Messages

I did some number crunching:[/size]All these averages are over 5 years - they only include the teams listed, regardless of conference switches (aka NKU's ASUN years are tabbed in, and Loyola's RPI hit is factored in MVC, and not Horizon's)Horizon avg (includes valpo)188.9MVC avg (includes wsu)155.5Horz no Valpo200.5MVC no WSU170.4Horz no Valpo, add Fort Wayne197.1MVC no WSU, add Valpo161.8MVC no WSU, add Murray, add Valpo159.2MVC no WSU, add Murray, add Valpo159.2MVC no WSU, add Murray, Valpo, and UWM164.05Horizon, no UWM, no Valpo, add IPFW194.8Any other combination?

Horizon, keep Valpo, no UWM

Exactly. Also, you're taking out the strongest team retroactively while still dinging the remaining teams for fewer wins/more losses to a team that isn't there. It's not an accurate picture. Also, it's a one-year sample. Need to look at least 5-year trends and build in probabilities vs. an MVC schedule compared to HL schedule (with all of the variables included) to get anything resembling a projection model with an ounce of confidence in its forecasting ability. In short, you can't project the MVC minus WSU by simply removing the Shockers from 2017's conference RPI because Wichita was still in the conference and everyone played them, for good and for ill.

You guys are missing the point. Yes, if want to compare the MVC going forward with Valpo to the Horizon going forward without Valpo, then you'd certainly have to account for Valpo, wouldn't you? But what if Valpo decided not to move? Then the comparison would be the MVC without Valpo or Wichita to the Horizon with Valpo. And in that case, the leagues would be very close. If Milwaukee were to move to the MVC, the Horizon would rank higher.

In other words, the goal is not to compare the MVC with Valpo replacing Wichita to the Horizon having lost Valpo. It's  to compare the MVC without Valpo replacing Wichita to the Horizon keeping Valpo--which is where we would be going forward if Valpo doesn't move. And the bottom line that results is that--once Wichita is out of the picture, which it is--which conference has a better conference RPI depends almost entirely on which conference Valpo chooses to play in. For Valpo, then, there is very little difference. If Valpo goes to the MVC, the MVC will be better in conference RPI (based on last year's numbers). If Valpo stays in the Horizon, the two will be almost identical. If Valpo turns the Valley down and Milwaukee then gets and takes the invite, the Horizon will be better.

As to the fact that all the numbers would change because schedules would change, I acknowledged exactly that. But in point of fact, that would actually help the Horizon in the comparison, because we would subtract from  the MVC its team with the best non-conference record, which is the main driver of conference RPI (since, by definition, conference teams play .500 ball against one another).

Again, this is just one factor in the calculation--others have mentioned many reasons to prefer the Valley. And as acknowledged, this is based just on one year, and you certainly want to consider longer term potential. But just in terms of conference RPI, at least based on the strengths of the teams last year, Valpo doesn't much benefit from joining the Valley. Wherever Valpo hangs it hat (based on last year, of course) will have the advantage.

Some food for thought: Last year the MVC was 12th, and the Horizon 17th in Conference RPI. Now, the numbers don't really translate exactly because all the schedules would change, but for simplicity sake, we'll assume they transfer--they'd be close, so I doubt there's any meaningful difference, and to the extent there is, it would translate in favor of the Horizon in the example below. Take Wichita out of the MVC, and the MVC falls to 15th in Conference RPI (and, of course, there's no way the conference gets a second bid). Now, take Milwaukee out of the Horizon and move it to the MVC, and the Horizon is 15th and the MVC 17th. Add the dreaded Fort Wayne to the Horizon as a 10th team, same result. In fact, the difference increases in favor of the HL. And the same is true if you add Murray State to the MVC--the difference further increases to favor the HL. So just maybe, if you want a stronger conference, the best thing for Valpo is to pass, save the exit fees, and let Milwaukee go to the MVC.

Yes the MVC was 12th in a very down year. The only 2 really competitive teams last year were WSU and IL St (really good teams). I'm willing to bet UNI, Bradley, SIU, & E-Ville rebound with in the next few years. Its almost for a fact Loyola will be better next year (very good recruiting classes the last 2 yrs), and I have faith MO St, IN St, and Drake can be solid one day (specifically MO St). Would also be nice being in a Conference with In-State rivals again. The HL can not provide In-State rivals and adding schools like IPFW or IUPUI would make us just want to leave even quicker. I think adding schools like Murray St (not leaving for the HL) and Belmont would be great for the HL (sounds like they are not leaving the OVC). I am willing to bet our future on those schools compared to the current HL's schools. Those schools are more committed and have a better track record, not to mention they are just a better fit for Valpo's culture. Valpo fans have grown tired of non-competitive the HL schools coming into the ARC. The OU games would be FUN IF THE HORIZON LEAGUE SCHEDULE MAKERS WOULD ACTUALLY SCHEDULE RIVALRY GAMES WHEN STUDENTS ARE ON CAMPUS!!! The HL also gave us ONE SATURDAY HOME GAME this year against a terrible YSU team! I'm sick of the ridiculous scheduling. If the Horizon League tossed out YSU and Cleveland State out of the Conference then they'd get Valpo Fans attention (specifically YSU). YSU's administration has made it crystal clear that Football is their priority which is not in alignment of the Horizon League. I feel really bad for Cleveland State because of the transfer epidemic over there but their latest hire is head scratching and doesn't give me confidence that they will be able to get back to where they were as a program and at the very least it will take a while. The Horizon League is no doubt on the up-swing but they are also a few coaching poaching away falling back again. I feel MUCH more confident hitching our wagon onto the MVC over the HL. The HL is not the same caliber of League when we initially joined and nor is the MVC the same league that it was even 4 years ago but the prospects are still better over there compared to the HL. I really appreciate the Horizon League providing an opportunity for Valpo to grow but I believe it is time for us to leave and find a better fit.

I agree with this and Oklahoma Mick's points. You should probably take the invite if it comes. I'd want my Titans to do it. What I'm just pointing out is that it's really not an uncontestable decision, and wouldn't be a catastrophe to be passed over. And there are lots of factors we--or at least I--don't know:
- What is the Horizon's exit fee? Over how many years can it be paid? Will the MVC help with it?
- What arrangements will there be for NCAA money? Will Valpo just start collecting the shares from past years that would otherwise have been part of the conference's distribution to Wichita? Or something else?
- What are the comparative travel costs, keeping in mind "non-revenue" sports, too?
- What conditions might the MVC put on for better facilities, etc.? Can Valpo afford those? Do they mix with the University's plans?
Most of all, what does one predict for the future of these conferences? The MVC is probably better, but there is the threat of it splintering over teams wanting to play BCS football.


