How to improve the MVC?

[Jsnhbe1Birds]

Whoever the MVC adds via realignment will not enhance the profile of league. The league needs to set rules to enhance the conference and make the schools sign a contract to abide by them or they would be able to be replaced by a school who would abide by them. Let's start with absolutely no games verses DII teams. Also, you are not allowed to schedule games versus any team that is currently 175+ in the RPI. I get that the team may be higher than 175 the next season but that happens. Or, maybe you cannot schedule someone who has averaged 175+ over the previous three seasons. Also, you must play at least two P5 schools even if that means both are buy games. It sucks not to get home and homes but you have to do what you have a to do until you get there. To a lot of lower tier schools they find playing MVC teams a challenge and good for their RPI and I hate not helping out the little guy because that's what we want the P5's to do for us but we are also a little-ish guy and we need to take care of ourselves first. Doing these things will not only enhance the conference profile but bring in better recruits and maybe one day we will be as strong as the Big East. I get some of these things will take at least three seasons to completely be implemented since schools already have contracts to play certain schools but it will get there. The conference needs to demands these things. If a school doesn't agree to these stipulations then don't let the door hit you... We have to enhance the conference from within by making our product better and the only way to do that is to learn how to be the best. You can't be the best if you don't play the best, or at least a lot better. The committee will look fondly upon a team with no games verses 175+ teams. Strength of schedule will be through the roof. Once the schools learn how to successfully navigate these schedules the MVC will be a three bid league. What do you guys think and what are some of your ideas?

[Play Angry]

Can someone help me understand the proposal against scheduling D-II teams? I have seen this several times and am always confused by it.

WSU always schedules a game year against a non-D-1 opponent and it has been a terrific move - the revenue of a home game, no impact (positive or negative) on RPI, and a much lower price to "buy" the opponent's visit to the home arena.

More than 1 of these games starts to stand out, and more than 2 of them really becomes an issue - however, for MVC schools, I think it would be wrong not to encourage them to each line up one of these games annually in lieu of whatever SWAC/MEAC metrics assassins lie in wait as the alternative.

[Drakey]

Games against non D1 teams don't hurt you at all. Better than paying SWAC teams 75,000. Those hurt you a lot.

[Jsnhbe1Birds]

Games against non D1 teams don't hurt you at all. Better than paying SWAC teams 75,000. Those hurt you a lot.

They hurt in the sense that its one less game you could gain good RPI and SOS in the committees eyes. A LOSS to a P5 or any other decently rated team (top 50, maybe even 100) team is more beneficial than a win against any DII team. I think the committee has spoken on that.

[Drakey]

I think the Valley needs to focus on teams that are truly committed to winning basketball. I think for the most part, the teams in the Valley all share that commitment. I was questioning Drake's commitment, but with the hire of the new coach and increase salaries for assistants being approved, I think we finally have a president who understands the unlimited potential of Drake basketball. I wish those schools who are losing a ton of money on football would drop it or go to non-scholarship. Mostly I'm thinking of Indiana State. I keep hearing about reduced budgets, and I think SIU just had to drop their tennis program.. I'm wondering if schools like that should re-evaluate football also. I think anybody admitted to the league should have mens basketball as their number one priority. I THINK Belmont fits that criteria. I THINK Valpo does too. I like the idea of forced scheduling, particularly if we can move up to more conference games. I think that would make it easier to schedule tougher ooc opponents. Will power 5 schools pay Valley teams to play them on the road? I'd rather see a loss to a big Ten team than a victory over Mississippi Valley State. Essentially the NCAA tournament selection committee has made it so that your overall record is meaningless. The only way to possibly meet their criteria is to play FBS teams on the road or on neutral sites if you are lucky enough to get into one of those tournaments.

[BCPanther]

UNI always plays a DIII Iowa Conference team. Way cheaper to bring them in (~5k) and it doesn't kill you RPI wise like Savnannah State or any other SWAC team.

