Finally a schedule release!!! - Page 2

Flyer'95 · #**101** 07-09-2008, 08:09 PM

Just a cursory glance and some tidbits after looking at the teams and their rosters from last year.

(Number of starters lost in parenthesis)

Teams that might be better than they were last year:
Marquette (1), Creighton (1), marshall (1), Miami(1), Toledo (1)

Teams that might be worse than last year:
Bethune cookman (2), mercer (2), troy (3), akron (4), coppin state (4), uncg (2), george mason (2)

Teams I’m not sure either way: wofford (2), deleware st. (2), auburn (2)

In other words, after looking at the rosters and each team's personnel losses it looks to me like the tough games seem even tougher and the easy games seem even easier.

But that's why they play the games.

Interestingly enough, francois bro-grebe is still kicking around at marshall and will be playing at UD arena.

as_4 · #**102** 07-09-2008, 10:57 PM

Originally Posted by Binnie Bombs 33

shame on Kissell and BG for not exploring MVC options all over the place ... that is how you get recognition when you are Dayton.

How do you know that they didn't?

You are just assuming because we only have Creighton from MVC that we explored no other option. Remember we owed Toledo, Akron, GMU, Miami, so that automatically takes away 4 more chances...

Binnie Bombs 33 · #**103** 07-09-2008, 11:30 PM

thats the problem, signing mid level MAC teams to a home and home ... they don't deserve us playing on their court just like we don't deserve top bcs teams on their court. It is a lose/lose for us ... we beat them and the rpi does nothing probably drops ... we lose and we are screwed.

they need to try to get about 5 to 6 teams a year from the top 9 conferences and I believe that is achievable. the MAC is ****, playing average makes you average.

Avid Flyer · #**104** 07-10-2008, 12:07 AM

Very interesting as you seem to fully understand it from our point of view but then lack the ability to see it from the BCS point of view which is exactly as you've outlined it, just switch a few names. Alot easier said than done. and after last years beating of Pitt it got alot tougher.

Now we just have to go deep in the NCAA to get their respect.

rollo · #**105** 07-10-2008, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by Binnie Bombs 33

they need to try to get about 5 to 6 teams a year from the top 9 conferences and I believe that is achievable.

Instead of constantly complaining, why don't you offer some solutions? It'll take some work and research, which I understand aren't your strong points, but after 5 years at UD, you should be able to use 'google'.

So let's play your game......

If what you say is truely 'achievable', then someone must be doing it, right? So find 8-10 teams similar to UD - those who havent' won an NCAA game in 18 years, come from a non-BCS conference, etc... - who have done what you say is 'achievable'. I dont' know if anyone has, as I don't have as much down time as you do and am unable to spend the time looking it up, so it's possible I'm way off base. And if I am, I'll admit it and give you ALL the credit and Kissell all the blame.

If you can't come up with any other schools doing the 'achievable', then it's safe to say that what you propose is NOT achievable.

And that should end this tantrum, but surely will lead to yet another.......and another.....and another.....

as_4 · #**106** 07-10-2008, 08:53 AM

We have similiar programs. Good fan base, mid-major conference. Last year they won 25 games. They have to play 2 more conference games though:

Last season:
vs. Missouri-St. Louis
vs. SEMO (Chicago Invitational Challenge 1st Round)
UNC-Wilmington (Chicago Invitational 2nd Round)
Indiana (Sears Centre)
Kent State (Sears Centre)
Chicago State
Illinois-Chicago
Eastern Michigan
Cincinnati
Bowling Green
Ball State

4 Mac Teams
1 Big 10
1 Big East (UC was a return game from 2 years ago when the beat ISU by 30 at home)

as_4 · #**107** 07-10-2008, 09:00 AM

Conference USA

Belhaven
at California
William Carey
at Alabama
Blue Mountain College
at South Alabama
Spring Hill
Alabama State
New Orleans
Louisiana Tech
Alcorn State
McNeese State
at Mississippi
at Savannah State

4 NON DIVISION 1 (could be 5 since Savannah State hasn't won a game in like 10 years)
3 SEC

Gazoo · #**108** 07-10-2008, 09:01 AM

To complete this assignment you HAVE to show home vs. away games. Coppin State plays a ridiculous schedule IIRC but they're all on the road. And everyone needs a whippin' boy. (PS: if that has any racial connotations they were not intended.)

as_4 · #**109** 07-10-2008, 09:03 AM

Coastal Carolina
Marshall
at Marist
Bradley
Miami (OH)
St. Bonaventure
at Cal State Fullerton
at Belmont
at Chattanooga
Presbyterian
at Illinois State (Bracket Busters -- Didn't actually do anything to get to play)

as_4 · #**110** 07-10-2008, 09:04 AM

All those seem fairly similar to ours....I wonder why they aren't demanding BCS schools to do home and homes with them?

Flyer'95 · #**111** 07-10-2008, 11:59 AM

I think the defenders of the schedule need to at least acknowledge that those teams are playing some 'names' and are willing to go on the road to do it if they have to. We are not. To the defenders of the schedule, i ask what the benefits of home and homes with mac teams are?

