MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Otule's Glass Eye on July 30, 2018, 10:29:37 AM
-
10/30: Carroll University (Exhibition)
11/6: UMBC
11/10: Bethune Cookman (Preseason NIT)
11/17: Presbyterian
11/27: Charleston Southern
12/1: Kansas State
12/4: UTEP
12/8: Wisconsin
12/18: North Dakota
12/21: Buffalo
12/28: Southern
-
No road games?
I understand the title, wondering if we have any non con
-
No road games?
I understand the title, wondering if we have any non con
At Indiana, two games in NYC.
-
Respectable schedule but anything less than undefeated at home in non-conf would be disappointing.
-
Respectable schedule but anything less than undefeated at home in non-conf would be disappointing.
K-State is a top 10 team.
-
Go 4-2 against K-State, I4, UW, Buffalo, and NIT. Win everything else, and we'll be ranked and in very good shape come Big East play.
-
A quick look and is it 4 Saturday games and a couple of Friday night games? If so, great! I like it.
-
Buthune Cookman and Presbyterian are poor adds. Both project to be sub 300 teams. Buthune Cookman was given by the Preseason NIT, Marquette schedule Presbyterian.
North Dakota and Charleston Southern are meh. They should be in the mid 200s, and are fine buy games.
Looks like Marquette will have at least 3 sub 300 RPI teams on the non con schedule including Southern. Really just no excuse for having more than 1, and we've seen what these games can do to a team's RPI.
-
K-State is a top 10 team.
K-State had a nice tourney run and brings everyone back, but they were a middle of the pack Big 12 team who ended up a 9-seed in the NCAAT. If Marquette wants to be a solid tourney team this season, that's a home game they should win.
-
One positive...they're actually playing the 13 noncon games they're allowed to play this season for this first time in.....4 seasons?
-
Buthune Cookman and Presbyterian are poor adds. Both project to be sub 300 teams. Buthune Cookman was given by the Preseason NIT, Marquette schedule Presbyterian.
North Dakota and Charleston Southern are meh. They should be in the mid 200s, and are fine buy games.
Looks like Marquette will have at least 3 sub 300 RPI teams on the non con schedule including Southern. Really just no excuse for having more than 1, and we've seen what these games can do to a team's RPI.
Since this seems to happen every year in Wojo's tenure, can we say it pretty much fits his philosophy at this point? I'm not very well informed on who drives the scheduling of these games, but I'm assuming there must be an underlying philosophy as to why the schedule consists of teams like that. I'm assuming that a part of it is that the sub 300 teams are cheaper to bring in.
Other teams, even in our conference, don't tend to feast as much on the sub 300 teams. (I haven't looked at their schedules yet so maybe they are feasting on them this year, just that it seems to be a trend)
-
Since this seems to happen every year in Wojo's tenure, can we say it pretty much fits his philosophy at this point? I'm not very well informed on who drives the scheduling of these games, but I'm assuming there must be an underlying philosophy as to why the schedule consists of teams like that. I'm assuming that a part of it is that the sub 300 teams are cheaper to bring in.
Other teams, even in our conference, don't tend to feast as much on the sub 300 teams. (I haven't looked at their schedules yet so maybe they are feasting on them this year, just that it seems to be a trend)
Its always that way. Its about $$$$.
-
Since this seems to happen every year in Wojo's tenure, can we say it pretty much fits his philosophy at this point? I'm not very well informed on who drives the scheduling of these games, but I'm assuming there must be an underlying philosophy as to why the schedule consists of teams like that. I'm assuming that a part of it is that the sub 300 teams are cheaper to bring in.
Other teams, even in our conference, don't tend to feast as much on the sub 300 teams. (I haven't looked at their schedules yet so maybe they are feasting on them this year, just that it seems to be a trend)
Well Bethune Cookman was assigned to us, no control, and every year, Wojo (or whoever is in change of scheduling) has always had a 300 rpi game between Christmas and the start of conference play. Its a time when players aren't always the most focused and need a tune up game before more important and more difficult games come flying fast. Presbyterian is a poor choice, but the other two are either out of our control, or follow Wojo's trends in years past.
-
Buthune Cookman and Presbyterian are poor adds. Both project to be sub 300 teams. Buthune Cookman was given by the Preseason NIT, Marquette schedule Presbyterian.
North Dakota and Charleston Southern are meh. They should be in the mid 200s, and are fine buy games.
Looks like Marquette will have at least 3 sub 300 RPI teams on the non con schedule including Southern. Really just no excuse for having more than 1, and we've seen what these games can do to a team's RPI.
No choice on Cookman, preseason not game.
-
.
-
@MarquetteMBB
"Event operators unable to secure 4th home game, so Nov. 17 no longer part of Preseason NIT. #mubb received waiver to schedule on own."
I'm guessing there wasn't much to choose from this late in the year.
-
@MarquetteMBB
"Event operators unable to secure 4th home game, so Nov. 17 no longer part of Preseason NIT. #mubb received waiver to schedule on own."
I'm guessing there wasn't much to choose from this late in the year.
I was wondering if something like this had happened. Preseason NIT bracket announcement has been delayed, our schedule came out late, we got screwed. I kind of wish we just didn't schedule a game if the best option was Presbyterian.
-
No choice on Cookman, preseason not game.
If you actually read the post, I said that.
-
Talk about pickin the fly s#it out of the pepper guys!!
With this schedule MU will end the season with one of the strongest SOS in the nation. Yet some are complaining about BC , southern and presbyterian?
My goodness.
Pretty sad.
Nothing else really needs to be said, but here i go...every coach is going to want a few cup cakes in there. It gives a team a chance to stack some wins and gives the guys that might not get a ton of time at IU, or versus the kansas schools, etc an opportunity to get some extended run in real game situations.
Take the 300s out and add 200 or 100s in their place and MU ends up with one of the hardest schedules in the country by not a close margin. Why in the hell would they want to do that??? Get a grip ignorant complainers!!
-
Man I already said this but we got screwed by the Preseason NIT. We were supposed to get two games against top 200 type opponents. Instead we got one game against a possible sub-300 team and no second game leaving us to scramble at the last minute.
This could end being a rough schedule. We've got 6 really tough games, all of which are loseable (but also winnable too). Then you got 7 games that don't help your computer numbers, and 5 of them have potential to really hurt your computer numbers.
