Thoughts on what Sunday says

[RoyalShock]

Most recent blog post from Suellentrop:

http://blogs.kansas.com/shockwaves/

He mentions that the root of the problem in the MVC is a lack of top-shelf players like those we had in 2006. Without them, scheduling up doesn't help much because it will be that much tougher to win. I largely agree with him.

Now, while Paul didn't really address the BracketBuster directly, an interesting correlation came to mind. The MVC was rising when the the BracketBuster was first unveiled (I think it was the 2003-04 season). And if you remember, the event only included the better "mid" teams, not the 100+ team conglomeration they have now. The better Valley players during that 2005-2007 stretch would have been recruited prior to the start of BracketBusters (with a few exceptions like Osiris).

Around that time the Mountain West, Atlantic 10 and to a lesser degree C-USA were struggling. In 2004-05, C-USA was #9, MWC was #11 and A10 was #18. The MVC was #8 that year and over the next two seasons would be #6. By the 2008-09 season (when those recruits prior to 2005 were gone), the MVC was #9, having been passed up by the MWC and A10. This season the top 3 non-BCS leagues are the MWC (#4), C-USA (#8) and A10 (#9). The MVC has fallen clear to #12, the worst in almost a decade.

I don't think the BracketBuster games themselves have been the problem. But there does seem to be a correlation between the timing of BracketBusters and how the recruiting in conferences that chose to particpate and those who didn't have fared.

If there is an argument for abandoning the BracketBusters it that the perception of our league is lower than that of the MWC, A10 and CUSA among recruits.

[rjl]

That argument hinges on a nexus between recruiting and bracketbusters, and, for the life of me, I can't come up with anything plausible.

[Snapshot9]

That would tie back to recruiting directly. Some of those years, I know, were 'down' years for recruiting. In other words, the number of quality recruits was less, and most of the quality recruits were snapped up by BCS schools, which presented Mid-Majors with a problem for getting quality recruits.

[RoyalShock]

That argument hinges on a nexus between recruiting and bracketbusters, and, for the life of me, I can't come up with anything plausible.

I'm sure there are other factors like coaching changes and the old 5/8 recruiting rule at play here. But the "nexus" is one of perception. The BracketBusters created one more threshold, dividing line or whatever you want to call it, separating a group of schools from another. And the argument could be made, using the data I provided, that teams and conferences on one side of that line have fared generally better than those on the other side.

[Ta town]

Association with BracketBusters screams small time. Association with leagues like the OVC, MAC, etc is not good. Nor is having broadcasters all weekend talk about how they are really good at their level of play and they might if everything goes perfect be an at large.

Also they need to limit the Bracket Busters T.V. games to 4 max. Outside of that you get some match ups that really suck and nobody cares about and that helps add to the poor perception.

Just my two cents, I know most disagree with me on this and thats fine. I just believe that WSU could, if it really wanted to, find a home and home series with a like mid major. Somebody that is going to be somewhere between 40-100 RPI most years.

[ShockerEngr]

2005 was about the time that the NBA minimum age rule came in as well (don't remember exactly when)

Whether that's beneficial or not, it still impacts recruiting.

[Shocker85]

Association with BracketBusters screams small time. Association with leagues like the OVC, MAC, etc is not good. Nor is having broadcasters all weekend talk about how they are really good at their level of play and they might if everything goes perfect be an at large.

Also they need to limit the Bracket Busters T.V. games to 4 max. Outside of that you get some match ups that really suck and nobody cares about and that helps add to the poor perception.

Just my two cents, I know most disagree with me on this and thats fine. I just believe that WSU could, if it really wanted to, find a home and home series with a like mid major. Somebody that is going to be somewhere between 40-100 RPI most years.

I just don't get this line of thinking.

ANY TV is better than no TV. And no one listens to the drivel being spewed by the commentators.

None of this talk is valid unless the MVC, or at least the top teams in the MVC, consistently win their BB games. You can say it is bush, sucks, or whatever, but when your top tier teams can't win those games, that performance is what dictates the perception, i.e. the MVC can't win crucial OOC games.

--'85.

[Ta town]

Association with BracketBusters screams small time. Association with leagues like the OVC, MAC, etc is not good. Nor is having broadcasters all weekend talk about how they are really good at their level of play and they might if everything goes perfect be an at large.

Also they need to limit the Bracket Busters T.V. games to 4 max. Outside of that you get some match ups that really suck and nobody cares about and that helps add to the poor perception.

Just my two cents, I know most disagree with me on this and thats fine. I just believe that WSU could, if it really wanted to, find a home and home series with a like mid major. Somebody that is going to be somewhere between 40-100 RPI most years.

I just don't get this line of thinking.

ANY TV is better than no TV. And no one listens to the drivel being spewed by the commentators.