You guys are making a lot of strawman arguments here. Nobody is claiming that UD should demand that UCLA and UNC come to the arena.

What i want to know is why aren't we taking a chance and traveling to a BCS school instead of doing home and homes with mac teams? The mac is not recognized as a top conference, even though it is admittedly tough. We get nothing for beating them, we get dinged for losing to them.

We should be, at the very least, scheduling home and homes with schools from conferences that are on par with the A10. A challenger from the WCC. The Valley (kudos on creighton). The Mountain West. Conference USA. Not the mac. We have three home and homes with the mac. That's not really going to blow anybody's mind. And two of those home and homes are against teams that haven't won or challenged for the mac title in years.

If we absolutely cannot get the home and homes with the 7-10 conferences, we should at least be inviting the challengers and contenders of lesser conferences to our house. We have a LOT of dogs on this schedule. It will hurt our SOS and our RPI. And god forbid we lose to any of them, we're in trouble. Troy, coppin state, wofford? WTF? Can't any of our gimme games be against teams that will have a shot to win their own crappy conference?

At least the potential of losing to a better team doesn't look so bad on a resume. I feel that this schedule has us playing with fire and very little room for missteps. I felt that last year's schedule was a work of art. This year's, not so much.

Binnie Bombs 33 · #**112** 07-10-2008, 12:15 PM

Top 9 conferences ... 5 teams is not that hard when you think about it.

Settling for Akron and Toledo on the high end of average to dipping down to playing Coppin St (2 yrs in a row!) and Marshall is stupid. And sacrificing two games (Betume and Mercer to get a shot at Marquette on a nuetral floor is kind of silly)

I say at least 2 MVC teams every season (home and home)

Then 2 teams from the top 6 conferences ... home or road or nuetral

1 from the 9th ranked conference, im not sure what that was off the top of my head.

That is achievable for UD and it should be done every season.

**** it ... let's take Xavier and SLU ... join the MVC conference logistically there is no reason for us to be in the A-10 anyways.

Binnie Bombs 33 · #**113** 07-10-2008, 12:15 PM

Top 9 conferences ... 5 teams is not that hard when you think about it.

Settling for Akron and Toledo on the high end of average to dipping down to playing Coppin St (2 yrs in a row!) and Marshall is stupid. And sacrificing two games (Betume and Mercer to get a shot at Marquette on a nuetral floor is kind of silly)

I say at least 2 MVC teams every season (home and home)

Then 2 teams from the top 6 conferences ... home or road or nuetral

1 from the 9th ranked conference, im not sure what that was off the top of my head.

That is achievable for UD and it should be done every season.

**** it ... let's take Xavier and SLU ... join the MVC conference logistically there is no reason for us to be in the A-10 anyways.

San Diego Flyer · #**114** 07-10-2008, 12:19 PM

All good thought-provoking scenarios. I would also love to know some of TK's logic and experiences on these issues that you have posed.

But referencing some earlier posts, I see no merit in dissing TK while swapping ignorance on the subject and "demanding" that we should have done this or that when we have no idea what the guy has been through in trying to solve many of the things being mentioned.

I believe Kissell has tried more approaches than he can reveal to beef up our schedule, but for reasons he can't discuss it is what it is.

This board would go into a meltdown if we tried the Temple/Chaney approach and went 7-8 in a tougher ooc and then 11-5 in the A10.

Gazoo · #**115** 07-10-2008, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by San Diego Flyer

This board would go into a meltdown if we tried the Temple/Chaney approach and went 7-8 in a tougher ooc and then 11-5 in the A10.

Would we really? Maybe. I'll start a poll because I'm interested in that answer.

San Diego Flyer · #**116** 07-10-2008, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by Gazoo

Would we really? Maybe. I'll start a poll because I'm interested in that answer.

Early returns would indicate that Door Number One would bring out maniacal tendencies on this board.

flyers/avs · #**117** 07-11-2008, 12:00 AM

Originally Posted by Flyer Hub

Just win the dang A-10 tourney. Is there a law that says we can't do that?

Yes. It's called the X law. We cant beat them here, there or anywhere. On a train, on a plane, in the rain. With a goat, in a boat, by a moat ...

UDBrian · #**118** 07-11-2008, 08:11 AM

I don't think the past predicts the future. I remember when Michigan used to own Ohio State and that turned around quite nicely. Xavier has had players who are a little bit better recently but UD has definitely raised their talent level (some players are yet unproven in college). You win with people and I think that UD has the people coming in who can beat Xavier in a boat or a moat.

Gazoo · #**119** 07-11-2008, 09:59 AM

Originally Posted by San Diego Flyer

Early returns would indicate that Door Number One would bring out maniacal tendencies on this board.

Fair enough, there you have it.

Figgie123 · #**120** 07-15-2008, 10:54 AM

Okay, I put my database skills to work.

