Did anyone see this coming?

[tornado]

I just read the umpteenth article on how the Valley cannot expect to get more than one team in and how the Valley's scheduling is so weak...
and we have a couple threads going about the weak scheduling and the statements from Doug Elgin urging the Valley members to schedule TOUGHER! Plus it';s the talk of several Valley message boards....

But my question (to Valley teams and to the MVC front offices) is ...
what the heck took so long before anyone says or does anything about this??

This is the 3rd straight year that the Valley will get only ONE team in the NCAA!

-Two years ago Drake was one-and-done while ISU lost any chance of an at-large bid because they scheduled so incredibly poorly..

-last year, UNI had an RPI of 59 but went one-and-done, while two higher RPI teams didn't go (ISU & Creighton) due to terrible scheduling.

-This year, Wichita blew any chance of an at-large bid by scheduling poorly, and ISU one-upped everyone by scheduling worse than any Valley team in memory...the worst since when ISU was "Normal Teachers College"...

So, why has it taken THREE years of some of the Valley teams doing the exact same thing that is killing us,
before someone like Doug Elgin or some of the Valley press steps up and calls teams out for this travesty??
We've been caling out loud here on BradleyFans for THREE years about this issue...I found dozens of threads saying exactly what would happen, we'd lose respect and we'd stop getting any at-large consideration....
so why has nobody else even bothered to recognize it 'til now, and suddenly, the commish is starting to take action like it's a new emergency!!


Here's some great lines...
"..the Valley is stuck in a mediocre stretch. The league hasn't had more than one team in the NCAA Tournament
since 2006-2007. In '06, the Valley put four teams in the NCAA Tournament, an invasion that caused basketball
elitists Billy Packer and Jay Bilas to nearly implode on national TV. And two of the entries, Bradley and Wichita State,
advanced to the round of Sweet 16.

Somewhere along the line, the MVC programs foolishly ignored commissioner Doug Elgin's intelligent formula
for constructing a sturdy NCAA Tournament resume. Elgin challenged the league's coaches and athletic directors
to pursue more challenging schedules, take on BCS conferences and avoid feasting on cupcakes
that would soften their Ratings Percentage Index (RPI).

Elgin's plan was the main reason four MVC teams crashed the NCAA Tournament in '06. And in 2007 --
the last year the Valley had at an-large invitation -- Southern Illinois was waved in largely due to ambitious scheduling.
The Salukis' non-conference foes that season included Arkansas, Indiana, Butler, Virginia Tech, Minnesota, Western Kentucky and St. Mary's.

For some reason a wave of new coaches and ADs who have entered the MVC over the past few seasons think they know more than Elgin.
Some of these guys have taken a knucklehead approach to scheduling, apparently believing that stockpiling junk-calorie
wins against garbage teams is the best way to get into the NCAA Tournament. It isn't. In fact it is absolutely the dumbest,
most damaging approach to scheduling for an MVC program. History confirms that. It isn't just the new guys, either.
Some of veteran coaches need to be reminded too. Have these know-it-alls finally learned their lesson?"

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/yb/142203830

[TheAsianSensation]

It's the responsibility of the teams at the top to make themselves more attractive for an at-large.

ISU, being 2nd, 3rd, and 3rd the last 3 years, have probably hurt the entire league, by costing it a chance at a 2nd bid, by not having a more relevant at-large profile.

I usually hesitate to direct singular blame in things like these; everyone knows that. But what ISU has done with the schedule has been directly catastrophic to the entire league.

Creighton and WSU too, but to a much lesser extent. They at least have attempted to schedule many quality opponents, so they should be held at blame as much. Their problem is the scheduling of truly rotten teams instead of merely below-average teams.


I also think, with the #1 seed winning the MVCT the last 3 years, the problem is magnified. If we had upsets in, say, 2 of them, that's 2 at large bids in 3 years and there wouldn't be as much panic.

[Majik45]

One problem is the #1 seed has won the tourney the last 3 years now. From '99 to '07, the number one seed did not win the tourney. That has a lot to do with the number of teams making the big dance as a lot of those early years, the valley only had 1 team worthy of an at large bid too. Later years (05, 06, 07) had multiple teams playing for at large bids.

[flipper]

well we had a good schedule and it didnt help us.

[SFP]

well we had a good schedule and it didnt help us.

