Bracketbuster

[valpo84]

Did the Horizon add the 10th team? 10-0 in the bracketbuster would be pretty impressive.

[SanityLost17]

Brain lapsed back to last year.  I meant  9-0, 8-1, or 7-2.

[a3uge]

I think WH is correct.  However, I would add poor scheduling on our part to the list.  Too many teams on the schedule with really low RPI's.  Playing Chicago St., IUPUI, IPFW, Bethune Cookman, and NIU every year is not helpful.  Winning all 5 of those games is probably worse than going 3-2 agianst teams with RPI's in the upper in the 170-190 range, or 2-3 against teams with RPI's around the 70-90 range. 

So lets look at our OOC schedule (sorry about the formatting)...

Team   Result   2012-13 RPI   2011-12 RPI   2010-11 RPI
Georgia Southern     W   263   203   341
Northern Illinois     W   281   334   317
Nebraska     L   73   154   89
Kent St.     W   184   106   78
Chicago St.     W   297   336   339
Bethune-Cookman     W   288   239   198
Saint Louis     L   68   31   175
IPFW     W   302   279   180
New Mexico     L   7   26   66
Missouri State     W   225   112   43
Oakland     L   157   141   53
IUPUI     W   304   210   115
Murray St.     W   96   22   117
-------------------------------------------

Mean   196   169   162
Median 225   166   149

So before this season, the combined average RPI of the OOC teams was 169 and 162 the year before that... this year, the teams ended up being at 196 average RPI. Not good, but hardly Valpo's fault. And scheduling IUPUI and IPFW was done as a deal before last season (Valpo lost both those games last year). I'm assuming Valpo scheduled a couple home games last minute with Butler's departure. It's not like they can phone up Bucknell and get a competative mid-major matchup.

Valpo does have a hard time scheduling decent home games. Last year's OOC home games were Akron, Duquesne, Bowling Green, and Oakland. Nothing too exciting. This year UIPUI, IPFW, Bethune-Cookman, Chicago State, Northern Illinois, and Georgia Southern.

[historyman]

Valpo does have a hard time scheduling decent home games. Last year's OOC home games were Akron, Duquesne, Bowling Green, and Oakland. Nothing too exciting. This year UIPUI, IPFW, Bethune-Cookman, Chicago State, Northern Illinois, and Georgia Southern.

We are voting for our student section to be top 8 in the country for student sections and at the same time saying it's tough to schedule good home games. Duh!

Don't you think that other schools know this? This is the reason why Bryce had to start with away games at Murray State, Saint Louis, New Mexico, etc. this year so he could improve the home schedule for next year.

It can be a catch 22 but Bryce is working the system well.

[bbtds]

Valpo does have a hard time scheduling decent home games. Last year's OOC home games were Akron, Duquesne, Bowling Green, and Oakland. Nothing too exciting. This year UIPUI, IPFW, Bethune-Cookman, Chicago State, Northern Illinois, and Georgia Southern.

We are voting for our student section to be top 8 in the country for student sections and at the same time saying it's tough to schedule good home games. Duh!

Don't you think that other schools know this? This is the reason why Bryce had to start with away games at Murray State, Saint Louis, New Mexico, etc. this year so he could improve the home schedule for next year.

It can be a catch 22 but Bryce is working the system well.

It has been pointed out here before but it is a good point.

When I posted highlights of our game at home against Wright State on the SLU board they noticed 2 things. The small size of the gym but also the enthusiasm of the fans.

[VULB#62]

Though next season will be a rebuild/reload season with all the new freshmen coming in, I'd hope that the schedule will be a cut above 2012-13.  I say this because:

1)  The home return matches against STL, MSU, UNM (already a done deal)
2)  Whatever new teams are added to the HL for 2013-14 (the goal is to give the HL a second (at-large) slot in the NCAA so at least one should be a high RPI addition, right?)
3)  [Then my hope]  Valpo's increased respect quotient based on last year and this season will allow Bryce to replace the low RPI teams with higher RPI teams even if he has to go on the road to do it.

It seems to this [admittedly naive] VUBB fan that the program is now at a point where it should be stepping up the competitive level across the board.  Based on 2012-13 that seems to be the trend -- just gotta keep pushing the competitive OOC schedule envelope.

