2015-2016 Opponents

[zvillehaze]

Not sure that I understand Oren's thought that we may end up with 1 or 2 non d-1's on the schedule. With the addition of NKU we have 2 fewer OOC opponents to line up than a year ago. Moreover, ml is on record as saying they need to do a better job of OOC scheduling, including moving away from playing non D-1's. IMO there is no justification for bringing anyone into the ARC other than a D-1. The "no one wants to play us at the ARC" excuse is getting pretty tired. Other good mids make it happen - so should we.

Agree with wh ... we all understand the challenges faced, but if you have a good team, you do everything possible to put together a decent schedule.  Depending on their draw in the Diamond Head Classic, Northern Iowa has put together an excellent non-con slate.  They got lucky in getting UNC at home, but even excluding that game, their schedule is very good.

http://unipanthers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mbball

[Pgmado]

Not sure that I understand Oren's thought that we may end up with 1 or 2 non d-1's on the schedule.

2014-15: IU-South Bend, Trinity International, Goshen
2013-14: North Park, Cincinnati Christian
2012-13: Purdue Calumet
2011-12: Holy Cross, IU-Kokomo
2010-11: IU-Northwest, Purdue North Central
2009-10: IU-South Bend, Concordia
2008-09: Marian, North Park
2007-08: Grace, Indiana Wesleyan

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." -- Albert Einstein

[justducky]

Don't panic...I think we will be OK on a nice OOC schedule

I saw nothing in the Oren article that greatly calms my nerves so panic time is getting very close. So far I see maybe one top 50 game along with perhaps another 5 top 100. That leaves no margin for error on an at-large bid and gives us very little chance for an 8 or 9 seed that any top 35 team in the country should have a shot at.

IMO there is no justification for bringing anyone into the ARC other than a D-1. The "no one wants to play us at the ARC" excuse is getting pretty tired. Other good mids make it happen - so should we.

If it is fully true that almost no one of quality will play us (anywhere) and we have to schedule 2 non D-1s just to find 5 OOC home games then maybe we need to document and record all texts, e-mail and phone conversations with rejecting parties towards proving to the NCAA that almost nothing in scheduling remains in our (or any mid majors) control except mediocrity. The NCAA has been a silent accomplice while this scheduling power grab has progressed off the charts (haves vs have nots) and eventually the NCAA may have to reign it back to some reasonable level for the good of the game.

[78crusader]

What are the OOC home schedules like for other mid-majors?  I looked at Bradley and Drake just to see.

Here is the Bradley home OOC schedule last year:

UT Arlington
Robert Morris
Central Michigan
Eureka

Here is Drake's:

Bowling Green
IUPUI
North Dakota
Jackson State
Simpson

Same kinda deal as what VU has.  I agree with Oren that we are headed for 1 and probably 2 home games against non-D1 opponents.  If true, can't we at least play some teams that are really good, or at least with whom we have some history?  Maybe Wabash, or Augustana (27-5 last year), or Wheaton.  Rather see these guys than, for instance, Cincinnati Christian or Purdue North Central.

Paul

ps why don't the mid-majors just fill their OOC home schedules with other mid-majors? 

[vu72]

What are the OOC home schedules like for other mid-majors?  I looked at Bradley and Drake just to see.

Here is the Bradley home OOC schedule last year:

UT Arlington
Robert Morris
Central Michigan
Eureka

Here is Drake's:

Bowling Green
IUPUI
North Dakota
Jackson State
Simpson

Same kinda deal as what VU has.  I agree with Oren that we are headed for 1 and probably 2 home games against non-D1 opponents. If true, can't we at least play some teams that are really good, or at least with whom we have some history?  Maybe Wabash, or Augustana (27-5 last year), or Wheaton.  Rather see these guys than, for instance, Cincinnati Christian or Purdue North Central.

Paul

ps why don't the mid-majors just fill their OOC home schedules with other mid-majors? 

I agree with your thoughts on scheduling folks with whom we have some history, kind of like--if we are distended to play a couple of non D1s then why not reinstitute the "Crusader Classic" where we used to bring in three other Lutheran colleges and then whoop up on them so everyone remembered that we were the top of the Lutheran stack!  Kinda of kidding here.  Still, I agree with Paul that some name recognition might be a little bit helpful. I guess Valpo would be in the same boat as the Bigs when, if they lose to Valpo, they are in a lose/lose situation.  If Valpo loses to a very solid D3, we gain nothing and lose a bunch, even when it comes to recruiting.  You know, "you lost to who?"

