Non-Con breakdown

[Anthroshock]

Pretty solid analysis, but on a BJs blog.

Once again, what were the reasons for dropping the RPI scheduling guidelines?

http://whiteandbluereview.com/?p=1508

[1972Shocker]

It was a good analysis, although I am more than a little jealous that UNI and Drake both get to play Iowa and Iowa State.

[ShoxFan45]

It's a little disappointing to see that we are towards the bottom of those graphs for each category. I know we have games against Pitt and maybe Texas if not Iowa, but still, our non-con is not very strong. I really enjoyed Turgeons attitude towards the end of his career here. Had games at Syracuse and 2 for 1 with LSU. I'd like to see more of that each year. I wouldn't mind going to a top tier BCS gym and see how we compete if we could get the game. Rather play a tough road game and give in some of our "home for home" "1 for 1" pride than play a bunch of no name cupcakes and pay for it in march.

Don't mean to criticize GM, he's doing a great job, but it seems like all the high profile games we have are in tournaments Turg had us in before GM was here. He didn't have the possibility of an At Large bid at Winthrop, in the MVC there is a definite chance with the right schedule, I don't wanna miss out.

:goshocks:

[1972Shocker]

It's a little disappointing to see that we are towards the bottom of those graphs for each category. I know we have games against Pitt and maybe Texas if not Iowa, but still, our non-con is not very strong. I really enjoyed Turgeons attitude towards the end of his career here. Had games at Syracuse and 2 for 1 with LSU. I'd like to see more of that each year. I wouldn't mind going to a top tier BCS gym and see how we compete if we could get the game. Rather play a tough road game and give in some of our "home for home" "1 for 1" pride than play a bunch of no name cupcakes and pay for it in march.

Don't mean to criticize GM, he's doing a great job, but it seems like all the high profile games we have are in tournaments Turg had us in before GM was here. He didn't have the possibility of an At Large bid at Winthrop, in the MVC there is a definite chance with the right schedule, I don't wanna miss out.

:goshocks:

I agree.

Off topic: Nice touchdown celebration by KC's Shawn Ryan. No "look-at-me" antics. Just trotted over to the stands and gave the ball to a kid. I liked it.

[wsushox1]

It was a good analysis, although I am more than a little jealous that UNI and Drake both get to play Iowa and Iowa State.
----------------------------------

I am pretty sure that Iowa state law requires those schools to play each other.

[Aargh]

It was a good analysis, although I am more than a little jealous that UNI and Drake both get to play Iowa and Iowa State.
----------------------------------

I am pretty sure that Iowa state law requires those schools to play each other.

There is no law in Iowa that requires those games, but...


...if they aren't played there's an ongoing threat that there will be a law. It's been to the Iowa legislature and never become a law because the schools always scheduled in-state games voluntarily. They also seem to be assured that if they don't play them voluntarily, there will be a law, which helps the voluntary efforts.

[shoxtop]

It's a little disappointing to see that we are towards the bottom of those graphs for each category. I know we have games against Pitt and maybe Texas if not Iowa, but still, our non-con is not very strong. I really enjoyed Turgeons attitude towards the end of his career here. Had games at Syracuse and 2 for 1 with LSU. I'd like to see more of that each year. I wouldn't mind going to a top tier BCS gym and see how we compete if we could get the game. Rather play a tough road game and give in some of our "home for home" "1 for 1" pride than play a bunch of no name cupcakes and pay for it in march.

Don't mean to criticize GM, he's doing a great job, but it seems like all the high profile games we have are in tournaments Turg had us in before GM was here. He didn't have the possibility of an At Large bid at Winthrop, in the MVC there is a definite chance with the right schedule, I don't wanna miss out.

:goshocks:

LSU was/still-is, as far as I remember, a 1-1-1. Whether the neutral site game will ever be played is yet to be seen. Also, I would think that for Turgeon, scheduling these games when teams thought we were just a cupcake with a decent rpi rating was much easier. It almost seems like we are a victim of our own success by winning those games. IMHO, I don't really see GM backing down from a challenge.

