Re: If we go to 12 who do you want (choose 2) poll?
Posted: August 22nd, 2017, 7:41 am
I've been looking at last year's schedule for my Indiana State team and I see no evidence that the MVC actually schedules using travel partners. Like there was instance where we played a home game, then played at Drake, just to come back home. If travel partners was actually a real thing we would have played at UNI on the same trip.
So that brings me back to this point. Why does Missouri State need a travel partner, particularly if we are not utilizing it in our schedules already? Our conference is more compact now without Wichita and with Valparaiso. Why can't we just add Murray State and be done with it? I'm starting to think this travel partner thing was just an excuse to be lazy on scheduling or to just stick at the status quo of 10 teams in the conference. Whenever Indiana State is taking a trip to Drake without playing any other road games in that trip it makes me think this travel partner thing is a bunch of nonsense. There's no way an added trip to any MVC school is costing anyone a ton of money in travel. Murray State would barely add travel. I know that scheduling would be harder, but how difficult is it really?
The MWC plays with 11 and the MWC apparently said they didn't want NM ST and/or Idaho. Why should we be any different? If we're not 100% sure about a team we need to just go to 11. We shouldn't just add to make scheduling easier. That is a terrible reason to add someone. You can't take back a bad add. But Murray State is too good of an addition not to add them for the 2018 season. Everyone says that Belmont and St Louis needs to wake up, but really I think the leadership in our conference are the ones that need to wake up. You can't just pass up on a team like Murray State that really wants in the conference over "travel partners, difficult scheduling, and public/private split". The travel in our conference is super easy. If Chicago State can travel all over the place when they are on the verge of shutting down, then we can all travel to Northern Iowa, Missouri State, and Murray State without having another road game while we're out, just like we're already doing.
So that brings me back to this point. Why does Missouri State need a travel partner, particularly if we are not utilizing it in our schedules already? Our conference is more compact now without Wichita and with Valparaiso. Why can't we just add Murray State and be done with it? I'm starting to think this travel partner thing was just an excuse to be lazy on scheduling or to just stick at the status quo of 10 teams in the conference. Whenever Indiana State is taking a trip to Drake without playing any other road games in that trip it makes me think this travel partner thing is a bunch of nonsense. There's no way an added trip to any MVC school is costing anyone a ton of money in travel. Murray State would barely add travel. I know that scheduling would be harder, but how difficult is it really?
The MWC plays with 11 and the MWC apparently said they didn't want NM ST and/or Idaho. Why should we be any different? If we're not 100% sure about a team we need to just go to 11. We shouldn't just add to make scheduling easier. That is a terrible reason to add someone. You can't take back a bad add. But Murray State is too good of an addition not to add them for the 2018 season. Everyone says that Belmont and St Louis needs to wake up, but really I think the leadership in our conference are the ones that need to wake up. You can't just pass up on a team like Murray State that really wants in the conference over "travel partners, difficult scheduling, and public/private split". The travel in our conference is super easy. If Chicago State can travel all over the place when they are on the verge of shutting down, then we can all travel to Northern Iowa, Missouri State, and Murray State without having another road game while we're out, just like we're already doing.