[Pathfinder]

That leaves no margin for error on an at-large bid and gives us very little chance for an 8 or 9 seed

Rather be a 11-12 seed. Difference in quality of first round opponent (a 5 or 6 seed vs. an 8-9 seed) is pretty insignificant, it's typically a major conference team with 9-10 losses, a team that can be beat. Then the second round opponent (a #3-4 seed) is likely to be much more beatable than the #1 seed that the 8-9 plays in the second round.

[Pathfinder]

ps why don't the mid-majors just fill their OOC home schedules with other mid-majors?

Because the high majors demand to play the vast majority of their games at home. The mid-majors, if they want to play high majors at all (and sometimes to fill their coffers) have to play "guarantee" games and "exempt tournament" games on the high major courts. So every mid-major starts with about 4-5 games on the road. If you fill out your schedule with only home and homes against other mid-majors, you'll effectively play about 4 home and 9 road games a games in non-conference. A lot of coaches, players, fans, and administrators don't want to do that. So to balance it out a bit, you've got to buy a couple games. But mid-majors can't afford to write $90,000 guarantee checks. So you either buy a MEAC or SWAC team or something like that, or you buy a D-II or D-III team. The latter is cheaper, won't hurt your RPI, and is probably no less a draw than a low D-I team (how many fans would know, for example, that Delaware State is D-I and Kentucky State is D-II, that Tennessee Tech is D-I and Indiana Tech is NAIA, or that Presbyterian is D-I and Catholic is D-III?).

[justducky]

That leaves no margin for error on an at-large bid and gives us very little chance for an 8 or 9 seed

Rather be a 11-12 seed. Difference in quality of first round opponent (a 5 or 6 seed vs. an 8-9 seed) is pretty insignificant, it's typically a major conference team with 9-10 losses, a team that can be beat. Then the second round opponent (a #3-4 seed) is likely to be much more beatable than the #1 seed that the 8-9 plays in the second round.

Well argued! I just don't think you should ever cap your ambition and potential for the hope of stumbling to an easier route. If we can play a schedule that might take us to an 8 seed vs one that might only get us to an 11 then I'll take the stronger opponents. Plus- Preparation for tournament atmosphere, pressure, and competition are always factors for success.

I think I first said that we shoot for an 8 or 9 seed (for 15-16) prior to the start of last season and with a good schedule and a couple big wins that seeding ceiling might still be lowered. Somebody correct me if I am wrong but wasn't Murray St a 6 or 7 seed when Butler eventually ended their great run?

[valpopal]

Interesting article about Valpo opponent Oregon, "Ticket Sales Soar as Interest in Men's Basketball Improves: better teams and cheaper tickets."


http://oregon.247sports.com/Article/Ticket-Sales-Soar-as-Interest-in-Mens-Basketball-Improves-38120477

[SanityLost17]

http://www.goldengrizzlies.com/sports/m-baskbl/sched/oakl-m-baskbl-sched.html

Oakland recently dropped their lone non-D1 game and put Georgia on their schedule instead.  Also, because Georgia has several Detroit area players on their team, they will be visiting the O'rena next year for a rare road game against a mid-major.     

Comparing theirs to ours (so far) in rough descending of quality opponents:
Virginia  /  Oregon
Michigan St.  /  Oregon St.
Georgia  /  Belmont
Washington  /  Belmont 
Colorado St.  /  Indiana State
Toledo  /  Missouri State   

Obviously, their schedule is quite a bit harder (so far).   
 

 

[valpotx]

Don't panic...I think we will be OK on a nice OOC schedule

I saw nothing in the Oren article that greatly calms my nerves so panic time is getting very close. So far I see maybe one top 50 game along with perhaps another 5 top 100. That leaves no margin for error on an at-large bid and gives us very little chance for an 8 or 9 seed that any top 35 team in the country should have a shot at.

IMO there is no justification for bringing anyone into the ARC other than a D-1. The "no one wants to play us at the ARC" excuse is getting pretty tired. Other good mids make it happen - so should we.