The following teams are from the following 4 conferences (A10, MVC, Mountain West, and CUSA) (kenpom 6-10 rankings), and played 5 or more games against the "Big 6"+3 of the above conferences, ignoring in-conference games, in 2007

[HTML]
Charlotte (5)
H(Wake Forest, Maryland)
A(Tulsa, Clemson)
N(Georgia Tech)
Massachusetts (5)
H(Houston)
A(Northern Iowa, Syracuse, Boston College, Vanderbilt)
Memphis (7)
H(Richmond,Georgetown,Arizona,Tennessee)
A(Cincinnati)
N(Oklahoma,Connecticut)
Missouri State (5)
H(Saint Louis)
A(Arkansas, Utah)
N(Alabama,Purdue)
Rhode Island (5)
H(Providence)
A(South Florida,Boston College,Syracuse)
N(UAB)
[/HTML]
[HTML]
Rice (7)
H(Duquesne, Richmond, Texas, TCU)
A(TCU,Vanderbilt,Oklahoma)
Richmond (5)
H(South Florida,Virginia Tech)
A(Memphis, East Carolina, Rice)
Temple (5)
H(Villanova, Duke)
A(Tennessee)
N(Providence, Florida)
UAB (6)
H(Cincinnati)
A(South Florida, Kentucky, Wichita State)
N(Florida State, Rhode Island)
UCF (6)
H(Villanova, Kansas State, Penn State, Mississippi, Connecticut)
A(South Florida)
Xavier (8)
H(Creighton, Cincinnati, Tennessee, Kansas State, Virginia)
A(Arizona State, Auburn)
N(Indiana)
[/HTML]

Missouri State, Rice, UCF : no wins since 1989 (my earliest NCAA stats)

You may now continue to argue...

John

rollo · #**121** 07-15-2008, 11:32 AM

It appears that most of these teams had to give up numerous home games to get these games. We all know that Kissell isn't going to ever schedule less than 16 home games and with 8 automatically being A10 conference games, we will forever have no less than 8 non-conference home games.

Here's a breakdown of the number of non-conference home games some (I couldn't look them all up) of these teams played in '07-08.

Rice 5
Temple 5
Missouri St 6
Central Fla 6
UNC-C 7
RI 7
UAB 7
Memphis 8 home, 3 neutral, 0 road games
X 8 + KSU at USBank Arena
UD 9

So it appears that teams similar to us (X and Memphis are wayyy past us) are able to get more and better games but also pay a price for doing so. Until UD changes their philosophy and decides to pass on the home gate receipts in order to appeas the masses, I would expect future schedules to remain the same: BORING!!

Which raises the question: What would upset the masses more....only 5 non conference home games (13 total) or a boring 18 home game schedule???

Flyer'95 · #**122** 07-15-2008, 12:46 PM

I'm exhausted by the all-or-nothing arguments that take place on this board. Why do you presume that the critics of the board only want 5 home games? You're presuming that this is the ONLY way the schedule could get better. It's just a tactic used to win an argument. "I mean, if improving our schedule would force us to only have FIVE home games then i guess our schedule is just gonna HAVE to suck from now on..."

The vast majority of people on this board, believe it or not, understand the financial implications to losing home games. But given that this year we had one more home game than last year, it seems to make sense that we could have gotten one more meaningful road game instead. (not to mention a slight improvement on half the home games that we do have).

How about 6 home games + a neutral site game to split the gate? 7 home games and one extra road game against a meaningful bcs opponent that will be at least regionally televised? Or seven home games and one neutral site? There is a middle ground.

Why do you take the criticism to mean that we have to abandon three of our home games to improve our schedule? No one, i repeat, no one is asking for that. No one on this board wants only 5 home games. Nor is it a requirement to improve our schedule.

And besides, on the list above that figgie posted (thanks figgie), only five out of those eleven teams had more TRUE road games than they did home games against those top 10 conference teams. The rest had either more home games, an equal amount of road games, or neutral games in which i presume they get a cut of the gate. Not sure how that works.

The Chef · #**123** 07-15-2008, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by rollo

Which raises the question: What would upset the masses more....only 5 non conference home games (13 total) or a boring 18 home game schedule???

The answer to that one is simple. The latter would upset the fans more. With that said, the scheduling decision is strictly one based on revenue. If TK thought that he could get more revenue with fewer great games, that's the direction we would go. The fact is that we put 10,000 fannies in the seats of a 13,500 seat arena every night out, To break even, we'd have to guarantee 7 sellouts to compensate for a 9 games with an 11,000 average paid attendance. That would be tough to actually make happen because if you schedule that way, it is likely that a few less interesting opponents will still find their way to UD Arena.

I think that average attendance for the non-conference would have to fall below 8,500 before we'd consider moving in the direction where we'd be scheduling fewer more interesting games.

Originally Posted by Flyer'95

I'm exhausted by the all-or-nothing arguments that take place on this board. Why do you presume that the critics of the board only want 5 home games? You're presuming that this is the ONLY way the schedule could get better. It's just a tactic used to win an argument. "I mean, if improving our schedule would force us to only have FIVE home games then i guess our schedule is just gonna HAVE to suck from now on..."

In fairness to rollo, I don't think that was his intent or argument. Sometimes, framing the argument as all-or-nothing helps to clarify the consistency of one's thinking. To me rollo's point is this: fans want more that what they are getting now. But, instead of more quantity which is what they are getting, what they really want is more quality. If they could get both, there's no doubting that fans would be happy with it.

