If this is your first visit, feel free to
check out the Frequently Asked Questions by clicking this
LINK.
You are welcome as a guest, but you will have to REGISTER
before you can post messages.
To register, click the link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions.
If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.
This has been known for a while, but the news was just made official this morning.
Bradley will host Utah as this year's Mountain West-Missouri Valley Challenge matchup on December 4, 2010.
ST. LOUIS ? The Bradley men's basketball team will host Utah Dec. 4 at Carver Arena in the second annual Mountain West-Missouri Valley Challenge Series, according to the pairings jointly announced by the two league offices Tuesday morning.
ST. LOUIS -- The Bradley men's basketball team will host Utah Dec. 4 at Carver Arena in the second annual Mountain West-Missouri Valley Challenge Series, according to the pairings jointly announced by the two league offices Tuesday morning. Utah owns a 3-2 lead in the all-time series against Bradley, but the teams have not met since the Utes left Peoria with the most-lopsided victory by an opponent in Carver Arena's 28-year history, an 83-49 decision Dec. 5, 1992. Bradley's last win in the series was a 64-62 victory Dec. 30, 1966 in New Orleans to claim the championship of the Sugar Bowl Tournament. The series dates back to Bradley's 42-32 win Jan. 4, 1938 at the Peoria Armory. All nine games in the 2010 MWC-MVC Challenge Series will be played during the same week, Dec. 1-5, 2010, including four games in Valley venues. The Valley won the inaugural Challenge Series in 2009 by a 5-4 margin and MVC champion UNI added to the overall season series advantage by knocking of UNLV in the first round of the NCAA Tournament. 2010 MWC-MVC Challenge Series Dec. 1: BYU at Creighton Dec. 1: Drake at Colorado State Dec. 1: New Mexico at Southern Illinois Dec. 1: UNLV at Illinois State Dec. 4:UTAH AT BRADLEY Dec. 4: Indiana State at Wyoming Dec. 4: UNI at TCU Dec. 4: Wichita State at San Diego State Dec. 5: Evansville at Air Force The agreement between the Mountain West and Missouri Valley conferences is in the second year of a four-year term. The 2011 Challenge Series will be played from Nov. 30-Dec. 4 and in 2012 from Nov. 28-Dec. 2. Pairings are made in two-year cycles with no team having two straight road or two-straight home games during the two-year period. Because the Mountain West Conference has only nine member institutions, one Valley team will not participate in the Challenge Series each season, Missouri State in 2010. The Missouri Valley Conference finished No. 7 in the 2010 Collegiate Basketball News RPI Report, while the Mountain West Conference followed at No. 8. The Valley has ranked among the top nine in conference RPI in each of the last six seasons.
Good opponent. Utah figures to be mid-pack in the MWC again, that's reasonable.
An incredibly difficult draw for the Valley, though. The MWC's best teams are going on the road (BYU, UNM, UNLV) and all 3 of those can win those games, easily.
Looking ahead to the following year, 2011-2012, it looks like a good chance that Bradley could get UNLV or New Mexico. The way I read the agreement, the scheduling is set up in 2-year cycles with one home and one road game. Since this year will be the 2nd year, next year could start a new cycle again with either a home or road game.
And a couple more notes- Since the MWC has only 9 members, note that the one MVC team left out this year will be Missouri State (Evansville was left out last year).
And the press release also acknowledges that with postseason games, the MVC rose to finish the #7 overall conference in Conference RPI, ahead of the MWC (#8 ) and the Pac-10 (#9).
Looking ahead to the following year, 2011-2012, it looks like a good chance that Bradley could get UNLV or New Mexico. The way I read the agreement, the scheduling is set up in 2-year cycles with one home and one road game. Since this year will be the 2nd year, next year could start a new cycle again with either a home or road game.
And a couple more notes- Since the MWC has only 9 members, note that the one MVC team left out this year will be Missouri State (Evansville was left out last year).
And the press release also acknowledges that with postseason games, the MVC rose to finish the #7 overall conference in Conference RPI, ahead of the MWC (#8 ) and the Pac-10 (#9). http://www.warrennolan.com/basketbal.../conferencerpi
I didn't even realize we went up to #7, that's very good. In terms of the matchup not as good as it could've been, but could be worse too I guess. I hope we get a "marquee" type game or 2 on the schedule for the resume though because this one won't be now I don't think. It will still be a decent win if we get it.
Why is Missouri State out?? I thought it was the last place team that gets left out, and they were 7th? So if it wasn't Evansville shouldn't it be SIU??
Well out of the 3 teams we were going to potentially play, this is by far the worst. Not happy.
