2018-19 VU Schedule

[valpowbb1]

Let the "Big Boys" have their own tourney and the Mid-Majors their own.  Also separate the polls and rankings by the Power Conferences and the Mid-Majors.  It would create some interest not only by region but perhaps on a National basis.  And of  course it would create new and more exciting schedules for the M-M schools.

Isnt this what the NCAA tourney and the NIT/CBI? etc. kind of already are???  NCAA for the "big boys" (mostly) and the NIT for the mids (mostly)

[vu72]

Let the "Big Boys" have their own tourney and the Mid-Majors their own.  Also separate the polls and rankings by the Power Conferences and the Mid-Majors.  It would create some interest not only by region but perhaps on a National basis.  And of  course it would create new and more exciting schedules for the M-M schools.

Isnt this what the NCAA tourney and the NIT/CBI? etc. kind of already are??? NCAA for the "big boys" (mostly) and the NIT for the mids (mostly)

Not really.  Last year'a NIT had 16 of 32 from Power 5 with Penn State winning it all.  In the NCAA tournament there were 30 teams from the Power 5. If you throw in the Big East then it goes to 35 of 65.

[VU2014]

Let the "Big Boys" have their own tourney and the Mid-Majors their own.  Also separate the polls and rankings by the Power Conferences and the Mid-Majors.  It would create some interest not only by region but perhaps on a National basis.  And of  course it would create new and more exciting schedules for the M-M schools.

Isnt this what the NCAA tourney and the NIT/CBI? etc. kind of already are??? NCAA for the "big boys" (mostly) and the NIT for the mids (mostly)

Not really.  Last year'a NIT had 16 of 32 from Power 5 with Penn State winning it all.  In the NCAA tournament there were 30 teams from the Power 5. If you throw in the Big East then it goes to 35 of 65.

The mid-majors still supply value to P5 because everyone loves Cinderella in the Tourney. everyone loves David vs Goliath. Let's not take that away. The interest in the CIT/CBI are almost non-existent for a reason. NIT can still draw some interest if the fan-base/players can get over not making the tourney. At the end of the day I'd rather make the NCAA Tournament and than win a NIT Tournament.

[vu84v2]

Let the "Big Boys" have their own tourney and the Mid-Majors their own.  Also separate the polls and rankings by the Power Conferences and the Mid-Majors.  It would create some interest not only by region but perhaps on a National basis.  And of  course it would create new and more exciting schedules for the M-M schools.

Isnt this what the NCAA tourney and the NIT/CBI? etc. kind of already are??? NCAA for the "big boys" (mostly) and the NIT for the mids (mostly)

Not really.  Last year'a NIT had 16 of 32 from Power 5 with Penn State winning it all.  In the NCAA tournament there were 30 teams from the Power 5. If you throw in the Big East then it goes to 35 of 65.

The mid-majors still supply value to P5 because everyone loves Cinderella in the Tourney. everyone loves David vs Goliath. Let's not take that away. The interest in the CIT/CBI are almost non-existent for a reason. NIT can still draw some interest if the fan-base/players can get over not making the tourney. At the end of the day I'd rather make the NCAA Tournament and than win a NIT Tournament.

Valpowbb1 - My guess is that you are speaking sincerely about what you feel would be best for Valpo basketball and similar programs, but I strongly disagree with the idea of separate tournaments. If this were done, at best it would look like D1A and D1AA in college football and could look more like D1 and D2 in college basketball today. Virtually all of the television, money and national attention would go to the highest level tournament. Teams from the highest conferences outside of the P5 and Big East (i.e. American Conference and A10, plus Gonzaga, etc.) would scramble to move up and you would be left with a lower tier that gets little national interest. The ripple effect would be a dramatic decrease in revenues, attendance and (perhaps most importantly) quality recruits. Do you think that great recent Valpo players, such as Ryan Broekhoff, Alec Peters, Keith Carter, etc., would have decided to play at Valpo if they did not have the opportunity to play in the highest level national tournament?

[EddieCabot]

How does a prospective new season ticket holder go about purchasing tickets?

It looks they haven't totally updated the site from last seasons info but it says to call the season ticket office. They have a young alums deal that allows you to buy season tickets at a reduced price.

Young Alums: http://cdn.streamlinetechnologies.com/valpoathletics/54FB8991-F303-4A4F-A19D-307D5827FF54/2017-18_MBB_Season_Tix_Poster.pdf

"Season tickets include all home games during the 2017-18 season and are on sale now.  To purchase, contact the Valpo ticket office at 219-464-5233 or visit the ticket office (open Monday-Friday, 10a-4p), located in the main lobby of the ARC."

http://www.valpoathletics.com/tickets/mbasketball/

I reached out through email and Erica responded quickly with a season ticket order form.   

