Money and the schedule

Gazoo · #1 07-10-2008, 09:15 AM

Here's something that bugs me about the schedule. Last year we had 9 pre-conference home games. We've been told that we need those games in order to support the program / university. Many end up being buy games against crap teams. Fine.

But this year, because of the Chicago tournament (I think) being a qualifying tournament with the first 2 games played at home, we have 10 home games.

Since we apparently made enough money for the program last year with 9 home games, why couldn't we use one of those throw-away buy games at home and put out the word that we'll play anyone, anywhere, and try to put a signature win on the record??

Or, is this just the new rule by the NCAA kicking in that allows an extra game on the schedule, and UD is choosing to make that extra game a home game? Even so, we need to use that extra game to take the fight to the other guys.

December 2nd (Troy) and November 16th (Wofford) look like prime candidates. Troy because who the heck cares and Wofford because a game that early works for everyone.

BCS school: yeah we lost on November 16th to UD but that was our first game of the season and we're playing much better now (March).

UD: we might catch them sleeping.

Avid Flyer · #2 07-10-2008, 11:55 AM

Your assumption is that UD/TK didn't try. How do you know what they did and didn't attempt to do. could be they very well did as you suggested but didn't get any bites. That thrashing of Pitt last year on national TV was an eye opener, great for UD last year but not for scheduling this year or till we get deep in the NCAA.

shapanud · #3 07-10-2008, 12:06 PM

If you read the Pitt & Louisville message boards after last years' games, you will understand why no BCS team wants to play UD. The fans of both teams basically killed their AD for even scheduling such a game and demanded it not happen again.

The reality is that losing to UD is not perceived the same as losing to a similar-ranked (bubble NCAA tourney) BCS team, nor is it perceived the same as losing to X, Gonzaga, or now maybe even Davidson and Butler.

The ADs of BCS teams have nothing to gain from scheduling a home-and-home w/ UD and are likely to not even want a home-and-neutral (i.e. the L'ville series) until UD is in the tourney consistently, has some success, and a loss to UD is no longer perceived (reality is unfortunately irrelevant) as a bad loss.

Flyer'95 · #4 07-10-2008, 12:15 PM

Gazoo, i couldn't agree more. Avid, i have a hard time believing that no BCS team would be willing to play UD on their own home court. You've got to be kidding me. I feel like a lot of the arguments in favor of the schedule aren't really holding much water.

There are PLENTY of teams in our conference, or similar conferences, that go to other schools home courts. Kent went to UNC. BYU went to MSU. Davidson went to duke, ucla, nc state. UMass went to syracuse, vandy and BC. UAB went to fla st. and kentucky.

These things do happen. Quite frequently. Just not on our schedule. I feel that our policy of only travelling and taking buy games for televised games may be working against us. It's leaving us with no quality opponents, and no television.

Flyer'95 · #5 07-10-2008, 12:25 PM

Shapanud, we're not talking about home and homes. We're talking about taking the fight to BCS teams. What about the BCS teams that could be bubble teams this year. They need quality wins, right? So do we. Why not offer up a chance for them to take us on in their own arena, with no return game? We'd at least have a chance at another scalp.

Instead we're playing troy and wofford. We get nothing (except $) for playing them. Our SOS suffers, our RPI suffers, and if we lose to teams like them it's death. If we lose on the road to a bubble bcs team, we could still overcome that.

I'm not saying we should do this all the time, but given the lack of names on our schedule, we should have done it once this year.

rollo · #6 07-10-2008, 01:05 PM

I'm probably in the minority, but I wouldn't mind taking Temple's attitude for a couple season and hit the road. Those John Chaney teams were tough, disciplined SOB's. They never quit. Knew nothing of fear. Losing to Duquesne or GW???...yeah....right!

I'm also for banning all 'buy' games until we have earned the right to schedule cream puffs. If we can't bring someone to UD Arena for free to play some good ole smashmouth basketball, then let's go on the road and do it. Who here wouldn't love to see our Flyers travel to some fat and sassy Big East team's court, rip their balls off, stuff 'em down their throat, imprison their cheerleaders, drink the town dry and wipe our rear ends off with their orange headed pumpkin of a mascot????