Presbyterian and Southern will be among the 25 worst teams in college basketball and will hurt no matter what. UTEP and Bethune Cookman could end up being sub 300. UTEP will finish near the bottom of their conference which really hurts RPI. Bethune Cookman might end up being okay. I think they will finish near the top of the MEAC and rack up a good W/L record. North Dakota will be mid 200s but look like they will be one of the bottom teams in the Summit. Charleston Southern and UMBC are the only two that I think are okay buy games and they don't help, they just don't hurt.
All of that being said, it won't matter as long as Marquette wins. Win the 7 lower games and go 4-2 in the 6 big games and they are in very good position. Even 3-3 and they should be solid. But if they go 2-4 or worse, will need to come up big in Big East play.
-
I am surprised that SOS wouldn't use the typical number of games that nearly every team plays in a season (let's say 30 just for grins), and if you play 32, for example, you drop the 2 lowest-rated teams before the SOS is calculated. Why should a team be penalized for playing extra games?
-
Man I already said this but we got screwed by the Preseason NIT. We were supposed to get two games against top 200 type opponents. Instead we got one game against a possible sub-300 team and no second game leaving us to scramble at the last minute.
This could end being a rough schedule. We've got 6 really tough games, all of which are loseable (but also winnable too). Then you got 6 games that don't help your computer numbers, and 5 of them have potential to really hurt your computer numbers.
Presbyterian and Southern will be among the 25 worst teams in college basketball and will hurt no matter what. UTEP and Bethune Cookman could end up being sub 300. UTEP will finish near the bottom of their conference which really hurts RPI. Bethune Cookman might end up being okay. I think they will finish near the top of the MEAC and rack up a good W/L record. North Dakota will be mid 200s but look like they will be one of the bottom teams in the Summit. Charleston Southern is the only one that I think is an okay buy game and they don't help, they just don't hurt.
Hand wringing in a vacuum. The very fact that we play 6? “loseable/winnable” games is 3-4-5 more than most Big 6 teams will play in non-con. Therefore, on a SOS basis we will be well ahead of them. Very strong, solid schedule.
-
Talk about pickin the fly s#it out of the pepper guys!!
With this schedule MU will end the season with one of the strongest SOS in the nation. Yet some are complaining about BC , southern and presbyterian?
My goodness.
Pretty sad.
Nothing else really needs to be said, but here i go...every coach is going to want a few cup cakes in there. It gives a team a chance to stack some wins and gives the guys that might not get a ton of time at IU, or versus the kansas schools, etc an opportunity to get some extended run in real game situations.
Take the 300s out and add 200 or 100s in their place and MU ends up with one of the hardest schedules in the country by not a close margin. Why in the hell would they want to do that??? Get a grip ignorant complainers!!
MSK, you may want to hold off against calling everyone ignorant complainers. Scheduling is an art and its not as simple as scheduling a bunch of good teams. As long as the committee uses outdated formulas like RPI, you have to be strategic with your non-conference scheduling. Setting up a schedule where half your games are so tough that you could lose them all and the other half is all fatty cupcakes can lead to an RPI disaster. From an RPI perspective, it is much better to schedule all middle of the pack teams then it is to schedule 6 from the top 50 and 7 from the bottom 150 (with 4 of them being in the bottom 50).
-
Hand wringing in a vacuum. The very fact that we play 6? “loseable/winnable” games is 3-4-5 more than most Big 6 teams will play in non-con. Therefore, on a SOS basis we will be well ahead of them. Very strong, solid schedule.
This isn't how SOS works. Scheduling #353 (which Southern has a good chance of being) does as much damage to your SOS as scheduling #1 does to help it. You can't just look at the top teams on the schedule and ignore the bottom ones. It SHOULD be the way you are describing but that's not how RPI and SOS work. Also, most Big 6 teams will play between 4-7 "loseable/winnable" games. I don't know of any Big 6 teams that will only play 1 or 2 loseable non-conference games and don't think there will be more than a couple who only play 3.
-
Talk about pickin the fly s#it out of the pepper guys!!
With this schedule MU will end the season with one of the strongest SOS in the nation. Yet some are complaining about BC , southern and presbyterian?
My goodness.
Pretty sad.
Nothing else really needs to be said, but here i go...every coach is going to want a few cup cakes in there. It gives a team a chance to stack some wins and gives the guys that might not get a ton of time at IU, or versus the kansas schools, etc an opportunity to get some extended run in real game situations.
Take the 300s out and add 200 or 100s in their place and MU ends up with one of the hardest schedules in the country by not a close margin. Why in the hell would they want to do that??? Get a grip ignorant complainers!!
lol, you calling people ignorant is so amazingly comical.
Fact of the matter is, a 175-275 team is still a cupcake that MU will easily handle at home. Playing some of the worst teams in the NCAA can really skew computer numbers, and it has cost MU in recent seasons. It is avoidable, and should be avoided.
All together, I agree, it is a solid schedule.
-
Reminds me a little bit of the 13-14 schedule, where there were 6 top 50 opponents and 7 from the garbage heap (including 4 sub-300s). Pomeroy non-conference SOS rank ended up at 205.
This is nowhere near the self-inflicted kneecapping of 15-16, but still not totally great.
-
This isn't how SOS works. Scheduling #353 (which Southern has a good chance of being) does as much damage to your SOS as scheduling #1 does to help it. You can't just look at the top teams on the schedule and ignore the bottom ones. It SHOULD be the way you are describing but that's not how RPI and SOS work. Also, most Big 6 teams will play between 4-7 "loseable/winnable" games. I don't know of any Big 6 teams that will only play 1 or 2 loseable non-conference games and don't think there will be more than a couple who only play 3.
I fully know how it works. And u clearly over estimate the number of top games other conferences teams play. Last year our 3rd and 4th toughest non con games were vermont n georgia. And we also played some 335 type teams yet our sos ended up as 25th hardest in the country. Once again picking the fly S#it out of the pepper. Same complaints and hand weinging last year and we had #25. Schedule is much harder this year and people still complain. Schedule is very good. SOS is the least of this teams concerns. One could easily argue they didnt need to make it this hard. Many coaches would look at it and be glad its not theirs
-
Looks like we really got affected by that 4th NIT game that couldn't get scheduled. Anyone have any info on that?