QUESTION:  Hypothetically, WHAT IF.... Murray State is one of the additions to the HL?  What does that do to the schedule?  Do we play them three times?  Or will the already scheduled game be incorporated into the HL schedule.  Just wondering   

[bbtds]

QUESTION:  Hypothetically, WHAT IF.... Murray State is one of the additions to the HL?  What does that do to the schedule?  Do we play them three times?  Or will the already scheduled game be incorporated into the HL schedule.  Just wondering

It would be negotiated. Most likely Valpo would play Murray State three times. As did Butler against Xavier. Their first game was not counted as a conference game.

[IndyValpo]

It would be negotiated. Most likely Valpo would play Murray State three times. As did Butler against Xavier. Their first game was not counted as a conference game.

I think Butler only plays X twice this year, the first game not counting against the conference.  No one ever schedules 3 games in a season so I do not think this will happen. 

[zvillehaze]

It would be negotiated. Most likely Valpo would play Murray State three times. As did Butler against Xavier. Their first game was not counted as a conference game.

I think Butler only plays X twice this year, the first game not counting against the conference.  No one ever schedules 3 games in a season so I do not think this will happen. 

Butler-X was going to be on ESPN, so neither team really wanted to give that up.  I also agree it might have been handled differently if Butler and X were playing twice as part of the A-10 schedule.

[zvillehaze]

Not sure I give a fig about the buster this year.     Since it's a home game, we can just take it in stride and get back to the business at hand.   Will take any seed this year.   Just get me back to the dance.

Disagree.  We MUST be a 13 seed or better on the years we do make the tournament!  We moved to a better league knowing we would make the tournament less, but when we did make it we would get a better seed, and with better recruits, have a better chance to win.  So here we are with 7 seniors and we are projected to get a 14 seed despite being 6-1 in the 12th ranked conference in the country.   NOT ACCEPTABLE!  Our SOS is absolutely terrible this year and we are in dire need of a win over a potential top 100 RPI team to help ease the pain of such a poor schedule.       

Your point is well made.  You are absolutely right that getting the same pathetic seed less often than we used to get is not a good trade off for our move to the HL.  I see 3 reasons for the dilemma we find ourselves in: (1) our SOS as you point out, (2) inexcusable losses to Oakland and Loyola (you HAVE to beat the teams you're supposed to beat), and (3) pathetic OOC W/L records by Milwaukee and Green Bay.  The GB thing is especially irksome because they dramatically underachieved at a time when it could have helped the conference, then miraculously get it together when it's of no help to anyone but themselves.  Very similar to what Detroit did last year.  Because of their piss poor OOC record, they earned a 15 seed.  Had they not won it, their piss poor OOC record would have negatively impacted the seed of whichever team did win it.  That's the biggest difference between us and the MVC, for example.  We typically have more teams at the far extreme of bad than they do. 

I totally agree with wh.  I've been harping on this for years when Valpo fans/beat writers/coaches would comment that losing non-conference games to the likes of IPFW or IUPUI didn't matter because Valpo wasn't getting an at-large bid anyway.  Now that Valpo is the team worrying about their potential NCAA seed, it's much easier to appreciate the impact of league teams taking bad losses in the non-conference.  As wh points out, it's even more frustrating when teams put in a mediocre performance in the non-con and then suddenly turn it on during league play. 

Sadly, Valpo can do little to control how the rest of the league schedules and/or performs in the non-conference.  As wh points out, they can control how they schedule (and yes, I understand the challenges) and most importantly, how they play, during non-conference games.  It can be done ... despite the Horizon's overall RPI ranking being similar to this season's, Butler received some decent seeds over the last 6 years.

I know that it's overly-simplistic to just say "improve the non-con schedule" and "win more games", but that's really the formula for success for teams from "mid-major" conferences to become perennial at-large candidates.  Valpo seems to be heading in the right direction on these fronts, but it takes some time.  Getting UNM, SLU and Murray to the ARC next year is clearly a big step.  Winning those games would be even bigger. I realize I'm not telling you guys anything you don't already know, but just my  .

[StlVUFan]

Not sure I give a fig about the buster this year.     Since it's a home game, we can just take it in stride and get back to the business at hand.   Will take any seed this year.   Just get me back to the dance.

Disagree.  We MUST be a 13 seed or better on the years we do make the tournament!  We moved to a better league knowing we would make the tournament less, but when we did make it we would get a better seed, and with better recruits, have a better chance to win.  So here we are with 7 seniors and we are projected to get a 14 seed despite being 6-1 in the 12th ranked conference in the country.   NOT ACCEPTABLE!  Our SOS is absolutely terrible this year and we are in dire need of a win over a potential top 100 RPI team to help ease the pain of such a poor schedule.       