Flyer'95 · #**124** 07-15-2008, 01:09 PM

I didn't mean to offend. If i did, i apologize. It's just that i believe that it's not an 'all or nothing' scenario. There is a way to appease all involved without hurting the bottom line too much. Kissell did a great job last year. This year, he came one or two 'name' games short. And half the home schedule could have been bumped up a little as well. (i.e. scheduling north texas, wku, or south alabama instead of troy).

I just have a hard time believing that this is the best UD can do, especially considering that we had an extra home game to play with this year.

rollo · #**125** 07-15-2008, 01:13 PM

Thanks Chef, you hit the nail on the head.

And Flyer '95, you're absolutely right. With 2 extra games, a bigger named school (or two) should have been scheduled over any of our non-con home games.

This morning I was talking to a buddy and season ticket holder about the schedule. In all honesty, I told him, if this type of schedule is what I can expect in the future, it's conceivable that I won't be a seat license paying season ticket holder much longer. I have 3 kids between 7-12 years old that are active and more deserving of my time and money that Bethune Cookman and Troy. Right now most of their activities are immediatly after school or on saturday and sunday mornings, but it won't always be this way. And their lives are only going to become more and more active meaning that I'm going to have less and less time.

If push comes to shove, UD will lose my time and money 100% of the time. And with a home schedule like this, I'm starting to feel someone's elbow in my back.

oldfan · #**126** 07-16-2008, 08:25 AM

The issue appears to be one of revenue from home game versus quality of opponents whether home or away. The proposal is to raise the quality even if the game must be played away from the Arena. And away is the most likely scenario as this appears to be the only way the Flyers can schedule a top or even a mediocre BCS school. What is left out is the offset to the reduction in number of home games which is to raise the ticket prices for the remaining games. I am sure all (all or nothing argument) the season ticket fans would be happy to pay more to see less games. (And season ticket prices would have to increase significantly to cover the loss of concession revenue due to the fewer number of games.) This would be true even though the quality of the home schedule did not change but at least the away schedule would improve. And if the fans are lucky they might even get to watch the additional away game or games on local television.

Since I am not a season ticket holder or a Dayton resident, the idea of Dayton playing more quality games away from the Arena does not bother me. I'd much prefer it if Dayton played all its OOC schedule away from the Arena if it meant their entire OOC conference schedule was against BCS competition. However I doubt that the area fans and season ticket holders would be quite so happy with fewer games and higher prices.

Dirty Sanchez · #**127** 07-16-2008, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by rollo

This morning I was talking to a buddy and season ticket holder about the schedule. In all honesty, I told him, if this type of schedule is what I can expect in the future, it's conceivable that I won't be a seat license paying season ticket holder much longer. I have 3 kids between 7-12 years old that are active and more deserving of my time and money that Bethune Cookman and Troy. Right now most of their activities are immediatly after school or on saturday and sunday mornings, but it won't always be this way. And their lives are only going to become more and more active meaning that I'm going to have less and less time.

If push comes to shove, UD will lose my time and money 100% of the time. And with a home schedule like this, I'm starting to feel someone's elbow in my back.

Bingo.

Furio · #**128** 07-16-2008, 11:43 AM

"If Lucy pulls that football away at last second one more time that's it I'm finished"
Charlie Brown

longtimefan · #**129** 07-16-2008, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by oldfan

Since I am not a season ticket holder or a Dayton resident, the idea of Dayton playing more quality games away from the Arena does not bother me. I'd much prefer it if Dayton played all its OOC schedule away from the Arena if it meant their entire OOC conference schedule was against BCS competition.

You can't really mean this. So you want UD to finish 5-10 in the non-con and have no shot at an at-large bid?

Figgie123 · #**130** 07-16-2008, 12:24 PM

How about this for a non-conference schedule:

@ Alabama (124)
@ Auburn (168)
vs Georgia Tech (85)
@ Dayton (24)
(2 games in Chicago)
@ Oklahoma State (95)
@ UCLA (5)
@ Loyola Marymount (310)
@ Iowa State (192)

That's Mercer. Maybe that will help part of our RPI, the Opp SOS.

http://www.mercerbears.com/schedules.asp?path=mbball

John

NCkevi · #**131** 07-16-2008, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by rollo

if this type of schedule is what I can expect in the future, it's conceivable that I won't be a seat license paying season ticket holder much longer. I have 3 kids between 7-12 years old that are active and more deserving of my time and money that Bethune Cookman and Troy.

But Pitt or any other 'BCS' team would be more deserving than your kids?

Piqua Flyer '66 · #**132** 07-16-2008, 01:02 PM

did I miss something?

longtimefan · #**133** 07-16-2008, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by Piqua Flyer '66

did I miss something?

I think he means the Chicago Invitational, not the Preseason NIT.

rollo · #**134** 07-16-2008, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by NCkevi

But Pitt or any other 'BCS' team would be more deserving than your kids?

Of course not...in those RARE instances I can justify skipping a practice or game to take the kids.