None of this talk is valid unless the MVC, or at least the top teams in the MVC, consistently win their BB games. You can say it is bush, sucks, or whatever, but when your top tier teams can't win those games, that performance is what dictates the perception, i.e. the MVC can't win crucial OOC games.

--'85.

The valley has been plenty successful in the BB prior to this season. Just WSU that tanks every year.

[shockar25]

Association with BracketBusters screams small time. Association with leagues like the OVC, MAC, etc is not good. Nor is having broadcasters all weekend talk about how they are really good at their level of play and they might if everything goes perfect be an at large.

Also they need to limit the Bracket Busters T.V. games to 4 max. Outside of that you get some match ups that really suck and nobody cares about and that helps add to the poor perception.

Just my two cents, I know most disagree with me on this and thats fine. I just believe that WSU could, if it really wanted to, find a home and home series with a like mid major. Somebody that is going to be somewhere between 40-100 RPI most years.

True, but until we start winning them, aren't we a little 'small time'? As much as I hate it.

[Kung Wu]

Does the average high school recruit have any idea what BracketBusters even is?

I have a rare disagreement with RoyalShock who would apparently say yes, and that it impacts recruiting in a very bad way.

I say no, they have no clue, and it has near zero impact on recruiting.

[shox1989]

Association with BracketBusters screams small time. Association with leagues like the OVC, MAC, etc is not good. Nor is having broadcasters all weekend talk about how they are really good at their level of play and they might if everything goes perfect be an at large.

Also they need to limit the Bracket Busters T.V. games to 4 max. Outside of that you get some match ups that really suck and nobody cares about and that helps add to the poor perception.

Just my two cents, I know most disagree with me on this and thats fine. I just believe that WSU could, if it really wanted to, find a home and home series with a like mid major. Somebody that is going to be somewhere between 40-100 RPI most years.

I just don't get this line of thinking.

ANY TV is better than no TV. And no one listens to the drivel being spewed by the commentators.

None of this talk is valid unless the MVC, or at least the top teams in the MVC, consistently win their BB games. You can say it is bush, sucks, or whatever, but when your top tier teams can't win those games, that performance is what dictates the perception, i.e. the MVC can't win crucial OOC games.

--'85.

Until this year the Valley totally dominated this event. This is the first year we had a losing record (3-7). It has nothing to do with winning and losing.

Perception is reality, especially with recruits. Associating ourselves with all of the one bid conferences is not a good thing.

As far as TV goes, WSU has been on national TV a lot the last few years. We do not need the one extra TV game that the BB might provide.
Especially when in my opinion it is really more of a negative TV exposure than a positive one.

As Royal pointed out, the conferences that decided to stay away from this thing (CUSA, MWC, and A-10) have fared much better.

[ABC]

Paul Sullentrop is one damn fine writer and analyst.

He is among the best of any college basketball writers I read, including all of the folks on ESPN.

[1972Shocker]

We do not need the one extra TV game that the BB might provide.
Especially when in my opinion it is really more of a negative TV exposure than a positive one.

I'm with Shocker85 on this one. It is not the event, it is our performance in the event that creates the perception.

I think we are way over-analyzing this. There is no doubt that BB provides a boost to our schedule that we do not seem capable of generating when left to our own devises.

If we can duplicate or exceed the scheduling benefits that BB provides, then fine, dump it. I would love to see the world change to accomodate that.

If we were consistently winning our BB games I doubt that there would be much issue with it. BTW, we have done very well in our return games. We will see how that holds up when we host Utah State and visit VCU.

Of course, we could just drop these and add Centenary and/or Georgia Southern to the ol' home schedule and not risk embarrassing ourselves losing a BB game on TV. That should help the recruiting.

[1972Shocker]

We are focusing on BracketBusters, which is one game out of 30, as being a huge problem. I don't see it. How about the 18 games we play against MVC opponents. Quite frankly, the current state of affairs in the MVC is a much bigger issue than BB.

The problem is we aren't exactly dominating either the MVC or our BB opponents. That is step one. If we fail to do that on a consistent basis then we probably don't have a lot of real good options.

Of course, if we start to do that then all of a sudden the issues surrounding the MVC and BB won't seem to matter as much.

[RoyalShock]

Utah St. will not be any better on our schedule next year than Tulsa was this year. And they may be worse. Yes, I know Tulsa was our best non-con win, but unfortunately, that isn's saying much.

The Aggies lose five of their top seven scorers after this season. Those return BB games have mostly been wins for us, but mostly wins over teams that are down, sometimes significantly, from the season or two before.

If that trend continues (and it looks to me like it will with VCU), then the BB is only giving us one decent game a year and in some cases taking up a spot via the return game that could be used to get a better opponent; scheduling difficulties notwithstanding.