-
I fully know how it works. And u clearly over estimate the number of top games other conferences teams play.
Show me. Show me what Big 6 programs scheduled 1 or 2 losable games last season as you claim. I can think of Georgetown and that's it. From the Big East last year:
Butler: 6 tough, 2 sub-300
Creighton: 5 tough, 3 sub-300
DePaul: 5 tough, 3 sub-300
Georgetown: 1 tough, 5 sub-300
Seton Hall: 7 tough, 0 sub-300
Providence: 7 tough, 2 sub-300
St. John's: 7 tough, 1 sub-300
Villanova: 5 tough, 2 sub-300
Xavier: 8 tough, 0 sub-300
Guess who had the toughest non-conference SOS? Villanova, Their non-conference SOS was #12, despite having less tough games than anyone else in conference (besides Georgetown's embarrassment of a schedule). How did they do it? Strategically scheduling a whole bunch of middle of the pack teams to make their computer numbers stronger.
Last year our 3rd and 4th toughest non con games were vermont n georgia. And we also played some 335 type teams yet our sos ended up as 25th hardest in the country. Once again picking the fly S#it out of the pepper. Same complaints and hand weinging last year and we had #25. Schedule is much harder this year and people still complain. Schedule is very good. SOS is the least of this teams concerns. One could easily argue they didnt need to make it this hard. Many coaches would look at it and be glad its not theirs
Marquette did not end up with the #25 SOS last season, it was #30. It was also #105 in non-conference SOS. It also ended with an RPI of 60 which is the much more important number. And we scheduled 7 losable games (Purdue, VCU, Wichita State, LSU, Georgia, Vermont, and @Wisconsin). Now the 6 this year are significantly better than 7 last year, but last year we only had two bad opponents dragging us down (Chicago State and American). This year we could have 4 sub 300 opponents (BC, UTEP, Presbyterian, and Southern). Last year's schedule was better from an RPI perspective. We have a much better team this year so hopefully it doesn't matter. As long as we go 10-3 or better in the non-conference it should be a non-issue.
-
Show me. Show me what Big 6 programs scheduled 1 or 2 losable games last season as you claim. I can think of Georgetown and that's it. From the Big East last year:
Butler: 6 tough, 2 sub-300
Creighton: 5 tough, 3 sub-300
DePaul: 5 tough, 3 sub-300
Georgetown: 1 tough, 5 sub-300
Seton Hall: 7 tough, 0 sub-300
Providence: 7 tough, 2 sub-300
St. John's: 7 tough, 1 sub-300
Villanova: 5 tough, 2 sub-300
Xavier: 8 tough, 0 sub-300
Guess who had the toughest non-conference SOS? Villanova, Their non-conference SOS was #12, despite having less tough games than anyone else in conference (besides Georgetown's embarrassment of a schedule). How did they do it? Strategically scheduling a whole bunch of middle of the pack teams to make their computer numbers stronger.
Marquette did not end up with the #25 SOS last season, it was #30. It was also #105 in non-conference SOS. It also ended with an RPI of 60 which is the much more important number. And we scheduled 7 losable games (Purdue, VCU, Wichita State, LSU, Georgia, Vermont, and @Wisconsin). Now the 6 this year are significantly better than 7 last year, but last year we only had two bad opponents dragging us down (Chicago State and American). This year we could have 4 sub 300 opponents (BC, UTEP, Presbyterian, and Southern). Last year's schedule was better from an RPI perspective. We have a much better team this year so hopefully it doesn't matter. As long as we go 10-3 or better in the non-conference it should be a non-issue.
You are 100% correct TAMU.
-
Since its come up. 2017 SOS from CBS and TR
https://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/rankings/sos
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other
Question: How can the two services have discrepancies as large as they do? MU from 31 to 25 isn't huge but Butler from 8 to 20 or Providence from 29 to 7?
-
You are 100% correct TAMU.
As usual. Great info, TAMU.
MU has the making of a fantastic schedule, but the last handful of games announced today are pretty disappointing.
This team should be good enough that computer numbers aren't going to matter. But if we get off to a slower start than we we'd like 4-5 non-con losses, and end up 9-9 or 10-8 in the Big East, we're going to be kicking ourselves again for playing a handful of terrible teams that will undoubtedly hurt our numbers.
-
You guys worry too much. We're fine.
-
Since its come up. 2017 SOS from CBS and TR
https://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/rankings/sos
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other
Question: How can the two services have discrepancies as large as they do? MU from 31 to 25 isn't huge but Butler from 8 to 20 or Providence from 29 to 7?
Different metrics. RPI is based more on opponents’ win/loss records and while I’m not certain what Team Rankings is about, I’d guess theirs is derived from team efficiency stats.
Also, in PC’s case, even though it’s a 22-spot gap between the two, overall that’s only a 6% difference considering there are ~350 D1 teams.
-
You guys worry too much. We're fine.
Exactly what i said
-
Every year I track the Big East None Conference games closely . I like to see as many Big East teams as possible with double digit non conference victories . That sets everyone up for success.
If the rest of the conference does well, I feel if we can get double digit in Non conference and double digit conference wins we are in good position.
-
Exactly what i said
Glow said it better
-
Guess who had the toughest non-conference SOS? Villanova, Their non-conference SOS was #12, despite having less tough games than anyone else in conference (besides Georgetown's embarrassment of a schedule). How did they do it? Strategically scheduling a whole bunch of middle of the pack teams to make their computer numbers stronger.
Errr... for Selection Sunday NonConf SOS I had Nova at #46... which was not the "best" of BEast teams.
(Their overall SOS was #12).
-
Errr... for Selection Sunday NonConf SOS I had Nova at #46... which was not the "best" of BEast teams.
(Their overall SOS was #12).
I use Warren Nolan which I have found to usually be accurate. According to that site Nova's overall SOS was #5 and non-conference was #12. Now what I'm not sure and may have missed was if Warren Nolan factors the postseason into those numbers.
-
I use Warren Nolan which I have found to usually be accurate. According to that site Nova's overall SOS was #5 and non-conference was #12. Now what I'm not sure and may have missed was if Warren Nolan factors the postseason into those numbers.