If it is fully true that almost no one of quality will play us (anywhere) and we have to schedule 2 non D-1s just to find 5 OOC home games then maybe we need to document and record all texts, e-mail and phone conversations with rejecting parties towards proving to the NCAA that almost nothing in scheduling remains in our (or any mid majors) control except mediocrity. The NCAA has been a silent accomplice while this scheduling power grab has progressed off the charts (haves vs have nots) and eventually the NCAA may have to reign it back to some reasonable level for the good of the game.

Not going to happen.  The NCAA has absolutely no power when it comes to the power conferences anymore.  These conferences can just go off and form their own collegiate league, rather than submitting to the hundreds of 'have nots.'  In this century, we have basically no say in what the power conference teams want to do, and simply need to play along in order to eat at the same table. 

[FWalum]

(how many fans would know, for example, that Delaware State is D-I and Kentucky State is D-II, that Tennessee Tech is D-I and Indiana Tech is NAIA, or that Presbyterian is D-I and Catholic is D-III?).

Found this a little funny, in 2009 I briefly discussed with Luke about getting Indiana Tech on the OOC schedule for the 2009-2010 year.  Then all hell broke loose at Tech and that was all she wrote.

[justducky]

Oakland recently dropped their lone non-D1 game and put Georgia on their schedule instead.  Also, because Georgia has several Detroit area players on their team, they will be visiting the O'rena next year for a rare road game against a mid-major.     

Comparing theirs to ours (so far) in rough descending of quality opponents:
Virginia  /  Oregon
Michigan St.  /  Oregon St.
Georgia  /  Belmont
Washington  /  Belmont 
Colorado St.  /  Indiana State
Toledo  /  Missouri State   

Obviously, their schedule is quite a bit harder (so far).   

Given the opportunity I would trade them in a heartbeat.

Unlike some I have no problem with IPFW and weaker Ball St teams sometimes being on our schedule, but this is a year I wish that both could disappear. With the hope that they might return to respectability we seem to have signed Missouri St based mostly on their willingness to come to the ARC but was that a good enough reason? The same goes for UTSA. (How come Oren didn't mention them?) So as much as I wanted Bradley (for Alec) I now hope that it doesn't happen, because we have all the 200+ RPI teams that we need.

OK. I will take a deep breath and try to relax, but keep in mind that we now are positioned for maybe only third or lower for HL OOC strength of schedule. Is that where we wanted to be?

[aevans12]

What ever happened with the conference challenge that was floated by Gary Waters and others?  Is that still a possibility for this season?

[vu72]

What ever happened with the conference challenge that was floated by Gary Waters and others?  Is that still a possibility for this season?

Long discussion starting on page 3 of this thread.  Doubt it will happen ever.

[Pathfinder]

Quote from: aevans12 on Today at 02:10:04 PM What ever happened with the conference challenge that was floated by Gary Waters and others?  Is that still a possibility for this season? Long discussion starting on page 3 of this thread.  Doubt it will happen ever.

Definitely not this year because Oakland and Detroit have announced their schedules.

[valpo84]

For that Oakland schedule, all of those are road games, except Michigan State which is at the Palace of Auburn Hills ("neutral"). Oakland will be lucky to go 1-5 in those games. While we should at a minimum be 4-2, with a hope of a split out west. Would not trade them for that schedule.

[vu84v2]

If the non-conference schedule is Oregon, Oregon State, Belmont (twice), Indiana State, Missouri State, Ball State, UTSA and IPFW plus three other low to mid major teams, Valpo will only be able to afford 3 or (at most) 4 losses prior to the conference tournament to make the NCAA tournament without winning the conference tournament. There is just not enough strength of schedule. Furthermore, there is no 'they beat ________' that would make up for the 175 to 200th most difficult schedule.

[justducky]

If the non-conference schedule is Oregon, Oregon State, Belmont (twice), Indiana State, Missouri State, Ball State, UTSA and IPFW plus three other low to mid major teams, Valpo will only be able to afford 3 or (at most) 4 losses prior to the conference tournament to make the NCAA tournament without winning the conference tournament. There is just not enough strength of schedule. Furthermore, there is no 'they beat ________' that would make up for the 175 to 200th most difficult schedule.

