Creighton Opens Old Spice Classic Paired with Michigan

[leebiddlecome]

let's take a poll...how many people actually believe this?
I think it is ridiculous....the big boys literally can have any opponent they want...the only ones they turn down...are the ones they can't accept because their schedule is already as full as they can get it with all the cupcakes or high revenue games that they can land.

If a mid-major turns down a game - it's for a completely different reason and happens only when a potential opponent is asking way, way too much in concessions and giveaways...

No offense, but its the truth. You listen too much to what is being said publicly and not on what is really happening. Mid-majors turn down games all the time. Some are versus BCS caliber schools, some are versus lower level teams.

Every coach looks out for #1. As they should. Don't be fooled by what coaches say publicly. Do BCS schools chicken out and schedule as they want? Absolutely. But so do many mid-majors.

Don't put all of this on the "big boys" not being willing to play teams. Everybody wants games on their own terms. That includes the BCS, the mids and even the lower levels. Everyone has certain terms they need to be met and everyone tries to do that.

For example--as a Bradley fan I don't want BU playing home and homes with someone like EIU, Chicago State, or High Point. Just as I wouldn't expect a fan of UCONN to want to play home and homes with SIU, Old Dominion, etc.

Why should we expect the "big boys" to play us in homes and homes, etc. when we, as mid-majors, aren't willing to do the same things to those we perceive as "less than" us?

[leebiddlecome]

I believe it. Most coaches are chicken.

They may talk a big game, but the fact of the matter is they are all exceptionally paranoid of losing their job, with good reason.

As a result, they don't take more chances than necessary.

Everyone is afraid to play anyone.

Ding, Ding, Ding. We have a winner. SGD is 100% correct. Talking and doing in this situation are two entirely different things.

[tornado]

as expected SGD and lee agree that Bradley and their coach are the ones who have failed here in their efforts to compose a decent schedule because --

"Most coaches are chicken.
They may talk a big game,
but the fact of the matter is
they are all exceptionally paranoid
of losing their job, with good reason."

as I said right here...

http://www.bradleyfans.com/vb/showthread.php?p=137391&highlight=anti-BU#post137391

"don't you find it intriguing that the same two or three people
take the anti-BU and "BU is bad" position in every discussion?"

[BradleyBrave]

Exactly.

And it's tourneys like this one that fuels the discussion for separation from Div-1A and Div-1/twoA.

I would be fine with that. The bottom 100-150 DI teams don't deserve to be DI anyways. BU would be in the upper division.

[TheAsianSensation]

as expected SGD and lee agree that Bradley and their coach are the ones who have failed here in their efforts to compose a decent schedule because --

"Most coaches are chicken.
They may talk a big game,
but the fact of the matter is
they are all exceptionally paranoid
of losing their job, with good reason."

as I said right here...

http://www.bradleyfans.com/vb/showthread.php?p=137391&highlight=anti-BU#post137391

"don't you find it intriguing that the same two or three people
take the anti-BU and "BU is bad" position in every discussion?"

They were talking about BU in this thread?

Regardless of if I agree with their points or not (I actually find myself halfway agreeing - they have a point, but they miss a part where flexibility that majors have and mid-majors don't), they're talking about schedules as a whole. Not once did they mention BU specifically here.

So disagreeing with a point you make, whether valid or not, makes someone anti-BU?

[leebiddlecome]

as expected SGD and lee agree that Bradley and their coach are the ones who have failed here in their efforts to compose a decent schedule because --

"Most coaches are chicken.
They may talk a big game,
but the fact of the matter is
they are all exceptionally paranoid
of losing their job, with good reason."

as I said right here...

http://www.bradleyfans.com/vb/showthread.php?p=137391&highlight=anti-BU#post137391

"don't you find it intriguing that the same two or three people
take the anti-BU and "BU is bad" position in every discussion?"

Whoa whoa whoa Tornado. When did I say anything specific about Bradley? I never said Bradley. I never said Jim Les. Please don't make stuff up.