Those weren’t their postseason #’s either. But, closer. Obviously using postseason wouldn’t make sense in the context of this thread’s discussion.
(My source: NCAA.com reports — which, btw I have found errors on before and had them fix.. but in this case, perhaps your source is measuring something other than RPI NC SOS)
-
Bethune Cookman isn't as bad as people are making it out to be. They might be sub-300, but look at their conference opponents. T-Rank projects them with a winning conference record and the 5th best team in their conference. Is it what I wanted from the NIT Tip-Off? Definitely not, but they project to be a plus for RPI if the other teams in their league are worse than they are.
We go through this every year, but it bears repeating. Opponent RPI rank has nothing to do with your own RPI rank. Low rank teams with winning records can be better than higher rank teams with losing records.
Presbyterian is a disappointment. No question about it, especially because the PNIT did a lot better for the other teams in there.
Southern has won double digit games in conference 7 years running, North Dakota, Charleston Southern, and UTEP should be okay. Not as good as it could be, but also not nearly as bad as some are making it out to be.
-
Southern has won double digit games in conference 7 years running, North Dakota, Charleston Southern, and UTEP should be okay. Not as good as it could be, but also not nearly as bad as some are making it out to be.
Gotta look at what those teams have coming back. Southern went through a coaching change and lost their entire starting lineup and most of their recruiting class. Despite being in the SWAC they will likely finish at the bottom of their conference. UTEP also went through a coaching change and lost their entire recruiting class and will likely finish at the bottom of CUSA. North Dakota is moving up from the Big Sky to the Summit this season and looks like they will finish at the bottom of their new conference.
-
Bethune Cookman isn't as bad as people are making it out to be. They might be sub-300, but look at their conference opponents. T-Rank projects them with a winning conference record and the 5th best team in their conference. Is it what I wanted from the NIT Tip-Off? Definitely not, but they project to be a plus for RPI if the other teams in their league are worse than they are.
We go through this every year, but it bears repeating. Opponent RPI rank has nothing to do with your own RPI rank. Low rank teams with winning records can be better than higher rank teams with losing records.
Presbyterian is a disappointment. No question about it, especially because the PNIT did a lot better for the other teams in there.
Southern has won double digit games in conference 7 years running, North Dakota, Charleston Southern, and UTEP should be okay. Not as good as it could be, but also not nearly as bad as some are making it out to be.
Brew you know nothing that you are talking about. TAMU is the academic that is smarter than everyone else, if you dont believe me just ask him.
You are correct our schedule is more than fine. We will again have one of the better SOS in the country when its all said and done. TAMU making a mountain out of a molehill, win 21 total games n 10 in BE n SOS no matter
-
Gotta look at what those teams have coming back. Southern went through a coaching change and lost their entire starting lineup and most of their recruiting class. Despite being in the SWAC they will likely finish at the bottom of their conference. UTEP also went through a coaching change and lost their entire recruiting class and will likely finish at the bottom of CUSA. North Dakota is moving up from the Big Sky to the Summit this season and looks like they will finish at the bottom of their new conference.
I do that every year, every time a new opponent is announced. Southern went the JUCO route because of those losses. I mentioned that weeks ago and think they have a couple additions that will contribute immediately.
I like Rodney Terry as a coach and he kept the four most important players at UTEP that didn't graduate. Admittedly, they will be much better in 2019-20 once their transfers are eligible. This year will largely come down to how they adjust to the new system and how well they schedule in non-conference. It won't all be Arizona and Marquette.
North Dakota projects as a middle of the league team in the Summit. Crandall is a big loss but they still return 3 starters and 2 reserves that played close to starter minutes.
I don't think it's as bad as you make it out to be. Presbyterian is a gut punch, but this doesn't look like the days of 5-6 sub-300 opponents. More like 2-3 with another few in the 200-275 range. It's not ideal, but it's not a disaster either.
-
Brew you know nothing that you are talking about. TAMU is the academic that is smarter than everyone else, if you dont believe me just ask him.
You are correct our schedule is more than fine. We will again have one of the better SOS in the country when its all said and done. TAMU making a mountain out of a molehill, win 21 total games n 10 in BE n SOS no matter
The only mountain anyone has made is how big of a deal you made someone disagreeing with you out to be.
Your last sentence is correct. Of course to win 21 total games with 10 in the Big East would required us to go 11-2 in our non-con. I think we can do that but its not a given. If we were to go say 9-4 in non-con, with our best wins coming against a weak Louisville squad and Buffalo.....we would have to do some major damage in conference to make up for it. Damage we wouldn't have to do if we had better cupcakes on the schedule.
Again, no one saying this is an awful schedule or that we won't make the tournament because of it. Just pointing out that it presents some potential challenges to computer numbers.
-
I do that every year, every time a new opponent is announced. Southern went the JUCO route because of those losses. I mentioned that weeks ago and think they have a couple additions that will contribute immediately.
I like Rodney Terry as a coach and he kept the four most important players at UTEP that didn't graduate. Admittedly, they will be much better in 2019-20 once their transfers are eligible. This year will largely come down to how they adjust to the new system and how well they schedule in non-conference. It won't all be Arizona and Marquette.
North Dakota projects as a middle of the league team in the Summit. Crandall is a big loss but they still return 3 starters and 2 reserves that played close to starter minutes.
I don't think it's as bad as you make it out to be. Presbyterian is a gut punch, but this doesn't look like the days of 5-6 sub-300 opponents. More like 2-3 with another few in the 200-275 range. It's not ideal, but it's not a disaster either.
Sorry Brew, check again. Southern lost a bunch of commits due to the coaching change. They are only bringing in two JUCOs, one of whom wasn't even a starter at the JUCO level, a two star freshman, and a grad transfer who averaged 1.3 points a game for Morgan State. T-ranks projects them as the #352 team in the nation...out of 353.
UTEP lost 7/11 of their rotation players from a team that won 10 games and replaces them with a bunch of freshman who aren't ranked by major recruiting services. They literally only have 8 scholarship players available, half of them freshmen. It's going to be a rough year for them.
North Dakota may be okay but they only won 12 games last season against worse competition in the Big Sky. Only two teams in the summit finished below them in KenPom last season (Western Illinois and Omaha) and I think its likely they stay towards the bottom. Less sure on that one though, sometimes losing a high usage player like Crandall can lead to other players stepping up in surprising ways.