If UD's teams in the past have lacked anything, it's testosterone. Especially on the road. Two or three guys with 'it' isn't enough. Ten would be nice. Wright, Johnson and Little are a good start, but they're not enough. And you can't buy 'it' at WalMart. Gotta earn that stuff.

Maybe we should hire Dara Torres to toughen up this team, she's got enough for us all.....

Phinhead54 · #7 07-10-2008, 01:30 PM

Unfortunately for us, almost any power team playing UD is pretty much a lose-lose for them. Especially this team which is super athletic and on any given night could probably take out any team in the country if not give them a scare. That risk on the home court coupled with the Flyer Faithful that show up to any games like that and embarass the home fans with their fervor and vocalness (in a good way) to the point that when you're watching on TV you're not sure if it's a home game for the Flyers or not don't really give big teams any motivation to schedule UD.

Gazoo · #8 07-10-2008, 01:54 PM

avid, I don't think those are reasonable assumptions. Go up and down the A-10, MAC, MVC, any 2nd tier conference and every team has road games against BCS schools.

Now, I admit that (obviously) I wasn't sitting in TK's office all year while he made the schedule. But the preponderance of the evidence would suggest that it wasn't high on the priority list.

How can Temple schedule 5 or 6 of these road games only a couple years ago and you're telling me we can't schedule 1? Remember, the 1 we have is only because we got into the Chicago tourney. Fine--props to TK for that.

But all the rest of those home games--not one could be swapped out for a road game against a mid-level BCS school? Doesn't that seem hard to believe to you? I'm saying it seems hard for me to believe. Maybe it's what happened, but color me skeptical to that theory.

xubrew · #9 07-10-2008, 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by Avid Flyer

Your assumption is that UD/TK didn't try. How do you know what they did and didn't attempt to do. could be they very well did as you suggested but didn't get any bites. That thrashing of Pitt last year on national TV was an eye opener, great for UD last year but not for scheduling this year or till we get deep in the NCAA.

if you look at all the teams that are still looking for games, and consider that some are kind of desperate for games, one has to wonder....

http://businesscomputertechnicians.c...09&Gender=Mens

mizzou is willing to consider a two-for-one, and from the sound of their ad sounds like they may settle for pretty much anyone.

vcu, who should be a solid ncaa caliber team next year, is looking for a home and home

southern illinois, another solid ncaa team, is looking for two home and homes and is actually willing to start one of them on the road

minnesota will "pay a great guarantee" for someone to come and play them. from the sound of that, it doesn't look as if they'd tell dayton no

vanderbilt wants a home and home. you'd have to go there first, but as gazoo pointed out, you have an extra home game this year. that wouldn't be a bad series, and i'd bet they'd be willing to consider ud considering some of the teams they've played home and home in the past. last year they played at toledo. i think they'd be willing to consider ud.

there are quite a few good teams that still need games. obviously, no one can hand pick their schedule exactly the way they want it, especially teams from leagues like the atlantic ten, but i don't think it's unreasonable to question (as many have done) if this is the absolute best they can do. if they're trying to get games but can't get anyone to play them, then why not scream it from the roof tops?? if i'm in that situation, i make it clear to the media that vanderbilt is looking for a home and home on such and such date, i called them, and they said no. gazoo has a valid point. did vanderbilt, southern illinois, vcu, arkansas, missouri, miami fl and gonzaga ALL say no despite the fact that they're promising some pretty high payouts in their attempts to schedule games??

xubrew · #10 07-10-2008, 02:18 PM

Unfortunately for us, almost any power team playing UD is pretty much a lose-lose for them

how so?? how much did pitt and louisville really lose?? louisville went to the elite eight and pitt went to the sweet sixteen. all of the fans that i've talked to consider last season to be a success. what did they lose?? if that's a "lose-lose," then what do they consider a winning situation to be??

Flyer'95 · #11 07-10-2008, 02:48 PM

Also there are at least a dozen ncaa-bubble-caliber teams from the BCS conferences that will need a quality win in their OOC season. We could provide that opportunity for them, on their own court. Lord knows most BCS teams don't want to take to the road. And when they do, they don't play at tough places typically.