I do think this is wrong:

Everyone seems to love making projections on a move based on the MVC without WSU, but want to compare them to an HL with Valpo from this past year. Gotta remove VU from the HL's equation to get a true apples-to-apples projection. If you're going to use a single backward-looking metric (2017 rankings), you can't remove the highest-ranking example from the data set from one league and compare it to another league where you haven't altered that data set and use that as a forward-looking projection. I sure as hell hope no one is making decisions of this magnitude based on patchwork analytics like that.

Yes, if Valpo goes to the MVC, the MVC would still have had a higher RPI than the HL, but not by a lot (and depending on what other teams join). But if Murray State and/or Milwaukee go, and Valpo stays in the Horizon, based on last year's data the HL would be better. And that's exactly the point I was making. Take Wichita out of the MVC, leave Valpo in the Horizon, and the leagues look equivalent. Move the weak sister Milwaukee from the Horizon to the MVC, the Horizon looks better--at least last year. The point is, in a sense, that Valpo controls which conference would have the higher RPI. So Valpo wouldn't moving to the conference with the higher RPI, it would be creating the higher RPI. Which pretty much takes the conference RPI stuff out of the equation--though you would, of course, want to look at more data and, most importantly, predictions going forward.

Anyway, if you go, we'll miss you, a lonely private in sea of publics...

Some food for thought:
Last year the MVC was 12th, and the Horizon 17th in Conference RPI. Now, the numbers don't really translate exactly because all the schedules would change, but for simplicity sake, we'll assume they transfer--they'd be close, so I doubt there's any meaningful difference, and to the extent there is, it would translate in favor of the Horizon in the example below.

Take Wichita out of the MVC, and the MVC falls to 15th in Conference RPI (and, of course, there's no way the conference gets a second bid). Now, take Milwaukee out of the Horizon and move it to the MVC, and the Horizon is 15th and the MVC 17th. Add the dreaded Fort Wayne to the Horizon as a 10th team, same result. In fact, the difference increases in favor of the HL. And the same is true if you add Murray State to the MVC--the difference further increases to favor the HL. So just maybe, if you want a stronger conference, the best thing for Valpo is to pass, save the exit fees, and let Milwaukee go to the MVC.

HL had 2 this year with NKU at RPI 85. Only VU in 15-16 at 31.  Us at 56 and GB at 60 in 14-15. GB at 69 and CSU at 91 in 13-14.   2012-13     Can't find it. Did we have any top 100 HL company that year?

Detroit was #71 in 2012-13.

For my friends on the Valpo board, my Titan preview today is late and short, but here you go: http://detroittitanhoops.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3155&p=46125#p46125

followed by Georgia at the McRena—the best non-con home game for any Horizon team this year. Very well written as always with the notable misstatement noted above.  In the latest poll Rhode Island is ranked 24th while Georgia is ranked 46th receiving 6 votes.  At home, Oakland should win that one. Clearly the nod goes to Valpo for scheduling.

Rhody is likely a tougher opponent this year but I consider Georgia--a Power 5 school--a better scheduling "get." I think for the casual fan Georgia is a bigger name, and I think a W over Georgia gathers a bit more attention from that casual fan than a W over Rhody (although if Rhody is ranked at game time, that will certainly draw attention.) Detroit had Rhody into Calihan just a couple years ago--hosting an SEC team is pretty rare--I think the last was UD hosting Mississippi State in 2011. Other than Wisconsin playing at its in-state sister schools, I think the last Power 5 school to play at a Horizon school was Virginia at Green Bay three years ago.


So that was my thinking. Here's another post I put together in my bored, nerdy moments, ranking the best and worst non-conference games this year.  http://udtitanbasketball.freeforums.net/post/6428/thread

Thanks to those who expressed compliments for the previews.

I have a little table collecting the various preseason predictions here http://udtitanbasketball.freeforums.net/post/6350/thread

Great read. I suspect you rate Calihan too low, given that Detroit had the longest home winning streak in the country around the turn of the century, and one of the longest--maybe 4th or 5th--as recently as 2013.

But maybe not.

View from Detroit fan: Robbed. As good a case for a waiver as you'll ever see.

Has any HL team had two players in the NBA at the same time?

[/size]
Detroit, Willie Green and Ray McCallum during the 2014-15 season.


Detroit also had multiple players in the NBA in the at various points from 2003-2006 with Willie Green and Jermaine Jackson and Green and Desmond Ferguson. If you count the Horizon by its old name, the MCC, during the 1982-83 season Detroit alums Earl Cureton, Terry Duerod, John Long, Terry Tyler, Spencer Haywood and Joe Kopicki were in the NBA simultaneously. The MCC launched in the fall of 1979. Detroit joined in 1980 and from 1980 through 1989, there were always at least three Titan alumni in the league simultaneously. The Titans had two players in the League (Cureton and Long) in 1997.


The Titans had multiple players in the League several times before joining the MCC, and one Titan, Lee Knorek, played in the first ever NBA game on Nov. 1, 1946.


What's that Springsteen song I'm thinking of?

A, D, E, G, K, N, O, R

Good post.

I'm just feeling all kumbaya this morning, so I though you all might appreciate a post I put on the general HL forum. Post below.

Love, Commish
-----

I just note that on the team boards around the league almost everyone--except, of course, at Valpo--seems to think COY should have gone to Green Bay's Linc Darner or WSU's Billy Donlon. While you can make a good case for both (I'd prefer Darner), I think people are selling Bryce Drew short.

The common line is "Valpo was the favorite, and they won." Or "he just had to stay out of the way."

Well, I don't think being the preseason favorite should lower your odds of post-season recognition. Note nobody says "well, Kay Felder is quicker and a better passer than anyone else in the league, so he just had to do his thing. Why name him POY?" And you have to ask, "how did Valpo come to be the conference favorite?" It came to be the conference favorite largely because of Drew's recruiting and coaching. But we're not going to give him COY when he recruited Peters, Adekoya, Carter, and Fernandez. And now we're not going to give him credit for coaching them?

Further, Drew actually had significant challenges this year. He lost his projected back-up center, 7-0 freshman Smits, before the season began. Valpo had injuries that forced Victor Nickerson and David Skara each to miss about a quarter of the season, and play hurt in other games. Tevonn Walker was also slowed for several games, missing a few. Drew took Valpo through a non-conference schedule that involved opening the season with 7 games in 11 days, including a trip to the West Coast.

