I figured we should start a new thread to recap this season. What was good. What was bad. Where to we go from here.
Here are my thoughts in no particular order:
Obviously, when compared to pre-season expectations, this season was a disappointment. There were a lot of blown games and missed opportunities. I think we were better than our 6-12 record suggested. Probably not a lot better though.
I've been on the fire Lottich bandwagon for awhile, but I've got to admit that I'm somewhat bullish on Valpo for next year. Maybe I'm overly optimistic but I thought this team really started to show their potential during Arch Madness. Edwards demonstrated a "composed aggressiveness" that could make him one of the best players in the league. It just seemed like this team was playing like, a team. Of course, we missed our shots and that was that, but it's not like we were blown out or not competitive.
I'm waiting to see how many players transfer, if any. If Krikke, Kithier, King, and Edwards all stay, then that's a pretty good nucleus to build around. I like Preston's game a lot; he reminds me of Jake Diebler in some ways. Add a healthy Young. I think there's some reason for optimism. Of course, if we have a repeat like like off-season then Lottich should be shown the door immediately.
If I had to draw a parallel, this season feels like more of the 09-10 season in the Horizon League than the 08-09 dumpster fire season. It's not a direct comparison by any means and I'm not suggesting that we're about to lead the MVC anytime soon.
Agreed. That is a great point that is often missed when you just look at our record. We were close/competitive in just about every game this season. Were we clutch? No. However, having been in those situations this season, if the vast majority of players return, I think that we are in good position for a top 5 finish.
My big concern is Valpo's recent apathy toward the basketball and that their are issues requiring more attention. Schools like Valpo, Drake, Bradley and Evansville are goin through financial difficulties recently. Padilla will get us through this mess, but basketball issues will be secondary in the short term.
Failure. We had some nice pieces. No excuse why our record is as bad as what it is.
Injuries to key play makers, consistent lack of defensive intensity and executing at the end of both halves cost us a handful of games. The difference in this conference between wins and losses is not for lack of talent. Winning will be bring the fans back, hence the apathy right now. Plus when players stay longer than two years, Peters, Ryan, locals catch on. Lets how Lets see what happens on twitter in the coming days and then we can have a better idea of how our roster looks for next season. Over under still at 3 transfers.
Only 48 hours after Valpo's final game of the tournament, I am already seeing excuses or explanations for the terrible and unacceptable 6-12 conference record leading to another Thursday play-in game, and there are suggestions the season wasn't quite as bad as it looks because there were some close losses, as if those were positive signs rather than indications of the problems with late-game strategy and performance. In addition, I see comments offering optimism for next year if only the same players stay instead of transfer. (Yes, a healthy and more experienced core of Kithier, Krikke, King, Edwards, etc. could be better, but so will the conference, particularly with the additions of Murray State and Belmont.)
However, after 5 years of mediocre (at best) play in the MVC following repeated enthusiastic preseason forecasts, enough is enough. I am not going to harbor any hopes for potential. I will not believe in progress until I witness victory on the court next season. Wishing for wins and trusting in their delivery is like waiting for the promised new mascot that we were assured would appear by the beginning of basketball season and yet remains a figment of everyone's imagination. If the program couldn't even provide a symbolic mascot, which is totally in its power, I am not confident we will see anything more substantial in areas that are less controllable. I no longer give Valpo basketball any benefit of the doubt that I once did. Unfortunately, the trust this program fostered in fans for so long has now been squandered.
To clarify, any optimism I have for this team is based on the last two games of the season. Yes, this is a small sample size and maybe I'm putting too much into it. But Valpo looked very different, compared to other games this season.
I'm also tired of the optimistic pre-season predictions followed by disappointing seasons. Lottich and others didn't do the program any favors by talking up King and the other transfers. But let's be honest, this program was in deep trouble a year ago. We could have become another Evansville. At least the bleeding has been stopped. In medical terms, our condition is serious, not critical. Of course this could all change in the next few weeks.
Quote from: mj on March 06, 2022, 12:08:12 PM
To clarify, any optimism I have for this team is based on the last two games of the season. Yes, this is a small sample size and maybe I'm putting too much into it. But Valpo looked very different, compared to other games this season.
I'm also tired of the optimistic pre-season predictions followed by disappointing seasons. Lottich and others didn't do the program any favors by talking up King and the other transfers. But let's be honest, this program was in deep trouble a year ago. We could have become another Evansville. At least the bleeding has been stopped. In medical terms, our condition is serious, not critical. Of course this could all change in the next few weeks.
I wouldn't get overly excited about a third win over Evansville.
I calculated the won-loss record of the games Valpo won, minus East-West and Trinity Christian. I don't have the numbers in front of me right now, but the winning percentage of the opponents Valpo actually defeated was 39 percent. Five of the wins were against Evansville (3) and Indiana State (2). So we can hang our hat on the fact we're not the worst team in Indiana, I suppose.