We'd be offering everything they need, while giving us a chance at a REAL game against a REAL team, maybe even on a network that the average cable package can pick up. Imagine that.

Brew's link provides some pretty clear evidence that not every stone was unturned. Some of these BCS teams literally were willing to do home and homes.

Vandy, st. mary's (ca), alabama, arkansas, kent st.(they're at least the best of the mac), miami, gonzaga, minnesota, so. ill, georgetown, wku, air force, stanford, mississippi state, nebraska, byu, san diego, k state, washington, mizzou, southern miss, etc.

The games were out there people. We just didn't take them. It's very disappointing. I know this team has question marks. But playing little sisters of the poor won't answer many of those questions. We'll still have questions heading into A10 play as to whether our schedule has really helped us to prepare at all.

NCkevi · #12 07-10-2008, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by Flyer'95

Vandy, st. mary's (ca), alabama, arkansas, kent st.(they're at least the best of the mac), miami, gonzaga, minnesota, so. ill, georgetown, wku, air force, stanford, mississippi state, nebraska, byu, san diego, k state, washington, mizzou, southern miss, etc.

The games were out there people. We just didn't take them. It's very disappointing. I know this team has question marks. But playing little sisters of the poor won't answer many of those questions. We'll still have questions heading into A10 play as to whether our schedule has really helped us to prepare at all.

All because these teams are looking for games, doesn't mean they'll play any team that calls them. We played Vandy home-home a few years ago and THEY decided not to renew. Most of these teams are looking for either a home-home with a team that has recent success in the NCAA (as stated in another thread, SIU is interested in a series with Dayton AFTER UD makes the NCAA) or will be an easy home win -- they're not going to say: Georgetown is looking for an easy win to pad their out of conference record because we have plenty of opportunities in conference to get 'quality' wins

rollo · #13 07-10-2008, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by xubrew

how so?? how much did pitt and louisville really lose?? louisville went to the elite eight and pitt went to the sweet sixteen. all of the fans that i've talked to consider last season to be a success. what did they lose?? if that's a "lose-lose," then what do they consider a winning situation to be??

Don't be such a putz. In the court of public opinion, which many of the BCS teams rely upon for prestige, preseason rankings, PR and recruiting (Louisville especially) both Pitt and Louisville took a direct hit to the cajones when the lost to UD. It shows in the polls when they drop and shows around the chat rooms that we all can monitor. As a Muskie fan, you have to admit that MMadness gets pretty crazy when _avier is 6-4 or loses for the 2nd time to Duquesne. If/when UD ever wins at Cintas, you'll know what I'm talking about.

NCkevi · #14 07-10-2008, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by xubrew

mizzou is willing to consider a two-for-one, and from the sound of their ad sounds like they may settle for pretty much anyone.

vcu, who should be a solid ncaa caliber team next year, is looking for a home and home

southern illinois, another solid ncaa team, is looking for two home and homes and is actually willing to start one of them on the road

minnesota will "pay a great guarantee" for someone to come and play them. from the sound of that, it doesn't look as if they'd tell dayton no

vanderbilt wants a home and home. you'd have to go there first, but as gazoo pointed out, you have an extra home game this year. that wouldn't be a bad series, and i'd bet they'd be willing to consider ud considering some of the teams they've played home and home in the past. last year they played at toledo. i think they'd be willing to consider ud.

. . . did vanderbilt, southern illinois, vcu, arkansas, missouri, miami fl and gonzaga ALL say no despite the fact that they're promising some pretty high payouts in their attempts to schedule games??

Is this speculation or do you know for a fact that
a) UD didn't approach any of these teams
b) they would without question schedule UD if approached

Flyer'95 · #15 07-10-2008, 03:09 PM

Sorry man. Not buying it. You mean to tell me that the likes of air force, st. mary's, san diego, kent state, and vcu are turning us down for home and homes? Or that mizzou, miami fl, k state, and washington aren't willing to play little old UD anywhere? Even on their own home court--with no return game? I'm simply not buying it. We must be scarier than i thought.

