2010-2011 Schedule

[squirrelgotdead]

It's rather difficult to win these games if the idea is to not schedule them to begin with.

For the billionth time, no one is not saying to not schedule them at all. Rather to limit them and not cancel out the benefit you get from those games with cupcakes.

You still need quality wins to go with your resume.

 

[TheAsianSensation]

It's rather difficult to win these games if the idea is to not schedule them to begin with.

That wasn't what I was implying; you schedule games you have a chance to win without going excessive (basically pulling a Chaney-led Temple).

Actually, squirrel probably said it better than I can.

6 spots is getting harder to fill with quality opponents each year, teams from the MAC are at least better then playing teams that have rpi"s higher then 200.

Actually, practically the entire western division of the MAC is 200+. :lol: They've actually regressed a lot. Let's sub in the Horizon League instead, then it'd make much more sense.

 

[TheAsianSensation]

but I think you're missing the point, too...
no team EVER loses such a game unless.....they schedule it first...
but then you'll never win tougher games either unless they schedule them....so
FIRST and FOREMOST -- they need to go out and schedule tougher!
Palm's Chicken Little philosophy of don't play Duke because you might lose...is suicide for all but a few of the top BCS schools.

The point he's making is not to play a bunch of games where you have little chance of winning any one of the games. We're not talking about the "toss-up" games against bubble teams, we're talking about top-tier teams.

This "Palm plan" doesn't say to avoid Duke because you'll lose....it's says not to play 5 games against Duke-like competition in a single non-con schedule. It's implying the depth of the schedule.

In fact, you could argue that, say, Gonzaga violates the Palm plan, but they do well for themselves.

No team schedules games JUST to lose them, so maybe that's what's he's saying they should avoid??

That's EXACTLY what he's trying to say. That's his whole point in that article. :lol:

Teams need to get the toughest teams they can on the schedule, and we finally see some of the Valley doing it...
then go out and try to win....and some of them you will win....

I agree with this philosophy.

Anyway...I have given my examples and I think they are SOLID....
had any of those team I cited (and I have cited a dozen or more) played tougher teams, even Duke on the road and lost, rather than dropping their SOS into the UNACCEPTABLE range by staking out Norfolk State at home, then THEY MIGHT just have gotten an at large bid.

I disagree on this point, as I think losses to better teams instead of wins against worse teams would not have changed the at-large status of the teams whose examples you provided. In fact, it would've slightly worsened them based on the simple principle that they failed against better teams. By having "weaker" schedules, they forced the committee to try to determine a value of their cheap wins. Obviously it didn't work.



And finally, given how Palm is so involved and knowledgeable about this process, I think he has a better idea of what to do than any of us.

 

[bdhove12]

All Palm said was not to go on the road without a return game. That's it. He's not saying avoid playing good teams altogether. You still should play good home/home games and play in quality preseason tourney. Considering none of the 8 non-BCS at-large teams played a road game last year without a return, it's tough to argue against his logic.

 

[Bravesfan]

I am not in agreement....I know he's an expert, and he's entitled to his opinion, but let me state mine....
I think one of the main points of that column is to show how far from the mainstream and how far out on a limb Palm is what that theory of his...because Doug Elgin and all the AD's in the MVC are among the MANY who will disagree!

He says......
"I can't think of a single team that missed the NCAA Tournament that would have made it by replacing wins by losing to better teams."

But I sure can....and two of them were in OUR conference!!
Had ISU ended 2009-2010 or 2008-2009 with a SOS in the Top 40, they'd have gotten a bid....but they didn't strictly due to the fact they didn't go on the road to play or beat anyone!!

Palm takes the viewpoint that winning gobs of easy games at home against absolute nobodies is the way to go!
What??? Has he been under a rock the last 3-4 years?? Is he just maybe referring ONLY to teams in BCS conferences that KNOW they are going to be in the upper part of their conference and that they are going to easily secure an NCAA bid anyway?


Intentionally scheduling gobs of softies and cupcakes at home for easy wins, had CLEARLY proven beyond question
to be ABSOLUTE SUICIDE for any mid-major wanting an NCAA bid....just ask any ISU fan!! I'll bet 100% of them wishes they'd gone on the road and played Duke last year....it WOULD have helped BOTH their RPI and SOS!

Agreed 100%. Yes, losing to bad teams hurts after going on the road and losing to great teams like Duke. However, teams like Bradley need to play great teams once in awhile to at least boost the RPI a bit. Believe me, playing and losing at Duke will help our RPI more than playing and beating three or four cupcakes at home. Obviously we have to win those type of games too, but the RPI boost will come more from scheduling up than following the ISU philosophy of the past three years!

 

[tornado]

..no one is not saying to not schedule them...

now it's clear..