Your point is well made.  You are absolutely right that getting the same pathetic seed less often than we used to get is not a good trade off for our move to the HL.  I see 3 reasons for the dilemma we find ourselves in: (1) our SOS as you point out, (2) inexcusable losses to Oakland and Loyola (you HAVE to beat the teams you're supposed to beat), and (3) pathetic OOC W/L records by Milwaukee and Green Bay.  The GB thing is especially irksome because they dramatically underachieved at a time when it could have helped the conference, then miraculously get it together when it's of no help to anyone but themselves.  Very similar to what Detroit did last year.  Because of their piss poor OOC record, they earned a 15 seed.  Had they not won it, their piss poor OOC record would have negatively impacted the seed of whichever team did win it.  That's the biggest difference between us and the MVC, for example.  We typically have more teams at the far extreme of bad than they do. 

I totally agree with wh.  I've been harping on this for years when Valpo fans/beat writers/coaches would comment that losing non-conference games to the likes of IPFW or IUPUI didn't matter because Valpo wasn't getting an at-large bid anyway.  Now that Valpo is the team worrying about their potential NCAA seed, it's much easier to appreciate the impact of league teams taking bad losses in the non-conference.  As wh points out, it's even more frustrating when teams put in a mediocre performance in the non-con and then suddenly turn it on during league play. 

Sadly, Valpo can do little to control how the rest of the league schedules and/or performs in the non-conference.  As wh points out, they can control how they schedule (and yes, I understand the challenges) and most importantly, how they play, during non-conference games.  It can be done ... despite the Horizon's overall RPI ranking being similar to this season's, Butler received some decent seeds over the last 6 years.

I know that it's overly-simplistic to just say "improve the non-con schedule" and "win more games", but that's really the formula for success for teams from "mid-major" conferences to become perennial at-large candidates.  Valpo seems to be heading in the right direction on these fronts, but it takes some time.  Getting UNM, SLU and Murray to the ARC next year is clearly a big step.  Winning those games would be even bigger. I realize I'm not telling you guys anything you don't already know, but just my  .

Very well put, and just for the record, I think I always pointed out what you did about the bad losses to IPFW, etc. -- we knew then that at-large was a pipe dream, but seeding could still be impacted by such a loss.

To be fair, the team can't afford to beat itself up over such losses because the auto-bid is the iron-clad goal.  However, you win those games and then win the auto-bid, and you might see a slightly better seed.  The only thing I can see is that perhaps statistically the difference between a 13-seed and a 15 seed is not nearly as big as we might think it is.  We remember that our one magical run came as a 13 seed, but we were also a 13 seed in 2002 and that went nowhere.

[Valpo2010]

2)  Whatever new teams are added to the HL for 2013-14 (the goal is to give the HL a second (at-large) slot in the NCAA so at least one should be a high RPI addition, right?)

I wouldn't think these teams would be added in time for the 2013-14 season.  Normally there would be a "lame duck" year before they're added.  Though I suppose with the ever changing landscape of collegiate athletics, many schools are making their moves rather quickly (ala Butler).

[valpotx]

I believe we would have to add new teams within the next 2 school years, as we will lose the baseball auto-bid if we have 5 teams for 3 years?  I imagine that the Summit and MVC have very low penalties for leaving the conference early...

[VULB#62]

I believe we would have to add new teams within the next 2 school years, as we will lose the baseball auto-bid if we have 5 teams for 3 years?  I imagine that the Summit and MVC have very low penalties for leaving the conference early...

Do you mean OVC?  MVC might have stiffer penalties.

[vuweathernerd]

2)  Whatever new teams are added to the HL for 2013-14 (the goal is to give the HL a second (at-large) slot in the NCAA so at least one should be a high RPI addition, right?)

I wouldn't think these teams would be added in time for the 2013-14 season.  Normally there would be a "lame duck" year before they're added.  Though I suppose with the ever changing landscape of collegiate athletics, many schools are making their moves rather quickly (ala Butler).

i believe the rumors floating were that the announcement would be made in march and take effect that july, in an effort to avoid that year.

[agibson]

The only thing I can see is that perhaps statistically the difference between a 13-seed and a 15 seed is not nearly as big as we might think it is.  We remember that our one magical run came as a 13 seed, but we were also a 13 seed in 2002 and that went nowhere.

