MVCfans.com

Jsnhbe1Birds wrote:Do whatever is needed. And sure, if that means you have to play 8 or 9 non conference games on the road for several seasons to gain long term benefits then that's what you do and take a hit in income.

There are teams that do this. Most of them share leagues. If MVC teams follow suit, they will end up being a similar league. They are leagues like the SWAC and the MEAC.

One thing the Valley has had going for it, relative to weak leagues, are relatively large and supportive fanbases. If you start having 11 home games a year, say goodbye to the money those fans bring. And once that is gone, you are stuck taking those 8 buy games every year because you need the money to function. Your proposal is much, much more likely to lead the MVC into low-major 16-seed land then mid-major potential multi-bid league territory.

Cdizzle wrote:

Jsnhbe1Birds wrote:Do whatever is needed. And sure, if that means you have to play 8 or 9 non conference games on the road for several seasons to gain long term benefits then that's what you do and take a hit in income.

There are teams that do this. Most of them share leagues. If MVC teams follow suit, they will end up being a similar league. They are leagues like the SWAC and the MEAC.

One thing the Valley has had going for it, relative to weak leagues, are relatively large and supportive fanbases. If you start having 11 home games a year, say goodbye to the money those fans bring. And once that is gone, you are stuck taking those 8 buy games every year because you need the money to function. Your proposal is much, much more likely to lead the MVC into low-major 16-seed land then mid-major potential multi-bid league territory.

Disagree. Those conferences don't have the facilities the MVC has. Some of those schools play on high school style gyms. Also, I've admitted a hit on income will happen. But, long term I think it will be advantage. Fans are fickle. They'll come back if they leave. Plus, the attendance in the MVC is pathetic as is. Let's not pretend we're north Carolina and losing 10000 per game. Average attendance in the MVC is around 5000 and the average stadium is about more than 8000. Stadiums are already at 60% capacity. Lose some more for long term gain is a plus.

You don't get any long term by taking a bunch of buy games to get your ass beat on the road. This is really stupid.

Play Angry wrote:You don't get any long term by taking a bunch of buy games to get your ass beat on the road. This is really stupid.

If the goal is to become the SWAC, I can't think of a much faster path.

Play Angry wrote:You don't get any long term by taking a bunch of buy games to get your ass beat on the road. This is really stupid.

At least I'm providing an option. The thread was posed as a question. Let's here your idea to enhance the MVC. Or is this Doug Elgin? Content just barely wading above mediocrity? I'm not. I'm sick of our ten schools acting like the little sisters. And, that's what we are, sisters. A bunch of p****** too afraid to better ourselves because we might lose some games and money in the beginning.

Jsnhbe1Birds wrote:

Play Angry wrote:You don't get any long term by taking a bunch of buy games to get your ass beat on the road. This is really stupid.

At least I'm providing an option. The thread was posed as a question. Let's here your idea to enhance the MVC. Or is this Doug Elgin? Content just barely wading above mediocrity? I'm not. I'm sick of our ten schools acting like the little sisters. And, that's what we are, sisters. A bunch of p****** too afraid to better ourselves because we might lose some games and money in the beginning.

I just think you misunderstand the impact of your suggestion on RPI and other metrics. Here is the best case scenario if you are a team that takes a bunch of checks to go on a circuit of beatdowns in November and December, in a league full of peers who do the same: http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2017/ ... s-Southern Non-WSU schools went 2-52 vs. the RPI Top 50 last year, and a reasonable number of those games were at home (WSU and ISU x 9 each) and neutral courts. A road heavy slate against top teams is a recipe for disaster.

The best path for the MVC is for schools to invest more aggressively in their basketball programs (i.e., not just increasing spending, but increasing spending at a rate greater than peer institutions are increasing theirs). This is really hard to do at a time when some member schools are facing major cutbacks in their state subsidies and declining enrollment, so it's not a likely outcome for all. It will take unified commitment among the school presidents to exert the proper pressure on those who are reluctant.