And Valpo was one of the top 3 defensive teams in the nation, by any criteria. Getting players to play tough defense and do it well is, to me at least, one of the toughest things a coach can do. It requires players to be willing to give up the glory of gaudy top stat lines (how many more points would Alec Peters have scored if Valpo just let it go and played at the pace of OU or Green Bay? Would he have scored 24 points and grabbed 10 rebounds per game and been POY? Would Keith Carter have made all-conference with 6 assists and 15 points per game? etc.). It is hard work--not as fun as fast breaks and knocking down pull up threes. Drew also had to keep happy a bunch of players who might have had substantially more playing time playing elsewhere.

And Valpo was remarkably consistent. Though Wright State had their goat, Valpo never played a really bad game. One of their WSU losses was by 11, but their other 4 losses were by a total of 15 points. They took Oregon down to the final 30 seconds on the road. Their road win over Oregon State was probably the conference's best win (possibly rivaled by Milwaukee over Wisconsin, though Wisconsin at the end of the season is clearly not the Wisconsin that Milwaukee played). This type of consistency and mental toughness is also a tribute to coaching. Donlon did fine work at Wright State, but losing to UIC? Valpo never had a slip up like that. Linc Darner's club lost to a so-so Georgia Tech team by 30. Valpo never fell apart like that in a game.

Taking nothing away from Darner or Donlon (or Greg Kampe, who did a good job this year merging a bunch of transfers, or John Brannen, who exceeded most expectations at NKU), I actually thought the selection of Drew as Coach of the Year was one of the easier choices for post-season recognition.

Interesting discussion, I hope you don't mind my chiming in on your board.

The Summit's thrashing of the Horizon in conference RPI this year is a fluke born of a couple or really bad Horizon teams, and scheduling. It can't be pointed out enough that while RPI rewards an individual team for mediocre record against a tough non-conference schedule, it doesn't work if every team in the conference takes that approach. The Summit's non-conference schedule ranks 30th (the Horizon's was 14th). But they got of lot of wins playing those crap teams. Now RPI recycles those wins through each team's RPI again and again in conference play. The losses the Horizon took out of conference cycle through each teams RPI again and again.

Conference RPI is not something to be totally ignored, but it's really a toy more than an analytical tool. That's a big reason why the NCAA has always insisted, correctly, that teams, not conferences, get tournament bids. Overscheduling is a problem in the Horizon, true. But basically you've got a very down year in the Horizon, and a very up year in the Summit, and still in the more sophisticated ranking systems, Sagarin and KenPom, the conferences are about equal. The Summit is not as good a conference as the Horizon, not really close. Yet. Still, we want that Conference RPI number up, for a lot of reasons.

The Conference was badly hurt by transfers this year. A Cleveland State team with Grady and Lewis (and Keane, I suppose) would be very good team, and raise the conference considerably (not only would it's score be higher, but it would make everyone else's higher). Remember also that YSU lost its leading scorer, Marcus Keene, to transfer.

League should be better next year barring such events. UIC is really rotten, but some of its freshmen/sophs have talent --  they could be quite a bit more competitive next year. YSU, with Hain injured, plays no seniors. They're not very good this year, but they've got a lot of good shooters coming back. Detroit -- which was picked 4th, not third in the conference, but point taken a3uge-- loses Anton Wilson, but other than Wilson our best players are the junior Jenkins and then all freshmen and sophs. You'll lose a lot in Carter, Walker, Vashil, but should be pretty good, esp. if Smits comes through to fill the center spot. OU doesn't lose anybody but Gibson, and he's not integral, and his replacement, Brechting, should be as good by next year. It's not always good to have a bunch of bad players coming back, but nonetheless, few Horizon teams are going to be hit hard by graduation. Green Bay (which loses just two players, but its two best) is hit, and Wright State (loses four key players). I suppose you could say Milwaukee (Tiby and Panoske, back up guard Lyle). NKU loses a couple of its best players but they've got an excellent recruiting class. The guys they're losing were good Atlantic Sun recruits. The guys they're adding are good Horizon recruits.

Which brings up that last year was a good recruiting year for the league. There is much more depth in this freshman class than two years ago (that class did have Peters and Felder, but not much else). The league's best players, including Peters and Felder, return.

The league should be solid next year.

You guys have a better offense than you're giving yourselves credit for. I think you can run with Oakland if need be, and definitely win a game in the 80s or 90s. It seems to me that the Crusaders emphasize defense because you can; Oakland emphasizes offense because it must.

Since WH posts this thread, here was my non-conference wrap up, for you insominiacs.

Horizon League Non-Conference Wrap Up and Preview:

Except for a stray game that Green Bay plays at Chicago State on January 19, Horizon teams are now done with non-conference play. All 10 teams open conference play on Saturday in what, as usual, should be an entertaining and unpredictable race for the regular season title and seeding in the all-important conference tournament.

The Horizon League's "official" preseason poll of coaches, SIDs, and media predicted the following finish:
1.   Valparaiso
2.   Oakland
3.   Milwaukee
4.   Detroit
5.   Wright State
6.   Green Bay
7.   Cleveland State
8.   UIC
9.   Youngstown State
10.   Northern Kentucky

That was also the order of a consensus of 16 various preseasons rankings by publications, computer whizzes, and seemingly reasonable bloggers. udtitanbasketball.freeforums.net/post/4849/thread.

The Horizon this year has the biggest gulf between the top and the bottom that I can remember, and the teams segregate themselves into three relatively clear tiers. In the top tier are Valpo, Oakland, and Milwaukee. In the second tier you've got Green Bay, Detroit, Wright State and Cleveland State. The bottom consists of Youngstown, UIC, and Northern Kentucky.

The Top Tier. In my preseason previews I wrote "For reasons that are nearly inexplicable to me, Valpo was not a unanimous choice to win the Horizon in the Conference pre-season poll. But they were a heavy favorite."

For the rest of the league, I noted in my Oakland preview, "Oakland is the trendy pick to finish second in the Horizon this year, and why not? I mean, somebody's got to finish second. It can't be Valparaiso, because they're going to finish first. It can't be Detroit, because since Valpo is finishing first, the highest you can pick Detroit is second, but Detroit always underperforms predictions, so the highest the Titans can actually finish is third. Green Bay and Cleveland State lost too much. Wright State has too far to climb, Northern Kentucky is too new, UIC too young, Youngstown State too Youngstown Statey. That leaves Oakland or Milwaukee. I'll pick Oakland." Specifically, I said in my Milwaukee preview "I won't argue if you want to pick them third," even as I confessed that "I don't see the title contender Milwaukee fans seem to think they have."

I've seen little that makes me alter those thoughts, although there some nuances.