This was the year when I finally went from expecting to win and being disappointed when we didn't, to expecting to lose and being mildly surprised when we won. I also went from watching every game I could to not caring whether I watched or not. I expect this attitude to carry over to next year, and I don't like it much. I'd like to be optimistic and think maybe next year we'll start winning most of those close games we lost this year, but I guess I'll have to see it to believe it. A lot of "maybe's" would have to fall the right way for that to happen. But stranger things have happened, like the Bengals coming from nowhere to make it to the Super Bowl. So I guess there's hope.
Excuses or not, Valpo was relying on experienced transfers plus Ben and Sheldon. Connor, maybe, and nobody has yet to tell anyone why he disappeared. So we relied on Ben, who missed the first 3 D1 losses, with Kobe out even longer. Ben and Kobe were our two best scorers. I really think the bigger problem was the loss of Trevor. He averaged 9.3 ppg plus 3.8 rebounds and was obviously the true floor general we needed. He was replaced by two freshman who combined, did not get to Trevor's numbers--actually combined were 4.1 ppg less than Trevor's.
Throw in the missed games from Thomas and his 10.1 ppg and more importantly his 6.6 rebounds and there you have it. A complete cluster.
"Never make excuses. Your friends don't need them and your foes won't believe them."
― John Wooden
We all believe in VU and have strong interests in the success of the university. That's why we are here.
At the same time, it's the fewest games (1) we have ever attended and didn't even turn on more games than ever before. And we're not the only ones. Something has to change.
One of the most outstanding things about this past season was the fact that Kobe missed the first 9 games of the season, Kithier missed 10 out of our 18 Conference games, Krikke out for some games, plus the numerous other injuries throughout the year. Is it any wonder why we were not consistent for the entire season? No cohesion or a solid chance to build team chemistry over the course of the season. I don't care who we played, but we looked better for our 2 games in the Tourney than any 2 game stretch during the season. We played Loyola real tough both games , beat No. Iowa and let a few slip away, and flat out blew a number of other potential wins. Let's forget this season and see what happens next year. I look forward to it.
64 - I am glad you are enjoying the brown and good keep l aid, and I will be more optimistic once new staffing gets in place.
I came into this season thinking this was Lottich's last chance to get me to believe he can be the guy and he absolutely failed. No matter what we do this offseason, I am not going to be hyped for next season if Lottich is still at the helm which he more than likely will be.
Another theme I see after the last 5 seasons in particular is fans saying "where we would be if we didn't have all these injuries"? Maybe you can make that claim if it happens one season, but when it happens repeatedly, there's something wrong with the player development/conditioning aspect. Here Drake has severe injuries to some of their top guys the last couple of years and they still made the MVC championship both years and won an NCAA game last season. I'm tired of the injury excuse. Either fix that problem internally or bring guys in that aren't injury prone.
I wish I had anything good to say regarding this season, but I really can't come up with anything. I guess I can say I hope we decide to go down the route of bringing more transfers up from D-II than bringing guys down from the Big Ten. Most of the guys we bring in from power conferences are on the bench at their schools for a reason. I didn't hate the play of King, Kithier and especially Anderson when he was healthy, but they also didn't really get us close to achieving a goal at a conference championship. Kevion at least was our most consistent shooter and scorer this year and I'd be more inclined to get guys that are imo, more motivated to jump up and play at our level than power conference guys having to transfer down.
3 Thoughts:
1. For those not subbed to The Victory Bell, PO had an excellent breakdown on player retention and the # of players in the championship game that had played 2+ years in the MVC. I won't spoil more but it's a deep dive and well worth a read.
2. Question for PO: Can we expect, or can you solicit, a comment from the AD on the MBB program? I don't think many of us expect he's willing (or able) to move on from ML, but I'll take even something bland like "I look forward to sitting down with Matt and figuring out how to better compete.....yada, yada, yada." I know he's a lame duck but I would feel a little better if MLB even acknowledged our last couple of years are not acceptable record wise.
3. It may seem like piling on, but I'm joining the chorus of those who will not be renewing my season tickets next year, assuming Matt is retained. The on court product has been covered here, but the atmosphere is also horrible. In addition to no pep band, I find it insulting that they run the same middle school boys club team out for 15 halftimes a year. I don't know of a better way to say "Screw your entertainment value" than that. I know not every game can have the Pacers dunk crew, but a handful of halftimes like that, a couple of local marching bands and/or a couple of Greek Life competitions, and you're set. And while we're at it, maybe let's find someone else to run the shot clock next year. We seemed to have 2-3 screw-ups there every game.