Strong leadership, fan bases who are willing to revert to their peak levels of support from the last twenty years, and significant investment at great financial cost (hopefully with corresponding future benefits) are what is needed in the long-term.

Play Angry wrote:

Jsnhbe1Birds wrote:

Play Angry wrote:You don't get any long term by taking a bunch of buy games to get your ass beat on the road. This is really stupid.

At least I'm providing an option. The thread was posed as a question. Let's here your idea to enhance the MVC. Or is this Doug Elgin? Content just barely wading above mediocrity? I'm not. I'm sick of our ten schools acting like the little sisters. And, that's what we are, sisters. A bunch of p****** too afraid to better ourselves because we might lose some games and money in the beginning.

I just think you misunderstand the impact of your suggestion on RPI and other metrics. Here is the best case scenario if you are a team that takes a bunch of checks to go on a circuit of beatdowns in November and December, in a league full of peers who do the same: http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2017/ ... s-Southern Non-WSU schools went 2-52 vs. the RPI Top 50 last year, and a reasonable number of those games were at home (WSU and ISU x 9 each) and neutral courts. A road heavy slate against top teams is a recipe for disaster.

The best path for the MVC is for schools to invest more aggressively in their basketball programs (i.e., not just increasing spending, but increasing spending at a rate greater than peer institutions are increasing theirs). This is really hard to do at a time when some member schools are facing major cutbacks in their state subsidies and declining enrollment, so it's not a likely outcome for all. It will take unified commitment among the school presidents to exert the proper pressure on those who are reluctant.

Strong leadership, fan bases who are willing to revert to their peak levels of support from the last twenty years, and significant investment at great financial cost (hopefully with corresponding future benefits) are what is needed in the long-term.

In a perfect world you are right. But, this isn't a perfect world. Like you said, some institutions can't increase their budgets from 2.5 to 7 million like wichita state did. They Lee have to prove it on the court. I'm a Redbird fan and 9,500, near sellout, came out to see WSU play at Redbird arena. When the drakes and indians states came? 5000. Nobody wants to watch bad basketball. We can schedule the crap universities to come play here in non conference too but nobody shows up because nobody cares. So, go on the road, prove your worth for however long it takes and make it pay dividends.

But I just showed you it doesn't pay dividends. Look at Texas Southern. That is your best case scenario under your plan. Long Beach State in 2015 and 2016 is another best case outcome. Those both suck for best case outcomes.

You haven't shown any support for your claim that everybody going 2-9 (worse perhaps? again, 2-52 vs. RPI Top 50 last year) in the OOC vs. a really hard schedule is somehow going to reap long term gains, and we've shown you how your logic is wrong. Provide some support (examples, facts, not just "I think...") for your claims.

It won't. If you go on the road and beat big time teams, why on earth would they come to your building when they hold all the power and all the cards.

It's a minor freaking miracle that UNI got Xavier to come to Cedar Falls next year. Those games aren't happening and the best strategy is to make sure you play in a good MTE. Take a buy game on the road against a P6. Try to find as many home/homes with like minded mid-majors as you can and then be smart about the games you buy, make your cupcakes 175-225 and not 300+.

We don't need to throw the baby out with the bath water and to your attendance point, even if you take out Wichita, the Valley is 10th in attendance. We do just fine there.

Play Angry wrote:Gotta schedule better, sure, but accumulating *smart* buy games is a big part of that. Regardless of what Chauncey AcesFan might argue, it's not that difficult to avoid scheduling the 300+ RPI grenades on a regular basis, which act as poison pills for the simple results-based metrics.

Right. It is beyond me why Marty doesn't schedule more regional teams.
If you draw a 250 mile radius circle around Evansville, there are a lot of D1 schools to pick from that aren't in the Valley, or in a power conference. Your Miami (OH), IPFW, Eastern Illinois, MTSU, Memphis, Western Kentucky, you name it. Any of these would be preferable to a SWAC team.