But it did not hurt the Valley and there lies all the difference. The other teams schedule did not hurt us directly but it could have and WSU schedule did hurt themselves.

[tornado]

How can you be sure....personally I disagree...
what helps our conference does help us, but I think it still might help us directly...

--whatever seed UNI gets in the NCAA tourney might just be directly a result of the teams they played...and at least we are a Top 100 team in RPI as a result of having a good schedule.

--whatever seeds both WSU and ISU get in the NIT will in part be influenced by our strength of scheduling

--and then if we get an invitation to the CBI or CIT, it won't be because of our pretty W-L record, the only reason it is even being discussed as within the realm of possibility is because we scheduled strong (best SOS in the Valley) and have a Top 100 RPI!
So I think Bradley's choice to schedule strong rather than weak will be a help to us.

[Garland 22]

I am actually quite sick of this arguement. The RPI code was broken a few years ago by the MVC and the MVC benefited from it. Our schedules aren't really any stronger or weaker than years past. We simply are being judged differently than we were three years ago. The mid-majors are not invited to the party. Plain and simple you can talk all you want about scheduling and I don't buy one freaking dollar of it.

This is a young league who is going to make mistakes, when the league gets older we will get more bids. ISU missed their shot and I'm sure there are some people who are questioning the risks they took, but that is basketball.

WSU should be in the tournament this year. They won't because they don't pass the eye test. WSU was smart when they created their schedule. They are a young team, would it be smart to put a young team through a guantlet schedule and let them get ripped game in and game out. No, you got a build a schedule that allows your team to grow, and then when you got Juniors and Seniors you get a schedule that builds the resume. Ask SIU, last years schedule was brutal, and they paid the price with disgruntled players. If you ask several close to the program many believe the difficult schedule last year may have set them back 5 years. Look at Creighton this year, kind of the same issue.

If you don't believe what I'm saying look at the Sweet Sixteen BU schedule - some familiar names. Look at the MSU schedule the years they got left out the dance - beat three ranked teams.

Its all BS. The schedules are the same. We got the same schedules the A10 has, except they won the big games this year. We will win big games when - Taylor Brown, Kyle Weems, Jackie Carmicheal, Toure Murray, etc. become stars instead of potential.

I know there are going to be seven hundred replies with this number and that. I went to the Valley tourney this year and watched every game - we are a young league not ready for Primetime. The BCS mopes aren't going to give us any room until we grow up.

[Braves4Life]

Nice post Garland.

[amckillip]

I am actually quite sick of this arguement. The RPI code was broken a few years ago by the MVC and the MVC benefited from it. Our schedules aren't really any stronger or weaker than years past. We simply are being judged differently than we were three years ago. The mid-majors are not invited to the party. Plain and simple you can talk all you want about scheduling and I don't buy one freaking dollar of it.

This is a young league who is going to make mistakes, when the league gets older we will get more bids. ISU missed their shot and I'm sure there are some people who are questioning the risks they took, but that is basketball.

WSU should be in the tournament this year. They won't because they don't pass the eye test. WSU was smart when they created their schedule. They are a young team, would it be smart to put a young team through a guantlet schedule and let them get ripped game in and game out. No, you got a build a schedule that allows your team to grow, and then when you got Juniors and Seniors you get a schedule that builds the resume. Ask SIU, last years schedule was brutal, and they paid the price with disgruntled players. If you ask several close to the program many believe the difficult schedule last year may have set them back 5 years. Look at Creighton this year, kind of the same issue.

If you don't believe what I'm saying look at the Sweet Sixteen BU schedule - some familiar names. Look at the MSU schedule the years they got left out the dance - beat three ranked teams.

Its all BS. The schedules are the same. We got the same schedules the A10 has, except they won the big games this year. We will win big games when - Taylor Brown, Kyle Weems, Jackie Carmicheal, Toure Murray, etc. become stars instead of potential.

I know there are going to be seven hundred replies with this number and that. I went to the Valley tourney this year and watched every game - we are a young league not ready for Primetime. The BCS mopes aren't going to give us any room until we grow up.

How, exactly is this a young league? Especially in comparison to the other 'mid-major' leagues? Yes I know we've lost teams like Cincinatti and Tulsa about two decades ago, but the majority of the league has been around for longer than about any other conference save the Big Ten...