[ShoxFan45]

It's a little disappointing to see that we are towards the bottom of those graphs for each category. I know we have games against Pitt and maybe Texas if not Iowa, but still, our non-con is not very strong. I really enjoyed Turgeons attitude towards the end of his career here. Had games at Syracuse and 2 for 1 with LSU. I'd like to see more of that each year. I wouldn't mind going to a top tier BCS gym and see how we compete if we could get the game. Rather play a tough road game and give in some of our "home for home" "1 for 1" pride than play a bunch of no name cupcakes and pay for it in march.

Don't mean to criticize GM, he's doing a great job, but it seems like all the high profile games we have are in tournaments Turg had us in before GM was here. He didn't have the possibility of an At Large bid at Winthrop, in the MVC there is a definite chance with the right schedule, I don't wanna miss out.

:goshocks:

LSU was/still-is, as far as I remember, a 1-1-1. Whether the neutral site game will ever be played is yet to be seen. Also, I would think that for Turgeon, scheduling these games when teams thought we were just a cupcake with a decent rpi rating was much easier. It almost seems like we are a victim of our own success by winning those games. IMHO, I don't really see GM backing down from a challenge.

Agreed, it was probably much easier for Turg to get those games before we won them. And the LSU series might as well be a 2 for 1, I don't think it should make a big difference if we play the game on campus at Baton Rouge or in some other Louisiana arena. It will be a homecourt advantage for the Tigers.

[ShockerFever]

It's a little disappointing to see that we are towards the bottom of those graphs for each category. I know we have games against Pitt and maybe Texas if not Iowa, but still, our non-con is not very strong. I really enjoyed Turgeons attitude towards the end of his career here. Had games at Syracuse and 2 for 1 with LSU. I'd like to see more of that each year. I wouldn't mind going to a top tier BCS gym and see how we compete if we could get the game. Rather play a tough road game and give in some of our "home for home" "1 for 1" pride than play a bunch of no name cupcakes and pay for it in march.

Don't mean to criticize GM, he's doing a great job, but it seems like all the high profile games we have are in tournaments Turg had us in before GM was here. He didn't have the possibility of an At Large bid at Winthrop, in the MVC there is a definite chance with the right schedule, I don't wanna miss out.

:goshocks:

LSU was/still-is, as far as I remember, a 1-1-1. Whether the neutral site game will ever be played is yet to be seen. Also, I would think that for Turgeon, scheduling these games when teams thought we were just a cupcake with a decent rpi rating was much easier. It almost seems like we are a victim of our own success by winning those games. IMHO, I don't really see GM backing down from a challenge.

Agreed, it was probably much easier for Turg to get those games before we won them. And the LSU series might as well be a 2 for 1, I don't think it should make a big difference if we play the game on campus at Baton Rouge or in some other Louisiana arena. It will be a homecourt advantage for the Tigers.

I wholeheartedly disagree. LSU doesn't get as much support for their basketball team, especially during football season. Having the game in Dallas or Shreveport will make it wayyyyy more neutral than if the game was in Baton Rouge. I'd be willing to guess it might only be 70-30 LSU to WSU fans at either Dallas or Shreveport venue. That is the definition of a neutral game.. and that's what makes the difference between a 2-1 series and a 1-1-1 series.

[ShoxFan45]

It's a little disappointing to see that we are towards the bottom of those graphs for each category. I know we have games against Pitt and maybe Texas if not Iowa, but still, our non-con is not very strong. I really enjoyed Turgeons attitude towards the end of his career here. Had games at Syracuse and 2 for 1 with LSU. I'd like to see more of that each year. I wouldn't mind going to a top tier BCS gym and see how we compete if we could get the game. Rather play a tough road game and give in some of our "home for home" "1 for 1" pride than play a bunch of no name cupcakes and pay for it in march.

