2016-17 Schedule

[shockmonster]

can wichita state talk to kentucky and calipari, who is usually complimenatry of the shockers?

Yes

[AndShock]

kenpom? Isn't that a statistical conglomerate? What was Texas ranked in the final regular season kenpom?

Yes. 30, why?

[another shocker]

UNI has been a top 50 KenPom team twice during Jacobson's tenure, 2010 and 2015. Saying they were top 50 is kind of misleading though. They were 12th in 2015 and 19th in 2010. Every other year they've been 66th or worse. Maybe "UNI builds for an every fifth year run" would be more accurate.

what's the matter with you? uni has won ncaa tournament games two years in a row now with another good team on the way. kenpom can suck it.

[Dave Stalwart]

MWC/MVC Challenge:

http://www.mwcconnection.com/2016/5/...harm-than-help

I agree with this article. I think it's unfortunate that the pairings can't be redone at this point. It's so painfully obvious who should be playing who, yet we seem have terrible matchups put in place. San Diego State playing at Loyola, if true, is terrible...
I wish we could just re-do the matchups today and get this thing correct for next season. WSU should obviously be playing San Diego State. I did notice that it's kinda nice we were able to get Nevada set up prior to their emergence. That will be a good game, and we've got it outside of the MVC-MWC challenge if I'm not mistaken.

[AndShock]

what's the matter with you? uni has won ncaa tournament games two years in a row now with another good team on the way. kenpom can suck it.

Sorry for providing data to prove a statement. I will use 1 game in March to prove statements from here on out.

[Kel Varnsen]

Sorry for providing data to prove a statement. I will use 1 game in March to prove statements from here on out.

Welcome to the Dark Side.

[Aargh]

MWC/MVC Challenge:

http://www.mwcconnection.com/2016/5/...harm-than-help

this setup has Elgin's fingerprints all over it. to hell with good matchups or games people want to see, we've got to make it so everyone has an even shot at getting somebody watching the game.

WSU vs. San Diego State would probably get a couple hundred thousand viewers. SDSU vs. Loyola and WSU vs. Colorado State is likely to get tens of thousands between the two games, but at least Loyola ends up on even ground with WSU for pulling in a TV audience.

[AZ Shocker]

Nice work Elgin. Good-Gawd....

[ShockingButTrue]

Sorry for providing data to prove a statement. I will use 1 game in March to prove statements from here on out.

Lotsa' people use March to validate true hardwood success and prove points.

You mean you've never had to listen to chickens bloviate? March success is a battle cry.

If kenpom held weight what should we have been seeded (just suspend reality ok)?

[ShockRef]

I agree with this article. I think it's unfortunate that the pairings can't be redone at this point. It's so painfully obvious who should be playing who, yet we seem have terrible matchups put in place. San Diego State playing at Loyola, if true, is terrible...
I wish we could just re-do the matchups today and get this thing correct for next season. WSU should obviously be playing San Diego State. I did notice that it's kinda nice we were able to get Nevada set up prior to their emergence. That will be a good game, and we've got it outside of the MVC-MWC challenge if I'm not mistaken.

Bagging on Loyola? C'mon Dave, everybody knows they were an equal replacement for Creighton and great addition to The Valley! After all, The Valley now has a reputable presence in the Chicago market.

I can not fathom the thought process when the Valley brain trust was deciding Loyola was the best piece to the puzzle.
Dumpy HS arena, no recent history of success, minimal fan support - yea, all good reasons to roll out the welcome mat.

If the Chicago thing was so lucrative, why not just grab UIC at the same time! In fact, lets go for the trifecta and snare Chicago State too!

They pointed to last year as their 'load up' and charge the top of the Valley pile. How did that work out?
They lost a boatload of starters, have little left in the well and their recruiting is still Summit/Horizon League level.

Great addition.

That is all.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

The MWC/MVC challenge Is the same kind of high risk-low reward set up that Bracket Busters was. I don't know who is to blame, as the MWC fans seem to blame their commish (who they hold in the same disdain as we hold ours). It cannot be that difficult to match up programs from each conference in descending order, but they have somehow managed to find a way to make it seem like brain surgery. We should be playing San Diego State almost every year, and Air Force should be playing Bradley. Why Colorado State, Loyola, Drake, and Wyoming are being led like lambs to the slaughter next year is beyond me.

[ShockTalk]

One thing that is going to hurt the MWC in this matchup of conferences is the Valley's bottom feeders. Bad matchups just make it worse.

MVC/MWC should concentrate on the top half teams in both conferences. It gives their better teams an opportunity to avoid that extra 200+ RPI buy-in game. After that, it doesn't make that much difference.

As it is, both conferences have made a mess of it which only makes things worse. I know trying to alternate the home/away situation can cause matchup problems, but this looks a lot worse than it needed to be.

[Gary Gorilla]

The MWC/MVC challenge Is the same kind of high risk-low reward set up that Bracket Busters was. I don't know who is to blame, as the MWC fans seem to blame their commish (who they hold in the same disdain as we hold ours). It cannot be that difficult to match up programs from each conference in descending order, but they have somehow managed to find a way to make it seem like brain surgery. We should be playing San Diego State almost every year, and Air Force should be playing Bradley. Why Colorado State, Loyola, Drake, and Wyoming are being led like lambs to the slaughter next year is beyond me.

Maybe the commissioners are somehow trying to game the league RPIs by scheduling the bottom dwellers up? I'm not even trying to pretend to understand RPI math, just speculating.

[shock]

To fix this:
1. Even years hosted by MWC, odd years hosted by MVC.
2. Match ups decided one week before game day.
3. Match ups decided by RPI, strength of schedule.
4. Top 5 games played the same day in consecutive order, televised.
5. Bottom 5 games played day before top 5, not televised as part of event.
6. Assign point values for games won. Bottom 5 each worth 1 point. 5 worth 2, 4 worth 3, 3 worth 4, 2 worth 5, 1 worth 6.
7. Conference with highest point total gets 60% tv revenue, 40% to losing conference. Awarded revenue to be split among schools with 30% going to the top school in each conference.

Puts incentive on strength of schedule, but awards a winnable schedule as well.

[Cdizzle]

To fix this:
1. Even years hosted by MWC, odd years hosted by MVC.
2. Match ups decided one week before game day.
3. Match ups decided by RPI, strength of schedule.
4. Top 5 games played the same day in consecutive order, televised.
5. Bottom 5 games played day before top 5, not televised as part of event.
6. Assign point values for games won. Bottom 5 each worth 1 point. 5 worth 2, 4 worth 3, 3 worth 4, 2 worth 5, 1 worth 6.
7. Conference with highest point total gets 60% tv revenue, 40% to losing conference. Awarded revenue to be split among schools with 30% going to the top school in each conference.

Puts incentive on strength of schedule, but awards a winnable schedule as well.

Interesting idea. And I had thought about the "just use metrics and set up the matchups the week before." But that breaks down really bad when you think about the state of most metrics around the 1st of December. Also, tying winning a competition and even the handout of money to a series which is played entirely on the home courts of 1 league would never fly.