[EddieCabot]

Another view of mid-major scheduling from CBS Sports.  Thoughts?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/mid-major-coaches-need-to-stop-complaining-and-start-adapting-to-college-basketball-realities/

[FieldGoodie05]

Another view of mid-major scheduling from CBS Sports.  Thoughts?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/mid-major-coaches-need-to-stop-complaining-and-start-adapting-to-college-basketball-realities/

I don't fault him for anything on this piece.  In fact I have long been of the same mindset in thinking "deal with it".  Unless the landscape of college basketball drastically changes (through P6 re-alignment, rules committees or the mid-majors making early season quality tournaments themselves) then we are just pissing into the wind.

I'd be very interested in a Cross Roads type of concept for pre-season top 3 teams from each conference.  I am not all together too sure why this idea hasn't taken off with some 3rd party sports firm.  Though, it's easy to throw out ideas . . . and I have not vetted the concept myself.  But it's relatively easy for each conference commissioner to have a cocktail at an airport Hilton in June and submit their 3 candidates I'd suspect.

[IrishDawg]

Just be glad it happened now and not on December 8th.  Yikes.

https://twitter.com/GWTV/status/1039606857348919298

[valpowbb1]

I was not trying to say there should be separate tourneys.  All kids want the chance to play in the big one

[Valpower]

Just be glad it happened now and not on December 8th.  Yikes.

https://twitter.com/GWTV/status/1039606857348919298

Lest anyone think it fell completely out of the blue, they were performing maintenance on it in a lowered position.

[bbtds]

Another view of mid-major scheduling from CBS Sports.  Thoughts?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/mid-major-coaches-need-to-stop-complaining-and-start-adapting-to-college-basketball-realities/

Now this is the place in the column where some writers would spend the next 500 words explaining how unfair this is for Loyola-Chicago and schools like Loyola-Chicago. And, to be clear, on that point, I agree. Power-conference schools largely refusing to give mid-majors a level playing field makes getting an at-large bid from any conference other than the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, SEC, Big East or American difficult bordering on impossible (for just about everybody except Gonzaga). For instance, last season, only three schools from outside of a top-seven league received at-large bids. The other 33 went to programs from either the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, SEC, Big East or American.

So, yeah, I agree it's unfair.

But spending more than a few sentences on that is about as pointless as screaming about an elected official lying on Twitter everyday. You can call him on it. You can try to shame him. But, ultimately, it does not matter and nothing changes. Same thing with non-league scheduling. Mid-major coaches, and college basketball pundits, have spent years trying to shame power-conference coaches into scheduling home-and-home series with schools from smaller leagues. But it's never worked because, truth is, it's rarely in their best interest to schedule home-and-home series with schools from smaller leagues. Fans of power-conference schools are typically more enthusiastic about home-and-home series with other power-conference programs. So there's that. And then the other thing working against mid-majors is that it's much easier to get a game between a power-conference program and another power-conference program on relevant television than it is to get a game between a power-conference program and a mid-major program game on relevant television. For proof, consider that Loyola-Chicago's game with Nevada in November will air on ESPNews even though it's a matchup featuring one team that's coming off of a Final Four and another that's coming off of a Sweet 16 and will be ranked in everybody's preseason top-10. A game between any other team coming off of a Final Four, and any other preseason top-10 team, would be given a prime television spot. But Nevada vs. Loyola-Chicago gets ESPNews.

Maybe the mid-majors should keep the cinderella teams out of the tournament and let the networks see how the ratings would fall for a year or two. Then they can renegotiate how many mid-majors get into the tournament. Are we sure this wouldn't work?

[FieldGoodie05]

Maybe the mid-majors should keep the cinderella teams out of the tournament and let the networks see how the ratings would fall for a year or two. Then they can renegotiate how many mid-majors get into the tournament. Are we sure this wouldn't work?

Certainly no one can be for sure that would not work, but that is a dangerous play.  If the ratings are unscathed then the P6 could make a solid point that there should be a Division 1A and 1AA . . . thereby causing the mid majors their largest possible damage.

I see far more disaster with that approach because no matter what happens, mid majors are parasitic to the Division 1A programs in small ways.  TV and national media cover our programs because they foresee the next Goliath slayer for the NCAA tournament.  I really think we need to accept the way things are and build a program that can compete for the slops.

Heroic stands seem to be uniquely human in nature.  Why do we always want to buck natures "only the strong survive and thrive" concept.  I don't really care what some think on this forum, my feet are firmly planted on the ground on this subject and I am thankful that our Division 1AA program has the platforms it has in todays age.

I can only speak for 2001 to present, but what was national coverage and awareness like back before 1995 for programs like Valpo?  Are we not living in a golden age for college basketball at the Division 1AA level?