Kids first, UD second, games third, practices fourth.

oldfan · #**135** 07-16-2008, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by longtimefan

You can't really mean this. So you want UD to finish 5-10 in the non-con and have no shot at an at-large bid?

No what I want is Dayton to finish 15-0 in the nonconference and be the game of the week on National TV from November through March.

As I stated in another thread I think the current schedule actually may help the team prepare for the conference play rather than a tougher schedule. My point here is that many are arguing that Dayton should be willing to surrender a home game or two for the chance to play a Marquee BCS team or two on the road. I can easily buy that but I doubt that many of the posters here who are season ticketholders would placidly accept the needed season ticket price increases required to offset lost Arena concessions for those two games in exchange for one or two quality road games.

OSU Flyer · #**136** 07-17-2008, 07:12 PM

I think this schedule has some nice games on it such as the Chicago tournament and a home and home series with Creighton. Creighton was a top 50 RPI team last year in what was a rebuilding year for them. They should be a NCAA caliber the next years we play them as well as being a top 50 RPI team. Great series to add to our schedule.

That being said we’ve put ourselves in a whole with this schedule via RPI and SOS. As bad as some of the RPI’s are on these teams wait until next season after graduation sets in. As XUBrew has already mentioned Akron is going to drop like a brick. They lose 3 1,000 point scorers in Cedric Middleton, Nick Dials and Jeremiah Wood. Along with former Colonel White player Quade Milum they lose 4 of their top 6 players in minutes played last season. Nate Linhart is the only start back from last year. From looking at the Zips board they expect to start a backcourt of freshman and sophomores and have a rebuilding season. It’s very likely they’ll be at least above 100 in the RPI next year.

George Mason loses Will Thomas and Florian Campbell who started on their Final Four team and were the corner stones of last years team. I think Mason will still have a good team next year but in all probability they’ll drop out of the top 100 of the RPI. Fans on the Mason board expect somewhat of a rebuilding year next season. They should be in contention for the CAA but the league as a whole will probably be down. Despite this I think this is a good series and the kind of home and homes we should be playing

They buy games is where it gets really scary. Many of our home games against low majors are against teams that suffer significant loss to graduation and have to replace those losses with freshman and a few JUCOs. Granted I haven’t seen any of these teams play but on paper it looks like they have a good chance of a having an even tougher year this go around. I could be completely wrong on this but these are the type of schools if they’re not getting a Stephan Curry impact freshman or a D1 transfer take some time to rebuild.

Coppin State which made the tourney last year and finished 232 in the RPI loses it’s top 4 leading scorers and top 2 rebounders of last years team. They aren’t bringing in any major DI transfers so it’ll but to the new comers to replace that void. Based off of that there’s a good chance their RPI drops compared to last season.

Wofford loses its top 2 scorers off a team that finished in eighth in the Southern Conference. They’re just bringing in freshman this year.

Delaware State loses Roy Bright who was a former UC recruit who fired a gun off on campus and ended up at JUCO before joining the Hornets. He was a 1st team all conference player for the Hornets. The all lose their top post player in Joe Dickens who was their 2nd leading scorer and 4th leading rebounder.

Bethune Cookman loses their 2nd and 3rd leading scorers off of a team that finished 319 in the RPI. They're not bringing in any DI transfers.

Flyer 86 · #**137** 07-19-2008, 11:36 PM

Originally Posted by FlyerFanatic08

wow...terrible OOC schedule...i feel bad for season ticket holders, especially those with long commutes.

it's a so-so to fair schedule, i'll give you that. But again, what's our goal as a program. To get to the big Dance. having realized last year, that that method didn't work (and also likely NOT getting chance at bcs schools) this is the year we should aim for 24 wins, takethe powderpuffs and get on the national fri**ing map.

And put the bogeymen to rest. if i lived near dayton i'd be willing to sacrifice lack of entertainment for first 2 months, so the last month -- Meaning March, is exciting and what we've dreamed of.

i also am not sure that a :
healthy Chris wright
marcus johnson
paul williams/ chris JOhnson
lowery and london
perry and Little
and on, don't qualify for entertainment.

FlyerFanatic08 · #**138** 07-26-2008, 12:28 AM

Originally Posted by Flyer 86

it's a so-so to fair schedule, i'll give you that. But again, what's our goal as a program. To get to the big Dance. having realized last year, that that method didn't work (and also likely NOT getting chance at bcs schools) this is the year we should aim for 24 wins, takethe powderpuffs and get on the national fri**ing map.

And put the bogeymen to rest. if i lived near dayton i'd be willing to sacrifice lack of entertainment for first 2 months, so the last month -- Meaning March, is exciting and what we've dreamed of.

i also am not sure that a :
healthy Chris wright
marcus johnson
paul williams/ chris JOhnson
lowery and london
perry and Little
and on, don't qualify for entertainment.

meh i think last years strategy was best...i understand its hard to get bcs schools to come to the arena...but TK couldnt get better? no one knows for sure how hard he tried to get what teams...but man, if we lose any of our OOC games except marquette we're in trouble. teams like coppin st and such are fine...no pitt, but at least they are at the top of their conferences. we have teams on our schedule who are bottom dwellers in their weak divisions.

at this point...OOC doesnt even really worry me...its conference play that has killed us recently...i dont know if the A-10 has BG figured out or what...but are conference play has been dreadful. lets hope we turn that around starting this year

singlet_of_truth · #**139** 07-26-2008, 06:03 AM

Originally Posted by Flyer 86

To get to the big Dance. having realized last year, that that method didn't work (and also likely NOT getting chance at bcs schools) this is the year we should aim for 24 wins, takethe powderpuffs and get on the national fri**ing map.

