Best Wishes!

[DUShock]

I think we should start by not acting like Cretin when they left. UNI and Illinois St will be top 100-150 most years. A h-h wouldn't be a bad thing. Even in the AAC conference our non-conference schedule isn't going to magically improve. People still aren't going to want to play at Koch Arena.

Let's act better

[1972Shocker]

I think we should start by not acting like Cretin when they left. UNI and Illinois St will be top 100-150 most years. A h-h wouldn't be a bad thing. Even in the AAC conference our non-conference schedule isn't going to magically improve. People still aren't going to want to play at Koch Arena.

Let's act better

I would say that would be okay if we are unable to do better. Not sure how 3G would feel about a H/H with Illinois State though. While that relationship did seem to defrost a bit it was still a somewhat chilly one. We'll just have to wait and see if joining the AAC creates better non-con scheduling opportunities or not.

I would still rather hook up with Creighton on and H/H but not sure if there is any interest on Creighton's part.

[Cdizzle]

I think we should start by not acting like Cretin when they left. UNI and Illinois St will be top 100-150 most years. A h-h wouldn't be a bad thing. Even in the AAC conference our non-conference schedule isn't going to magically improve. People still aren't going to want to play at Koch Arena.

Let's act better

What H-H do we currently play with non-P5 teams that are outside the Top 100? Tulsa? So which H-H do we play that are outside the P5, outside the Top 100, and more than 3 hours away?

I think the most logical add is MSU if they ever get their stuff together.

[WuDrWu]

I think we should start by not acting like Cretin when they left. UNI and Illinois St will be top 100-150 most years. A h-h wouldn't be a bad thing. Even in the AAC conference our non-conference schedule isn't going to magically improve. People still aren't going to want to play at Koch Arena.

Let's act better

Think of it this way, we have to replace Tulsa for a regional H/H. We could do worse than the top of the Valley and at least for the next 2-3 years we'd have a good idea (not flawless) of who that's likely to be.

[1972Shocker]

I think the most logical add is MSU if they ever get their stuff together.

Yes, if they get there stuff together. They may not be too bad next year. The year after that who knows.

Most of the Valley teams are a bit of a crapshoot as to what you will get year-to-year. And when you schedule them home and home you are also scheduling the potential ratings drag from the rest of the league.

Certainly they would be much better buy games than the MEAC and SWAC teams and others but will they be the best we can do Home and Home? I hope not but time will tell.

[Dave Stalwart]

Think of it this way, we have to replace Tulsa for a regional H/H. We could do worse than the top of the Valley and at least for the next 2-3 years we'd have a good idea (not flawless) of who that's likely to be.

I hope we immediately start scheduling MVC teams on the regular and further prove the difference between Wichita State and Creighton as it pertains to class

[Cdizzle]

I hope we immediately start scheduling MVC teams on the regular and further prove the difference between Wichita State in Creighton as it pertains to class

Class has nothing to do with it. Putting together a good schedule does. Creighton was declining to schedule a regional Top 40 team(WSU) and a regional Top 100 team (UNI). That was/is their choice. What options still in the MVC does that sort of qualifier leave WSU? Literally zero.

I don't think we have to avoid scheduling MVC teams out of some disdain or 'high-and-mighty' attitude, but I don't think there is any reason to treat them differently than any other team when trying to put together a schedule.

[1972Shocker]

Think of it this way, we have to replace Tulsa for a regional H/H. We could do worse than the top of the Valley and at least for the next 2-3 years we'd have a good idea (not flawless) of who that's likely to be.

Yes, we coud do worse. The real question IMHO is can we do better? Creighton? Nevada, Colorado State, New Mexico (Mountain West)? Gonzaga, St. Mary's or BYU (West Coast)? Dayton, VCU even St. Louis (A-10)? How about some P-5 programs? All from conferences rated above the Valley (and that was the with the Shockers carrying the Valley). Where will the Valley rank without the Shocks?

[Dave Stalwart]

Class has nothing to do with it. Putting together a good schedule does. Creighton was declining to schedule a regional Top 40 team(WSU) and a regional Top 100 team (UNI). That was/is their choice. What options still in the MVC does that sort of qualifier leave WSU? Literally zero.

I don't think we have to avoid scheduling MVC teams out of some disdain or 'high-and-mighty' attitude, but I don't think there is any reason to treat them differently than any other team when trying to put together a schedule.

To me, nostalgia is one reason to treat them differently than others. It's not worth much, but it's worth something.

[Cdizzle]

To me, nostalgia is one reason to treat them differently than others. It's not worth much, but it's worth something.

Nostalgia doesn't help your seed line.

It would be one thing if there were any real rivalries in the league, but there just aren't. Fans aren't clamoring to keep some game on the schedule because it's great fun.

[shockerfan]

I guess it just depends. If our choice is a h-h with a team that will be around 100 RPI or better most years, or a buy game with a team that is a risk and at best will be 150 in the RPI I would rather see a h-h with the more consistent team.

I am mostly talking UNI. They have problems and I am not sure they will be that team next year. But most years under Jacobsen they wouldn't be a big risk and most of the time you know they will be competitive and among the top of the league. Some of these buy games are a big risk. You are hoping they perform, but many times they don't.

Seems you would want the more consistent player on the schedule

Edit*** FWIW I realize this year UNI was way down. I think they will eventually bounce back. If/when they do I wouldn't mind them on the schedule

[Cdizzle]

I guess it just depends. If our choice is a h-h with a team that will be around 100 RPI or better most years, or a buy game with a team that is a risk and at best will be 150 in the RPI I would rather see a h-h with the more consistent team.

I am mostly talking UNI. They have problems and I am not sure they will be that team next year. But most years under Jacobsen they wouldn't be a big risk and most of the time you know they will be competitive and among the top of the league. Some of these buy games are a big risk. You are hoping they perform, but many times they don't.

Seems you would want the more consistent player on the schedule

Couple of costs with that.

1. You give up a home game. WSU is going to need cash more than ever at this point.
2. You play a bunch of floppers.

[shockerfan]

Couple of costs with that.

1. You give up a home game. WSU is going to need cash more than ever at this point.
2. You play a bunch of floppers.

Can't argue with those points. Especially the 2nd lol

[AndShock]

UNI appears to be a better program than they actually are because they've won in March a couple of times. Jacobson has been at UNI 11 years and have been good 3 times.

[shockerfan]

UNI appears to be a better program than they actually are because they've won in March a couple of times. Jacobson has been at UNI 11 years and have been good 3 times.

Strictly speaking RPI not horrible outside a couple years

2016-2017 - 161
2015-2016 - 73
2014-2015 - 15
2013-2014 - 109
2012-2013 - 80
2011-2012 - 72
2010-2011 - 99

And I only mention them because they usually play a decent non-conference schedule which gives them chances to pick up good RPI wins...etc

Plus, in the new Valley I would bet they kind of take over as the team most likely to get to the NCAA tourney most years. Which gives us wins over tourney team.

Look, if we can buy them then all the better. But don't buy a team that most years would be worse. Try and get some consistency on the schedule.

Really, I don't care either way. Just want to play good teams :). At least we are in a conference now where that is a guarantee.