[VULB#62]

Another view of mid-major scheduling from CBS Sports.  Thoughts?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/mid-major-coaches-need-to-stop-complaining-and-start-adapting-to-college-basketball-realities/

If you go to a dictionary and look up "pragmatism," you could probably envision this article listed as an outstanding example to illustrate the definition. He's right. Do what you have to do and don't expect any help, but take it if it happens.

And I still think that until all mid-majors adopt this philosophy, stop wasting time on trying for games they can't get and begin conspiring among themselves to ensure the best possible mm-mm OOC matchups possible, this mess will continue.

[IrishDawg]

If you go to a dictionary and look up "pragmatism," you could probably envision this article listed as an outstanding example to illustrate the definition. He's right. Do what you have to do and don't expect any help, but take it if it happens.

And I still think that until all mid-majors adopt this philosophy, stop wasting time on trying for games they can't get and begin conspiring among themselves to ensure the best possible mm-mm OOC matchups possible, this mess will continue.

Even if mid-major programs did this, the problem is that the power leagues still hold all the cards, and much like an NFL lockout, it's only a matter of time before schools break because a lot of the low-major league schools depend on the power league buy games to fund not just their own basketball team, but their entire athletic departments.  As the article articulated, the Loyola/Nevada game is on ESPNNews.  Unfortunately, the Big Ten/ACC challenge is going on at that time, so Michigan State-Louisville is on ESPN, Notre Dame-Illinois and Penn State-Virginia Tech games are on ESPN2 and ESPNU at the same time.  You could easily make the argument that the Nevada-Loyola game at worst should be just behind a Michigan State-Louisville game, at least in terms of the skill of both teams on the court, but because the power leagues draw the eyeballs and ultimately the advertising dollars, networks would be acting against their own self interest and bottom line to feature a game with 2 of the premiere non-power league teams over conferences that consistently draw better ratings.

I completely understand why mid-major schools feel this way.  It's not fair.  But even colluding together to try and force power leagues to schedule home and homes would ultimately be a fruitless exercise, in my opinion, because of the lower tier schools that simply don't have the funds to survive without those buy games.  That doesn't mean that mid-major leagues shouldn't still try to get together for non-conference games, but that can already be done now.

[bbtds]

Maybe the mid-majors should keep the cinderella teams out of the tournament and let the networks see how the ratings would fall for a year or two. Then they can renegotiate how many mid-majors get into the tournament. Are we sure this wouldn't work?

Certainly no one can be for sure that would not work, but that is a dangerous play.  If the ratings are unscathed then the P6 could make a solid point that there should be a Division 1A and 1AA . . . thereby causing the mid majors their largest possible damage.

I see far more disaster with that approach because no matter what happens, mid majors are parasitic to the Division 1A programs in small ways.  TV and national media cover our programs because they foresee the next Goliath slayer for the NCAA tournament.  I really think we need to accept the way things are and build a program that can compete for the slops.

Heroic stands seem to be uniquely human in nature.  Why do we always want to buck natures "only the strong survive and thrive" concept.  I don't really care what some think on this forum, my feet are firmly planted on the ground on this subject and I am thankful that our Division 1AA program has the platforms it has in todays age.

I can only speak for 2001 to present, but what was national coverage and awareness like back before 1995 for programs like Valpo?  Are we not living in a golden age for college basketball at the Division 1AA level?

Another view of mid-major scheduling from CBS Sports.  Thoughts?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/mid-major-coaches-need-to-stop-complaining-and-start-adapting-to-college-basketball-realities/

If you go to a dictionary and look up "pragmatism," you could probably envision this article listed as an outstanding example to illustrate the definition. He's right. Do what you have to do and don't expect any help, but take it if it happens.

And I still think that until all mid-majors adopt this philosophy, stop wasting time on trying for games they can't get and begin conspiring among themselves to ensure the best possible mm-mm OOC matchups possible, this mess will continue.

Not the philosophy that drove westward expansion, put the first man on the moon, led to the birth of our country and oust the British, kept the federal government from splitting into North and South, won Trump his election--yes, thinking small was not in Trump's vocab--made this country great--AGAIN--(imagine patriotic music playing)

Okay, okay--but we just don't have to lie down for the majors and make it easy. 

[FieldGoodie05]

Maybe the mid-majors should keep the cinderella teams out of the tournament and let the networks see how the ratings would fall for a year or two. Then they can renegotiate how many mid-majors get into the tournament. Are we sure this wouldn't work?

Certainly no one can be for sure that would not work, but that is a dangerous play.  If the ratings are unscathed then the P6 could make a solid point that there should be a Division 1A and 1AA . . . thereby causing the mid majors their largest possible damage.

I see far more disaster with that approach because no matter what happens, mid majors are parasitic to the Division 1A programs in small ways.  TV and national media cover our programs because they foresee the next Goliath slayer for the NCAA tournament.  I really think we need to accept the way things are and build a program that can compete for the slops.