I still think Valpo is the favorite to win the league championship. Even with the slip ups at Ball State (which has played better than expected) and Belmont, the Crusaders have compiled the league's best non-conference resume. Their 10-3 record is the conference's best. More importantly, they took two out of three of their big road games, against Oregon, Oregon State, and Rhode Island. The loss was to Oregon by 6 points in a game they were in until the end. Unfortunately, the loss at Belmont probably doomed their at-large hopes. They have no remaining margin for error.

How valuable Valpo's wins will be come NCAA seeding or at-large time we'll have to see. Rhode Island lost its best player, EC Mathews, in the first game of the season and, not surprisingly, has struggled a bit in non-con play (7-5). They need to emerge as the A10 contender that was predicted for that win to help Valpo much. Oregon State was projected as a middle of the pack PAC 12 team. They've played well so far, with an 8-2 record (losing at Kansas State in addition to Valpo), but they've only got one win over a top 100 RPI team (Tulsa). Their next 14 games are against teams that currently have top 100 RPIs, so we'll see what that win is worth to Valpo soon enough. Even losing to Oregon, at least when combined with the wins, is probably a small plus for Valpo—they showed they can play with the big boys on the road, and that matters to the NCAA selection committee, which above all wants at-large selections to produce exciting tournament games. But the loss at Belmont this week really hurts. If Valpo goes 16-2 in conference, losing at Oakland and Milwaukee, and then loses to OU in an Horizon League Championship game, they would finish 27-6 with an RPI probably in the mid-30s, probably with no top 50 wins (though Oregon State could squeeze into the top 50) and top 100 wins probably over Oregon State, Rhode Island, Oakland and Belmont. The only really bad loss would be at Ball State. That might get an at-large; probably not. So you can see they've got no room to slip up again.

Valpo has yet to play at full strength. Lexus Williams has recovered slowly from his ACL tear of a year ago, and has played fewer than 100 minutes. It may well be that he won't contribute much this year, but he still could. David Skara and Tevonn Walker have each missed a few games with nagging injuries. Darien Walker played through an ankle sprain for a couple games. And now Victor Nickerson is out with a hand injury and it's not sure when he'll be back.

Nonetheless, Valpo remains the deepest, most experienced team in the league, and the one that accomplished the most in the non-conference season. They are well-coached and always come well-prepared. I still consider them the favorite for the regular season title.

That said, Oakland appears better than I thought they would be. Basically, OU has performed at or near the top of what I thought it could. When I look at teams in the preseason, I try to figure out how many question marks there are—how many guys are being expected to improve substantially, how many guys are "promising" but have yet to actually do much; who is expected back from injury, etc. The odds are that not all question marks will yield positive answers, but some will. For Oakland, however, almost all the question marks have come in positive. All three of their transfers—Percy Gibson, Sherron Dorsey-Walker, and, since his eligibility in mid-December, Mellonhead Walker—have hit the upper range of expectations, and Kahlil Felder has been magnificent. Max Hooper has played quite a bit better than last year and Jalen Hayes is turning into a consistent beast. The loss of Tommie McCune before the season started was about the only wrong answer Oakland's gotten, but that was probably the least important of their question marks, and is rendered meaningless by how many positive answers they've gotten.

Oakland's play, including the narrow loss to Michigan State at the Palace, have convinced me that OU is more of a threat to Valpo than I thought in October. Having said that, however, Oakland hasn't done as much as some seem to think. They've got a couple nice road wins at Toledo and Washington, winning each convincingly. But those aren't exceptional victories (Washington, for example, lost at home this week to 4-7 UC-Santa Barbara and unless they surprise in PAC 12 play, is unlikely to crack the top 100 in RPI). Oakland's other six wins are against teams with a combined 6-46 record againt D-I competition. They've lost at Colorado State (7-5, KenPom #162) which has been disappointing this year, and at Southern Illinois (11-2, KenPom Ranking #112), which has far exceeded expectations. Neither loss, on the road, is embarrassing, but nor does losing those games scream out "Horizon Champs." The close losses to Georgia (on the road), Michigan State (neutral) merit respect, but they are losses, as is the game at Virginia. So I liked OU in October, I like them more now, but I still don't think they merit being picked over Valpo.

Then there's Milwaukee. The Panthers have a nice 9-4 record, including road wins over Wisconsin and Minnesota. Working against the Panthers' are losses to a subpar Murray State team on a neutral floor, a home loss to South Dakota, and a road loss to an awful Santa Clara team. It's fair to note that Wisconsin is also not its usual self, and Minnesota looks likely to finish near the bottom of the Big 10. I don't mean to take anything away from Milwaukee—those are very nice wins that I wish we had; it is always tough to beat a Big 10 team on the road; there's a very good chance that MSU, Purdue, Maryland, Indiana, Michigan or Iowa loses at one or both locations. I'm just trying to keep Milwaukee's wins in perspective—I'm not sure that either Wisconsin or Minnesota is more than an NIT team, and Minnesota, which is 6-7 with a #157 KenPom ranking, probably won't be even that. So again, while I'm higher on Milwaukee than I was two months ago, I still see the Panthers more as pretenders than champs.

A key to Milwaukee's success has been the play of point guard Jordan Johnson, a juco transfer who is second in the nation—to Felder—in assists (it's pretty cool that the Horizon has the top 2 in the nation in a major stat category). Pretty much everything has gone right for Milwaukee. They lost back-up guard Justin Jordan, who quit the team, but picked up Murray State transfer JayQuan McCloud this month, and he's played well in 4 games. The Panthers are capable of some big wins, but I don't see them having the consistency to beat out Valpo for the regular season title, nor do I see them with the same talent level as Oakland.

The Middle
The middle of the Horizon consists of Detroit, Green Bay, Cleveland State and Wright State. Detroit and Green Bay are dark horses to bust up the top three in the final standings, and all 4 of these clubs will be competitive.

Green Bay at this point may be the better bet than Detroit, if only because the Phoenix have won three road games, even if all three were against Ohio Valley teams. They've also got an embarrassing loss at East Tennessee State. Their best wins are at home against Akron and on the road at Morehead State. Carrington Love has emerged as a big time scorer, and Jordan Fouse remains the definition of "glue guy."

Detroit has looked good at home (6-0) and bad on the road (0-5). The schedule favors a fast start by Detroit—if the Titans have more than 2 losses by mid-January, they're through.