-
UTEP lost 4 guys to graduation. No coach was bringing them back. The other three were the back end of that rotation. Gilyard, Thomas, Osborne, and Magee were the four players eligible to return that played the most on last year's team. So while they don't have experienced depth, most of their starting lineup will be returning players that played significant minutes.
And it sounds like glass half empty when you cite T-Rank to justify why Southern will be bad but ignore where T-Rank has North Dakota.
-
You know how MU can easily improve their RPI, regardless of their schedule?? Win your home games(and don't lose to DePaul)...it's really that simple. That's a big reason their RPI was as low as it was last year, regardless of how tough their Non con schedule ended up being. For RPI purposes, losing at home KILLS you, regardless if it's Nova, or Bethune Cookman...It's time MU regains a true home court advantage, something that has been missing under Wojo.
-
North Dakota projects as a middle of the league team in the Summit.
As a side note, I didn't realize until reading this sentence that North Dakota moved from the Big Sky to the Summit. Makes a lot of sense for them.
-
You know how MU can easily improve their RPI, regardless of their schedule?? Win your home games(and don't lose to DePaul)...it's really that simple. That's a big reason their RPI was as low as it was last year, regardless of how tough their Non con schedule ended up being. For RPI purposes, losing at home KILLS you, regardless if it's Nova, or Bethune Cookman...It's time MU regains a true home court advantage, something that has been missing under Wojo.
Ultimately this is correct. If this season comes down to strength of schedule to determine if they make the tournament, it is ultimately a disappointment. And yeah I know that it also comes into play with seeding, but I don't think we are talking about huge swings in seeding here.
My expectation is that they go undefeated at home non conference. A KSU loss would be understandable, but a disappointment. MU should win the rest.
-
UTEP lost 4 guys to graduation. No coach was bringing them back. The other three were the back end of that rotation. Gilyard, Thomas, Osborne, and Magee were the four players eligible to return that played the most on last year's team. So while they don't have experienced depth, most of their starting lineup will be returning players that played significant minutes.
And it sounds like glass half empty when you cite T-Rank to justify why Southern will be bad but ignore where T-Rank has North Dakota.
UTEP didn't lose returning players but they did lose their recruiting class which contained a pair of top 200 type players. That's why earlier in this thread I said UTEP wouldn't be that bad but then reevaluated when I took a closer look at their roster.
And I wasn't ignoring North Dakota's T-Rank. I said above that I expect them to finish 7/9 in the Summit and T-Rank projects 6/9 with #7 and #8 being very close to them.
-
Let's have the North Dakota game as turn back the clock night. Fighting Sioux vs Warriors!
-
Let's have the North Dakota game as turn back the clock night. Fighting Sioux vs Warriors!
Yeah let's not do that.
-
When is the gol dern PNIT NYC games getting released!?
-
Charleston, SC (Charleston Southern) and Daytona Beach (B-C) would be nice road visits.
-
I use Warren Nolan which I have found to usually be accurate. According to that site Nova's overall SOS was #5 and non-conference was #12. Now what I'm not sure and may have missed was if Warren Nolan factors the postseason into those numbers.
I believe Warren Nolan continues calculating during post season--note they show our RPI and SOS based on record of 21-14, which includes our NIT games.
CBS and Realtime RPI both show an SOS of 25 based on a record of 19-13, which is through the conference tournament but before post season.
-
Ultimately this is correct. If this season comes down to strength of schedule to determine if they make the tournament, it is ultimately a disappointment. And yeah I know that it also comes into play with seeding, but I don't think we are talking about huge swings in seeding here.
My expectation is that they go undefeated at home non conference. A KSU loss would be understandable, but a disappointment. MU should win the rest.
Agreed completely.
From a control perspective in terms of buy games, there's one real home run (Buffalo) and two disappointments (Southern and Presbyterian). North Dakota, UTEP, and Charleston Southern are okay games. They'll all likely win double digit D1 games on the season, which for me is more of a barometer of a good buy than strictly going by rankings.
I imagine we were somewhat forced into Presbyterian because of the NIT Tip-Off. It could be worse, they should get their best player back; the Blue Hose were 5-8 in D1 games before Francois Lewis was declared ineligible and 3-13 after. Hopefully their new coach does a better job than the last guy who had them sub-325 in Pomeroy his last 5 years.
Southern...we'll see. In recent history, they've been a decent buy team. Sean Woods, their new coach, has some character questions but has been a successful head coach at every stop.
The 7 softest home games won't make or break the schedule. Win them all and go at least 3-3 in the rest and we'll be fine.
-
You know how MU can easily improve their RPI, regardless of their schedule?? Win your home games(and don't lose to DePaul)...it's really that simple. That's a big reason their RPI was as low as it was last year, regardless of how tough their Non con schedule ended up being. For RPI purposes, losing at home KILLS you, regardless if it's Nova, or Bethune Cookman...It's time MU regains a true home court advantage, something that has been missing under Wojo.
The new arena will help tremendously. Been saying it fir 30 years, but the BC suuuuuucked!! Was a nice venue n when there were 17k plus fans it was great. But the other 95% of tge time provided very little homecourt advantage. Hopefully the FF provides that true home court advantage that other schools enjoy.
-
Yeah let's not do that.
How about the Fighting Sue vs. the Worriers?
-
How about the Fighting Sue vs. the Worriers?
The Marquette Worriers would be an appropriate Scoop nickname.
-
You know how MU can easily improve their RPI, regardless of their schedule?? Win your home games(and don't lose to DePaul)...it's really that simple. That's a big reason their RPI was as low as it was last year, regardless of how tough their Non con schedule ended up being. For RPI purposes, losing at home KILLS you, regardless if it's Nova, or Bethune Cookman...It's time MU regains a true home court advantage, something that has been missing under Wojo.
#FakeNews
#Lies
This is false. It depends on the specifics. If last year we had one more game and it was a loss at home to Nova, it would not have killed us.. rather it would have been essentially a wash to our RPI.
-
#FakeNews
#Lies
This is false. It depends on the specifics. If last year we had one more game and it was a loss at home to Nova, it would not have killed us.. rather it would have been essentially a wash to our RPI.
True re the likes of Nova and Xavier last season. Though, having multiple home losses certainly is not a good recipe for a solid RPI.....