If it's true, and that's a big if, then our school and schools like ourselves should have better PR and press connections to make a bigger deal of this. Shout it from the mountain tops and try to find schools in similar situations. And if there are schools like us, why aren't we playing them?

Do you mean to tell me that not only are we the only school that BCS teams won't play home or away, but that also, we are the only team in the country in this particular unique scenario? Or if there are other teams like us, they refuse to play us too?

Come on. For real?

xubrew · #16 07-10-2008, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by rollo

Don't be such a putz. In the court of public opinion, which many of the BCS teams rely upon for prestige, preseason rankings, PR and recruiting (Louisville especially) both Pitt and Louisville took a direct hit to the cajones when the lost to UD. It shows in the polls when they drop and shows around the chat rooms that we all can monitor. As a Muskie fan, you have to admit that MMadness gets pretty crazy when _avier is 6-4 or loses for the 2nd time to Duquesne. If/when UD ever wins at Cintas, you'll know what I'm talking about.

for starters, if coaches and athletic directors listen to fans in that regard, it won't be long before they're sitting next to them. i just don't think that worrying about fans on message boards getting upset is something that should be factored in. we did lose to miami last year, and the fans were upset, but they got over it. we'll lose to dayton at home sooner or later, and the fans will be upset, but it won't be the end of the world. louisville and pitt ended up having great years by any and all accounts despite the fact that they lost to dayton.

georgetown lost to old dominion two seasons ago in the first game of a home and home series. i'm sure the fans were upset, but that loss isn't anywhere close to being considered a distinctive part of that season. georgetown still made it to the final four, and the court of public opinion was largely in their favor. not only that, but georgetown lived up to their end of the bargain and played at old dominion the following season. if old dominion can get a game like that, i can't help but think dayton can as well. not all the teams who are looking for games are willing to play dayton, but i think it's a little naive to think that NONE of them will. some will. in fact, some have. just look around your own conference and you'll see some of the opponents that atlantic ten teams have managed to schedule.

xubrew · #17 07-10-2008, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by NCkevi

Is this speculation or do you know for a fact that
a) UD didn't approach any of these teams
b) they would without question schedule UD if approached

of course it's speculation, but i don't see how anyone wouldn't be skeptical. are you not the least bit skeptical yourself??

NCkevi · #18 07-10-2008, 03:32 PM

Originally Posted by Flyer'95

mizzou, miami fl, k state, and washington aren't willing to play little old UD anywhere? Even on their own home court--with no return game? I'm simply not buying it. We must be scarier than i thought.

I don't think UD should be a buy game for those teams - I'd be OK with a UCLA, Duke, UNC, or other big name PROGRAM - but I's rather play UNC-Greensboro once at UD arena that being a buy games for team like Missouri (16-16, 6-10) just because they play in a name conference. Once we do that, then we're no better than the Mercers of the college basketball world.

Flyer'95 · #19 07-10-2008, 03:36 PM

Ok, so over the last five years we have had an average of 91 RPI. Eck. So i looked on some schedules to see if BCS teas were willing to play teams of that ilk at home. What do you know? They were!

Tennessee played temple (rpi 47).
UNC played UCSB (89), Nevada (75), Valpo (97), Kent st. (22), AT DAVIDSON (34).
Memphis played Austin Peay (83), siena (66), AT TULSA (93)
UCLA played Portland State (91) and davidson (34)

And that's just the top four teams. You gotta be kidding me if you think that NO BCS team was willing to play UD on their own home court with no return game. That is just pure fantasy. I mean, do you really think those schools think so much of us that they don't think they could beat us on their home floor? Really?

This belief that the schedule could not have been done any better is bordering on pathology.

Binnie Bombs 33 · #20 07-10-2008, 03:36 PM

Don't you think it is fair for UD a team with tons of resources and die-hard fans to make the best schedule possible every year for success? I understand a lot go into it but if you are telling me this years schedule is the best thing possible that UD can get then I am calling you insane.

I know Kissell tried, but sometimes that isn't good enough ... this schedule is not good enough. I am trying to be fair here, it just looks like he slopped it together.