[uniftw]

Games against non D1 teams don't hurt you at all. Better than paying SWAC teams 75,000. Those hurt you a lot.

They hurt in the sense that its one less game you could gain good RPI and SOS in the committees eyes. A LOSS to a P5 or any other decently rated team (top 50, maybe even 100) team is more beneficial than a win against any DII team. I think the committee has spoken on that.

You aren't replacing a top 150 game with a D2, D3 or NAIA. You are replacing a SWAC/MEAC type game. UNI plays Dubuque, Wartburg, Coe, etc... They are all Iowa D3s that are within an hour to an hour and a half of campus. Why?

1. In stead of paying Morgan freaking State to fly from the east coast, pay them 75K (or more) for the game UNI pays the D3 10K and pays for the bus to Cedar Falls for a day trip. It's literally a savings of at least 70K per game.

2. Games against local non-D1s will actually draw better than MEAC/SWAC/Big Sky teams. Why? Wartburg is 15 minutes from the McLedod Center (Hell, UNI would probably offer to drive our custom cruiser to their campus to pick them up and take them back). The extreme majority of Wartburg students are from the Cedar Valley. Players on Wartburgs team are almost all Cedar Falls, Waterloo, or small communities around Cedar Falls kids. The families of those players will go to the game. Players of those schools have friends at UNI, or still in HS, that will go to that game to see them play against a D1. UNI will draw significantly more people for a D3 than a low major

3. More people in the building means more concessions sold. More people buying tickets. Paying less money to the school coming in. It's a massive financial win.

4. There is no RPI hit. As I said, no one is giving up a game against a top 100-150 team for this. Play a SWAC/MEAC team, even if you win by 90, crushes the hell out of your RPI. It HURTS your resume to play a low major. It doesn't hurt your resume to play a D3.

5. When scheduled early in the year you can mix/match line ups. Treat it like a scrimmage. Game action for different line ups for game experience.

[Jsnhbe1Birds]

Games against non D1 teams don't hurt you at all. Better than paying SWAC teams 75,000. Those hurt you a lot.

They hurt in the sense that its one less game you could gain good RPI and SOS in the committees eyes. A LOSS to a P5 or any other decently rated team (top 50, maybe even 100) team is more beneficial than a win against any DII team. I think the committee has spoken on that.

You aren't replacing a top 150 game with a D2, D3 or NAIA. You are replacing a SWAC/MEAC type game. UNI plays Dubuque, Wartburg, Coe, etc... They are all Iowa D3s that are within an hour to an hour and a half of campus. Why?

1. In stead of paying Morgan freaking State to fly from the east coast, pay them 75K (or more) for the game UNI pays the D3 10K and pays for the bus to Cedar Falls for a day trip. It's literally a savings of at least 70K per game.

2. Games against local non-D1s will actually draw better than MEAC/SWAC/Big Sky teams. Why? Wartburg is 15 minutes from the McLedod Center (Hell, UNI would probably offer to drive our custom cruiser to their campus to pick them up and take them back). The extreme majority of Wartburg students are from the Cedar Valley. Players on Wartburgs team are almost all Cedar Falls, Waterloo, or small communities around Cedar Falls kids. The families of those players will go to the game. Players of those schools have friends at UNI, or still in HS, that will go to that game to see them play against a D1. UNI will draw significantly more people for a D3 than a low major

3. More people in the building means more concessions sold. More people buying tickets. Paying less money to the school coming in. It's a massive financial win.

4. There is no RPI hit. As I said, no one is giving up a game against a top 100-150 team for this. Play a SWAC/MEAC team, even if you win by 90, crushes the hell out of your RPI. It HURTS your resume to play a low major. It doesn't hurt your resume to play a D3.

5. When scheduled early in the year you can mix/match line ups. Treat it like a scrimmage. Game action for different line ups for game experience.