Quote from: NativeCheesehead on March 07, 2022, 01:19:54 PM
3 Thoughts:
1. For those not subbed to The Victory Bell, PO had an excellent breakdown on player retention and the # of players in the championship game that had played 2+ years in the MVC. I won't spoil more but it's a deep dive and well worth a read.
2. Question for PO: Can we expect, or can you solicit, a comment from the AD on the MBB program? I don't think many of us expect he's willing (or able) to move on from ML, but I'll take even something bland like "I look forward to sitting down with Matt and figuring out how to better compete.....yada, yada, yada." I know he's a lame duck but I would feel a little better if MLB even acknowledged our last couple of years are not acceptable record wise.
3. It may seem like piling on, but I'm joining the chorus of those who will not be renewing my season tickets next year, assuming Matt is retained. The on court product has been covered here, but the atmosphere is also horrible. In addition to no pep band, I find it insulting that they run the same middle school boys club team out for 15 halftimes a year. I don't know of a better way to say "Screw your entertainment value" than that. I know not every game can have the Pacers dunk crew, but a handful of halftimes like that, a couple of local marching bands and/or a couple of Greek Life competitions, and you're set. And while we're at it, maybe let's find someone else to run the shot clock next year. We seemed to have 2-3 screw-ups there every game.
1. Thanks for the plug.
2. It is my intention to take a deep look at everything over the next several weeks. This will include talking to the key figures (MLB, ML, etc.) What has gone wrong, what can be fixed, what is needed, etc. Obviously I think everyone knows MLB is on the way out and someone else is on the way in. It's a fascinating dynamic.
3. I'll just settle for Valpo not inviting Chesterton to Loyola games, Lake Central to Drake games or Portage to Illinois State games. Please recognize the school colors of the opposition when planning on which middle school team is brought in.
For Drake this year,3 of their starters were from NW Indiana. Just blows my mind away - why are we so inept?
No insider info, but you have to think that facilities play a decent role.
I'm going to share a longer-term impression, and I will defer to closer followers of VU's MBB program to tell me whether it's an overwrought one.
I attended VU during its early DI years (77-81). During that time, the biggest MBB event was when DePaul brought its #1-ranked team (featuring Mark Aguirre, Terry Cummings, and Clyde Bradshaw, coached by Ray Meyer) to Hilltop. When the Blue Demons took the floor for their warm-ups, many in the crowd quietly stood, as if we didn't quite believe that such collegiate hoops royalty was actually in our presence. VU gave DePaul a decent contest in the first half, before giving way to the inevitable double-digit loss.
Like many alums of that era, I didn't start paying attention to VU hoops again until the Bryce Drew years, which kicked off a long period of steadily being in the mix for post-season play, including the NCAA tourney.
But today, as the NCAA bracket was announced, followed by news of the NIT and other tourneys filling out, it feels like VU is at the tipping point of continuing to be relevant to that conversation. I'm not suggesting that Valpo is returning to the circa 1980 days of fans standing in quiet attention because a great team has taken the floor, but I think there's a risk of falling into the vast sea of unremarkable mid-major teams that serve as W-L fodder for better teams.
Quote from: David81 on March 13, 2022, 08:47:38 PMBut today, as the NCAA bracket was announced, followed by news of the NIT and other tourneys filling out, it feels like VU is at the tipping point of continuing to be relevant to that conversation. I'm not suggesting that Valpo is returning to the circa 1980 days of fans standing in quiet attention because a great team has taken the floor, but I think there's a risk of falling into the vast sea of unremarkable mid-major teams that serve as W-L fodder for better teams.
All of us are equally concerned and afraid. None of us know exactly how to reverse this decline. Our plight and frustration also helps explain our gigantic falloff of postings, posters and tolerance for dissent.
Quote from: NativeCheesehead on March 07, 2022, 01:19:54 PMFor those not subbed to The Victory Bell, PO had an excellent breakdown on player retention and the # of players in the championship game that had played 2+ years in the MVC. I won't spoil more but it's a deep dive and well worth a read.
Quote from: Pgmado on March 07, 2022, 02:43:55 PMIt is my intention to take a deep look at everything over the next several weeks. This will include talking to the key figures (MLB, ML, etc.) What has gone wrong, what can be fixed, what is needed, etc. Obviously I think everyone knows MLB is on the way out and someone else is on the way in. It's a fascinating dynamic.
My apologies to Paul but my 21-22 disappointment has been sufficient to bring to question my future as a Valpo diehard. Thus no Victory Bell subscription while I clear my brain of this season. Sorry.
Quotebut I think there's a risk of falling into the vast sea of unremarkable mid-major teams that serve as W-L fodder for better teams.
The Drew family was an unbelievable asset to Valpo. But not only were they an asset, they were an asset that required no maintenance. Turn it on, watch it win (at least in the late 90s and beyond). In many ways, the university didn't capitalize as much as they could have with that success.