There is no reason why 5 games against the top 10 conferences is the NCAA is not achievable ... take out the A-10 and that is 9.

The top 10 are ... ACC, Big 12, Pac 10, SEC, Big East, Big 10, A-10, MVC, MWC, C-USA

You look through those conferences and tell me that their are not at least 5 games we can get from those each and every year whether it is home and home, nuetral or away.

Just throwing names out there:

C-USA - UAB, Houston, Tulsa
M.W.C - BYU, SDSU
M.V.C. - Ill. St, Creighton, SIU (bus ride away), Bradley
Big 10 - Minnesota
Big East - Villanova, Providence, Syracuse (they played the A-10 like 3 times last year)
S.E.C. - Georgia, Alabama
Pac 10 - Cal, ASU
Big 12 - Mizzou, OK St.
ACC - FSU, UV, NCSU

You could even throw in teams from 11-15 conferences like San Diego, Nevada, Pacific

I am just saying there are so many options ... I would rather sacrifice a home game or two to play lets say Mizzou on the road or Syracuse on a nuetral court. These are things that could happen. Settling for not just lower/lower level conference games like Marshall etc just make no sense. C-USA, MWC, MVC would be awesome fits for us and they never tap into that wealth.

Obviously everything is based on how a team preforms on a year to year basis but come on ... UD v. SIU would be all over Espn and would be a real cool home and home series.

I am sorry we have the most money in the A-10 and our basketball team gets tons of revenue and donor money ... I would just like to see them pony up and make some cool series to help us get in.

5 games from top 10 conferences should be able to be done for a school like us, and if we want to make it back to the dance that is what we need to do.

Flyer'95 · #21 07-10-2008, 03:39 PM

NCKevi--

I agree that we shouldn't do it 'all the time'. But when you're looking at a schedule this bad, and a home schedule that lacks any interest at all. The least you could do is throw the fans a bone and play a name team on the road.

We'd be better than the mercers of the world, because we might actually WIN. Against a name team. On their home court. Possibly maybe even get on sportscenter.

You think those uncw highlights are going to get on sportscenter, or even get more than a 4 sentence blurb from the AP?

The policy for us to only play buy games if they involve tv is leaving us with few games against bcs teams and no tv at all.

Once in a while, we need to take a shot on the road at a bcs team. This schedule was begging for it. And i think our lack of wins, or even games, against top 75 caliber clubs is going to kill us.

NCkevi · #22 07-10-2008, 03:43 PM

If we're willing to schedule games at Missouri and Minnesota without a return, than we should also be willing to schedule the same with IUPUI, SF Austin, Portland St, Ohio, and Akron, all of which finished with higher RPIs last year so would be more helpful in getting an NCAA bid

xubrew · #23 07-10-2008, 03:49 PM

The policy for us to only play buy games if they involve tv is leaving us with few games against bcs teams and no tv at all.

as recently as two weeks ago, memphis, purdue and duke were promising television as part of their guarantee game. duke ended up scheduling duquesne, i think it was, and it's going to be on national television. i find it hard to believe they wouldn't have scheduled dayton instead. i'm not entirely sure who memphis and purdue got, but those games will be on telelvision as well.

NCkevi · #24 07-10-2008, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by xubrew

of course it's speculation, but i don't see how anyone wouldn't be skeptical. are you not the least bit skeptical yourself??

No – I don’t think AG is anxious to bring a team to UD arena (especially after what happened to Pitt); as mentioned elsewhere, SIU is interested in a possible series with UD AFTER UD makes the NCAA again; after the last series ended with Vandy, I recall it being pretty clear they had no interest in playing again

Originally Posted by xubrew

as recently as two weeks ago, memphis, purdue and duke were promising television as part of their guarantee game. duke ended up scheduling duquesne, i think it was, and it's going to be on national television. i find it hard to believe they wouldn't have scheduled dayton instead. i'm not entirely sure who memphis and purdue got, but those games will be on telelvision as well.