At the start of the year I saw Wright State as a team that could make the biggest comeback in the conference, mainly because last year was so ruined by injuries. They just weren't that bad. With JT Yoho and Steve Davis back from injuries, and some solid transfers coming in for depth in Biggie Minnis and Mark Alstork, a turnaround seemed very possible. But WSU has been hit again by injuries, losing Davis and back up guard Brandon Neel for the season. Guards Minnis and Justin Mitchell have missed several games. By mid-December I was ready to write Wright right out of the race, after a neutral court loss to a dreadful Cal-State Northridge team and road losses to mediocre squads from George Mason and Miami. But Wright proceeded to win their next three against Charleston Southern, Bowling Green, and Murray State. Granted, all three were at home, and Charleston Southern isn't any good, but BGSU and Murray State are sound enough. Wright crushed both, beating the Falcons by 36 points and the Racers by 16. So I can't relegate the Raiders to the bottom tier yet.

Cleveland State is just 5-8 overall, 3-8 in D-I play, but they've played a tough schedule, #35 nationally so far. Wins over Belmont and at Loyola suggest that they, too, could be dangerous in Horizon play. What should be worrisome for CSU are home losses to Bowling Green, Ohio, and Kent State. You have to win those games at home. They can certainly beat Detroit.

The Dregs. At the bottom of the conference we find Northern Kentucky, Youngstown, and UIC. UIC has some talented freshmen but they are winless against D-I competition. NKU's only D-I wins are over Norfolk State and 1-10 SE Missouri State. Looks like a long first year. Youngstown State had a 4 game winning streak a while back, but enters conference play having lost 4 of 5 en route to a 5-8 record.

Where Sits the Horizon. Of course, we all want to be in a better conference, or at least most of us do. Some even think we are entitled to it, because, hey, Dave DeBusschere played here, and that's just 50 some years ago. But for now we're stuck in the Horizon, so we need the HL to be the best it can be.

Unfortunately, this year that's not too good. Currently the Horizon ranks 15th in RPI, an improvement from last year's final 17th, which in turn was the worst for the Horizon in a long time. Unfortunately, this year's RPI is likely to sink further as conference play begins. That's because, although it's gotten better in the last two weeks, the Horizon still has an awful non conference record of 42-56 against D-I competition (Horizon teams are 18-0 against non-DI opponents, which doesn't factor into RPI). The Conference RPI has been floated by the fact that the Conference SOS so far is 4th best in the nation, and SOS is the biggest single factor in RPI. But the low winning percentage drags it way down. And once conference play begins, all those non-conference losses will keep recycling through each HL team's RPI, and be a major component of their opponents' opponents record, the 3rd factor in RPI. As it stands now, RPI Forecast sees the Horizon finishing 18th in RPI.

Oddly, the conference's weakness may improve the odds of getting a second team to the NCAA this year, which the conference badly needs both for prestige and because the money from Butler's two final four runs is about to disappear. With the bottom of the conference so weak, it should be possible for the top teams to run up glittering W-L records. That means higher RPIs for the top, and better looking wins when they play each other. Valpo benefits more if it beats a team with a 200 RPI and another with an 80 RPI than if it beats two teams with RPIs of 135 and 145, simply because that win over the 80 shows up as a quality win.

That said, it's hard to see an at-large coming. OU fans like to dream about it, but according to RPI Forecast, if Oakland were to go 17-1 in conference, losing only at Valpo, and were then to lose again in the tournament final to Valpo, it would have an RPI of about 50. With just 1 top 50 win—and that's a maybe, presuming Valpo stays top 50—and likely no other top 100 wins, OU would have almost no chance of an at-large bid. And that, of course, is a pretty optimistic projection. Doing the same for Milwaukee yields an RPI of about 65. They'd have top 100 wins over Valpo and possibly Oakland and Wisconsin. That won't do it, either. So, Horizon fans hoping for a second bid need to root for Valpo to run the table, or close to it, and then lose to their team in the conference tournament final. At least Valpo would have a shot.

Here are what I consider the 10 best non-conference wins for the Horizon this year, considering opponent, home/away, and the final score and dominance:

1.   Valparaiso 63-57 @ Oregon State
2.   Milwaukee 68-67 @ Wisconsin
3.   Valparaiso 58-55 @ Rhode Island
4.   Oakland 97-83 @ Washington
5.   Milwaukee 74-65 @ Minnesota
6.   Oakland 76-64 @ Toledo
7.   Green Bay 66-63 vs. Akron
8.   Detroit 76-73 v. Northeastern
9.   Green Bay 78-72 @ Morehead State
10.   Valparaiso 69-63 @ Indiana State

Not a very impressive lot.

Meanwhile, here is another bad stat: Average attendance in non-conference home games this year is 2361: a decline of just over 5 percent from last year's 2490. And that's with a decline from 58 to just 50 home games, despite adding a 10th team. Take out Northern Kentucky, and the 9 holdover schools still have a cumulative decline of over 3 percent.

Finally, here is how the Horizon did against various other conferences this year:

Read more: http://udtitanbasketball.freeforums.net/thread/487/2015-non-conference-wrap#ixzz3w8uS4Q2n

Our team is the most talented since Detroit's 2011-2012 team?  Valpo won the regular season championship that year, so wouldn't we be the most talented team since...Valpo of 2011-2012? lol  Detroit got hot at the right time.  I like the comparison that ESPN had the other day, saying that our team was the most talented HL team since Butler's 2010-2011 team

The preview says "highly touted," not "talented." Detroit was generally predicted as a Top 60, if not Top 40 team at the start of the 2011-12 season. See e.g. http://www.searchingforbillyedelin.com/2011/11/7/2545894/college-basketball-preview-top-10-non-bcs-conference-teams. That's what I'm referencing. Hopefully (for you, for the Horizon) Valpo won't flame out early like Detroit did in 2011-12.

Just a couple notes on Milwaukee, responding to a few of Panther U's comments:

It should also be noted that when Commissioner's preview went up, we had no idea that Austin Arians (11.1 ppg) would be out for the season.
* * *
Also, Akeem Springs spent two months playing with a broken hand that a trainer had diagnosed as a sprain.
* * *
I only bring these up because a lot of our fans' hopes for the season wouldn't have been as high without the two guys expected to create 90% of our scoring on the wing.