All Palm said was not to go on the road without a return game. ...

again...I agree that's good advice for the UNC's, Syracuse's, and Michigan State's...but Palm doesn't qualify it that way and argues it's good for everyone.
In fact, in the context of the article we're quoting - he's clearly aiming this argument at the Wichita State's abd Bradley's of D-I.
but did you ever wonder why 75% of D-I has done exactly this routinely for decades (loading up on guarantee games)...there are numerous reasons like $$, toughening the schedule, and the simple fact that most of the WIU's of the world ain't gonna get anyone to come to Macomb...so much for WIU heeding Palm's advice..
But now, we see solid mid-majors like Bradley, Saint Louis, etc...doing it...so just maybe, since they are the ones right there in the trenches fighting the daily battle to schedule and earn a bid, then just maybe they know something that a stat freak behind a desk does NOT know....'sall I'm sayin'


Last thing...the companion column to the one about Palm, cites the SUCCESSFUL teams who are NON-BCS but got at large bids..and guess how many played a guarantee game at a BCS?
Answer---VIRTUALLY ALL OF THEM DID -
so --the facts seem to be refuting Jerry - so read it yourself......
http://www.kansas.com/2010/07/25/1418119/how-they-did-it.html

 

[shaunguth]

That wasn't what I was implying; you schedule games you have a chance to win without going excessive (basically pulling a Chaney-led Temple).

I guess that's the Jank philosophy! :roll:

All Palm said was not to go on the road without a return game. That's it. He's not saying avoid playing good teams altogether. You still should play good home/home games and play in quality preseason tourney. Considering none of the 8 non-BCS at-large teams played a road game last year without a return, it's tough to argue against his logic.

And now the Jank philosophy is validated!

Only schedule games you have a chance to win (to me, you have a chance to win every time you step on the floor) and don't go on the road without a return game.

 

[tornado]

Late Oct. - prob. Oct. 29 or 30 - Red-White Game @ On-Campus Arena
Early Nov. - Exhibition game at new On-Campus Arena
Early Nov. - Exhibition game @ Carver Arena
Mid-Nov. - 1st Home game in Hall of Fame Classic
Mid-Nov. - 2nd Home game in Hall of Fame Classic
Nov. 20 - Sat - USC @ Basketball Hall of Fame Tip Of Tournament
Nov. 21 - Sun. -UMass or New Mexico State @ HOF Top Off Tournament
Dec. 4 - Sat. Utah (@ Carver Arena)
Non-conference games at home vs. NIU & @ Western Carolina - dates TBD
Dec 8. - Duke @ Duke's Cameron Arena
Dec. 20 - Jackson State @ Carver Arena -- ranked #140 by CHN **
Late Dec - Feb. - 18-game home & home MVC schedule
Feb. 18-19 Road game - BracketBusters
(Poss. Drexel return game for BB?)
Mar. 3-6 MVC Tournament


**http://bradleyfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=187891&postcount=27

 

[bdhove12]

Last thing...the companion column to the one about Palm, cites the SUCCESSFUL teams who are NON-BCS but got at large bids..and guess how many played a guarantee game at a BCS?
Answer---VIRTUALLY ALL OF THEM DID -
so --the facts seem to be refuting Jerry - so read it yourself......
http://www.kansas.com/2010/07/25/1418119/how-they-did-it.html

Two of the six played a guarantee game at a BCS. The others all had return games.

 

[TheAsianSensation]

I guess that's the Jank philosophy! :roll:



And now the Jank philosophy is validated!

Only schedule games you have a chance to win (to me, you have a chance to win every time you step on the floor) and don't go on the road without a return game.

That's not the Jank philosophy. The Jank Plan :lol: is scheduling nothing but games you think you're basically a lock to win. That's not the plan anyone should want.

The right plan is to make sure you schedule games you CAN win but aren't locks to win. We're talking about beefing up the schedule against top half teams in BCS conferences, some of the better teams in the A-10, MWC, etc.....not the worst possible teams.

The "only schedule games you have a chance to win" philosophy....every MVC team should feel 97% of all opponents in D-1 fit this criteria. We're just saying don't schedule 6 games against the other 3%.

 

[TheAsianSensation]

Last thing...the companion column to the one about Palm, cites the SUCCESSFUL teams who are NON-BCS but got at large bids..and guess how many played a guarantee game at a BCS?
Answer---VIRTUALLY ALL OF THEM DID -
so --the facts seem to be refuting Jerry - so read it yourself......
http://www.kansas.com/2010/07/25/1418119/how-they-did-it.html

Again, Palm isn't saying to completely avoid guarantee games at BCS, he's saying to avoid binging on them. It's like a fine dessert. Eaten as part of a meal, it's delicious, but as a main course, it'll ruin your appetite That same philosophy carries over to non-conference scheduling. Dessert and scheduling are one in the same. :lol:

 

[shaunguth]

That's not the Jank philosophy. The Jank Plan :lol: is scheduling nothing but games you think you're basically a lock to win. That's not the plan anyone should want.