So do you think Duquesne was the best quality opponent willing to take Duke up on that offer? That a Davidson or VCU or SIU wouldn't have been willing to play that game? No matter how desperate these teams may seem in these ads, I still don’t believe they’ll schedule just anyone and, in my opinion, for the most part are looking for a big name team, a team with recent NCAA success, or an easy win

Flyer'95 · #25 07-10-2008, 04:06 PM

NCKevi-- your logic just isn't quite stacking up.

First off, most of the teams you listed would be better home and homes than toledo. At least they win their conferences consistently. Also, by your logic we should grant home and homes to murray state, northwestern state and vermont since they all have similar rpis to Toledo.

Secondly, if you think beating any of those teams on their home court would get the same type of attention as beating a team like miami fl, arkansas, miss st. or washington on the road (all of whom you conveniently left off) then god bless. Good luck to you in this world.

Thirdly, the reason we have to play bcs teams on the road is because they allegedly won't come play us at home. Now we're being told they won't play us ANYWHERE. Mmmmmmmmmmmright.

Sorry man. I just feel that we were very rigid in our 'only taking by games if they're on tv' policy and it has left us with a very weak schedule and not much for the fans to get excited about.

Binnie Bombs 33 · #26 07-10-2008, 04:18 PM

I would rather beat a mid-level Big 10 team in Mizzou or Minnesota than a mid-level MAC team in Akron or Toledo ... it is that simple.

UD plays to much MAC bull**** ... I hate it ... stick to the top 9 conference and find games. Then after you get your five from there pick carefully with your best knowledge the top two teams of the smaller conferences.

NCkevi · #27 07-10-2008, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by Flyer'95

NCKevi-- your logic just isn't quite stacking up.

First off, most of the teams you listed would be better home and homes than toledo. At least they win their conferences consistently. Also, by your logic we should grant home and homes to murray state, northwestern state and vermont since they all have similar rpis to Toledo.

Actually, I don't like Toledo as a home-home and never said I did

Originally Posted by Flyer'95

Secondly, if you think beating any of those teams on their home court would get the same type of attention as beating a team like miami fl, arkansas, miss st. or washington on the road (all of whom you conveniently left off) then god bless. Good luck to you in this world.

If a team isn't ranked, you won't get much if any publicity for beating them, regardless of what conference they're in.

Originally Posted by Flyer'95

Thirdly, the reason we have to play bcs teams on the road is because they allegedly won't come play us at home. Now we're being told they won't play us ANYWHERE. Mmmmmmmmmmmright.

I think there are BCS teams willing to play us at their gym; but as I stated before I don't beleive in being a buy game for just any team

NCkevi · #28 07-10-2008, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by Binnie Bombs 33

I would rather beat a mid-level Big 10 team in Mizzou or Minnesota than a mid-level MAC team in Akron or Toledo ... it is that simple.

Actually, out of 12 teams last year, Missouri finsihed 10th in the Big 12 and Akron had the second best record in the MAC

We can go back and forth on the merits of the schedule, obviously everyone has an opinion - my last thought on thematter is that we'll just have top wait until March and see if this schedule gives us a chance at an NCAA bid

xubrew · #29 07-10-2008, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by NCkevi

No – I don’t think AG is anxious to bring a team to UD arena (especially after what happened to Pitt); as mentioned elsewhere, SIU is interested in a possible series with UD AFTER UD makes the NCAA again; after the last series ended with Vandy, I recall it being pretty clear they had no interest in playing again

So do you think Duquesne was the best quality opponent willing to take Duke up on that offer? That a Davidson or VCU or SIU wouldn't have been willing to play that game? No matter how desperate these teams may seem in these ads, I still don’t believe they’ll schedule just anyone and, in my opinion, for the most part are looking for a big name team, a team with recent NCAA success, or an easy win

i'm pretty sure davidson is playing duke, vcu couldn't play on the day the game was available, and southern illinois, for whatever reason, wasn't interested in playing a guarantee game. i know some people at duke. several teams contacted them, and dayton wasn't one of them. i'm not saying ud should or shouldn't play that game, but i'm saying that it was there if they wanted it. duke wouldn't refuse to play dayton on their home court. in fact they've done it before.