Getting back to that level is going to take commitment. It's going to take work. That commitment has to start at the top with the Board. If Valpo still has the hands off attitude of the Drew years, then we will be an unremarkable mid-major team. And I think Valpo will suffer in the long run.
The good news is that President Padilla is someone who understands how athletics can benefit a school. The other thing is that Valpo still has the history of success; the records of the Drew years are etched in stone. We will always get good publicity from "The Shot." That's an asset that will fade over time, but never go away completely.
Quote from: mj on March 13, 2022, 10:28:41 PM
Quotebut I think there's a risk of falling into the vast sea of unremarkable mid-major teams that serve as W-L fodder for better teams.
The good news is that President Padilla is someone who understands how athletics can benefit a school. The other thing is that Valpo still has the history of success; the records of the Drew years are etched in stone. We will always get good publicity from "The Shot." That's an asset that will fade over time, but never go away completely.
Yes, Pres. Padilla's grasp of the value of a successful sports program as a complement to a quality academic institution offers reason for optimism in this regard. But it won't be an easy revive, not in a competitive conference like the MVC. I just took a look at Belmont's record, and they'll be coming into the conference on the heels of an NIT appearance. This is where VU should be.
Yesterday was the 24th anniversary of Bryce's shot (March 13, 1998), nearly a quarter of a century. If you were asked then where the Valpo program would be in 25 years, would you envision something different from where it is today? I remember the great excitement at the time, especially on campus. I would have been pleased to see the continuing success on the court until the last five years, which have been a disappointment. I would have hoped for the kind of program growth witnessed at Gonzaga. In fact, twenty years ago I spoke to the university faculty senate about a proposal modeling the development of athletics at Valpo after the Gonzaga model, a private religious based university not much larger than VU. My recommendation was not followed. I have been struck by the differing directions of Gonzaga and Valparaiso since then, especially this week as Gonzaga is the tournament's #1 seed. From m y 1998 perspective, I would be surprised to see the seeming lack of enthusiasm on campus currently for VU basketball and the relatively unchanged physical state of the ARC. I also would be dismayed by the failure to capitalize and build fully on the publicity of that national moment, a gift that was not exploited but apparently was squandered.
[tweet]1503219847139926016[/tweet]
First off, great points by all in this thread, especially valpopal, mj and David81. This thread is so good it pulled me in from a long hibernation on this board.
I think the unfortunate reality for Valpo right now is that we are at an important crossroads, and VU either needs to step up, invest and put the program into the upper echelon of Valley programs, or it continues on the same path, and watch us regress into the Tom Smith era again. (To be clear -- I'm not knocking Smith's coaching acumen when I say that. I'm referring to the budgetary constraints, extreme fan apathy and administrative neglect that led the program to be a joke from its Division I debut until Homer's fifth season).
Quite frankly, I don't want to hear about financial issues being the reason why we can't make a coaching change or either build a new facility or completely to-the-bones uprade and reno of the ARC. Those are excuses, and we're going on nearly two decades now of excuse-making as to why Valpo refuses to invest in its signature athletic program. We promised the Horizon League we'd build better facilities when we joined in 2007. Didn't happen. We promised Homer and then Bryce in the early to mid-2010s that we'd upgrade the facilities on multiple occasions. Didn't happen. We made iron-clad commitments to the Valley that we'd do so when we joined. Here we are, five years into our membership and there isn't so much as an artist's rendering, much less a plan to get it done. What are we getting instead? More excuses. Quite frankly, they'd be justified in threatening to kick us out for not moving on this commitment by now.
As for Coach Lottich, this is the fourth iteration of his roster with no discernible progress on the floor, the same disorganized offense, the same inability to hold leads, the same issues at the foul line, the same issues with player defections year after year. It's clear now he was a panic hire by our AD and the decision to not engage a national search after Bryce left will go down in infamy in VU's athletics history. The decision to retain him is only compounding the problem. (Lest you think this is overkill, I point you in the direction of Ball State. They made a poor hire in the wake of a MAC championship and their coach being hired away by Houston, and kept his successor for a few extra years rather than paying the buyout when it was clear he wasn't the guy. That was 22 years ago, and the Cardinals have not sniffed an NCAA Tournament berth since and are about to embark on their fifth coaching search in that time).
So what to do? Well, it's clear that our AD is not going to make a change on his way out the door. But he should absolutely sit with Coach Lottich and insist on changes in his leadership of the program, with clear metrics spelled out in writing for the next AD to refer to at this time next year.
