Non-Conf Schedule

[WuDrWu]

I listened a bit to 1410 this morning talk about the MVC being a 1 bid.


I know this is oversimplifying things, but I don't believe we are that far away. Staying away from the "are we good enough to be an at large" discussion, I offer the following thoughts:


1)The A-10 and MWC had dead weight much worse than the bottom feeders of the Valley. MUCH WORSE, and both of those conferences managed at larges (in fact 5 of the non power 8 came from those 2 conferences).

2)Teams. especially decent or good teams, get better by playing better competition. Why is that a team like ODU can beat Georgetown early in the season but often times, can't come up with a win in the tournament? I doubt that this can be quantified or qualified, but I think my point is understood. You get better by playing better competition.

3)The tougher we schedule, the more room for error there is. This season, the margin for error, for WSU, was razor thin. 25 wins wasn't enough....we needed 27. 26 might have put us in the field. 27 almost assuredly gets us in. That doesn't allow much wiggle room. This is our choice.....schedule easy with no room for mistakes, or schedule harder and give yourself some breathing room.

4)All this and I still go back to my original preface. We aren't that far away. It doesn't take a gynormous shift from what we are doing today.

Take this season. Now, I don't have the facts to support this (someone sharper than I, and that doesn't take much, I'm sure can find a formula to plug in the numbers) but if you just replaced 2 300+ cupcakes with 2 150ish cupcakes (still at home) and 1 more cupcake with a brutal road game (or home and home or 2-1 ...whatever we can get), then I think we're there.

Yes, the rest of the Valley needs to pull their weight, however there is no reason to think they are going to...they are going to do whatever is in their own best interest and so should we.

Now, 2 more things.

1)I don't think we performed well enough to get an at large. Do I think we could have? Sure, but given what we had to work with schedule wise, our margin for error, the lack of strength in the Valley and the strength of the other middling teams in the country, we certainly got what we deserved. We simply did not execute at a high enough level to be an at large team, based on who else got in.

2)Geography. Unlike schools on the east coast, we have about 5 schools in a nearly 400 mile radius to choose from, and 2 of those schools absolutely refuse to play us. It isn't easy. But, to me, that's what makes it fun. It shouldn't be easy. It should be hard. That's what will make us better.

:wsu_posters: :goshocks: :posterwu: :posterwsu:

[pogo]

I'd happily take fewer home games for home-and-homes with other schools in the same boat as us. I'd much rather see the Utah States, George Masons, and the like at home every other year than the Arkansas-Monty Pythons of the hoops world. One or two guarantee games against 250+ RPI is enough for me, lest RPI turn into RIP come tournament time.

This is the greatest post of all time. The only part I'm not on board with is the 250+ rpi I would rather see nothing more than 175 rpi. If you could have a gentlemans agreement among the non-bcs coaches to adhere to this I think the power conferences would begin to feel squeezed.

[60Shock]

I know it is complicated and frustrating and there are no easy answers, but this has been going on for years.

Budget the money, provide them with calendars for the next five years, and send our AD and Coach on at least 20 personal visits to a number of like schools and meet face-to-face with their fellow counterparts and work it out.

Appears we are on a Catch-22 scenario and can't get off. The reasoning for scheduling another year of numerous 250-350+ teams makes no sense whatsoever. It puts us in the same predicament which killed us this year. Slip once or twice in the conference and have one or more of the tournament teams we play, or Tulsa, not live up to expectation, and it's NIT all over again.

Just why are we paying good money to these schools to play us? Hell, as much as it would gnaw, wouldn't it be better to at least pay more money to like mid-major schools than pissing it away like we are now?

[vancedave56]

Marshall says he will schedule 4 guarantee games. That's 4 home games against 250+ RPI teams. More likely, 300+ RPI teams.

Where is this quote taken from?

[SubGod22]

Marshall says he will schedule 4 guarantee games. That's 4 home games against 250+ RPI teams. More likely, 300+ RPI teams.