With 96 NCAA teams, you win this game v a fringe BCS and move on. Got to win the home games, no more excuses or meltdowns. My guess is UTAH isnt probably thrilled with getting us either.
I'm disappointed too, I'd like to know how these match ups get determined. Not a terrible matchup, but definitely the worst of the 3 teams.
"The Challenge will feature head-to-head competition between nine Mountain West and nine Missouri Valley teams annually. Evansville, by virtue of finishing the 2007-08 MVC regular season in 10th place, will be the Valley school that does not participate in the 2009 Challenge Series."
From last year's article on the Missouri Valley website.....So why and how was it determined Mo. St. was out this year?? It should be SIU or EU. I'd be angry if I was a Mo. St. fan, they could be one of the Valley's better teams next year so it hurts to Valley too, and i hope BU doesn't have this happen one year unless they finish last. The last place team shouldn't participate IMO, and that's it. If a team doesn't participate for 10 years in a row, then that is their fault for not winning enough to not finish last. I don't understand how Missouri St. was picked???
Utah finished tied for 5th in the MWC. Bradley finished 5th in the MVC. It is the matchup that is the most logical considering the criteria looked at by the conferences when they plan these games.
Utah was an outstanding defensive team, but lacked offense and this year could be an even bigger offensive struggle.
They lost their 1st leading scorer Carlon Brown, who left the program a short time ago, and their 3rd leading scorer, Luka Drca, to graduation. Their 2nd leading scorer Marshall Henderson (freshman) just transferred out, too. They have a bunch of pretty good recruits coming in next year along with a couple key returnees, so they could still be a pretty good team.
I'm disappointed too, I'd like to know how these match ups get determined. Not a terrible matchup, but definitely the worst of the 3 teams.
"The Challenge will feature head-to-head competition between nine Mountain West and nine Missouri Valley teams annually. Evansville, by virtue of finishing the 2007-08 MVC regular season in 10th place, will be the Valley school that does not participate in the 2009 Challenge Series."
From last year's article on the Missouri Valley website.....So why and how was it determined Mo. St. was out this year?? It should be SIU or EU. I'd be angry if I was a Mo. St. fan, they could be one of the Valley's better teams next year so it hurts to Valley too, and i hope BU doesn't have this happen one year unless they finish last. The last place team shouldn't participate IMO, and that's it. If a team doesn't participate for 10 years in a row, then that is their fault for not winning enough to not finish last. I don't understand how Missouri St. was picked???
They go to the standings 2 years ago, not last year. I have no idea why, but they designated that.
Missouri St finished 9th 2 years ago. Evansville 10th. UE missed last year, so it's MSU's turn to miss this year. Next year, Evansville will miss the challenge by being 10th this year. Had any other team finished 10th this year, they would miss the challenge next year.
They go to the standings 2 years ago, not last year. I have no idea why, but they designated that.
Missouri St finished 9th 2 years ago. Evansville 10th. UE missed last year, so it's MSU's turn to miss this year. Next year, Evansville will miss the challenge by being 10th this year. Had any other team finished 10th this year, they would miss the challenge next year.
Ah thanks I understand. I just reread the quote, and it said 07-08 for this past year's determination and I finally thought about it and realized it was 2 years before this past year. That is kind of stupid if you ask me, why not just go off the past year. I also think it should always be the last place team even if they miss 2 years in a row.
Ah thanks I understand. I just reread the quote, and it said 07-08 for this past year's determination and I finally thought about it and realized it was 2 years before this past year. That is kind of stupid if you ask me, why not just go off the past year. I also think it should always be the last place team even if they miss 2 years in a row.
I think the idea is that the one team that misses is put at such a disadvantage from a scheduling setpoint. Instead of a quality game against a MWC, there's a new game to go get. So instead of getting a couple of months to fill the vacancy, you get a full year to plan ahead and get a quality game in place.
I think the idea is that the one team that misses is put at such a disadvantage from a scheduling setpoint. Instead of a quality game against a MWC, there's a new game to go get. So instead of getting a couple of months to fill the vacancy, you get a full year to plan ahead and get a quality game in place.
Makes sense again, I never thought of it that way. It's not like a big conference where you just go get another game, it is tough to schedule in the MVC. So ya I can understand that.
Well out of the 3 teams we were going to potentially play, this is by far the worst. Not happy.
I agree completely. UNM or UNLV would have been much bigger draws to Carver. It looks like 2 straight years with zero marquee opponents at home. Not good at all, though if we get in a good exempt tourney our schedule could still be more than respectable.
Tweet
Comment