As for the facilities? The time for talk is over. No more "oh, we have a good home court advantage when attendance is good" or "we don't fill the seats we have now." No more "we don't have the money for this right now." We don't know what money is available for a project like this because WE SIMPLY HAVE NEVER TRIED TO RAISE ANY. Put a fundraising plan in place, sound off potential corporate donors in the county, Region, and Chicago, talk to the city to see what sort of partnerships might be available (the mayor of Valpo is a former VU athlete, after all). Pay for an artist's rendering of what a new facility could look like. It doesn't have to be the final version -- just a vision. Give fans (and more importantly, potential donors) something to believe in and work toward. This "well the university has other needs" is a false zero-sum game. There are people who would donate to a new athletics facility who will never donate to other projects at the university and vice versa. A $20M donation from someone who wants to see their name on a basketball arena does not mean that this person would have donated $20M to the university for other purposes. Development doesn't work that way, no matter how much university fundraisers wish it would.
In short, take ownership of the current state of the program and work to improve it, both from a personnel standpoint and a physical facilities standpoint. And quite frankly, it's going to be hard to do too much to help the former without addressing the latter. VU has very little to offer talented coaches and players right now compared to our peers in the MVC. That's a problem, and everyone should be sounding the alarm. The lack of urgency on the university and AD's part has been a slap in the face to longtime fans who sat through the lean years of the 70s, 80s and early 90s and have done their part to maintain the success that began a quarter-century ago.
The good news? President Padilla has shown he gets the importance of athletics so far. And it's not too late to fix this.
The bad news? It soon may very well be.
(As an aside, the fact that some still point to the video boards in the ARC as some sort of commitment delivered by the university is insulting. First off, those video boards are a decade old. Secondly, they were almost entirely paid for with HL funds from Butler's Final Four run. And Hilltop Gym cosmetic changes absolutely define "bare minimum." Stop citing these things as progress. They are not).
Bigmosmith, welcome back! Your voice of reason has been missed.
All of your points are well taken.
The only thing I'm not sure about is the Valpo mayor being a former VU athlete. Matt Murphy attended IU, I believe. Perhaps he attended VU and played football, briefly? He did play football at VHS.
Casey Schmidt, obviously, is a former VU athlete. He's currently a member of the City Council.
bigmosmithfan ... right on. All the words, all the excuses, all the rationalizations, just wad them up and throw them away because they're worth squat.
The fact of the matter is the university has EXACTLY the program it wants. It's hard to come to any other conclusion. All of the actions and decisions were made consciously, whether to invest in facility upgrades, coaching and recruiting budgets, travel, etc. These are people who are presented with information and data and choose the outcome they desire.
I was a huge critic of the Lottich hiring at the time it was made, for a number of reasons. It was a total short-sighted decision that has done nothing but hamstring the program since. What competent leader hires a No. 3 (at best) assistant coach, with no prior D-1 coaching experience, to take over a potential NCAA-Tournament team? Administrative malpractice. All for the sake of one senior class that didn't even make it back to the NCAA Tournament. You can have your but's and what if's about the season, but the bottom line is the bottom line. I am not a Bears fan, but Lottich to me is very similar to Mitch Trubisky. Trubisky took a lot of heat for his play with the Bears, and rightfully so. But it was overdone in a way. It's not like he asked the Bears to trade up for him and take him No. 2 overall, after all. He was in over his head from the get go and never really got his head above water. Same with Lottich. What did the powers that be think they were getting with a first-time No. 3 assistant coach? It was a completely foolish and ill-advised hiring at the time and remains even more so today.
All is not lost, however. Thankfully, Valpo still has the Valley going for it. There are many qualified coaches out there who would jump at the chance to coach in this league, even at a limited place like Valpo. Right now, it is my belief that the affiliation with the MVC is about the only kernel of hope around the program. So long as they are a member of the league, they will be able to attract quality candidates. The problem, as always, is who will be making that decision of who to hire when it comes time (most likely way down the road).
Not too long ago I thought I remember reading a post on this forum that the University had a couple of big donors for ARC renovation in place but that nothing more would be said until additional funding became available and the project could be announced.
I remember reading that they had already drawn up some plans for a full renovation but that they were searching for a lead donor before they could move forward. They seem to want to have a large chunk down before they pull the trigger cause it's easier than trying to fundraise from scratch and it creates momentum to get it over the top.
Now, who knows if the they ever found a lead donor or maybe they've found some people who would commit to some of it but not enough to make it worth starting the official drive. I know it's on the list of the top 3 things to do (including a new nursing building and I think a business renovation) and that they will build whichever one gets the most donor momentum first vs prioritizing one over the other.
President Padilla said that a committee will determine whether a new arena will be built or if the arc will be remodeled into more of an arena type of structure. Regardless, it is a high priority, and the decision will be made before the next school year.
Didn't know where to put this.
For the last 4-5 years during NCAAT time, the local sports radio station in Tulsa plays a commercial advertising for the tournament. The sports radio station plays 3-4 famous calls from memorable NCAA tournament games. I love driving to work in March hearing "to Drew for the win! GOOD!!! HE DID IT!! BRYCE DREW DID IT!! VALPO HAS WON THE GAME, A MIRACLE!! It's just a good start to the work day.