The only reason we were on the map last year and had any shot at the NCAA was SOLELY because of our non-conference schedule.

We will get absolutely no respect or recognition for doing well in this year's OOC schedule. We will need to have a near sterling record mid way through the A-10 before we start getting any recognition. We are not Syracuse - we will not get the benefit of the doubt beating the sisters of the poor at home.

Avid Flyer · #**140** 07-26-2008, 07:16 AM

Last year many were bit*hing about the schedule and it turned out just fine. Every year some fans complain about the schedule. Just win baby it will take care of itself. Got to stop the mid year meltdowns.

NCkevi · #**141** 07-26-2008, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by singlet_of_truth

The only reason we were on the map last year and had any shot at the NCAA was SOLELY because of our non-conference schedule.

You can also argue the oly reason we didn't get a bid was because of a couple of bad loses in the A10 - win the games we're suppose to and we'll always have at least a shot for a bid

longtimefan · #**142** 07-26-2008, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by NCkevi

You can also argue the only reason we didn't get a bid was because of a couple of bad loses in the A10 - win the games we're suppose to and we'll always have at least a shot for a bid

Not really. If we had lost to Louisville and Pitt and beaten GW and LaSalle we would have been in the same place - sitting at home. The only reason we were in the discussion at all was because of our big non-conference wins. Because of who we are we really need to win the games we're supposed to win AND a couple we're not supposed to win. We did half the job last year. We will get the early recognition this year if we beat Marquette, and to a lesser degree Auburn or Creighton.

San Diego Flyer · #**143** 07-26-2008, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by rollo

Thanks Chef, you hit the nail on the head.

And Flyer '95, you're absolutely right. With 2 extra games, a bigger named school (or two) should have been scheduled over any of our non-con home games.

This morning I was talking to a buddy and season ticket holder about the schedule. In all honesty, I told him, if this type of schedule is what I can expect in the future, it's conceivable that I won't be a seat license paying season ticket holder much longer. I have 3 kids between 7-12 years old that are active and more deserving of my time and money that Bethune Cookman and Troy. Right now most of their activities are immediatly after school or on saturday and sunday mornings, but it won't always be this way. And their lives are only going to become more and more active meaning that I'm going to have less and less time.

If push comes to shove, UD will lose my time and money 100% of the time. And with a home schedule like this, I'm starting to feel someone's elbow in my back.

Not in anyway defending what I feel is somewhat of a down year for home games this year at UD Arena. But in all the major sports markets where I have lived, LA , Dallas, San Diego, the next step when prices get out of hand is to split season books with someone. And we know that pro sports ticket prices redifine the word "outrageous". That notion will not placate a fan who wants to stomp off totally in protest and that's fine. But as a once fan of the Lakers, Angels, Cowboys, Padres, Rangers, and Mavs (but not all at once), splitting books due to rising costs beats bailing out all together if you really want to see them play. I once bought Clippers (yes you heard right) tickets and split the season book four ways so I could see the Lakers, Mavs, Suns, Boston and others.

If I were within a several hour commute of UD, and license costs and tickets really became an issue, I would attend half the games and sell off the rest to a party (s) who also wants to go to 6 or 9 games.

We once had a telephone "draft" for Lakers home tickets among three families.

Necessity is the mother of invention.

Of course I can't argue with anyone who seriously opts to save the ticket money altogether and put it in their gas tank. Again I'm not addressing the quality of this year's schedule, simply the inevitable prospect of ever-rising ticket prices.

NCkevi · #**144** 07-26-2008, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by longtimefan

Not really. If we had lost to Louisville and Pitt and beaten GW and LaSalle we would have been in the same place - sitting at home.

I don't know - if that happened and we beat Duquense at the arena we would have been 11-5 in the A10 (21-8 overall) and seeded second in the A10 tournament - who knows what would have happened then, but I still think if UD wins the games they're suppose to, they'll be in good position to contend for a bid

Flyer 86 · #**145** 07-26-2008, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by singlet_of_truth

The only reason we were on the map last year and had any shot at the NCAA was SOLELY because of our non-conference schedule.