I mentioned this elsewhere but I am not certain that a 3 loss regular season coupled with a HL championship game loss to Oakland would guarantee an at large bid. If you play a weak schedule and do not beat any good teams then getting an at large is not and should not be easy. It doesn't mean anything for us to know this should be a top 35 team because we still have the need and responsibility to go out and prove it to the world.

For that Oakland schedule, all of those are road games, except Michigan State which is at the Palace of Auburn Hills ("neutral"). Oakland will be lucky to go 1-5 in those games. While we should at a minimum be 4-2, with a hope of a split out west. Would not trade them for that schedule.

Their game with Georgia will be at Oakland so they might go 2-4 with a small chance at 3-3. (This could be their best team ever, by far.) So I would still trade them in a heartbeat because we might be able to do 4-2 against their schedule and thus build our at large bid potential. If ever there were a need for an Oakland like schedule this is the year! If we take a few lumps along the way then so be it. The HL isn't apt to properly prepare us for the post season so we still have some scheduling work to do.

[vusupporter]

Oakland's game is at Georgia this year, at the O'Rena next year.

[wh]

Interesting article about Valpo opponent Oregon, "Ticket Sales Soar as Interest in Men's Basketball Improves: better teams and cheaper tickets."


http://oregon.247sports.com/Article/Ticket-Sales-Soar-as-Interest-in-Mens-Basketball-Improves-38120477

Ranking the 10 Best 'Small Ball' Lineups in NCAA Basketball for 2015-16

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2521971-ranking-the-10-best-small-ball-lineups-in-ncaa-basketball-for-2015-16/page/5

[oklahomamick]

Ranking the 10 Best 'Small Ball' Lineups in NCAA Basketball for 2015-16 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2521971-ranking-the-10-best-small-ball-lineups-in-ncaa-basketball-for-2015-16/page/5

So your saying we have a chance.

[wh]

Ranking the 10 Best 'Small Ball' Lineups in NCAA Basketball for 2015-16 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2521971-ranking-the-10-best-small-ball-lineups-in-ncaa-basketball-for-2015-16/page/5

So your saying we have a chance.

Actually, Mick, I wasn't trying to make a correlation between their height and our chances. I don't know enough about their talent level to make that judgement.  I just thought it's interesting to ponder how far we've come as a program, where we are now in a position to create height/size matchup problems for a Power 5 opponent.       

[VULB#62]

Ranking the 10 Best 'Small Ball' Lineups in NCAA Basketball for 2015-16 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2521971-ranking-the-10-best-small-ball-lineups-in-ncaa-basketball-for-2015-16/page/5

So your you're saying we have a chance.

There, I fixed it for you and anyone else who confuses the possessive "your" with the contraction "you are." 

And while I am on grammar, another thing that irritates me to no end is when people refer to a person and use "that."  The correct term to use is "who," not "that."  Things, animals and groups of people can be referred to as "that," but a person is a who. For example:  "Bryce Drew, the head coach at Valpo, who is famous for 'the shot'......"  Not "Bryce Drew, the head coach of Valpo, that is famous for 'the shot'...."  I see all these releases from the VU athletic department and quotes from coaches and they continually refer to people as things with the use if 'that.' But, maybe due to a failure to teach good grammar early in schools and the acceptance of misspelled words and poor grammar in emails and texts, this has come to be an acceptable bastardization of the language. Just my opinion.

[a3uge]

Ranking the 10 Best 'Small Ball' Lineups in NCAA Basketball for 2015-16 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2521971-ranking-the-10-best-small-ball-lineups-in-ncaa-basketball-for-2015-16/page/5

So your you're saying we have a chance.

There, I fixed it for you and anyone else who confuses the possessive "your" with the contraction "you are." 

And while I am on grammar, another thing that irritates me to no end is when people refer to a person and use "that."  The correct term to use is "who," not "that."  Things, animals and groups of people can be referred to as "that," but a person is a who. For example:  "Bryce Drew, the head coach at Valpo, who is famous for 'the shot'......"  Not "Bryce Drew, the head coach of Valpo, that is famous for 'the shot'...."  I see all these releases from the VU athletic department and quotes from coaches and they continually refer to people as things with the use if 'that.' But, maybe due to a failure to teach good grammar early in schools and the acceptance of misspelled words and poor grammar in emails and texts, this has come to be an acceptable bastardization of the language. Just my opinion.

Your wrong.