Here Panther U seems to suggest that Milwaukee underperformed last year (at least per Milwaukee fan expectations) because of injuries. Well, no. Milwaukee hardly suffered an injury-free year, and obviously would have been better without those injuries, but life wasn't so bad. Basically, they lost Arians for the year, and Springs missed two games and playing hurt in some others. That's not an unusual or particularly unlucky year. Injuries are part of the game. You guys, after all, lost Lexus Williams for the season and Keith Carter for a substantial part. You had more injury issues last year than Milwaukee. My Titans lost Patrick Onwenu, our main inside guy, minutes into the first game of the year. Wright State suffered far more injuries than Milwaukee, losing JT Yoho, Kendall Griffin, and Steve Davis for basically all the conference season, and watching Joe Thomasson and Reggie Arceneaux play hurt much of the year. UIC lost their best big man, McClellan, for a good stretch, and lost their starting point guards right out of the gate.  Cleveland State was without Charlie Lee and Marlin Mason for stretches. It wasn't a good year for Milwaukee on the injury front, but it wasn't an unusually bad year, either.

Ken Pomeroy ranked Milwaukee as the 75th luckiest team in the nation last year, that is to say, in the top 25 percent for "luckiness." (By comparison, the Titans were the 204th luckiest team (i.e. they were unlucky); Valparaiso 58th; Green Bay 100th; Oakland 136th). In other words, the stats say that the Panthers' 14-16 finish last season was no fluke—if anything, it was slightly better than the team really played.

Luck is whatever. Maryland was one of the "luckiest" teams in the NCAA last year. Duke, the national champions, were the 37th luckiest team in Division I. National runner-up Wisconsin was 145th luckiest. It's a meaningless stat.

It's meaningless only if you don't know what it means. To say Duke was luckier than Wisconsin is not to say that Duke wasn't better than Wisconsin, or didn't beat Wisconsin, or didn't deserve to beat Wisconsin. It's to say that if you could rerun the season with the same players, schedule, injuries, etc., Wisconsin would be more likely to do better than they did in the actual year than would Duke. Or, within the Horizon, if we could replay last season, Detroit would be more likely to improve than Valpo. That doesn't mean Detroit would be better than Valpo, not by a long shot. Far from being meaningless, however, "luck" is a pretty predictor of whether a team is likely to get better or worse if they kept all the same personnel. Of course teams change personnel and players get better (or sometimes worse), there are more less injuries, etc. But basically, this is saying that when Milwaukee finished 14-16, it wasn't because they got some bad breaks--bad calls, a shot that rattled out at the buzzer, a freak bounce that caused them to lose a game, etc. What it says is that they really were a 14-16 team (or worse). So if you want to think about Milwaukee getting better, you start by recognizing that they were not a bad bounce or two away from being 17-13 last year. In truth, the opposite is more likely--they were a lucky bounce or two (or referee's call, or shot) away from having a poorer record than 14-16. If you want to ignore that in predicting them forward, fine, but it's not that the stat is meaningless, it just means you don't know what it means or how to use it.

Milwaukee loses just one important player, but that loss is a big one—its best player, Steve McWhorter, who played the most important position, point guard. On the other hand, they get back redshirt junior small forward Austin Arians, who missed last season with an ankle injury. That swap seems unlikely to make Milwaukee better, so they have to hope for improvement elsewhere.

Comparing McWhorter to Arians is an odd one considering they're completely different players, but I understand he's talking about scoring.

Actually, I'm not comparing McWhorter to Arians, and I'm not talking about scoring. I'm saying that if you take last year's Milwaukee team, subtract McWhorter and add Arians, do you have a better team? I think the answer is pretty clearly "no." So if the Panthers are going to move from 14-16 to something remotely resembling contention, you've got to figure out where they're going to get better. Adding Arians back in doesn't do it.

"The small forward should be Arians, a catch and shoot guy who cuts and moves well without the ball and plays solid defense. I like Arians, but again, I think Milwaukee fans tend to think a bit too highly of him. As a sophomore in 2014 he averaged 11.1 points and 3.7 rebounds while shooting 36.7% from the three. That's good for a small forward but nothing special. Moreover, his numbers dropped in conference play, where he scored in single digits, and his three point shooting fell to a pretty mediocre 33 percent. Like Tiby and Panoske, he's a good foul shooter. After a year off he'll probably be a bit rusty to start, but I expect he'll be performing at or near 100% by the time conference play begins. How good is that? If all goes well for Milwaukee, Arians will contest for second team all-conference honors. But the wiser Panther fan will temper expectations. I see him as a good player but not a likely recipient of post-season honors."

I don't understand this. So Arians, as a sophomore, scored 11.1 points per game. He has a full year redshirt year in between, and he's "not a likely recipient of post-season honors." The only reason I don't see him getting post-season honors is if he doesn't improve at all or only a tiny bit. And if he averages 11-12 points and 4-5 rebounds, he'd be a shoo-in for 3rd team all-conference. Oh wait, we don't have a 3rd team. (ghostofdylan and I on the UWMFreak board have long held the Horizon League limiting all-conference honors to two teams stops a bunch of worthy players from being honored. We don't even have honorable mention!)

Case closed, right? We don't have a 3rd team all-conference. Arians is not a strong candidate for all-conference honors. But I chuckle at this too because Panther fans before last season were asserting that he was clearly one of the 10 best players in the league. I remember thinking that I could name 10 better players off the top of my head. Same this year. Some Panthers are touting him as POY. Really? It still isn't hard to name 10 better players in the league: Fouse, Tiby, Peters, Fernandez, Carter, 2 Walkers, Felder, Thomasson, Yoho, Bass, and Hain are all better players than Arians. You could add some others to that list who are at least as likely to contend for all-conference honors--Jalen Hayes, Nick Daniels, Andre Yates, Tai Odiase, Carrington Love, maybe even guys like Jalen Billups of NKU, Skara, Adekoya, Lexus, Grant Benzinger, Michael Karena, the OU transfers. It's worth noting I've yet to see Arians appear on anyone's pre-season all-conference team. Maybe Arians will improve enough to pass some of these guys. But maybe not.

Arians was how we were beating Villanova as late as we were in our NCAA Tournament game in March '14. This is a kid who went from 6.6 ppg as a freshman to 11.1 as a sophomore and then got a whole year to just focus on his game.

Yeah, he's a good player, I think I made that clear. But lots of guys show that kind of improvement from freshman to sophomore year. Meanwhile, there is very little evidence that players get better with a redshirt year in the middle of their careers, and pretty good evidence that it takes them a while to get back into the groove of actual game situations.

I'm a fan, and therefore I'm very biased. But I think Commissioner's strong dislike for Milwaukee is causing him to short change Arians here.

That's what Milwaukee fans said last year, too. But as Bogey's Rick Blaine replied when the lugubrious human smuggler Ugarte asked "you despise me, don't you?": "Well, if I gave you any thought I probably would." I don't dislike Milwaukee. I know it's harder for most people to face indifference than dislike, but they just don't get me worked up either way. I'm sorry I'm not wetting my pants about Arians. Valpo? I dislike (and respect) you guys.  OU I dislike. Milwaukee? Meh.

