Looking ahead to the following year, 2011-2012, it looks like a good chance that Bradley could get UNLV or New Mexico. The way I read the agreement, the scheduling is set up in 2-year cycles with one home and one road game. Since this year will be the 2nd year, next year could start a new cycle again with either a home or road game.
And a couple more notes- Since the MWC has only 9 members, note that the one MVC team left out this year will be Missouri State (Evansville was left out last year).
And the press release also acknowledges that with postseason games, the MVC rose to finish the #7 overall conference in Conference RPI, ahead of the MWC (#8 ) and the Pac-10 (#9).
http://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2010/conferencerpi
Well out of the 3 teams we were going to potentially play, this is by far the worst. Not happy.
Well out of the 3 teams we were going to potentially play, this is by far the worst. Not happy.
I'm disappointed too, I'd like to know how these match ups get determined. Not a terrible matchup, but definitely the worst of the 3 teams.
"The Challenge will feature head-to-head competition between nine Mountain West and nine Missouri Valley teams annually. Evansville, by virtue of finishing the 2007-08 MVC regular season in 10th place, will be the Valley school that does not participate in the 2009 Challenge Series."
From last year's article on the Missouri Valley website.....So why and how was it determined Mo. St. was out this year?? It should be SIU or EU. I'd be angry if I was a Mo. St. fan, they could be one of the Valley's better teams next year so it hurts to Valley too, and i hope BU doesn't have this happen one year unless they finish last. The last place team shouldn't participate IMO, and that's it. If a team doesn't participate for 10 years in a row, then that is their fault for not winning enough to not finish last. I don't understand how Missouri St. was picked???
They go to the standings 2 years ago, not last year. I have no idea why, but they designated that.
Missouri St finished 9th 2 years ago. Evansville 10th. UE missed last year, so it's MSU's turn to miss this year. Next year, Evansville will miss the challenge by being 10th this year. Had any other team finished 10th this year, they would miss the challenge next year.
Ah thanks I understand. I just reread the quote, and it said 07-08 for this past year's determination and I finally thought about it and realized it was 2 years before this past year. That is kind of stupid if you ask me, why not just go off the past year. I also think it should always be the last place team even if they miss 2 years in a row.
I think the idea is that the one team that misses is put at such a disadvantage from a scheduling setpoint. Instead of a quality game against a MWC, there's a new game to go get. So instead of getting a couple of months to fill the vacancy, you get a full year to plan ahead and get a quality game in place.
Well out of the 3 teams we were going to potentially play, this is by far the worst. Not happy.
Well out of the 3 teams we were going to potentially play, this is by far the worst. Not happy.
I agree completely. UNM or UNLV would have been much bigger draws to Carver. It looks like 2 straight years with zero marquee opponents at home. Not good at all, though if we get in a good exempt tourney our schedule could still be more than respectable.
Well out of the 3 teams we were going to potentially play, this is by far the worst. Not happy.
Yeah...this is too bad.
Had a decent chance at getting an NCAA-caliber opponent at home this year as a part of this challenge...instead we get Utah...a team coming off a mediocre season and losing their top three scorers...ugh.![]()