I agree. Thank god for the Bracketbuster and the new Valley/Mountain West tournament, which helps every one in the Valley. Yes, the Bracketbuster is only meaningful for the top 3 or so teams in the conference, but if ISU takes care of business in the league, they get three decent opponents each year. Like you said though, they got lazy in regards to the rest of their OCC schedule, which helps no one!
-
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.
Strength of Schedules - Year by Year Comparison
- Thread starter tornado
- Start date
I agree. Thank god for the Bracketbuster and the new Valley/Mountain West tournament, which helps every one in the Valley. Yes, the Bracketbuster is only meaningful for the top 3 or so teams in the conference, but if ISU takes care of business in the league, they get three decent opponents each year. Like you said though, they got lazy in regards to the rest of their OCC schedule, which helps no one!
AZ BU Fan
New member
GTD was spot on...BU needs to win games and move up in the MVC...Admittedly, JL has had some bad luck (Granger fiasco, POB leaving early, Wilkens eligibility, injury after injury), and JL has been cut a lot of slack with the so so performance of all but one of his teams . I give JL this year or next to win Conference, or MVC Tournament (or get an NCAA/NIT bid). With the new players he has recruited, and others potentially arriving next year, it is time for JL to get the BU Program where he said he would take them. No more excuses!
IMO, winning would also open up more opportunity for scheduling better non con.
IMO, winning would also open up more opportunity for scheduling better non con.
Not necessarily true. The most consistent winning program in the MVC, Creighton, has just as much trouble scheduling good teams as Bradley does. The Omaha World-Herald called their non-conference schedule "disappointing". Their home schedule consists of exhibitions against Missouri Western and Nebraska-Omaha, and games against Florida A&M, Arkansas Little-Rock, Nebraska, Savannah State, and Houston Baptist. That is quite a "who's who" of bad teams for the home fans!-
Part of men's schedule proves disappointing
http://www.omaha.com/article/20090904/SPORTS02/709049893
In fact, you could make a better argument that it is exactly the opposite. Losing more games might help scheduling.
How else do you explain a school like Evansville, that has been a perennial bottom feeder in the MVC was able to get North Carolina to play them in Evansville? Its because UNC knows it's a road game they will win.
tornado
New member
he said in an interview that he is no longer holding teams to this because they had all voluntarily done what needed to be done.
Note that in two consecutive seasons (2005-2006 and 2006-2007) all the Valley teams were in the Top 100 SOS's.
(BU was Top 50 both years while ISU was one of the worst or the worst in the Valley each of those seasons).
http://realtimerpi.com/2005-2006/rpi_mvc_Men.html
http://realtimerpi.com/2006-2007/rpi_mvc_Men.html
but since then....the numbers have fallen off...so Elgin needs to get back on his high horse!
absolutely NOT true...the stronger the team is within the Valley the more scared the better teams are to face them.
But Evansville got a home and home against North Carolina because UNC does not fear taking a loss there!
Do you think UNC would have come here or gone to SIU or Creighton? NEVER!! The winning programs thus get hurt by being good!
TheAsianSensation
New member
I think the UNC/Evansville series also has something to do with a certain UNC player looking to play a game near home. Zellar I think.
TheAsianSensation
New member
Also, let's remember: Instead of scheduling, say, Western Carolina and Idaho State and a couple other cupcakes, we can play 4 much higher mid majors. Ok, let's say we do that.
But if we do that, we'll have to go on the road eventually. We just can't expect them to come in and play and not expect a return game. So, if you're BU, are you willing to get rid of yet another 2 home games, when you're not getting THAT many home games to begin with, to strengthen the schedule?
Now, I still would, and I would plan better with multi-year deals, but it's again not as simple as just getting bigger names to come in. Remember, we had Butler coming in until they backed out.
But if we do that, we'll have to go on the road eventually. We just can't expect them to come in and play and not expect a return game. So, if you're BU, are you willing to get rid of yet another 2 home games, when you're not getting THAT many home games to begin with, to strengthen the schedule?
Now, I still would, and I would plan better with multi-year deals, but it's again not as simple as just getting bigger names to come in. Remember, we had Butler coming in until they backed out.
tornado
New member
wow, then maybe we can get Indiana (Roth), Purdue (Jackson), Illinois (Richardson), and Duke (Scheyer) to come and play us!
G
georgethedog
Guest
Thanks AZ, I will cut JL some slack for some bad luck, but the next two years need to be big winners IMO. This year could be really good if a couple players step up, but next year could be special if our recruits come and catch on more quickly than most JUCOs. Will Wilkins catch on quicker than most JUCO's???
TheAsianSensation
New member
Well it only really works when a player goes far away from his hometown.
For example, if Livingston had gone to Duke, BU should've been on the phone with Coach K IMMEDIATELY.
Hi Coach. True about Creighton, but they got one helluva road/neutral schedule! Win a couple of those and finish in first (and that goes for Bradley too) and an at-large bid should be theirs.
The teams have not done recently what needs to be done. That's why Elgin needs to reestablish this requirement immediately!