Hm?  From a simple statistical perspective the numbers are very clear.  Several of us posted them recently.  13 seeds are something like four times as successful as 15 seeds.

Now, maybe you can make some sort of argument about how the statistics don't really affect our particular case very much.  That if we happened to hit another three against Nebraska, and that happened to bump our seed up, how much better of a chance does that hypothetical VU doppleganger team have in the Big Dance than the familiar version?

But, the simple statistics of it seem pretty clear.

[valpotx]

No, I meant the MVC.  They won't have a huge buyout in place for teams either.  The Atlantic-10 even has a fairly small buyout I believe

[StlVUFan]

The only thing I can see is that perhaps statistically the difference between a 13-seed and a 15 seed is not nearly as big as we might think it is.  We remember that our one magical run came as a 13 seed, but we were also a 13 seed in 2002 and that went nowhere.

Hm?  From a simple statistical perspective the numbers are very clear.  Several of us posted them recently.  13 seeds are something like four times as successful as 15 seeds.

Now, maybe you can make some sort of argument about how the statistics don't really affect our particular case very much.  That if we happened to hit another three against Nebraska, and that happened to bump our seed up, how much better of a chance does that hypothetical VU doppleganger team have in the Big Dance than the familiar version?

But, the simple statistics of it seem pretty clear.

Well, I did say, "perhaps"   Sorry, I'm Mr. Short Attention Span sometimes.

What was the statistical difference between 13 and 14 seeds?

[justducky]

Well, I did say, "perhaps"   Sorry, I'm Mr. Short Attention Span sometimes.

What was the statistical difference between 13 and 14 seeds?

You should refer back to the Now what? How does this team continue to improve? thread where this issue was recently addressed. Take note that I pretty much took your position and got carved up like a watermelon. Even my son called me a fool.

[StlVUFan]

Well, I did say, "perhaps"   Sorry, I'm Mr. Short Attention Span sometimes.

What was the statistical difference between 13 and 14 seeds?

You should refer back to the Now what? How does this team continue to improve? thread where this issue was recently addressed. Take note that I pretty much took your position and got carved up like a watermelon. Even my son called me a fool.

It's not my position.  As I stated, I was one of those who did grouse about bad losses to IPFW precisely because of that.  I was just trying to see the other side, that's all.

[agibson]

The 14 seed is closer to the 13 than it is to the 15.

The 15 seed's won in 5% of tournament games, the 14 in 15% (round numbers), the 13 in 20% .  The 12 in 33% of games overall (and 31% of 12-5 games).

I'm using
http://www.bbstate.com/wiz/
for this.

Sorry to assume you're slavishly reading all these threads   Lots of activity lately, which is great, but surely even "old hands" don't keep up with all of it. 

[talksalot]

BTW, just to add another Home game for us next year... Loyola Marymount owes us (and we do OWE THEM!) a return from last years BracketBuster... they are down this year, like 220-ish... but it is still another name-opponent in the ARC... so we will have teams from all 4 timezones coming in!  UNM will be the interesting one... looking at their ytd-stat sheet... They have only played three games (outside the paradise jam) in front of less than 10,000 fans, with the smallest 6,080 at Indiana State, 6782 at Saint Louis and 8177 at New Mexico State.... we don't have a shoe-horn big enough to get there typical crowd.   Their smallest crowd coming up with the at Air Force... the falcons only average about 1800 per home game.

[vu72]

I really can't see scenario where we don't get a good TV game.  The problem is that the better teams are all home teams and so getting a good matchup which could help our ranking will be tough.  To me, assuming we win the next two, it looks like either Ohio, ND State, SF Austin or Illinois State.  Some of those may go up against higher rated home teams.  I think it gets down to Ohio or Illinois State, and getting a Missouri Valley team would be preferable in my mind.

[valpotx]

Illinois State is 12-10, but 3-7 in the MVC.  They will NOT be placed against the HL leader, regardless of RPI

[vu72]

Illinois State is 12-10, but 3-7 in the MVC.  They will NOT be placed against the HL leader, regardless of RPI

Logically I agree, but from a TV matchup it probably will draw better, particularly in the midwest with their large alumni and fan base, as well as travel accomodations.  If they want to match us up against another conference leader, then it could be ND State, Ohio or SF Austin, all of which are tied for the lead in their respective conferences. The best of these from a travel and rematch standpoint would of course be Ohio.