[tornado]

ahhh, yes...the eye test.....this is the latest manipulative catch phrase (that they can bend to mean whatever they want)
for all those who want to put forth an argument that allows BCS also-rans in, but even Regular Season League Champions
like Creighton was last year, got left OUT!!

[BradleyBrave]

How, exactly is this a young league? Especially in comparison to the other 'mid-major' leagues? Yes I know we've lost teams like Cincinatti and Tulsa about two decades ago, but the majority of the league has been around for longer than about any other conference save the Big Ten...

Depends what 'young' means I guess. 7 of the 10 teams in the league have joined since 1975. My guess is that the 'core' of other leagues, especially the BCS leagues, are significantly older. But 35 years is long enough to 'figure it out', so to speak.

[TheAsianSensation]

It should be clear that when we discuss this topic, we're not discussing Bradley in particular. We're talking about a more general subject - the health of the entire league.

[TheAsianSensation]

Our schedules aren't really any stronger or weaker than years past.

I straight-up disagree, but to each his own.

[tornado]

exactly - but will someone give me a concise reason why most Valley teams/coaches refuse to play any team - even a top team - on the road without a return deal?
A few years back (06-07), Wichita was bold enough to on the road to Syracuse & LSU and beat them both!

[BUFAN]

I just read the umpteenth article on how the Valley cannot expect to get more than one team in and how the Valley's scheduling is so weak...
and we have a couple threads going about the weak scheduling and the statements from Doug Elgin urging the Valley members to schedule TOUGHER! Plus it';s the talk of several Valley message boards....

But my question (to Valley teams and to the MVC front offices) is ...
what the heck took so long before anyone says or does anything about this??

This is the 3rd straight year that the Valley will get only ONE team in the NCAA!

-Two years ago Drake was one-and-done while ISU lost any chance of an at-large bid because they scheduled so incredibly poorly..

-last year, UNI had an RPI of 59 but went one-and-done, while two higher RPI teams didn't go (ISU & Creighton) due to terrible scheduling.

-This year, Wichita blew any chance of an at-large bid by scheduling poorly, and ISU one-upped everyone by scheduling worse than any Valley team in memory...the worst since when ISU was "Normal Teachers College"...

So, why has it taken THREE years of some of the Valley teams doing the exact same thing that is killing us,
before someone like Doug Elgin or some of the Valley press steps up and calls teams out for this travesty??
We've been caling out loud here on BradleyFans for THREE years about this issue...I found dozens of threads saying exactly what would happen, we'd lose respect and we'd stop getting any at-large consideration....
so why has nobody else even bothered to recognize it 'til now, and suddenly, the commish is starting to take action like it's a new emergency!!


Here's some great lines...
"..the Valley is stuck in a mediocre stretch. The league hasn't had more than one team in the NCAA Tournament
since 2006-2007. In '06, the Valley put four teams in the NCAA Tournament, an invasion that caused basketball
elitists Billy Packer and Jay Bilas to nearly implode on national TV. And two of the entries, Bradley and Wichita State,
advanced to the round of Sweet 16.

Somewhere along the line, the MVC programs foolishly ignored commissioner Doug Elgin's intelligent formula
for constructing a sturdy NCAA Tournament resume. Elgin challenged the league's coaches and athletic directors
to pursue more challenging schedules, take on BCS conferences and avoid feasting on cupcakes
that would soften their Ratings Percentage Index (RPI).

Elgin's plan was the main reason four MVC teams crashed the NCAA Tournament in '06. And in 2007 --
the last year the Valley had at an-large invitation -- Southern Illinois was waved in largely due to ambitious scheduling.
The Salukis' non-conference foes that season included Arkansas, Indiana, Butler, Virginia Tech, Minnesota, Western Kentucky and St. Mary's.

For some reason a wave of new coaches and ADs who have entered the MVC over the past few seasons think they know more than Elgin.
Some of these guys have taken a knucklehead approach to scheduling, apparently believing that stockpiling junk-calorie
wins against garbage teams is the best way to get into the NCAA Tournament. It isn't. In fact it is absolutely the dumbest,
most damaging approach to scheduling for an MVC program. History confirms that. It isn't just the new guys, either.
Some of veteran coaches need to be reminded too. Have these know-it-alls finally learned their lesson?"
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/yb/142203830

I think the best and easiest way to show case the MVC would be in the NIT. If we could get a couple of teams to the garden I think the NCAA would take notice. If you can't win the NIT its hard to plea your case for the NCAA.