I think we'll challenge for a title, because I think while our front court is fairly thin, so is everyone else's.

The teams most people are listing 1-2, Oakland & the Crusaders, have considerable depth up front.  I'd say several other teams have more depth of front, too, but that doesn't mean they'll be better than Milwaukee.

Valpo preview is up, by the way. You all should like it well enough.

This tells me that we are struggling to close out our schedule.  Are multiple non D-1 home games in our future? [tweet]638054415975493632[/tweet]

No. You've got 10 definite games scheduled assuming Belmont is H&H this year. You'll probably schedule 1 non-DI game at home to round out the schedule (you get 11 non-conference games since you are not in an exempt tournament). That you haven't announce the schedule suggest that you are still trying to get a DI opponent. So it's 1 non-DI at most. Assuming Belmont.

http://udtitanbasketball.freeforums.net/post/3977/thread

I'm reading all this with interest because I think you guys can be really good this year, and the Horizon needs a) a ranked team (haven't had one since Butler left the league); b) a second NCAA bid (none since 2009); and c) an NCAA tournament win (none since 2011).

The NCAA requires schools to make grant in aid renewals (or better put, denials for returning players) by July 1. It is permissible to add a student after that date. So if (e.g.) Davidson was notified he's got a scholarship, he's got a scholarship this year, and it counts against the limit. But maybe they told him, per the above, that his scholarship was not renewed; they could still give him one if it turns out that Vashil doesn't come back. NCAA Rule 15.3.5.1. Also, if a player gets aid based solely on his academic performance at the school (that is, what he's done at Valpo, not high school tests or anything) he doesn't have to be counted. In addition to the school award, he must have at least a 3.0 at the institution. 15.5.1.1.1. How good a student is Davidson?

If a player was awarded a scholarship for the coming season but voluntarily leaves the team before the first day of fall classes, he doesn't count against the scholarship limit. 15.5.1.4.

If you were recruited for football, you count for football. If you were recruited for basketball, you count for basketball, unless you count for football. So Valpo can't stash Davidson on the swim team. 15.5.9.2.

I suppose the NCAA can waive any rule it wants if it wants, but the manual doesn't have any specific provision for an institution to get a waiver on the number of scholarships.

I wonder if we leave if we could get some of our exit fee waived....Because this is not what we signed up for.  The HL is massively different from what we entered 10 years ago.

the HL has been in a downward spin since Butler left.

You know I love you guys, but
1) This is not the Horizon the Titans signed up for either. You think it is different from 10 years ago--We signed up for a conference with Xavier & Evansville, with its sights set on Marquette, Dayton, DePaul, St. Louis, Bradley.
2) "A downward spiral since Butler left"? The league has been in a downward spiral since Marquette and St. Louis left in 1991. Look, Valpo has the most in common with Detroit of any current Horizon school, and of late has been the #1 program, year in and year out - starting even before Butler left. So I'm not trying to slight you when I say that for Detroit fans, Valpo is part of the decline. No offense, but Xavier or Dayton you ain't. Again, don't get me wrong - right now, you're about the best thing the league has going, and I'd hate to lose you. We sure ain't Xavier or Dayton - programs we once considered equals - anymore either. But that fact that you are the best thing going shows the decline of the MCC/Horizon. The conference we want, and were once in, was Butler, Dayton, Evansville, Loyola, Marquette, St. Louis, Xavier, and Detroit. If we could put that back together, we'd be happy to have you, too.


So...
1) No, you don't get your exit fee waived. If you can't afford the exit fee, you're not ready to move; and
2) Let's hope our programs can both soar in the next few years, and we can move on together!


Love ya,


The Commish

The Conference should be better next year. Assuming CSU doesn't lose Anton Grady and Trey Lewis (both of whom could transfer to a high major and be eligible immediately) 4 of 5 first team all-conference players return, and arguably all 4 were better than the guy who won conference POY. 6 of the top 10 scorers, 7 of the top 10 rebounders (including 5 of the top 6), 5 of the top 10 in assists, 6 of the top 10 in steals and blocks, return. If the league named a second team all-frosh, it would have been as good as you would have seen in several years, with players like Skara, Detroit's Jaleel Hogan, Milwaukee's Justin Jordan, UIC's Tai Odiase, YSU's Cameron Morse, maybe your guy Joseph.

It's also been a good recruiting year for many teams. You guys got Smits, a huge get for you and the the league. In most years he'd be rated the best recruit in the conference, easily, but he may not be the best recruit signed in the Horizon this year - Detroit signee Josh McFolley was ranked in the top 100 nationally by Lindy's and is generally considered the best senior point guard in the state of Michigan. Oakland also got a really good center, Brad Brechting, though he probably won't have a big impact as a frosh. Green Bay and Cleveland State had good recruiting years -  CSU signed a forward named Jeron Rogers who is really good and had high major offers. In many years *he* would be the best signee in the league. The league will also see an influx of talent that sat out this year -- red-shirted freshmen (Wright State has a couple redshirted big guys who might come through; Detroit will see Aaron Foster-Smith, a first team all-state forward in Michigan a year ago who many compare to Nick Minnerath, become eligible; there are a lot of other good redshirt frosh, such as CSU's Jon Janssen, "coming on line" next year), transfers (especially Oakland, which has Percy Gibson, a rotation player from Iowa State to plug in for Corey Petros; plus Sherron Dorsey-Walker also from Iowa State, who can give Felder some relief at the point as well play the #2; and Martez Walker, a first-team all-stater in Michigan who was a rotation player as a freshman at Texas, but left after an ugly incident of girl friend abuse; and also guys like your Hammink), and injuries (mainly your guy Williams, also Austin Arians from Milwaukee). Obviously transfers out could hurt -- YSU, as noted in this thread, has already gone from so-so to so, so bad with the loss of two of its three best returning playing - but overall, the new talent looks strong, and we still have spring signings to come.

I think the league overall improves, quite possibly by a lot.

Congratulations on your season, btw. I believe I wrote somewhere back in October that if the other Horizon teams didn't stop Valpo this year, it was going to be awfully hard to stop you guys the next couple seasons. I think you can have legit hopes for an at-large berth (if needed) and even a possible top 25 ranking next year, if your kids play to their full potential. Personally, as a Detroit fan, I see Valpo as a bigger rival than Oakland, although we need to get competitive again fast to really stoke this rivalry. But delaying your clinching the league title was at least something for Titan fans to enjoy in a disappointing year.

And I appreciate WH sharing my conference previews and such over here.

