MUScoop

It appears we will play all 16 teams once and two twice.  Who should we lose?

I think your math is a little off.  We can't play ourselves.  Still have three two plays next year as well.

Huh? We played Providence, Pittsburgh and Louisville twice this past year.

In my opinion, we should be playing DePaul and Notre Dame twice every year. I'd throw Pitt in there, too, since that's become quite the heated rivalry.

Even though Depaul is closer, I think ND, Louisville, and Pitt are MU's most heated rivalries now.

Quote from: TT13 on March 26, 2007, 06:42:48 PM
I think your math is a little off.  We can't play ourselves.  Still have three two plays next year as well.

You're right.  My math is always off.

So, do we lose two non conference games next year with the additional of two conference games?

Quote from: SoCalwarrior on March 26, 2007, 07:17:36 PM

Quote from: TT13 on March 26, 2007, 06:42:48 PM
I think your math is a little off.  We can't play ourselves.  Still have three two plays next year as well.

You're right.  My math is always off.

So, do we lose two non conference games next year with the additional of two conference games?

yes. 2 less non conference.

I voted Pittsburgh.  Give up one of two tough games vs. two winnable games with DU.  Talent to recruit from in Chicago with DePaul home and home, none in Pittsburgh since Mo, Ulice and Marc, if I remember correctly.   Much bigger alumni base in Chi.   TV money goes to the conference.

Whoa.. I didn't think about losing 2 OOC games, as we'll only be gaining 1 home (+1 away), and usually, our OOCs are homers. 

.. ya know .. why don't they bump the BE schedule even higher, like 24 games.  While there's some OOC "rivalry" games (example: MU/UW) .. the OOC schedules of many BE teams are just revenue generator cupcakes.   I'd think most teams would gladly swap a BE homer for an OOC homer vs. North Florida CC.

  Can anyone think of a good reason to not have even more conference games?  Seems to me, it'd be better competition, better games, higher attendance, better ratings, and lots more $$$.  What am I missing?

MU doesn't have a choice when it comes to their mirror games. 

Quote from: mu_hilltopper on March 26, 2007, 09:12:09 PM
Whoa.. I didn't think about losing 2 OOC games, as we'll only be gaining 1 home (+1 away), and usually, our OOCs are homers. 

.. ya know .. why don't they bump the BE schedule even higher, like 24 games.  While there's some OOC "rivalry" games (example: MU/UW) .. the OOC schedules of many BE teams are just revenue generator cupcakes.   I'd think most teams would gladly swap a BE homer for an OOC homer vs. North Florida CC.

  Can anyone think of a good reason to not have even more conference games?  Seems to me, it'd be better competition, better games, higher attendance, better ratings, and lots more $$$.  What am I missing?

that's easy.  less wins. 

I think you meant : less "wins".

Is a "win" over Morgan State a win if no one is in the forest to hear it?

Quote from: mu_hilltopper on March 27, 2007, 07:40:28 AM
I think you meant : less "wins".

Is a "win" over Morgan State a win if no one is in the forest to hear it?

The counter to that argument is whether Syracuse really gained anything by playing tougher teams like Drexel and Wichita State at home.

Ultimately, I'll let you win this one  ;)--however, there is a counter argument that unless we're getting an elite level made-for-TV game (i.e Arizona, Duke,  Kansas), we need to make sure we're undefeated in home non-conference games.  Mid-majors with a chip on their shoulder and something to prove (i.e ODU, Drexel, Wichata State) should be the last teams we play. 

So .. you think SU would have been dancing, had they not played (and lost) to Drex, WSU, and OKState, and instead, had 3 cupcake wins to their record?  Hmm.   

I'd propose SU would not have gotten in replacing those 3 "good losses" with 3 cupcake wins .. on the plus side, what SU "gained" from those 3 games was the opportunity to get 1 more quality win which might have made the difference between dancing and Not In Tournament.   (at least to the Selection Committee.)

Quote from: mu_hilltopper on March 27, 2007, 10:41:48 AM
So .. you think SU would have been dancing, had they not played (and lost) to Drex, WSU, and OKState, and instead, had 3 cupcake wins to their record?  Hmm.   

I'd propose SU would not have gotten in replacing those 3 "good losses" with 3 cupcake wins .. on the plus side, what SU "gained" from those 3 games was the opportunity to get 1 more quality win which might have made the difference between dancing and Not In Tournament.   (at least to the Selection Committee.)

Seriously, when does 25-7 overall in the Big East not deserve to dance regardless of SOS.

In the Pac 10, 25-7 while playing the #310 non-conference schedule gives you a #3 seed.

Compare Washington State to Syracuse.  WSU's non conference SOS was 310 (versus 122 for Syracuse).  Overall, WSU was 89th in SOS, Syracuse 46th. 

Both had some good wins in conference--WSU played (and won) two more conference games.

WSU had a 26 overall RPI versus 50 for Syracuse.  The only difference I can see is that Syracuse lost those three comparably tough non-conference home games, while WSU beat three more bunnies. 

Those home losses killed Syracuse from an RPI perspective.  They count as 1.4 losses each.

I really think 25-7 would have got Syracuse into the dance, even with a weaker schedule--I think that because it's exactly the record (against much weakere schedule, BTW) that got Wash State a 3 seed. 

DePaul, Notre Dame, Pitt or Louisville.