We will get absolutely no respect or recognition for doing well in this year's OOC schedule. We will need to have a near sterling record mid way through the A-10 before we start getting any recognition. We are not Syracuse - we will not get the benefit of the doubt beating the sisters of the poor at home.

if we win couple of the marq/auburn/earlier games we'll be fine. we don't play for recognition - altho that's nice .

my goal is for us to go 11-5 in A10 play, come 2 nd or 3rd. with good OOc record.
And have 24 or 25 wins at end of a10 championship. perhaps win a10 or come atop as reg. season leader. we play to get in tourney, for most part, and esp. after 4 or 5 years of not getting in. We have the quality, the personnel, the resources -- just gotta get 'over the hump"

Flyer 86 · #**146** 07-26-2008, 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by longtimefan

Not really. If we had lost to Louisville and Pitt and beaten GW and LaSalle we would have been in the same place - sitting at home. The only reason we were in the discussion at all was because of our big non-conference wins. Because of who we are we really need to win the games we're supposed to win AND a couple we're not supposed to win. We did half the job last year. We will get the early recognition this year if we beat Marquette, and to a lesser degree Auburn or Creighton.

ditto, ditto , did i say ditto

John R · #**147** 07-26-2008, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by Flyer 86

ditto, ditto , did i say ditto

Flyer 86 did you happen to say ditto?

Figgie123 · #**148** 07-28-2008, 01:02 PM

We have been discussing why we don't have big names coming in, and why we have such low level teams coming in, and as I was perusing my daily news updates, and adding to my 2008 NCAA Men's Basketball schedule, I came across this article.

It's from Wisconsin, a Q&A with Greg Gard, assistant coach, and how they deal with scheduling.

Start with 28 games, get 18 games in the Big Ten, 3 with in-state rivalries (UW-Milwaukee, UW-Green Bay, Marquette), Big Ten/ACC Challenge (Va Tech), and an exempt tournament every year (this year - Virgin Island Paradise Jam, next year-Maui)...

"...we are left with five games to work with. Of those, we have to try to schedule as many home games as possible to meet the revenue requirements." (Texas visits to complete home-and-home this year. "We try to have at least one home-and-home with a marquee opponent.")

Seems like something we feel we have going on as well.

Full article here: http://www.uwbadgers.com/sport_news/...&storyid=14471

Talks about guarantees, road games for players to go home, teams not wanting to play against them because their good, or play at Wisconsin because noone wins, etc.

Interesting reading...

John

skip69 · #**149** 07-29-2008, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by UDBrian

I don't think the past predicts the future. I remember when Michigan used to own Ohio State and that turned around quite nicely. Xavier has had players who are a little bit better recently but UD has definitely raised their talent level (some players are yet unproven in college). You win with people and I think that UD has the people coming in who can beat Xavier in a boat or a moat.

Guess you haven't seen X's recruits for next year. They have the top rated player in Michigan who can shoot lights out and a big man who is highly rated. Not sure who else, but they are pretty much on a par or better. They may continue their dominence unless we are able to play uptempo this year.

Hope so, I just hate losing to them!

San Diego Flyer · #**150** 07-29-2008, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by skip69

Guess you haven't seen X's recruits for next year. They have the top rated player in Michigan who can shoot lights out and a big man who is highly rated. Not sure who else, but they are pretty much on a par or better. They may continue their dominence unless we are able to play uptempo this year.

Hope so, I just hate losing to them!

I agree. By the middle of ooc Xavier will once again show their mojo. CJ Anderson, BJ Raymond and Derrick Brown are all veterans now and X is loaded with young talent. Same 'ol Xavier.

But we are equally equipped. And I think we are on a similar improvement curve.

The outcome of this year's X/UD games could very well hinge soley on coaching and strategy and be decided in the last minutes of the games.

hUDygrad · #**151** 07-29-2008, 12:33 PM

Originally Posted by San Diego Flyer

The outcome of this year's X/UD games could very well hinge soley on coaching and strategy and be decided in the last minutes of the games.

That kinda scares me!

xubrew · #**152** 07-29-2008, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by Figgie123

We have been discussing why we don't have big names coming in, and why we have such low level teams coming in, and as I was perusing my daily news updates, and adding to my 2008 NCAA Men's Basketball schedule, I came across this article.

It's from Wisconsin, a Q&A with Greg Gard, assistant coach, and how they deal with scheduling.

Start with 28 games, get 18 games in the Big Ten, 3 with in-state rivalries (UW-Milwaukee, UW-Green Bay, Marquette), Big Ten/ACC Challenge (Va Tech), and an exempt tournament every year (this year - Virgin Island Paradise Jam, next year-Maui)...

"...we are left with five games to work with. Of those, we have to try to schedule as many home games as possible to meet the revenue requirements." (Texas visits to complete home-and-home this year. "We try to have at least one home-and-home with a marquee opponent.")

Seems like something we feel we have going on as well.

Full article here: http://www.uwbadgers.com/sport_news/...&storyid=14471

Talks about guarantees, road games for players to go home, teams not wanting to play against them because their good, or play at Wisconsin because noone wins, etc.

Interesting reading...

