Golden: Indiana State's difficulties in scheduling

[Snaggletooth]

So how much did last year's terrific home schedule contribute to this year's sked ? Did it allow for home/home with Alabama St., Northern Arizona, LA-Lafayette, Kennesaw State, Western Illinois or maybe even Samford or did it cost approx. 1/2 mil or more to get the easy "W's" ?

Fri, Nov 12 vsAlabama State W71-57 1-0 (0-0)
Sun, Nov 14 vsNorthern Arizona W74-70 2-0 (0-0)
Wed, Nov 17 vsLouisiana-Lafayette W63-58 3-0 (0-0)
Fri, Nov 26 vsKennesaw State W75-57 4-1 (0-0)
Wed, Dec 1 vs#25 Brigham Young L77-65 4-3 (0-0)
Sat, Dec 11 vsSaint Joseph's W82-75 5-4 (0-0)
Sat, Dec 18 vsIdaho State W66-60 6-4 (0-0)
Mon, Dec 20 vsWestern Illinois W60-47 7-4 (0-0)
Wed, Dec 22 vsSamford W58-40 8-4 (0-0)

Are you asking me to explain/justify their schedule last year? I can't.

But so far Marshall and Co. are doing lots of things things to make a good schedule for this year and making the following years schedule a bit easier to complete. The 4 year deal with Tulsa is exactly the type of contracts that MVC teams should be trying to land....multiyear deals with Top 100 type programs.

Is that controversial? Did I miss something?

I think he's is asking you to justify CU schedule.

[valleychamp]

I'm fine with buyout games if they are against legit top 20 teams/programs. Those are games that are very valuable to schools like us, and they tend to pay well.

Now, if you are taking buyout games with Auburn or Oregon State or something like that, then I'd have a problem with it.

[isumvc1]

now this I can agree with, and thank goodness Vanderbilt is looking like they could be a top 10-15 team by the time ISU plays them in December.

I'm fine with buyout games if they are against legit top 20 teams/programs. Those are games that are very valuable to schools like us, and they tend to pay well.

Now, if you are taking buyout games with Auburn or Oregon State or something like that, then I'd have a problem with it.

[2livewu]

Here we go again.....It's as if this discussion is based on some fact that the Trees were in the mix for an at large last season.

That schedule is going to have to result in something like a 3-5 loss season to be in the mix for an at large bid. Maybe the Trees are that good, maybe they aren't, but let's face some TRUTHS. They weren't an at large team last year, and it wasn't even close.


This is becoming surreal.........

[valleychamp]

Here we go again.....It's as if this discussion is based on some fact that the Trees were in the mix for an at large last season.

That schedule is going to have to result in something like a 3-5 loss season to be in the mix for an at large bid. Maybe the Trees are that good, maybe they aren't, but let's face some TRUTHS. They weren't an at large team last year, and it wasn't even close.


This is becoming surreal.........

Who's talking about last year?...

[dgreenwell3]

Here we go again.....It's as if this discussion is based on some fact that the Trees were in the mix for an at large last season.

That schedule is going to have to result in something like a 3-5 loss season to be in the mix for an at large bid. Maybe the Trees are that good, maybe they aren't, but let's face some TRUTHS. They weren't an at large team last year, and it wasn't even close.


This is becoming surreal.........

Who's talking about last year?...

Yeah typical baiting for an argument nonsense

[WSUbballer]

[quote="valleychamp"]Who's talking about last year?...[/quote]

I think it was a Sycamore fan who brought up last year's schedules with WSU and CU. Still not sure what the point or intent was?

[jayball]

So how much did last year's terrific home schedule contribute to this year's sked ? Did it allow for home/home with Alabama St., Northern Arizona, LA-Lafayette, Kennesaw State, Western Illinois or maybe even Samford or did it cost approx. 1/2 mil or more to get the easy "W's" ?

Fri, Nov 12 vsAlabama State W71-57 1-0 (0-0)
Sun, Nov 14 vsNorthern Arizona W74-70 2-0 (0-0)
Wed, Nov 17 vsLouisiana-Lafayette W63-58 3-0 (0-0)
Fri, Nov 26 vsKennesaw State W75-57 4-1 (0-0)
Wed, Dec 1 vs#25 Brigham Young L77-65 4-3 (0-0)
Sat, Dec 11 vsSaint Joseph's W82-75 5-4 (0-0)
Sat, Dec 18 vsIdaho State W66-60 6-4 (0-0)
Mon, Dec 20 vsWestern Illinois W60-47 7-4 (0-0)
Wed, Dec 22 vsSamford W58-40 8-4 (0-0)

Are you asking me to explain/justify their schedule last year? I can't.

But so far Marshall and Co. are doing lots of things things to make a good schedule for this year and making the following years schedule a bit easier to complete. The 4 year deal with Tulsa is exactly the type of contracts that MVC teams should be trying to land....multiyear deals with Top 100 type programs.

Is that controversial? Did I miss something?

I think he's is asking you to justify CU schedule.

Thanks Snaggle, totally missed that.

I can't justify it as a great schedule. But I think the coaches had a different mindset last year. New coach, new system and Gregory didn't become eligible until December. They cramed 3 games in the week he became eligible to try to get him ready for conference play. I was unhappy with the number of cupcake type teams and don't want to see that type of schedule in the future.

We had 3 H&H series going last year, Nebraska, NW, and St Joes. 2 of those will be at home this year. Additionally this year we will start a series with Tulsa, and hopefully another solid team.

Last year we had a fun neutral site game with Iowa State, that required 2 home games against crappy teams. Fun event but not a substitute for a really quality exempt tournament on a neutral floor. It might have ben workable without adding 3 extra creampuffs when Gregory became eligible. This year we do the same thing with Iowa, hopefully with a few less cupcakes outside of that event. We are supposedly getting into some better exempt tournaments in the next two years, so that will help down the line.

Look I think the Vandy game will be a blast for ISU's team and fans. I just think that in general doing buy games isn't as helpful as getting multiyear, H&H contracts with solid programs and getting into good exempt tournaments. Every team has a much better shot of getting BCS pelts at a neutral site tourney than as a buy game on someone's home floor. It is just playing the percentages really.

It will be fun and if you win it will be a great resume builder.

[dgreenwell3]

Who's talking about last year?...

I think it was a Sycamore fan who brought up last year's schedules with WSU and CU. Still not sure what the point or intent was?

I think he was trying to point out that even when people buy games doesn't make them good

[WSUbballer]

Nobody..

It has nothing to do with the thread. Indiana State can't buy opponents anyways so I dunno why the shots were taken at WSU's and CU's schedules from last year. They were still well beyond better than Indiana State's schedule is this year. The only reason I could come up with is the Sycamore fan didn't like the WSU and CU fan bringing a valid discussion point to the table..