Where is this quote taken from?

The 4 home games thing is accurate. The RPI is a crap shoot.

[Downtown Shocker Brown]

If you remember, we had a buy game against UAB. Coach will get the best he can get with the budget he has.

If you want games againg HIGHER class competition, its time to step up your DONATIONS to the athletic department. WILL you pay more to get these games here? Will you LEAD the way to putting us back on the map? TO get these games we need to increase our budget. BETTER teams want more money. GAMES can be bought, and we can bring any team to Koch, but it is up to us.

If you're confused, just read the highlighted words.

[Zardoz]

How much can we afford to spend on guarantee games? What will that buy us? and what will we have to give up to get those games?

We may have scheduled weaker this season due to lack of experience and needing to build confidence. With who is already on the schedule, and a delayed return game maybe we can budget some slightly better guarantee games? Maybe talking to say George Mason about an 1 and 1? Perhaps a certain Mr. Koch could help make that happen?

I'm sure we can do something to prevent cupcake month. But I maybe all wrong on my take on the situation? HCGM said he was ahead of schedule on the rebuild. If we get someone to help out DW at the PG, be it KM or a JUCO. We have Murry, Hatch, Durley, Stutz, Blair, Ellis and Kyles returning, you add EO and red-shirts Hamilton and Richardson. This has to be the deepest Shocker tean I have seen sin since Smithson 1 and maybe even better if you add a PG and Murry has played PG for us and Kyles has played PG in his past. Hey, we have a lot of very talented player and I'm just trying to give them all PT. When Hannah was suspended he was even looking at Hatch at the PG.

I want to see us go deep in the tourney this year, but I can't wait for next year!

[DUShock]

If you remember, we had a buy game against UAB. Coach will get the best he can get with the budget he has.

If you want games againg HIGHER class competition, its time to step up your DONATIONS to the athletic department. WILL you pay more to get these games here? Will you LEAD the way to putting us back on the map? TO get these games we need to increase our budget. BETTER teams want more money. GAMES can be bought, and we can bring any team to Koch, but it is up to us.

If you're confused, just read the highlighted words.

:good:

[forevershockerfan]

Coach Marshall seemed quite impressed with the improvement of next Seasons schedule on a recent Coaches Show thus far. He was not interested in a "1 and done scenario" with the Pitt's and Syracuse type teams at their house right now.

After listening to all of the ESPN garble yesterday about "bubble teams," I still don't understand how a team like Missouri gets right in but only 1 Valley Team again is even on the radar. Thus, it is good that we are improving our schedule. However, along the way, we Have to beat some of these teams as well. We have a solid team with several seasoned upper-classmen returning next Season. Shocker fans keep saying that next Season will be OUR year to shine and dance. To do so, we will need to continue to take care of business at home but also keep improving on the road and get some quality wins.

I still would like a quality 4 team tourney at our new Intrust Sports Arena. I'm sure KU and K-State would never come even though their fans would love and want it. Therefore, let's get 3 of the most top-notched teams we can find and get them in here while we are a Program on the rise.

Would it be better to have the Big Dance selections "computer generated?" They could put in all of the formula's and expectations in there and take out the possible politic angles? It reminds me of an experiment at College. They had several English Comp. teachers grade the same essays. There was several papers that had very similar grades. However, on a few essays, there was a disparity of an A and C. Yikes!!! You know FSF might get the C unless the instructors could dig on on a driveling, loquacious perspective. Then I would get an A+++++++ baybay.
Me keed--me keed!!!

[shocker3]

I listened a bit to 1410 this morning talk about the MVC being a 1 bid.


I know this is oversimplifying things, but I don't believe we are that far away. Staying away from the "are we good enough to be an at large" discussion, I offer the following thoughts:


1)The A-10 and MWC had dead weight much worse than the bottom feeders of the Valley. MUCH WORSE, and both of those conferences managed at larges (in fact 5 of the non power 8 came from those 2 conferences).



