Thoughts on what Sunday says

[Good News]

Re: Thoughts on what Sunday says

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.

I would agree, and additionally hypothesize that the change in the 5 and 8 rule (or whatever it was) didn't just swing more recruits toward BCS conferences, it also skewed them toward population centers with larger concentrations of high school talent - which the MWC, A10, and CUSA all have a greater relative proximity to than the Valley.

[calfan]

I think another factor that hurts the MVC is the perception and the reality that the MVC is a slow, boring, defensive-minded conference.

What good high school player is looking to go to that kind of conference and school?

[shockall]

It's simple, folks.

IF YOU CAN'T SCHEDULE BIG, YOU CAN'T RECRUIT BIG!

The better players want to play better competition than what we have been able to muster the past three or four years. We won't get more than medium talented players scheduling against the likes we've been seeing lately, including the teams from the MVC.

[1972Shocker]

From Sully's Shockwaves Blog (not that he has all the answers):

There is no great mystery to any of this. It’s about winning games. Even with a lot of weak schedules this season, MSU and WSU had games on their schedules that could put them in the NCAA. Not many. But some.

Teams can schedule up all they want. It doesn’t matter if they don’t have the talent to win. Coaches can talk all they want about scheduling, which in some ways shields them. This is about talent.

Non-conference scheduling doesn’t matter unless everybody works at it. ...it is going to be almost impossible to build an NCAA-worthy resume solely on non-conference games. All 10 MVC schools must pitch in, or it doesn’t work.

Since 2004, the MVC put seven at-large teams in the field. That group totaled six non-conference top 50 wins (two from the BracketBusters series).

I don't really disagree with much of what Paul has to say in this blog. To me Bracketbusters, if it is a problem and that is debatable as this board proves continually, is only a very small part of the overall problem.

[60Shock]

At least so far, the BB has resulted in our playing schools which most people have heard of and generally have average to above average seasons.

this does not necessarliy hold true for the schools that whomever is responsible for our overall recruiting can accomplish and this has been going on for at least 10 years.

All you have to do is to measure the media attention/TV we usually get from BB with the non-existent media attention we get for playing schools such as Texas Southern, Chicagp State, Nicholis State and Alabama A&M. Plus we don't have to pay them $100,000 for the pleasure of their playing us.

[1972Shocker]

Actually, when you think about it BracketBusters is more of a sympton of the problem, then the problem itself. Wheher or not there is practical cure for the underlying disease is hard to say.

[1972Shocker]

BTW Royal, I may have missed something. Is Sunday the nickname we are now applying to Paul Suellentrop?

[RoyalShock]

BTW Royal, I may have missed something. Is Sunday the nickname we are now applying to Paul Suellentrop?

No, that was just the title of his latest blog entry, referring to all the tournament selection and seeding activities this past Sunday.

[1972Shocker]

BTW Royal, I may have missed something. Is Sunday the nickname we are now applying to Paul Suellentrop?

No, that was just the title of his latest blog entry, referring to all the tournament selection and seeding activities this past Sunday.

OK, I'm a little slow on the uptake. I though maybe he had a new moniker. I was slow on the swith of HCGM to 3G, so thought I may have missed something.

[LoneStar48]

I don't think BB or scheduling or anything besides winning in St Louis on Sunday is going to make a difference for a long time.

We can't really do much about the quality of player we get; every so often there will be diamond, but most often some good players that don't have too much baggage or much of a chance of leaving early for the NBA will sign with WSU or another MVC team.

And, every so often, everything will be just right for some mm team and they will make a little run in the NCAA's. Then that luck will shift to another team, and on and on.

Most years, win one game, and you're in, lose one game, and you're out.

[proshox]

Shockernet seems to be sure that some outside factor has contributed to WSU's lack of success... I think it is as simple as not winning two to three key games. In my estimation, it is highly unlikely that the bracket buster event has had any impact on our recruiting. I would bet a lot of money on it.


The real problem:

The players did not progress as our fans and coaches expected.

Stutz - recruited by UK, KSU played fifteen minutes a game

TM - flatlined after 1.5 years

DK - never put it all together compared to the type of potential he showed as a recruit

I only focus on that class because they are the first real recruiting class and they are the players that will set the tone for success.