Also a good call regarding those two seasons where the Valley had all top 100 teams. It's no coincidence that we earned more at-large bids those years because the NCAA committee saw wins against conference foes as quality wins, even if they weren't against BCS teams. So it's not as necessary that teams need to get wins over BCS teams to put themselves into at-large position as it is necessary to get every, and I mean EVERY Valley team to play well during the non-conference portion of the season. This gives teams more opportunites for solid wins within the conference season, and therefore more bids. If the conference as a whole does poorly during the OOC season, then yes, beating the BCS teams becomes far more important.
Now Creighton last year did beat Dayton and George Mason. I thought that combined with their Valley co-championship, that would have been enough to get them in. Even some of the ESPN pundits thought so too. I guess I was wrong, and that's why it was smart of a veteran team like theirs to beef up their schedule. So let's hope for a couple of teams representing the Valley come March!
squirrelgotdead
New member
Bravesfan, this is where people get tripped up in their understanding of the RPI.
It is not enough to play games like BU did against Michigan State and Florida.
Those are great games no doubt. But when you also play SEMO and SIUE you lose ALL benefit from those two contests.
You must have breadth of quality.
Creighton has generally played an acceptable non-con. And those wins proved they were at least worthy of being in the convo. But they also played two SWAC teams.
The SWAC is astronomically awful. They are twice as toxic as the MEAC (which is without a doubt the 2nd worst DI league). The SWAC last year did not have a single out-of-conference win vs. a full DI member. They did have 2 maybe three wins against provisionals. And they had a less-than-impressive mark vs. non-DI's.
One probably would've kept them in the bubble picture had they not lost to UALR. But with two SWAC teams on their schedule alone probably cost their RPI via SOS 20-30 spots.
It is not enough to play games like BU did against Michigan State and Florida.
Those are great games no doubt. But when you also play SEMO and SIUE you lose ALL benefit from those two contests.
You must have breadth of quality.
Creighton has generally played an acceptable non-con. And those wins proved they were at least worthy of being in the convo. But they also played two SWAC teams.
The SWAC is astronomically awful. They are twice as toxic as the MEAC (which is without a doubt the 2nd worst DI league). The SWAC last year did not have a single out-of-conference win vs. a full DI member. They did have 2 maybe three wins against provisionals. And they had a less-than-impressive mark vs. non-DI's.
One probably would've kept them in the bubble picture had they not lost to UALR. But with two SWAC teams on their schedule alone probably cost their RPI via SOS 20-30 spots.
I don't totally agree with your assessment squirrel. I thought the RPI has been devalued by the selection committee the last few years because the Valley and other similar mid-major conferences "cracked" the RPI code in 2006. Having heard enough pundits on the "Eastern Seaboard Programming Network" last season telling us that it is quality wins against BCS opponents and not the rankings that matter the most, the fact that Creighton and Bradley have some BCS opponents this year should be a blessing! My guess is that had Creighton scheduled and beat Michigan St and Florida last year, they would have been in the tournament as an at-large, even with the soft games they played.
My other question is when teams like Duke, Syracuse and Illinois play NCAA "powers" like Longwood, McNeese St and Prairie View A&M, why is it that they are not called out for playing them. To single out Creighton for playing a couple of SWAC teams should only hold water if we do the same for some of the "big boys" who soften their schedules playing the very same teams! Granted they have more chances for solid wins, but if Creighton or Bradley can make good in beating the two or three BCS teams they are playing this year, they should both have the chance to go to the NCAA Tournament if they take care of business in the Valley, high RPI numbers or not. Wouldn't the pass the "Eye Test" if they did that?
TheAsianSensation
New member
Because they get 16-18 conference games to help offset scheduling cupcakes. And while we know the MVC is good, they don't nearly provide the RPI protection the BCS conferences do.
Oh, and squirrel, I do think the SWAC did pick off a game against a CUSA member last year, IIRC. That one, 4 wins over provisionals, and that was it for them.
squirrelgotdead
New member
I'm not saying don't play the big dogs. I just saying you can't play one or two and pretend its enough. And you can't round out your schedule with patsies.
squirrelgotdead
New member
After double-checking, I did find two wins vs. the OVC. . .Grambling over Morehead and Alabama A&M over Tennessee St. I don't see any wins over CUSA. But it is still remarkable how awful the league is.
What I think about ISU's schedule or my degree of happiness really doesn't matter in this debate though.
There is a bottom-line here, and everyone seems to be dancing around it.
For as poor as ISU's schedule was last season, their non-conference SOS was a mere 9 spots away from what Bradley's was.
Ark-PB over SMU.
squirrelgotdead
New member
So 3 DI wins and 4 wins over provies. . .
TheAsianSensation
New member
I think their argument is intent.
ISU attempts a specific philosophy to their schedule, and their final SoS rank last year was a best-case scenario given the philosophy.
BU attempts a specific philosophy to their schedule, and their final SoS rank last year was a worst-case scenario given the philosophy.