:wsu_posters: :goshocks: :posterwu: :posterwsu:

The MWC and MVC were actually very close in conference rpi this year.

The difference is that the MWC had four very good teams and 5 real bad teams. There was a very big gap between their 4 th place team and their 5 th place team (and all the rest). They had the separation. The Valley did not. We were much more balanced which made if very difficult to get more than 1 or 2 teams in the dance.

[GarH]

We need as many 1 and 1s with teams like Nevada, Utah St., New Mexico, etc. as we can get. Eliminate games with teams likely to have an RPI below 150 or 175.

[shocker3]

If you remember, we had a buy game against UAB. Coach will get the best he can get with the budget he has.

If you want games againg HIGHER class competition, its time to step up your DONATIONS to the athletic department. WILL you pay more to get these games here? Will you LEAD the way to putting us back on the map? TO get these games we need to increase our budget. BETTER teams want more money. GAMES can be bought, and we can bring any team to Koch, but it is up to us.

If you're confused, just read the highlighted words.

The bottom line is if we want a top 40 basketball program we need to spend the same kind of money that the other top programs do.

We need to be able to buy the better guarantee games.

Gene Stephenson has always understood this in baseball. That is why he always tries to keep in front of things in baseball. Bigger stadium, video board, in-door practice facility etc.

We let our basketball program slip in the 1990s. We need to support it today. :wsu_posters:

[ripemupshocks]

Hey. I know. Let's try to get a game with Iowa..............Oh, wait. Maybe not.

This scheduling thing is starting to look like a real crap shoot. I'm just glad we didn't play North Carolina this season. That could have kept us out of the NIT.

:lol:

[Steeleshocker]

How about the following teams for buy games?

Bucknell
University of Illinois-Chicago
Pepperdine
Tulane

Or maybe even these four...
Coastal Carolina
Belmont
Robert Morris
Rider

How do those sound to everyone?




















Now check the current RPI's (according to statsheet.com)
Bucknell = 258
University of Illinois-Chicago = 290
Pepperdine = 303
Tulane = 280

Coastal Carolina = 135
Belmont = 150
Robert Morris = 129
Rider = 147


I just do this to illustrate a point. It is incredibly challenging to predict who is going to be a good "buy" game. I'm willing to bet many people would respond as favorably to the first group (if not more so) than the second group. If not, it's likely you pay way too much attention to the national landscape during the season. But it is clear that one set would have a much greater positive effect on our RPI than the other grouping.

I have no idea how much any of those teams will cost in our scenario, but I am willing to bet HCGM can get some good ones on the schedule via buy games. They just may not look very good to us until the end of the season.

Remember how Louisiana Tech turned out a few years ago. We were all freaking out that they almost beat us in their own house in a buy game situation. Then they turned around and won a game in the Big Dance. I think we can get a plenty good schedule using 4 buy games. We just have to get a little lucky with who we buy.

edit: I also see no reason why any of these 8 teams would have a vastly different "purchase" price than the others. We should be able to get good games in our arena against without getting desperate and setting up 1 and 1's with every A-10 and C-USA team that comes along.

edit2: In addition, if our athletic department is continuing to operate in the black, then we should have some extra money to throw around at the buy games as well (but I don't know that more money is the answer in this situation).

[ShockerFever]

Substitute Northwestern State for Louisiana Tech.


I realize scheduling is a challenge and it's hard to predict far out in advance how teams will perform on your schedule.

But there are some OBVIOUS no-brainers:

1.) Do not schedule a SWAC opponent. Nuff said.
2.) Do not schedule D-1 transitionals. USC Upstate? I mean come on. That seemed easy enough.
3.) Mid-major conference. The conferences that are generally right there in the middle. Go after as many teams there as possible. You never know which ones could get hot and you gotta hope you don't pick the inevitable one that finishes dead last with a 250+ RPI.

Just some general basics. But you can generally pick up on senior-laden teams, a la Northwestern State, that are showing upward trends a year or two in advance..