-
True re the likes of Nova and Xavier last season. Though, having multiple home losses certainly is not a good recipe for a solid RPI.....
This exactly...you simply cannot lose 3-5 home games every year, that will kill your RPI, plain and simple.
-
This exactly...you simply cannot lose 3-5 home games every year, that will kill your RPI, plain and simple.
I agree with this 100%. In addition to this had we beat either Villanova or Xavier we would of had the quality win we needed to get a bid. The Villanova win is what got us in the year before.
-
This exactly...you simply cannot lose 3-5 home games every year, that will kill your RPI, plain and simple.
...unless those losses are to top teams, then it will either be no impact or can even benefit your RPI. Of course winning against those top teams is much better for your RPI but losing does not kill it.
If teams are as good as they are expected to be, losing to Villanova or Kansas State at home will not kill our RPI. Buffalo possibly too, they should be an RPI gold mine because they should go undefeated in the MAC. Everyone else? Probably hurts our RPI.
-
...unless those losses are to top teams, then it will either be no impact or can even benefit your RPI. Of course winning against those top teams is much better for your RPI but losing does not kill it.
If teams are as good as they are expected to be, losing to Villanova or Kansas State at home will not kill our RPI. Buffalo possibly too, they should be an RPI gold mine because they should go undefeated in the MAC. Everyone else? Probably hurts our RPI.
Should we still be looking at RPI? Last year the NCAA started using quadrants (?) or something like that. Basically they look at your records against quadrant 1, quadrant 2. Quadrant 3 and 4 wins only matter, because you need to avoid bad losses. Villanova and Kansas St may be our only quadrant 1 home games, which I believe have to be top 25 teams. Road game quadrant 1, I believe have to be top 50 teams. I am not sure how neutral court games fit in. Feel free to correct me on this. We will have at least one quadrant 1 game in NIT. Maybe 6 conference road games and Indiana. These are the games that matter the most. 22-9 with all quadrant 1 losses would make me very nervous at bid time. Basically whether an opponent has a 200 rpi or 300 rpi does not matter much. You simply cannot lose to either.
-
Should we still be looking at RPI? Last year the NCAA started using quadrants (?) or something like that. Basically they look at your records against quadrant 1, quadrant 2. Quadrant 3 and 4 wins only matter, because you need to avoid bad losses. Villanova and Kansas St may be our only quadrant 1 home games, which I believe have to be top 25 teams. Road game quadrant 1, I believe have to be top 50 teams. I am not sure how neutral court games fit in. Feel free to correct me on this.
Yeah, QUADRANTS BASED ON RPI. sheesh. And no, your understanding of the home/road splits are off. Yikes.
-
Should we still be looking at RPI? Last year the NCAA started using quadrants (?) or something like that. Basically they look at your records against quadrant 1, quadrant 2. Quadrant 3 and 4 wins only matter, because you need to avoid bad losses. Villanova and Kansas St may be our only quadrant 1 home games, which I believe have to be top 25 teams. Road game quadrant 1, I believe have to be top 50 teams. I am not sure how neutral court games fit in. Feel free to correct me on this. We will have at least one quadrant 1 game in NIT. Maybe 6 conference road games and Indiana. These are the games that matter the most. 22-9 with all quadrant 1 losses would make me very nervous at bid time. Basically whether an opponent has a 200 rpi or 300 rpi does not matter much. You simply cannot lose to either.
Except the quadrant system was based on RPI. So until they change their metric, it still matters. And while a sub-160 home loss is the same regarding quadrants, the committee will notice the difference between Rutgers and Grambling.
-
Should we still be looking at RPI? Last year the NCAA started using quadrants (?) or something like that. Basically they look at your records against quadrant 1, quadrant 2. Quadrant 3 and 4 wins only matter, because you need to avoid bad losses. Villanova and Kansas St may be our only quadrant 1 home games, which I believe have to be top 25 teams. Road game quadrant 1, I believe have to be top 50 teams. I am not sure how neutral court games fit in. Feel free to correct me on this. We will have at least one quadrant 1 game in NIT. Maybe 6 conference road games and Indiana. These are the games that matter the most. 22-9 with all quadrant 1 losses would make me very nervous at bid time. Basically whether an opponent has a 200 rpi or 300 rpi does not matter much. You simply cannot lose to either.
What quadrant a team falls into depends on their RPI and where the game was played. RPI is still heavily used by the committee as well.
The quadrants are broken down like this:
Quad 1: H (1-30) N (1-50) A (1-75)
Quad 2: H (31-75) N (51-100) A (76-135)
Quad 3: H (76-160) N (101-200) A (136-240)
Quad 4: H (161-353) N (201-353) A (241-353)
-
How many times are we playing SH?
-
Except the quadrant system was based on RPI. So until they change their metric, it still matters. And while a sub-160 home loss is the same regarding quadrants, the committee will notice the difference between Rutgers and Grambling.
However, I was thinking more in line with the argument whether a team on our schedule has an RPI of 280 or 330. I do not think it really matters. Whether we play a 280 or 330 team does not effect our game against Villanova. Villanova will be a quadrant 1 game no matter who else we are playing. The same goes for our other quadrant 1 opponents. A higher RPI for us may make us a quadrant 1 opponent for them, but does a 280 vs. 330 opponent really matter that much. Look at it this way assuming we beat the four worse teams on our schedule is the committee going to be impressed that we beat four teams in the 280's vs. four teams in the 300's. Given no change in the other games, we may have a higher RPI having beaten the four 280 teams, but in the end is the quadrant 1 games that are going to matter. That is the point I am trying to make. Whether a team on our schedule is somewhat above or bellow 300th in the end does not matter.
-
However, I was thinking more in line with the argument whether a team on our schedule has an RPI of 280 or 330. I do not think it really matters. Whether we play a 280 or 330 team does not effect our game against Villanova. Villanova will be a quadrant 1 game no matter who else we are playing. The same goes for our other quadrant 1 opponents. A higher RPI for us may make us a quadrant 1 opponent for them, but does a 280 vs. 330 opponent really matter that much. Look at it this way assuming we beat the four worse teams on our schedule is the committee going to be impressed that we beat four teams in the 280's vs. four teams in the 300's. Given no change in the other games, we may have a higher RPI having beaten the four 280 teams, but in the end is the quadrant 1 games that are going to matter. That is the point I am trying to make. Whether a team on our schedule is somewhat above or bellow 300th in the end does not matter.