John

i love how wisconsin schedules, and always have. it's 29 games, not 28, so they do have an extra one to work with. last year was also the first time they've ever played on the road at wisconsin milwaukee, and the badgers got a big chunk of the gate. uwm and uwgb are almost always a home game, so it isn't as if they're losing revenue by playing them.

in addition to playing the three milwaukee schools and the big ten/acc challenge, they generally play more than just one home and home. they start one and complete one ever year. last year they finished up with georgia, and started texas. they're not afraid to play "mid-majors" on the road either. they played xavier home and home in the late 1990s/early 2000s before xavier had any success in the ncaa tournament. i believe they recently played missouri state home and home, but can't be sure. i know they played them away from madison, but don't remember the terms of the deal.

bo ryan is the man. he schedules well, coaches well, and understands that there is nothing wrong with playing the "mid-majors." wisconsin lost to missouri state two years ago, but still ended the season in the top five and earned a #2 seed in the ncaa tournament.

they also spend about $5 million a year on basketball, but make close to $16 million. they spend less and make more than both xavier and dayton, and they somehow manage to do this while playing on the road.

jack72 · #**153** 07-29-2008, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by skip69

Guess you haven't seen X's recruits for next year. They have the top rated player in Michigan who can shoot lights out and a big man who is highly rated. Not sure who else, but they are pretty much on a par or better. They may continue their dominence unless we are able to play uptempo this year.

Hope so, I just hate losing to them!

X has a highly rated player from Michigan. He won Mr Basketball, but no one would rate him the top rated college prospect from Michigan; and UD seems to have got the better of the two.

The Fat Tuna · #**154** 07-29-2008, 01:56 PM

top rated player in Michigan????

Yes he did win Mr. Basketball, and he deserved it...but think about this, how did Eric Crouch do in the NFL?...same type deal. The kid can play, but don't be silly. Draymond Green is the best from MI and in second comes PW when you are talking about actual talent.

skip69 · #**155** 07-29-2008, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by The Fat Tuna

top rated player in Michigan????

Yes he did win Mr. Basketball, and he deserved it...but think about this, how did Eric Crouch do in the NFL?...same type deal. The kid can play, but don't be silly. Draymond Green is the best from MI and in second comes PW when you are talking about actual talent.

OK, if he was Mr. BB, I'd like to think this outweighs your opinion, but let's just wait and see. I hope PW is better, MUCH better. My point is that X has done as well as we have. Also, did you see the post on X getting a transfer from Indiana today?

I just HATE this stuff happening!

FlyerFanatic08 · #**156** 07-29-2008, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by xubrew

i love how wisconsin schedules, and always have. it's 29 games, not 28, so they do have an extra one to work with. last year was also the first time they've ever played on the road at wisconsin milwaukee, and the badgers got a big chunk of the gate. uwm and uwgb are almost always a home game, so it isn't as if they're losing revenue by playing them.

in addition to playing the three milwaukee schools and the big ten/acc challenge, they generally play more than just one home and home. they start one and complete one ever year. last year they finished up with georgia, and started texas. they're not afraid to play "mid-majors" on the road either. they played xavier home and home in the late 1990s/early 2000s before xavier had any success in the ncaa tournament. i believe they recently played missouri state home and home, but can't be sure. i know they played them away from madison, but don't remember the terms of the deal.

bo ryan is the man. he schedules well, coaches well, and understands that there is nothing wrong with playing the "mid-majors." wisconsin lost to missouri state two years ago, but still ended the season in the top five and earned a #2 seed in the ncaa tournament.

they also spend about $5 million a year on basketball, but make close to $16 million. they spend less and make more than both xavier and dayton, and they somehow manage to do this while playing on the road.

bo ryan doesnt get enough respect imo. hes right up there with coach k and roy williams in my book...maybe no national titles...but hes a tremendous coach.

Muskie Mike · #**157** 07-30-2008, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by jack72

X has a highly rated player from Michigan. He won Mr Basketball, but no one would rate him the top rated college prospect from Michigan; and UD seems to have got the better of the two.

Why has UD got the better of the 2? I checked rivals today, and couldn't find either ranked in the top 150. I checked Scout and Redford was ranked the 27th best sg, with Williams ranked the 39th best sg. Honestly I don't think most of these rankings mean anything. I was just curious how Dayton seems to have the better better player.

jpk4ud · #**158** 07-30-2008, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by jack72

X has a highly rated player from Michigan. He won Mr Basketball, but no one would rate him the top rated college prospect from Michigan; and UD seems to have got the better of the two.

Originally Posted by Muskie Mike

Why has UD got the better of the 2? I checked rivals today, and couldn't find either ranked in the top 150. I checked Scout and Redford was ranked the 27th best sg, with Williams ranked the 39th best sg. Honestly I don't think most of these rankings mean anything. I was just curious how Dayton seems to have the better better player.

I like the way you turned one man's opinion into all of Dayton. I'm sure we will find out after about two years who has worked out better.

Figgie123 · #**159** 07-31-2008, 09:06 AM

Okay, I posted sometime back teams in 2007 that played 5 or more top 10 conf teams from confs 7-10.

So far, only Utah has 5 top 10 conference teams on it's non-conference schedule:

- Missouri State (away)
- Oregon (home)
- California (home)
- Oklahoma (away)
- LSU (home)

See for yourself here: http://ohiomcginn.homeip.net/ncaasta...niversity=Utah

Oh, and Mercer and Centenary are playing 5 or more games against top 6 teams.

John