Gazoo · #30 07-10-2008, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by NCkevi

If we're willing to schedule games at Missouri and Minnesota without a return, than we should also be willing to schedule the same with IUPUI, SF Austin, Portland St, Ohio, and Akron, all of which finished with higher RPIs last year so would be more helpful in getting an NCAA bid

Honestly, you don't think the committee sits down and says "they beat Portland State AND SF Austin in the same season!" No one gives a darn and you simply have to know that.

But if you can say "among other teams we beat Missouri and Minnesota on the road" somebody on the committee sits up and takes notice.

It seems like this is a disingenuous argument, but you tell me if you really meant that.

Binnie Bombs 33 · #31 07-10-2008, 04:55 PM

Big 12 or MAC ... you pick.

I am sorry but Mizzou and Minnesota have the tools to have a better season than Akron and Toledo ... and Tubby Smith is one hell of a coach.

Akron was good because they had like 5 seniors last year, they will probably win 15 games this year. Mizzou was bad because of all the rebuilding after Quinn Synder cracked out ... I would rather have a program like Mizzou out of a top 5 conference locked up in a home and home than Akron ... I would rather have a home and home with Auburn than Toledo, it just looks better ... the MAC is Wack, haha.

Just the idea of seeing Big 12, ACC, Big East next to teams you play helps alot ... MAC means nothing.

Once again a realistic goal is 5 games from the top 9 conferences ... in my previous posted I gave a couple examples ... that should happen every year, that would be great for UD. And in those 5 games at least one legit top 25 team ... which we have seemed to be doing the past 3 years. However getting Marquette at the expense of Buthume Cookman and Mercer is sketchy.

NCkevi · #32 07-10-2008, 09:37 PM

Originally Posted by Gazoo

Honestly, you don't think the committee sits down and says "they beat Portland State AND SF Austin in the same season!" No one gives a darn and you simply have to know that.

But if you can say "among other teams we beat Missouri and Minnesota on the road" somebody on the committee sits up and takes notice.

It seems like this is a disingenuous argument, but you tell me if you really meant that.

I think the committee would be more impressed with 2 wins against teams with a double digit rpi than they would be against a school with a losing record from a name conference

shocka43 · #33 07-10-2008, 09:44 PM

The main point that many of us overlook is the situation of immediate gratification versus long term successes. I don't care to load up a cupcake home schedule. I go to every game, but I would much rather see high quality opponents as the majority of us do. The problem is the money aspect. We need to think long term in scheduling success. We have looked long term in aspect to recruiting, whats the problems with scheduling? We have some added games that peak interest, and two tourneys which are positives, but on the other hand....The questions center around whether or not we should be scrapping a home cupcake for ticket revenues and attempting to play and one and done with a large school...or the status quo.

I want to beat a big school on the road that purposely scheduled us in an attempt to get a what they think is a "guaranteed" quality home win. It does more for the program long term, but it doesn't satisfy the immediate gratification of 12,000 tickets sold and the Arena. None of us know if the powers to be tried or didn't try. But season after season you can't argue that we seem to fall on the settling side of the fence when it comes to a game or two at home that should be going on the road to a fairly top tier team.

If the Dukes can do it....well....I will leave it at that.

shapanud · #34 07-11-2008, 07:12 AM

Originally Posted by Flyer'95

Ok, so over the last five years we have had an average of 91 RPI. Eck. So i looked on some schedules to see if BCS teas were willing to play teams of that ilk at home. What do you know? They were!

Tennessee played temple (rpi 47).
UNC played UCSB (89), Nevada (75), Valpo (97), Kent st. (22), AT DAVIDSON (34).
Memphis played Austin Peay (83), siena (66), AT TULSA (93)
UCLA played Portland State (91) and davidson (34)

I know the point you are trying to make, and I'm sure there are examples to back up the fact that occasionally big name BCS teams do play on the road, but your two examples above of UNC and Memphis playing road games are not accurate.