I get what you’re asserting but I think it’s largely baseless. You’re asserting quadrants matter a ton.
That said, it indeed does not matter if an opp is in the 280s or 300s for a completely different reason — that reason is that your opponent’s RPI doesn’t directly impact your RPI... playing #305 can be better for your RPI than playing #285.
-
I get what you’re asserting but I think it’s largely baseless. You’re asserting quadrants matter a ton.
That said, it indeed does not matter if an opp is in the 280s or 300s for a completely different reason — that reason is that your opponent’s RPI doesn’t directly impact your RPI... playing #305 can be better for your RPI than playing #285.
You know if RPI is still in effect, we'll be making this same type of post in 12 months. ;D
-
However, I was thinking more in line with the argument whether a team on our schedule has an RPI of 280 or 330. I do not think it really matters. Whether we play a 280 or 330 team does not effect our game against Villanova. Villanova will be a quadrant 1 game no matter who else we are playing. The same goes for our other quadrant 1 opponents. A higher RPI for us may make us a quadrant 1 opponent for them, but does a 280 vs. 330 opponent really matter that much. Look at it this way assuming we beat the four worse teams on our schedule is the committee going to be impressed that we beat four teams in the 280's vs. four teams in the 300's. Given no change in the other games, we may have a higher RPI having beaten the four 280 teams, but in the end is the quadrant 1 games that are going to matter. That is the point I am trying to make. Whether a team on our schedule is somewhat above or bellow 300th in the end does not matter.
First, what Jay Bee said.
Second, while the quadrants matter, a team's individual RPI still matters.
Third, the committee isn't blind when it comes to quadrants. I think you are mostly right about the committee valuing all Quad 4 victories equally, I don't think the same can be said of of the other quadrants. If you just look through the lens of the quadrants, a road win against the #75 team is equal to a road win against the #1 team....but obviously one is much more significant than the other. Marquette's Q1 record (3-8) last season was actually pretty solid compared to other bubble teams, but our Q1 wins were not equal to other teams' Q1 wins. Winning at #31 Seton Hall, #36 Providence, and #50 Creighton just isn't as sexy as say winning vs. #12 Kentucky, at #17 Arizona, and at #37 USC. That's one of the reasons why UCLA was dancing and we were in the NIT.
-
Respectable schedule but anything less than undefeated at home in non-conf would be disappointing.
Sorry. Not a respectable schedule. It is a pad your record schedule.
-
Sorry. Not a respectable schedule. It is a pad your record schedule.
It's perfectly respectable, don't be a willie warrior about it.
-
It's perfectly respectable, don't be a willie warrior about it.
Not only respectable, but a bit dangerous imo. Get through it with a very good record & rightful praise shall be due.
-
It depends on how you define a respectable schedule. Maybe its is respectable for your beloved RPI calculations. However, as a fan paying for season tickets the non-conference schedule sucks. The three most exciting games are not home games. The only two home games to get excited about are Kansas St and UW. The rest is not going to make people want to buy tickets. There is not a great home court advantage, if the arena is half empty. Maybe that is why I was cringing as you guys were debating the RPI values of the worst teams on this schedule.
-
It depends on how you define a respectable schedule. Maybe its is respectable for your beloved RPI calculations. However, as a fan paying for season tickets the non-conference schedule sucks. The three most exciting games are not home games. The only two home games to get excited about are Kansas St and UW. The rest is not going to make people want to buy tickets. There is not a great home court advantage, if the arena is half empty. Maybe that is why I was cringing as you guys were debating the RPI values of the worst teams on this schedule.
The new stadium should be a pretty big draw all season. I would hope that fans don't just come for the home opener, decide whether or not they like the forum, and then don't come back. Some of the midweek buy games may be a bit empty, but as stated earlier, a lot of non conference games will be Friday night's or Saturdays. Should be a healthy crowd for those regardless of the opponent.
Also, winning cures all. If we end up being as good as some project, people will show up regardless of who we're beating. I'm not too worried about attendance for next year.
-
My desire to win the home games has nothing to do with RPI or the tournament.
Good (and great) programs win their home games. Period.
-
Maybe that is why I was cringing as you guys were debating the RPI values of the worst teams on this schedule.
Let’s be clear: you didn’t cringe. You just made up false claims that we’re not close to being truthful. If you don’t like the NC Home schedule, just say it. Don’t make stuff up, bud.
-
It depends on how you define a respectable schedule. Maybe its is respectable for your beloved RPI calculations. However, as a fan paying for season tickets the non-conference schedule sucks. The three most exciting games are not home games. The only two home games to get excited about are Kansas St and UW. The rest is not going to make people want to buy tickets. There is not a great home court advantage, if the arena is half empty. Maybe that is why I was cringing as you guys were debating the RPI values of the worst teams on this schedule.
I have a thought.
Instead of bitching every year about the schedule, just stop buying tickets. The schedule is going to be what it is roughly every year. You aren’t going to control that. You can control if you keep paying for it.
-
It depends on how you define a respectable schedule. Maybe its is respectable for your beloved RPI calculations. However, as a fan paying for season tickets the non-conference schedule sucks. The three most exciting games are not home games. The only two home games to get excited about are Kansas St and UW. The rest is not going to make people want to buy tickets. There is not a great home court advantage, if the arena is half empty. Maybe that is why I was cringing as you guys were debating the RPI values of the worst teams on this schedule.
Hi. Welcome to college basketball. Pretty much since Thanksgiving tournaments became vogue this is what non-conference scheduling has become. You get your big rivalry game (Wisconsin), one big name (Kansas State), and a whole bunch of cupcakes. And if your lucky, one of your cupcakes will be a quality team...just not a sexy name (Buffalo). Very few teams do anything different with their home non-conference schedule.