Don't mean to criticize GM, he's doing a great job, but it seems like all the high profile games we have are in tournaments Turg had us in before GM was here. He didn't have the possibility of an At Large bid at Winthrop, in the MVC there is a definite chance with the right schedule, I don't wanna miss out.

:goshocks:

LSU was/still-is, as far as I remember, a 1-1-1. Whether the neutral site game will ever be played is yet to be seen. Also, I would think that for Turgeon, scheduling these games when teams thought we were just a cupcake with a decent rpi rating was much easier. It almost seems like we are a victim of our own success by winning those games. IMHO, I don't really see GM backing down from a challenge.

Agreed, it was probably much easier for Turg to get those games before we won them. And the LSU series might as well be a 2 for 1, I don't think it should make a big difference if we play the game on campus at Baton Rouge or in some other Louisiana arena. It will be a homecourt advantage for the Tigers.

I wholeheartedly disagree. LSU doesn't get as much support for their basketball team, especially during football season. Having the game in Dallas or Shreveport will make it wayyyyy more neutral than if the game was in Baton Rouge. I'd be willing to guess it might only be 70-30 LSU to WSU fans at either Dallas or Shreveport venue. That is the definition of a neutral game.. and that's what makes the difference between a 2-1 series and a 1-1-1 series.

It may be more neutral than a game in Baton Rouge, but it won't be "neutral" in my book. 1-1-1 to me signifies that that the third game would be in a arena that isn't partisan. A Shreveport game is not as neutral as our Paradise Jam game or a mid-season tournament game. This version of a 1-1-1 is better than a 2-1 I guess. But it isn't as good as a 1-1 trade of games.

[tropicalshox]

We need to play more LSUs, ect. I don't care if they are a 1-1, 1-1-1 or a 2-1.

[shockmonster]

2-1 and 1-1-1 sounds good (especially to out of towners) until the years when we don't have any good home games to schedule. Then there is an out cry from season ticket holders. Then it's another problem. At least this year, there is an TT and TCU to go see. This year, the CBE dropped the bomb when we go a Div. II team. Scheduling isn't easy.

[WuDrWu]

Scheduling isn't easy.

You're right, up to an extent.


Imho, it is time to put up or shut up. I don't want to schedule like Creighton and "look" like we are trying to be tough. I want to follow Gonzaga's model. Anyone, anywhere, anytime.

Good games will come to us if, IF, we can put up. If we are going to fail, then I want to fail trying. We aren't going to schedule Duke, Syracuse, Kentucky and UCLA home and home. If have NO problem, in fact I encourage, scheduling these type teams on the road or where ever.


You get better by playing better competition, not by pounding Arkansas Montecito.


I give us a pass through this season, and that's it. I believe our staff wants to play these games; as a fan I believe we need these games; as a supporter, I demand these games.


The difference between being 23-9 without these type games and (at worst) 19-13 with them is immeasurable to me. I will not wildly support the former, I will the latter. One is worthy of recognition, the other is not.

[Snapshot9]

Our non con scheduling this year is soft, 184 RPI, 30 points higher than last year. I don't know which of the staff members attends to this, but they need to do a better job.

If we want 'name recognition', we have to play teams with name recognition.
Although Gonzaga is a good basketball model for us, I imagine us becoming better known more like MSU. (perhaps because of the 3 letters in each of our University's acronyms).

[ShockTalk]

Absolutely Doc!

Nothing wrong with having one "1 & done" each year to a top tier basketball program. Continue to add in each year a couple of BCS caliber games at neutral site tournements and you have a great start to a very good schedule.

We already have a nice arrangement set up with the MVC/MWC games. Next, add in another 1-1-1 with a middle tier BCS or a 1-1 with an upper tier mid-major school. Bring back a good rivalary - Tulsa or George Mason - for 1-1.

Six games from the above will mix in nicely with a few (no more than 3) easier opponents. This is the only way to truly gain respectability for your program, like a Gonzaga or Xaiver.