The right plan is to make sure you schedule games you CAN win but aren't locks to win. We're talking about beefing up the schedule against top half teams in BCS conferences, some of the better teams in the A-10, MWC, etc.....not the worst possible teams.

The "only schedule games you have a chance to win" philosophy....every MVC team should feel 97% of all opponents in D-1 fit this criteria. We're just saying don't schedule 6 games against the other 3%.

What I'm saying is you have a chance to win every single game you play.

I realize they weren't "scheduled" games, but tell Kansas, Pitt, and Illinois that Bradley had no chance to win those games. They might have agreed with Palm........BEFORE the games were actually played!

You have 0% chance to win if you don't play those games.

 

[TheAsianSensation]

What I'm saying is you have a chance to win every single game you play.

I realize they weren't "scheduled" games, but tell Kansas, Pitt, and Illinois that Bradley had no chance to win those games. They might have agreed with Palm........BEFORE the games were actually played!

You have 0% chance to win if you don't play those games.

Fair enough. What I'm saying is that I realize there's a chance to win every game, but the chance differs from opponent to opponent, and we should avoid taking on several games that fit the definition of "slim chance". There's a different kind of chance in every game.

 

[SFP]

I really do not care a rats @ss what the experts say about scheduling. I personally like that we are scheduling the best college team in America and our guys have a chance of experiencing an environment that almost sacred for college ball. It is the Carnegie Hall of college basketball when you have a chance you go. JL has been pretty good scheduling so let's not knock him for getting the Duke game. That is what I am hearing now from a few of you. I wish we had a tougher non con but I'm sure JL did all he could under the circumstance. I'm done with discussing ISU's cupcake schedule as well.

Play the best and let the cards fall from there.

 

[Bradleyguy10]

anyone, anywhere, anytime

 

[Out of Balance]

I really do not care a rats @ss what the experts say about scheduling. I personally like that we are scheduling the best college team in America and our guys have a chance of experiencing an environment that almost sacred for college ball. It is the Carnegie Hall of college basketball when you have a chance you go. JL has been pretty good scheduling so let's not knock him for getting the Duke game. That is what I am hearing now from a few of you. I wish we had a tougher non con but I'm sure JL did all he could under the circumstance. I'm done with discussing ISU's cupcake schedule as well.

Play the best and let the cards fall from there.

Agreed. friend:!: To me, theres nothing worst then scheduling a bunch of cup cakes, beating the hell out of them and getting nothing out of it but a uncredited W:roll: Or worst we get beet a couple games or more because our players don't get up for the games and then our scheduling hurts us down the road at the deciding point (maybe) at tournament time:!: I am not saying we need to schedule to get our ass's kicked every game by scheduling all unwinable games as visitors but rather, a good balance schedule that meets your teams development needs. Playing the best may not always help your W's and L's record but it surly will add to your teams learning, player/team development, recruiting and team attitude :|

 

[AZ BU Fan]

Since college bb is all about recruiting, it would be interesting to know what potential recruits value more:

-opportunity to play against name teams with possibility it lowers opportunity of post season opportunity as at large team

-increase, but not guarantee, opportunity to play in post season as at large team by going undefeated vs lots of cupcakes on the schedule

If the Jank scheduling approach drives more quality recruits than a fan's scheduling approach, Jank would achieve success in the long run by getting better recruits, improving the team and its ability to play stronger opponents in the future.

 

[Da Coach]

Here is how the BU schedule looks to be shaping up-

Late Oct. - prob. Oct. 29 or 30 - Red-White Game @ On-Campus Arena
Early Nov. - Exhibition game at new On-Campus Arena
Early Nov. - Exhibition game @ Carver Arena
Nov. 17 - Wed. - Loyola Marymount @ Carver Arena
Nov. 20 - Sat - USC @ Basketball Hall of Fame Tip-Off Tournament
Nov. 21 - Sun. -UMass or New Mexico State @ HOF Tip-Off Tournament
Nov. 24 - Wed. - EIU @ Carver Arena
Nov. 30 - Tues. - @ Western Carolina
Dec. 4 - Sat. Utah @ Carver Arena
Dec 8. - Duke @ Duke's Cameron Arena
Non-conference game at home vs. NIU - date TBD
Dec. 20 - Jackson State @ Carver Arena
18-game home & home MVC schedule
Feb. 19 (probable) Road game - BracketBusters

Mar. 3-6 MVC Tournament

 

[LittleBrave]

Hopefully we'll get at least 1 more game before the non-conf. schedule is set.
We only have 9 before the Valley season begins.

 

[TheAsianSensation]

If Loyola Marymount isn't part of the HOF Tipoff tourney, we're done, right?