Just to prove it, here are are the home non-conference games for the rest of the Big East:
Butler (18-19): 1 big name (Ole Miss) 6 cupcakes
Creighton (17-18): 1 big rivalry (Nebraska), 8 cupcakes (including a D2 team)
DePaul (17-18): 1 big rivalry (Northwestern), 1 big name (Notre Dame), 5 cupcakes
Georgetown (17-18): 1 big rivalry (Syracuse), 9 cucpcakes
Providence (17-18): 1 big rivalry (Boston College), 2 big names (Minnesota, Houston), 6 cupcakes
Seton Hall (17-18): 2 big names (Indiana, VCU), 6 cupcakes
St. John's (17-18): 2 big names (Nebraska, Duke) 5 cupcakes (including a D2 team)
Villanova (18-19): 1 big name (Michigan), 2 big rivalries (Temple, St. Joe's), 3 cupcakes
Xavier (18-19): 1 big name (Wisconsin), 7 cupcakes
As you can see, only two teams played more than two "big names". Providence...and Houston was good last season but I don't know how big a name they are. Buffalo is in a similar position for us this year. And Villanova...and their two rivalry games are against lower tier opponents.
The schedule you seem to be hoping for is not possible in today's environment. Everyone does their biggest games on neutral courts and eats cupcakes at home.
-
Hi. Welcome to college basketball. Pretty much since Thanksgiving tournaments became vogue this is what non-conference scheduling has become. You get your big rivalry game (Wisconsin), one big name (Kansas State), and a whole bunch of cupcakes. And if your lucky, one of your cupcakes will be a quality team...just not a sexy name (Buffalo). Very few teams do anything different with their home non-conference schedule.
Just to prove it, here are are the home non-conference games for the rest of the Big East:
Butler (18-19): 1 big name (Ole Miss) 6 cupcakes
Creighton (17-18): 1 big rivalry (Nebraska), 8 cupcakes (including a D2 team)
DePaul (17-18): 1 big rivalry (Northwestern), 1 big name (Notre Dame), 5 cupcakes
Georgetown (17-18): 1 big rivalry (Syracuse), 9 cucpcakes
Providence (17-18): 1 big rivalry (Boston College), 2 big names (Minnesota, Houston), 6 cupcakes
Seton Hall (17-18): 2 big names (Indiana, VCU), 6 cupcakes
St. John's (17-18): 2 big names (Nebraska, Duke) 5 cupcakes (including a D2 team)
Villanova (18-19): 1 big name (Michigan), 2 big rivalries (Temple, St. Joe's), 3 cupcakes
Xavier (18-19): 1 big name (Wisconsin), 7 cupcakes
As you can see, only two teams played more than two "big names". Providence...and Houston was good last season but I don't know how big a name they are. Buffalo is in a similar position for us this year. And Villanova...and their two rivalry games are against lower tier opponents.
The schedule you seem to be hoping for is not possible in today's environment. Everyone does their biggest games on neutral courts and eats cupcakes at home.
FACTS! Booo. Facts are not allowed!
-
I am disappointed in the non-con as a whole, simply for the reason that we started out so strong and ended up decent-to-mediocre.
ESPN Events screwed us twice, once with Bethune Cookman and the second time with nobody, forcing MU to scramble to fill a vacancy (which I really wish we would have been denied the NCAA waiver for).
In the end, it won't matter too much.
If a minuscule RPI hit keeps us out of the tourney this year, we've got bigger issues than the schedule.
-
If a minuscule RPI hit keeps us out of the tourney this year, we've got bigger issues than the schedule.
Thing is, the RPI hit won't be minuscule. Replace the 300+ RPI teams with 175-225 RPI teams, and the "hit" will be significant. These are still teams MU would handle easily at home.
I agree, though - this team should be good enough that we won't need to worry about computer numbers too much come March. But I still don't understand why the people in charge of scheduling (Broeker, Wojo, etc.) wouldn't do everything in their power to game the numbers. Tons of other programs do it - for some reason, MU hasn't. Is what it is, I suppose.
-
I think that Presbyterian game might end up being better than we expect. Not that they will be a Norfolk State type addition, but last year they looked pretty good when Francois Lewis was available. He was their most efficient, highest usage player, but was declared ineligible midway through the season.
With Lewis, Presbyterian was 5-8 in D1 games (8-8 overall). Included in there was a win over a UNC-Greensboro team that made the NCAA Tournament and they were competitive with NC State and Virginia Tech on the road. They led the Wolfpack by 8 at halftime and were tied in Blacksburg with 10 minutes to play. Without Lewis, they went 3-13 down the stretch.
The Blue Hose have three other starters returning and their coach, Dustin Kerns, equaled their highest win total in the past six years. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they were closer to the 225-275 range than the sub-300 they are currently projected to be.
-
I am disappointed in the non-con as a whole, simply for the reason that we started out so strong and ended up decent-to-mediocre.
ESPN Events screwed us twice, once with Bethune Cookman and the second time with nobody, forcing MU to scramble to fill a vacancy
#Accurate
#Truth
-
#FakeNews
#Lies
(BC was the nobody replacement we found)
Hmm...not according to the PR released by Marquette. It specifically says Bethune Cookman is part of the Preseason NIT on both the Twitter feed and gomarquette.com. Presbyterian is listed the same way the other buy games are. Is Marquette wrong?
-
Virginia just released their NC schedule today. Home games are:
Middle Tenn St (Battle for Atlantis)
Maryland (ACC/Big10)
Towson
George Washington
Coppin St
Morgan St
VCU
Not a lot to get excited about here. Bottom line is that most home non conference slates are pretty blah.
-
I was excited to see the new Brewer stadium. It is much better than County Stadium was. However, I still only attend 1 Brewer game a year. I am sure there are non season ticket holders that will be excited to see the new "Buck's" stadium. Some of them will show up at MU games. However, they can also see it by attending a Buck's game or a concert. It will be interesting to see, if we get much of an uptick in attendance this year.
-
Is it worth doing a 2 and 1 deal with UWM as part of a deal to recruit Patrick Baldwin?
-
https://twitter.com/ebosshoops/status/1025229587452702720
UTEP added a 4-star guard to their roster real late. Kind of addition that could keep them out of the cellar of Conference USA.
-
https://twitter.com/ebosshoops/status/1025229587452702720
UTEP added a 4-star guard to their roster real late. Kind of addition that could keep them out of the cellar of Conference USA.
http://krod.com/isiah-osborne-leaves-utep-mens-basketball-program/
But also just lost their top returning scorer to transfer...woof, straight back to the basement.