FWalum: I do have Peters 2nd team all-conference. He could easily be first team. I figured Sykes and Howard are gimmes for the first team. Like several folks here, I'm not a big Petros fan. But he was second team last year, and he's going to average 15 points and 8 rebounds this year. He'll be all-conference. After that I had Felder, Grady, Hain, Peters, and maybe Lewis (not necessarily in that order) as first team candidates. Some people think Felder will fall off without Bader and Mondy. I think he's the real deal. I left Peters on the second team mainly because not many sophs make the first team. He certainly could though - I think in my Valpo projection I even suggested he could be a strong POY candidate, and I still think that. A very valuable property when you figure he's only a sophomore. So it was sort of a coin flip. Grady and Felder (and Hain, too, for that matter; and, well, Peters and Lewis too for THAT matter) were playing really well at the end of last season.

I also included Carter (and Fernandez) as players to watch. Could have included Jubril and even Nickerson there, too. I also think Valpo has a couple guys who could be all-defensive team, esp. Fernandez (likely league leader in blocks, which voters will like), Carter, and even Peters. I don't think Valpo has all-frosh team contenders if for no other reason than I don't think the freshmen will get the playing time, but I could be wrong and one of the Canadian guards may force his way into the rotation or even the starting lineup with the loss of Williams and Yeo.

Cheers.

Apostle - love combat basketball. I still can't believe Laimbeer wasn't a 1st ballot Hall of Famer 

Hello Crusaders,

I don't post much on other boards (which I figure are for other teams' fans), but I read them a lot, and having a whole thread for me, well... I had just to register here and comment.

First, I thank WH for posting these previews, despite the obvious copyright violations.    Some guys sky dive, some work on cars, some collect stamps, some play Axis & Allies - my hobby is basically thinking about college basketball (and especially Horizon basketball) which takes up way too much of my time, probably. But it's my hobby. I write these mainly for my own enjoyment but I am pleased that others like them and that is part of the enjoyment I get from doing them. And no, Panther, I don't hate anyone, let alone Milwaukee.

Second, I've made a brief addition to the Valpo preview since WH posted it here - something I had intended to include but accidentally left out. It is this: "Valpo committed more turnovers last year than any other Horizon team, and now they've lost their point guard for the year." Of course, part of the reason Valpo led the league in turnovers is the relatively up-tempo style of play; part may be stone-hands or other errors in the front line. Still, if you lead the league and turnovers and lose your point guard, that's gotta hurt. Anyway, that was in my paragraph at the end of the preview for why my enthusiasm for Valpo had dropped as I'd written the preview. That further explains, rather than changes, my final assessment as it appears: "A finish somewhere between 3rd and 6th seems reasonable, probably towards the high end, but I do have my doubts." If I were pinned down, I'd say 3rd or 4th, but with some doubts. Pre-Williams injury, I'd say definite 3rd, with possibility to finish higher.

Finally, what's with all the stuff on the Canadians? I write like 40,000 words or something on your team, and that's what you all seem focused on?

To Apostle: Some people see a team sign a couple of guys who don't seem to be on anyone's radar, relatively late in the recruiting year, and think "desperation." And some see a team sign a couple of guys from a place where scouts aren't normally looking and think, "a hidden gem - a steal." The truth is likely in between - they're probably good enough players overlooked by others, but I've seen nothing that suggests that these guys are great, previously undiscovered finds. Maybe they'll turn out to be great finds. I suspect they'll turn out to be decent mid-major players, but neither a "steal," nor flops signed in desperation. Is that really so non-sensical?

BlackPanther's comment is a non-sequitur: I don't know of coaches who sign kids they don't want either. But you can't (and don't) always get what you want. The life of a recruiter is often signing 2nd or 3rd or 4th or 5th or 6th or lower choices, because the others have turned you down. I'm not saying that these two guys were Drew's 3rd choice or 6th or 25th choices. I don't know. And that's exactly the question people are asking: "Why did Drew sign these two guys no one else was following? Does he know something others don't know, or was he just at the point where recruiting wasn't going well, they were the best available to him, and better them than nothing?" Of course, there is that third option - something in between - even if Apostle thinks it makes no sense.

Which takes us to vu72. If you presume Coach Drew always gets his man, then yes, you might say "because Coach Drew chose to pass on any number of excellent players in the Midwest, there is little doubt about the skill level of these two coming to Valpo from Canada." Of course, you could say that about every Valpo recruit: "Because Coach Drew chose to pass on any number of excellent players in the Netherlands and elsewhere abroad, there is little doubt about the skill level of these two local signings." But that presumes the very issue in question. If you don't presume that Bryce always gets his man--and look at your own threads on 2014 recruiting, there were a fair number of guards getting offers from Valpo before these two were offered and signed (Erick Locke, Darreon Reddick, CJ Rivers, Jevon Carter - that's just a few of the many 2014 guards who passed on Valpo, there are more)--then it's a reasonable question if he a) was getting desperate to sign someone, and this was the best he could get; b) got a real steal - i.e. "found a pair of quality apples in an orchard not picked over," as WH suggests (I agree, good analogy, and I agree that overseas recruiting has been a big plus for Valpo); or c) was somewhere in between - he found a couple solid players others weren't on to, but neither is likely to have immediate impact. I'll take c), Monty. (And before anyone jumps on it, there's no shame in having several recruits turn you down - that's part of the point.) Being aware that several of Coach Drew's recruits have not turned out to be all-conference players, I think your formulation, vu72, which is basically "they must be really good, or he wouldn't have signed them" goes too far. I think that Coach Drew has shown enough on the recruiting trail that I don't at all blame you for trusting his judgment on the Canadians, or anyone else he signs, for that matter. But he doesn't always get his man, and his judgment is not always perfect, and with this type of signing the question seems natural.

Anyway, toss all that aside. C'mon, guys, a throw-away line on the Canucks is not what the preview is all about. Just substitute "he signed two guards from Canada that were not on the radar of most U.S. scouts," and read on.

Switching gears, and since I'm here, I really like the Valpo-Detroit rivalry. We're the only privates and the only religiously affiliated schools in the league anymore, similar in size, competitive of late (well, the Titans not so much last year) with Titans getting 2012 NCAA bid, Valpo 2013 bid, with a touch of bad blood, and we've played a bunch of exciting games over the last 3 years. I think it's potentially one of the best rivalries in the Horizon (maybe it already is, depending on how deep you can go and still be among the "best"). Looking forward to this year's games. Good luck.

Thanks wh for posting the previews here.

Commish

PS. I love a school that doesn't flinch from sticking with its traditional nickname "Crusaders" in an era of PC-dom.