• 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.

MVC Media Day...

Da Coach said:
One other small bit of news from yesterday's media day that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere- Commissioner Doug Elgin announced there is a small change in the BracketBusters setup. The return games from this year's BracketBusters games will not be played next year, but 2 years into the future. Because teams alternate home and away in the BB, it means each year they have either 2 home games or 2 away games, which can complicate scheduling. With the new setup, teams would have one home game and one road game each season in the BracketBuster.
Click to expand...

Won't that leave a gap with only one Bracketbuster game next year and no "return" game being played (until the year after)?
 
Da Coach said:
Because teams alternate home and away in the BB, it means each year they have either 2 home games or 2 away games, which can complicate scheduling. With the new setup, teams would have one home game and one road game each season in the BracketBuster.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you are getting that teams alternate home and away in the BB, but it isn't accurate. Creighton played at home last year (vs. George Mason) and plays at home again this year. In fact, in the whole history of the bracket buster I can only remember a couple of Creighton road games (Oral Roberts two years ago and Kent St a long time ago).
 
ESPN has said they try to schedule teams so that they alternate home and away games every alternate year. It isn't always possible to accomodate that goal, since there are different teams participating each year, though I think it has worked that way for the majority of teams.
But in every case, the teams agree that when they play a team at home in the BB, they will schedule them on the road the next year, and vice versa.
 
Da Coach said:
One other small bit of news from yesterday's media day that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere- Commissioner Doug Elgin announced there is a small change in the BracketBusters setup. The return games from this year's BracketBusters games will not be played next year, but 2 years into the future. Because teams alternate home and away in the BB, it means each year they have either 2 home games or 2 away games, which can complicate scheduling. With the new setup, teams would have one home game and one road game each season in the BracketBuster.
Click to expand...

Makes complete sense from a scheduling standpoint, but I'm leery of the idea of having to potentially commit to an opponent 2 seasons in advance. I sure wouldn't want to earn a top home game last year with, say, Davidson, and then have to travel there 2 years later when they're worse.

I suppose this helps those in the lower echelons of D-1, but I almost think it's better for the Valley's take if there was no return game to begin with.
 
Some of the top mid-majors have dropped BB all together because it is not doing what it was stated to do. I'm not a big fan of the teams we have had to play.
 
SFP said:
Some of the top mid-majors have dropped BB all together because it is not doing what it was stated to do. I'm not a big fan of the teams we have had to play.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly...


As it always seems we have a 2-3 game slide right before they select BB and we get shafted because of that along with the combination of lack of quality opponents outside the conference
 
SFP said:
Some of the top mid-majors have dropped BB all together because it is not doing what it was stated to do. I'm not a big fan of the teams we have had to play.
Click to expand...

But it might be better than the Idaho State, Wofford,Presbyterian,Loyola and Western Carolina. If we play well we would get a better opponent right?
 
DoubleJayAlum said:
I'm not sure where you are getting that teams alternate home and away in the BB, but it isn't accurate. Creighton played at home last year (vs. George Mason) and plays at home again this year. In fact, in the whole history of the bracket buster I can only remember a couple of Creighton road games (Oral Roberts two years ago and Kent St a long time ago).
Click to expand...

I've read that somewhere as well. Teams were to play home then away alternating years. So there coulda been a renewing of the 2 years that put some home games back to back in the event (away then home... then home and away).

I believe the 1st year for the event, Creighton already had a series with Fresno St so they scheduled the game to be part of the BB. They then played @ Kent followed by home vs Chattanooga. They then got back-to-back home games (Fresno again and then Drexel). That was followed by @ ORU and then home vs Geo Mason. Now starting a new 2 year cycle... with a home game first.

But so looking at Creighton's games in the BB the past 7 years - you are right. They have played 5 at home and 2 on the road. Imagine that - preferential treatment for Creighton. :roll: :lol:
 
I don't think ESPN gives a flying flip about who is at home and who is on the road. Why would they? Their interest is in putting together match-ups which create a buzz and will draw good ratings numbers. If, in fact, there is some sort of preference on the part of ESPN, my bet would be that they would prefer to have the games in packed arenas rather than half empty venues simply because it makes for better TV.
 
lefty said:
But it might be better than the Idaho State, Wofford,Presbyterian,Loyola and Western Carolina. If we play well we would get a better opponent right?
Click to expand...

I agree that if we played better at the right time, then we should get a better Bracketbuster opponent. That is not completely out of our hands. However, I don't understand why people bring up Wofford and Presbyterian when talking about our "bad" home schedule this year. Without those two teams, we wouldn't have Oklahoma State and Illinois or Utah on the schedule at all!
 
DoubleJayAlum said:
I don't think ESPN gives a flying flip about who is at home and who is on the road. Why would they? Their interest is in putting together match-ups which create a buzz and will draw good ratings numbers. If, in fact, there is some sort of preference on the part of ESPN, my bet would be that they would prefer to have the games in packed arenas rather than half empty venues simply because it makes for better TV.
Click to expand...