However, this year it has been removed from the commercial and replaced with one from ORU last year making it to the sweet 16. :'( :'( :'(
Quote from: humbleopinion on March 15, 2022, 02:56:19 PM
President Padilla said that a committee will determine whether a new arena will be built or if the arc will be remodeled into more of an arena type of structure. Regardless, it is a high priority, and the decision will be made before the next school year.
I wish this wasn't necessary, i.e., that a quality school offering a full-ride that can lead to a darn good degree, along with serviceable athletic facilities and a respectable hoops tradition, would instantly mean being competitive for top mid-major talent. But I'm persuaded that the current ARC is a liability (the interview with Ryan Fazekas in The Victory Bell helped to convince me), and I'm glad this is now a priority.
Talking to a good friend and alum, Valpo needs available cash and lots of it to build these facilities. I am guessing the $250M drive cannot contribute to this. Schools like Valpo, Drake, Bradley and Evansville, good middle of the road private schools, are hurting financially and many other private schools will be closing its doors in the near future.
I feel Padilla wants Valpo to be successful in athletics and particularly the basketball program, but the cronies under him have a different old school laizze-faire outlook. It has been and will continue to be a battle.
You have to remember how the recruiting process works. Recruits are brought to multiple campuses and given the hard sell by coaches. You are competing with every other school they are visiting. And recruits know that coaches may not stay so the facilities are one of the main things factoring in their minds.
Other policy changes that could help attract the players they are hoping to attract without spending money:
*Let the freshmen live in the nicer dorms. Brandt is a major turnoff.
*Don't require them to live on campus for three years, the other schools aren't.
*Let them park on campus.
*Don't force them to have a roommate.
Improving the ARC is important, but inexpensive policy changes would do a lot to help. The other schools aren't treating the Bball players like every other freshman, believe me.
A big turn off for my daughter was the three years on campus rule? Why have such a restriction in place?
I'm sure it's because they make a ton of money from room and board and allowing students to move off campus would be a huge loss of revenue. But making the Bball teams adhere to the same rules is a barrier to getting the recruits that they want. They need to be competitive in the market and the market is the other schools who are recruiting the same players.
Honest question: Per NCAA standards can they even do that? I thought athletes cannot get extra perks that differentiate them from student and I'd imagine living off-campus w/o a valid exemption would qualify?
There must be ways to do it, I would assume through the waiver process.
https://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/big-12/university-of-kansas/article336824.html
Seriously, how many schools have this level of campus restriction, especially with people working and studying remotely. Dumb archaic rule. Valpo needs to get out of the I like Ike days.
During my Junior year in Berg, my roommate moved off campus for the second semester. I never had anyone put in for a request for another room apparently, and ended up having the room to myself for the entire semester, while paying a rate for 1/2 a room. It was very nice.
Not only does the university make money from room and board but also wants to avoid a commuter campus feel. Freshman and sophomores living on campus creating life long friends and being part of a community I think is part of the mission or valpo experience.
Quote from: DuneHwx on March 16, 2022, 10:22:51 AM
I'm sure it's because they make a ton of money from room and board and allowing students to move off campus would be a huge loss of revenue. But making the Bball teams adhere to the same rules is a barrier to getting the recruits that they want. They need to be competitive in the market and the market is the other schools who are recruiting the same players.
It is a more complicated decision than it appears. DuneHwx is right about the loss of revenue. First, many small, private schools face economic challenges: The result of this is that the financial aid that is termed a "scholarship" reduces the tuition costs more than it has in the past. The economics of this makes sense, because there are few additional variable costs related to instruction of one more student - the costs for professors, classrooms, utilities, etc. are the same if there are 30 students in a class or if there are 31 students in the class. So, what more private schools do is offer more "scholarship" aid to reduce the tuition cost. (There are limits to this strategy of course, yet the marginal cost of instruction of one more student is low.) The benefit of this is that the students come on campus: They are required to stay in the dorms, be on the meal plan, pay general / technology fees and the like. These end up being value-add to the university budget, and adding one more student brings in perhaps $13K/year in room and board alone.
Second, as to whether athletes should be treated differently, it is not just a men's basketball question. My sense is that historically, non-freshmen athletes have gotten waivers to live off campus relatively easily, yet it is difficult to make policy pronouncements. Imagine that all men's basketball athletes are allowed to live off campus: The next question is if the women's basketball athletes are allowed to live off campus, and if not, why not? If those happen, how do you require tennis players, or football players, cross country runners, or any other athletes to live on campus? The loss of all of this additional revenue is substantial.