Heroic stands seem to be uniquely human in nature.  Why do we always want to buck natures "only the strong survive and thrive" concept.  I don't really care what some think on this forum, my feet are firmly planted on the ground on this subject and I am thankful that our Division 1AA program has the platforms it has in todays age.

I can only speak for 2001 to present, but what was national coverage and awareness like back before 1995 for programs like Valpo?  Are we not living in a golden age for college basketball at the Division 1AA level?

Another view of mid-major scheduling from CBS Sports.  Thoughts?

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/mid-major-coaches-need-to-stop-complaining-and-start-adapting-to-college-basketball-realities/

If you go to a dictionary and look up "pragmatism," you could probably envision this article listed as an outstanding example to illustrate the definition. He's right. Do what you have to do and don't expect any help, but take it if it happens.

And I still think that until all mid-majors adopt this philosophy, stop wasting time on trying for games they can't get and begin conspiring among themselves to ensure the best possible mm-mm OOC matchups possible, this mess will continue.

Not the philosophy that drove westward expansion, put the first man on the moon, led to the birth of our country and oust the British, kept the federal government from splitting into North and South, won Trump his election--yes, thinking small was not in Trump's vocab--made this country great--AGAIN--(imagine patriotic music playing)

Okay, okay--but we just don't have to lie down for the majors and make it easy.

A Mid major team can make the leap (ie Butler) but not every school can be P6 nor every conference.

If the argument is for Valpo to strive, HELL YES.  But if the argument is to bring the whole of the mid major conferences with.....stop lying to yourself.

[EddieCabot]

Maybe the mid-majors should keep the cinderella teams out of the tournament and let the networks see how the ratings would fall for a year or two. Then they can renegotiate how many mid-majors get into the tournament. Are we sure this wouldn't work?

I think this would work. 

[VU2014]

According to this metric, Valpo has the strongest OOC schedule in the Valley this season.

https://twitter.com/Fieldof68Freak/status/1047228338958471168

[VULB#62]

Really?  What the......

[VU2014]

Really?  What the......

It's undeniable that our away non-conference schedule is tough. The home OOC schedule... no so much.

[VULB#62]

What doesn't kill ya makes ya stronger  .

[wh]

To the collective Loyola, Missouri State and Bradley scheduling brain trust,

Thank you for doing your part to diminish the conference's at-large resume. Yeah I know, "Scheduling's hard."

[IrishDawg]

To the collective Loyola, Missouri State and Bradley scheduling brain trust,

Thank you for doing your part to diminish the conference's at-large resume. Yeah I know, "Scheduling's hard."

Valpo needs to build its at-large resume through the non-conference schedule.  It won't happen in league play other than maybe a game here or there.  The good news is that more times than not MVC opponents also aren't going to be a "bad loss" unlike in the Horizon.

[wh]

To the collective Loyola, Missouri State and Bradley scheduling brain trust,

Thank you for doing your part to diminish the conference's at-large resume. Yeah I know, "Scheduling's hard."

Valpo needs to build its at-large resume through the non-conference schedule. It won't happen in league play other than maybe a game here or there.  The good news is that more times than not MVC opponents also aren't going to be a "bad loss" unlike in the Horizon.

...and, according to the ranking above, Valpo has done exactly that. Unfortunately, as a MM, you can't build an at-large resume by yourself. Every MVC program needs to do it's part. Every  SOS affects your SOS, every opponent win (or loss) and every opponent's opponent win (or loss) affects your RPI. Lousy OOC schedules by sister programs are lazy, self-serving, and detrimental to everyone.

Oh, I almost forgot - "Sheduling is hard, don't ya know?"

Mark Twain: "There are a thousand excuses for every failure, but no good reason."

[IrishDawg]

...and, according to the ranking above, Valpo has done exactly that. Unfortunately, as a MM, you can't build an at-large resume by yourself. Every MVC program needs to do it's part. Every  SOS affects your SOS, every opponent win (or loss) and every opponent's opponent win (or loss) affects your RPI. Lousy OOC schedules by sister programs are lazy, self-serving, and detrimental to everyone.

Oh, I almost forgot - "Sheduling is hard, don't ya know?"

Mark Twain: "There are a thousand excuses for every failure, but no good reason."

Yes you can.  That's what Gonzaga does every year (even though they're really a major program in a mid-major league) because outside of BYU and St. Mary's being considered every couple of years, there's no one in the WCC that builds their resume.  It's harder than ever, but programs in mid-major conferences absolutely have to make a go of it basically by themselves in the non-conference schedule to have a shot.

I don't disagree that schools should still be trying to schedule more difficult games rather than relying on the conference tournament for their NCAA bid.  But optics such as a 20 win season are still important for some coaches to keep their jobs or in recruiting, and few coaches want to take risks if it means they could lose their jobs.