Ok - agreed.

But you can't convince me Creighton gets preferential treatment based on ESPN wanting a packed big house in Omaha.

Heck, ISU played on ESPN2 (or whatever, an ESPN BracketBuster game last year) in a packed little house of 2100 at Niagara. Vermont hosted on tv which has an arena for 3266.

I think the reason for the rolling 2 year agreement for teams to play a home and an away game is to attract more teams into the event and help with better matchups. It also helps with scheduling for Mid-majors to maybe get a decent home game that wouldn't normally get scheduled cause teams don't like to play on the road.

If the same teams got home games every year, and the same teams had to play on the road every year... pretty soon the repeat road teams would give up on the event, drop out, and schedule their own opponents.
 
Da Coach said:
One other small bit of news from yesterday's media day that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere- Commissioner Doug Elgin announced there is a small change in the BracketBusters setup. The return games from this year's BracketBusters games will not be played next year, but 2 years into the future. Because teams alternate home and away in the BB, it means each year they have either 2 home games or 2 away games, which can complicate scheduling. With the new setup, teams would have one home game and one road game each season in the BracketBuster.
Click to expand...

This really isn't actually news or breaking, though it is a bit on the complicated side. . .

Kirk Wessler actually covered and explained this after LAST YEAR'S media day. . .it just went largely unnoticed because of the excitement of the MVC-MWC Challenge. . .Wessler also included a table explaining years out how it will take shape. . .

http://www2.pjstar.com/index.php/we...ey_mountain_challenges_and_the_bracketbuster/

Macabre--this doesn't mean you actually read a KW article?
 
shaunguth said:
I agree that if we played better at the right time, then we should get a better Bracketbuster opponent. That is not completely out of our hands. However, I don't understand why people bring up Wofford and Presbyterian when talking about our "bad" home schedule this year. Without those two teams, we wouldn't have Oklahoma State and Illinois or Utah on the schedule at all!
Click to expand...


I suppose...it's just when you think about going to game we have to wait until the conference starts to get a good game at the Civic Center...hopfully...

It would be nice to get A-10,WCC, or Colonial teams on our schedule
 
lefty said:
I suppose...it's just when you think about going to game we have to wait until the conference starts to get a good game at the Civic Center...hopfully...

It would be nice to get A-10,WCC, or Colonial teams on our schedule
Click to expand...

There have been attempts recently to get an A-10 team, a couple specifically this year were St. Joseph's and LaSalle, but dates didn't work out on the former and ESPN Ok'd LaSalle for a guaranteed TV spot with Oklahoma State. . .

But BU hasn't exactly helped itself out in the non-con enough to put itself into a premier Bracket Buster game. . .the one year they did (2007) they did more than enough to benefit from it (drawing VCU, getting a primetime TV spot, and winning on the road) but one game (either the loss to Illinois or conf tourney loss to SIU) kept them out of the Dance.

You can't lose to teams like UMKC, Milwaukee, UIC, and Loyola. Period. In order to get into position for a premier game you need to have a lot of wins in the non-con and good start in conference play.
 
squirrelgotdead I agree! We need to be a bit more consistent. Some days we look like world beater and the next game we throw a complete dud. JL has said it that some days you just can't score but if you play tough D you can stay in those games and find a way to win. UNI did that a lot last year and here's to us being able to do that!

I have a feeling we will see our guards pressing the other team a bit more this year then in years past! Our strongest area is in our guard play with quality depth, so why not use them to their fullest and make the other teams go to their bench quicker?:-o
 
One of the things that never gets mentioned, and I think is the biggest selling point to this years team:

The SEMO and UMES games two years ago saw Maniscalco, Warren, and Egolf on the floor extensively together. To a lesser extent, the same is true for the FGCU game, until the Eagles made a late rally.

That pure game experience is more invaluable than any other attribute to this year's team, IMO.
 
squirrelgotdead said:
Macabre--this doesn't mean you actually read a KW article?
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are getting at. First of all, are you referring to your buddy Wessler or your other buddy Whelliston?

At any rate, I don't care for either one's dialogue from their soapbox.

What maybe you are referring to was my comment that I read somewhere about the BB and revolving "contract" of home-away and away-home games. Honestly - neither KW comes to my mind as to who I read regarding that. Yes - they may have printed it. But I may have easily read it elsewhere online - which is more likely. I don't read Wessler and have chosen to not ever read his garbage ever again - he's dead to me. As for Kyle, the only little I have read of him has come from his "drive-by media" opinion and attack of Coach Les and the Bradley program. And I will not be back to hear more, no matter what he has to say - he has (also) lost credibility IMO.
 
I'm referring to Wessler, who for the record, I have never even met. I've exchanged emails with him but that is the extent of any personal contact I've had with him.

Not sure how I could be portrayed as being "buddy" with him. But I guess it fuels the fire!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top