Regardless of the equity factor, basketball recruits are being offered far better living arrangements at other institutions. If you want the good recruits to come to Valpo you need to be competitive. The one article I posted suggested that 51% of students in an athletic housing arrangement need to not be athletes. The most obvious answer then would be to allow the full scholarship players (mbb, wbb, vb) to live in Promenade until they are allowed to move off campus. The rigors of D1 full athletic scholarship competition, need for sleep & recovery space, and community support should be sufficient. Similar to the German House, these students should have specialty housing.
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 17, 2022, 07:09:32 AMNot only does the university make money from room and board but also wants to avoid a commuter campus feel. Freshman and sophomores living on campus creating life long friends and being part of a community I think is part of the mission or valpo experience.
*Freshmen, sophomores, and juniors. I would challenge you to lead the tours of Brandt to highly sought after recruits and try to sell them on three years of dorm living.
Quote from: DuneHwx on March 17, 2022, 09:46:54 AM
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 17, 2022, 07:09:32 AMNot only does the university make money from room and board but also wants to avoid a commuter campus feel. Freshman and sophomores living on campus creating life long friends and being part of a community I think is part of the mission or valpo experience.
*Freshmen, sophomores, and juniors. I would challenge you to lead the tours of Brandt to highly sought after recruits and try to sell them on three years of dorm living.
Well here ya go!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0GIhFJtBhY
Well, the video shows how Brandt Hall is now a whole lot nicer than its rather Spartan existence back in my day! (Though I confess to having nostalgic memories of late night study & paper writing marathons in the Brandt cafeteria, which became an impromptu study hall after the dinner hour.)
That said, many of today's kids expect fancier surroundings, and if you're sought-after athlete, sharing a small dorm room isn't exactly a sales pitch.
I was in Brandt for my first 2 years, 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. The current state is a lot better than what we had. Did they finally get rid of the unused cafeteria on the first floor? I know that the kitchen was used for food at Berg, but that general eating area was always vacant.
While that video is, I'm sure, designed to make Brandt look as appealing as possible (notice lack of bathroom footage) the point is not to compare it to your time on campus but to compare it to the living arrangements that athletes are being offered at other institutions.
My biggest concern with this is it boils down to special treatment for athletes that could risk, on a campus this small, increasing resentment between the other students.
You already struggle to get students to the games. Imagine how that works if they feel like the basketball team (who is not winning well right now) gets extra perks. Also, if you're going to basically say that even Beacon is not good enough for the athletes and they deserve the only area of campus housing that is apartment style over Juniors who have lived on campus already for 2 years you're really really pushing into these players are better than the rest of our student's territory.
I get your piece about recruiting and perks but the reality is that giving them that doesn't seem to really help that much if facilities are still crap and probably has more of a downside than anything
Haven't been on campus in a few years. When I was on campus during the Bryce Drew years, I would invariably run into him at some point...often shaking hands or having conversations with students. Does that happen with Lottich?
Fair enough. It seems that the choice has been made to favor equality between all students over attracting top recruits. It's a decent choice to make as long as everyone is aware that the trade off is there.
Maybe the answer is to move the athletes into Beacon with other students having backup opportunities. Obviously, Beacon is the best dorm, air conditioned with suite style rooms. Take a look!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nimiWF3qe00
Reading through all 3 pages of this we're missing 2 VERY big points here...
We were "competitive" and "in the game" for many of our losses. This is true. And most of them were a case of the coaching on the other bench overcame the talent on our roster. Lottich cost us quite a few games this year with late game decisions and/or lack of decisions. The Loyola game comes to mind, you could see that collapse coming at halftime.
And all the talk of Brandt Hall. I made the decision to move 500 miles to transfer to VU from a little state school back home that I was commuting to, 20 years ago. 20 years ago Brandt was already behind the curve and almost caused me not to transfer to VU. Brandt isn't just affecting athletic recruiting, it's probably a big driving force in the lack of enrollment overall. Valpo isn't keeping up with the competition in that regard, and hasn't been for 2+ decades.
In the early/mid 2000's we had a new library, union, the Huegli replacement, "welcome center," meteorology building, and other construction projects. It was honestly a bit annoying going to college on a giant construction site knowing by the time that stuff got built I'd already be graduated and never get to enjoy most of them. Also in that time, VU made arrangements with Compass Pointe for off campus housing and then that "Uptown" or whatever it was called was built as private partnerships costing VU almost nothing. Why not more private partnerships for housing like almost all other universities do these days? Law school land could be Valpo's "investment" with the developer to develop that housing. With the significantly reduced enrollment these days, does Brandt even need to exist capacity wise? Furthermore, with all of those buildings going up 20ish years ago, one would think that any/most notes/bonds taken on those projects are close to or already paid off by now. That should free up some capital.
Agree 100% on freshman housing inhibiting enrollment as well as recruiting.
Quote from: tjn2004 on March 19, 2022, 02:48:15 PM
Reading through all 3 pages of this we're missing 2 VERY big points here...