UNC never played at Davidson. They played Davidson in Charlotte at the Bobcats Arena, not at there actual home arena. It may have been listed as a home game for Davidson, but in reality there were 3k Davidson fans and 15k UNC fans. UNC only played there b/c the NCAA Regionals were also being playing in Charlotte and Roy Williams wanted to get his team a game in the arena before the tournament in case they ended up playing there (which they did).

And Memphis played at Tulsa b/c they are in the same conference so they had no choice.

Gazoo · #35 07-11-2008, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by NCkevi

I think the committee would be more impressed with 2 wins against teams with a double digit rpi than they would be against a school with a losing record from a name conference

Fair enough, but I disagree.

Avid Flyer · #36 07-11-2008, 10:39 AM

Guys don't get me wrong, I am not excited about the home schedule, my only point is that it is easier to speculate than to do it. Don't know what all was or is involved and how much they took into consideration the freshmen coming in. I truly miss the good ol days of upsetting Notre Dame, DePaul, Marquette, and the home and home series with the likes of Louisville etc and the annual beating of that school down south (sequel is forthcoming). Now those were teams and games to get excited about.

But the schedule is what it is and I would be going to the games regardless of the opponent to just watch the freshmen develop along with the likes of CW. Man the future looks bright.

But when it comes to scheduling I guess we have to give the staff credit for knowing what is best for the development of this team early in the year so we have a fighting chance come A-10 play. TK/BG all know what it takes to get into the NCAA now and with that will come bigger fish tofry in our arena so while its not a stellar schedule lets support what we have.

If memory serves me didn't we think about the same last year with that schedule and our rpi did pretty well until the rpi turned into rip!

From the looks of things it seems they opted for a lighter ooc schedule to get wins and lots of experience for the newcomers. Hopefully come March we will be happy with the results. Till then we can only speculate.

MrFlyerFanatic · #37 07-11-2008, 11:04 AM

Tubby Smith may be a good coach, but is he willing to schedule UD after losing to UD as head coach at Kentucky? Do you think he may have taken just a little bit of heat for that game?
You also have to look at school schedules. UD never plays during exam week. It's guaranteed that there will be one week in December where there are no games scheduled. Considering that, there is always a buy game following exams. Do you think it would be wise to schedule a game against a big name team on the raod following exam week? Gee, where would the kids heads be all week? That's a recipe for disaster. I assume other schools follow a similar philosophy with different exam schedules.
Historically, teams tend to struggle in thier first game back after playing exempt tournaments in exotic locations (remember what UC did to us at home after our good Maui showing?). Is someone going to schedule UD to be that first game after returning home? I wouldn't.
How about facility availability? Sure, at UD men's basketball has priority over all. Would UConn change the date of a nationally televised women's game against Tennessee just so that the men could play UD? Hmm... Which game is going to bring in more money and exposure for the host school?
Of course TV schedules have to come into play as well. With several hundred college bowl games, exempt tournament match-ups, Big10-ACC challenge type games, etc going on, how many television dates are available that fit with all of the other variables?

Scheduling is not as easy as picking up the phone and asking if BCS teams can come out and play. Just because 2 teams are looking for someone to play doesn't mean that they can or want play each other.

The Chef · #38 07-11-2008, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by Gazoo

Here's something that bugs me about the schedule. Last year we had 9 pre-conference home games. We've been told that we need those games in order to support the program / university. Many end up being buy games against crap teams. Fine.

But this year, because of the Chicago tournament (I think) being a qualifying tournament with the first 2 games played at home, we have 10 home games.

Since we apparently made enough money for the program last year with 9 home games, why couldn't we use one of those throw-away buy games at home and put out the word that we'll play anyone, anywhere, and try to put a signature win on the record??

Back to this question for a bit, cause I think it's a good one. I think one could certainly envision a scenario where we were looking for one more home-and-home arrangement to start at the opponent's home floor this season, and that would sublet the 10th home contest in the non-conference. I think it's conceivable that TK was looking to make a deal with a "name" (read as upper half BCS) school or a mid-major conference champion from a conference were not already playing. I think that the absence of takers for such a deal probably led to TK deciding to cash in his chips and get more money rather than lower the bar for scheduling and go after the mizzous or the...

Well, I was going to go there, but I won't go there.