Go back and read my posts. Don't make assumptions based on the poster. I spoke in generalities about scheduling. I never called out Bradley. In fact, I never even used them as an example.

What I gave you was some insight on how scheduling, IN GENERAL, works. Stop making stuff up like usual and putting words in my mouth.

[TheAsianSensation]

And back on point:

I believe it. Most coaches are chicken.

They may talk a big game, but the fact of the matter is they are all exceptionally paranoid of losing their job, with good reason.

As a result, they don't take more chances than necessary.

Everyone is afraid to play anyone.

I think this was a lot true 5-10 years ago. The emphasis on SoS in the past few years are getting people to schedule a little bit harder, although there are still a few outliers.

Also, $$$ speaks above all else, so a few teams are scheduling more premier games.

[TheAsianSensation]

let's take a poll...how many people actually believe this?
I think it is ridiculous....the big boys literally can have any opponent they want...the only ones they turn down...are the ones they can't accept because their schedule is already as full as they can get it with all the cupcakes or high revenue games that they can land.

If a mid-major turns down a game - it's for a completely different reason and happens only when a potential opponent is asking way, way too much in concessions and giveaways...

This is mostly correct, but a couple things:

I do think the majors turn down more games, but that's simply because they get offered more games than mid majors. If there's 200-some non-BCS teams in D-1, and 60 or so BCSers, it stands to reason us mid-majors get rejected the most.


The truly big boys (Dook, Kansas, et al) can get who they want, but for most of the BCS, there still is some give and take there. Those are the ones more likely to schedule top mid majors, because they don't have another option.

As far as mid majors, the concessions they're asked to make when accepting a game aren't unreasonable - if you're a major offering to play a mid major, you're only going to do it under circumstances that makes sense for you. Only because the agenda of the major and the agenda of the mid major differ does games get turned down.

[squirrelgotdead]

I would be fine with that. The bottom 100-150 DI teams don't deserve to be DI anyways. BU would be in the upper division.

I've gone back and forth on this one. I think it's inevitable, and necessary, but I do fear (again, I realize I'm in the minority on this one) that football will be the litmus test for the upper division (i.e. you or your league must play FBS level football). That would mean Bradley would either have to be grandfathered in, or not be at the upper division, unless either the MVC made the move en masse to FBS football, or they joined a conference that already offered it. The grandfather clause in this case, could be the golden ticket for BU, as schools like DePaul, Dayton, Xavier, SLU, etc would be more open to leave their current affiliations.

While I have been adamant about BU competing at the highest level or drop sports altogether, the idea of competing for national championships at a I-AA or "college" level is growing on me.

[squirrelgotdead]

This is mostly correct, but a couple things:

I do think the majors turn down more games, but that's simply because they get offered more games than mid majors. If there's 200-some non-BCS teams in D-1, and 60 or so BCSers, it stands to reason us mid-majors get rejected the most.


The truly big boys (Dook, Kansas, et al) can get who they want, but for most of the BCS, there still is some give and take there. Those are the ones more likely to schedule top mid majors, because they don't have another option.

As far as mid majors, the concessions they're asked to make when accepting a game aren't unreasonable - if you're a major offering to play a mid major, you're only going to do it under circumstances that makes sense for you. Only because the agenda of the major and the agenda of the mid major differ does games get turned down.

Another BIG factor that came into play inside of five years is that the NCAA repealed the exempt tournament rule, and allowed schools one more non-conference game. So that bloated the schools that could buy games and distorted a number of perceptions.

[leebiddlecome]

I would be fine with that. The bottom 100-150 DI teams don't deserve to be DI anyways. BU would be in the upper division.

In basketball yes but as an athletic department as a whole? I'm not so sure. That's why I wouldn't want to tempt that.

[BradleyBrave]

In basketball yes but as an athletic department as a whole? I'm not so sure. That's why I wouldn't want to tempt that.

I was looking at it purely from the basketball perspective. I still think we'd be safe, as there several other non-football schools that would remain in the DI tier IMO. But, you are probably right in that right now we probably shouldn't tempt that.