We were "competitive" and "in the game" for many of our losses. This is true. And most of them were a case of the coaching on the other bench overcame the talent on our roster. Lottich cost us quite a few games this year with late game decisions and/or lack of decisions. The Loyola game comes to mind, you could see that collapse coming at halftime.
And all the talk of Brandt Hall. I made the decision to move 500 miles to transfer to VU from a little state school back home that I was commuting to, 20 years ago. 20 years ago Brandt was already behind the curve and almost caused me not to transfer to VU. Brandt isn't just affecting athletic recruiting, it's probably a big driving force in the lack of enrollment overall. Valpo isn't keeping up with the competition in that regard, and hasn't been for 2+ decades.
In the early/mid 2000's we had a new library, union, the Huegli replacement, "welcome center," meteorology building, and other construction projects. It was honestly a bit annoying going to college on a giant construction site knowing by the time that stuff got built I'd already be graduated and never get to enjoy most of them. Also in that time, VU made arrangements with Compass Pointe for off campus housing and then that "Uptown" or whatever it was called was built as private partnerships costing VU almost nothing. Why not more private partnerships for housing like almost all other universities do these days? Law school land could be Valpo's "investment" with the developer to develop that housing. With the significantly reduced enrollment these days, does Brandt even need to exist capacity wise? Furthermore, with all of those buildings going up 20ish years ago, one would think that any/most notes/bonds taken on those projects are close to or already paid off by now. That should free up some capital.
You may have missed this from a different thread, but the development is already underway which will include the old law school property.
https://www.yahoo.com/now/avro-development-announces-vitalize-valpo-150400227.html
Watching the NCAAT and all the screens and movement. Hope Lottich is watching it too. Also watched Valpo vs. Maryland NCAAT game.
We are going to need a really good coach to overcome the facilities and a small town/small school. I'm afraid will become Wichita St. in the American, Butler in the Big East, should I dare to say it, Oklahoma in the SEC.
Dont crucify me for this thought, but...
Maybe the question needs to be asked - does Valpo really belong in the Valley and should they consider a move back to the Horizon or ??? If the commitment isnt there from the University BOD and Administration (Padilla can talk all he wants, it is actions that matter), then maybe the best step is to take a step back. Something that the next AD may need to think about.
Brian
Quote from: bmlvu97 on March 20, 2022, 11:17:34 AM
Dont crucify me for this thought, but...
Maybe the question needs to be asked - does Valpo really belong in the Valley and should they consider a move back to the Horizon or ??? If the commitment isnt there from the University BOD and Administration (Padilla can talk all he wants, it is actions that matter), then maybe the best step is to take a step back. Something that the next AD may need to think about.
Brian
Great question and I will also think about it.
Absolutely not. Much more athletic and financial stability being tied to the MVC versus the HL. The MVC is a long-term conference for a school like Valpo
Too bad Valpo doesn't have a coach and team like St. Peter's. Very impressive performance indeed.
Quote from: valpotx on March 20, 2022, 01:54:36 PM
Absolutely not. Much more athletic and financial stability being tied to the MVC versus the HL. The MVC is a long-term conference for a school like Valpo
You gave the right answer but I think Brian was implying the deeper question which is also a point of honor. If we are not committed to compete with the best in the Valley then why are we hanging around and spongeing off its productive members?
Quote from: justducky on March 20, 2022, 06:01:40 PM
Quote from: valpotx on March 20, 2022, 01:54:36 PM
Absolutely not. Much more athletic and financial stability being tied to the MVC versus the HL. The MVC is a long-term conference for a school like Valpo
You gave the right answer but I think Brian was implying the deeper question which is also a point of honor. If we are not committed to compete with the best in the Valley then why are we hanging around and spongeing off its productive members?
[/b]
This is premature to say the least. We've been in the Valley for 5 years. Evansville has been in the Valley for 28 years. We had a big hole to fill to get up to Valley standards and it will take a while but progress is being made--witness the new broadcast abilitiy of both baseball and softball. This was a Valley requirement.
The more important question is where do we "belong" and the answer is clearly with schools like Belmont, Drake, Bradley, Indiana State and Evansville or with schools like Cleveland State, Youngstown State, Fort Wayne and IUPUI?
This may belong in a separate item, but because it's so relevant to this thread about the future of VU's MBB program, I thought I'd post it here. It's about a forthcoming book by Graham Honaker and Jerry Logan, Unbracketed: How Four College Basketball Programs Burst the Bubble and Made the Big-Time, to be published in November. It purports to be the inside story about how Villanova, Gonzaga, Loyola-Chicago, and Davidson found a key to long-term success. Here's the link to the publisher's description:
https://www.pediment.com/products/unbracketed-college-basketball-hardcover-book (https://www.pediment.com/products/unbracketed-college-basketball-hardcover-book)