or the opposite, you look at how much you can pad your athletic departments coffers by playing a steady diet of buy games. Most BCS and bottom-tier (MEAC, SWAC) conference members fall into this group.
5) Resume building. A balanced mix of demanding home and road games, anticipate who the teams are that will contend for league titles or postseason bids and find a way to play them. Molinari definitely fell into this category.
6) Thrown together. Numerous conflicts force numerous late changes.
Unfortunately, I am afraid BU's this year is falling into the #6 category. There can still be some games to be had. For instance, Syracuse usually has a home date open this late that Wichita and UIC have grabbed up the last few seasons.
But I also think this is a by-product of getting involved in too many multi-year deals as you don't anticipate needing opponents. Moving forward, we should have no more than 2 multi-year deals with Horizon teams at any given time.
Dave Reynolds posted this on the PJS site concerning BU's scheduling.
http://www2.pjstar.com/index.php?/reynolds/article/bu_scheduling_woes/
http://www2.pjstar.com/index.php?/reynolds/article/bu_scheduling_woes/
MacabreMob
New member
No - go ahead and use it when you think it fits.
Then let discussion flow from it. Let the debates occur. Maybe we both (all) learn from it.
Bradley is a Mid-Major in a Mid-Major conference and it doesn't bother me to say/admit it.
But to point out how "easy" it is for Utah (or Gonzaga or Memphis or Xavier or Butler) to schedule H-n-H's and we should just follow their gameplan is laughable.
C'mon now... I am talking with an Illini fan here.