That's small time thinking. That's the problem. Youre absolutely correct in the short term. Eventually teams will get better recruits with really good quality schedules and they wont get crushed. Think long term because we all are in the MVC long term. Face that fact. It's just like business phrase, if you don't spend money, you don't make money. If the conference doesn't put in the work and face the immediate negative effects then they'll never gain the long term effects. The MVC is actually worse than their 12th rated RPI now that WSU left. They'll remain around the 15th rated conference in RPI and be an annual one bid, 13 seed league without drastic measures.

Screw the wins versus 175 and beyond. The committee has spoken. 175 should be the worst game on an MVC schedule within five/ten years.

[UNIFanSince1983]

Ask Dan Muller, Ben Jacboson, Gregg Marshall, et al and they will tell you how easy it is to get games against the top 150 for our league.

You literally don't get it. Being in the MVC WSU could hardly get games against the big dogs. It was a lose-lose for the team they would play no matter how good WSU was. You can guarantee it will be much easier now that they are in the AAC. UNI does their best and had some good games. ISUr tried but are struggling to get these games. I get what you are saying everyone should just be playing great teams all the time. However, the logistics of that just don't always work out. Especially because as hard as it is to get those games it is even harder to get them to come to your stadium. So unless they want to be straight road warriors it just isn't feasible or likely.

[Play Angry]

They hurt in the sense that its one less game you could gain good RPI and SOS in the committees eyes. A LOSS to a P5 or any other decently rated team (top 50, maybe even 100) team is more beneficial than a win against any DII team. I think the committee has spoken on that.

You aren't replacing a top 150 game with a D2, D3 or NAIA. You are replacing a SWAC/MEAC type game. UNI plays Dubuque, Wartburg, Coe, etc... They are all Iowa D3s that are within an hour to an hour and a half of campus. Why?

1. In stead of paying Morgan freaking State to fly from the east coast, pay them 75K (or more) for the game UNI pays the D3 10K and pays for the bus to Cedar Falls for a day trip. It's literally a savings of at least 70K per game.

2. Games against local non-D1s will actually draw better than MEAC/SWAC/Big Sky teams. Why? Wartburg is 15 minutes from the McLedod Center (Hell, UNI would probably offer to drive our custom cruiser to their campus to pick them up and take them back). The extreme majority of Wartburg students are from the Cedar Valley. Players on Wartburgs team are almost all Cedar Falls, Waterloo, or small communities around Cedar Falls kids. The families of those players will go to the game. Players of those schools have friends at UNI, or still in HS, that will go to that game to see them play against a D1. UNI will draw significantly more people for a D3 than a low major

3. More people in the building means more concessions sold. More people buying tickets. Paying less money to the school coming in. It's a massive financial win.

4. There is no RPI hit. As I said, no one is giving up a game against a top 100-150 team for this. Play a SWAC/MEAC team, even if you win by 90, crushes the hell out of your RPI. It HURTS your resume to play a low major. It doesn't hurt your resume to play a D3.

5. When scheduled early in the year you can mix/match line ups. Treat it like a scrimmage. Game action for different line ups for game experience.

That's small time thinking. That's the problem. Youre absolutely correct in the short term. Eventually teams will get better recruits with really good quality schedules and they wont get crushed. Think long term because we all are in the MVC long term. Face that fact. It's just like business phrase, if you don't spend money, you don't make money. If the conference doesn't put in the work and face the immediate negative effects then they'll never gain the long term effects. The MVC is actually worse than their 12th rated RPI now that WSU left. They'll remain around the 15th rated conference in RPI and be an annual one bid, 13 seed league without drastic measures.

Screw the wins versus 175 and beyond. The committee has spoken. 175 should be the worst game on an MVC schedule within five/ten years.

I'm borderline Ayn Rand when it comes to bootstraps and college hoops, but this just isn't a thing. Budgets and season ticket packages require a certain number of home games for teams on the "buy" side of the table. Teams on the "sell" side require more road games because those bring in higher revenue than home games for those programs. The MVC is still on the "buy" side of the table, with or without WSU.

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. Wichita State has scheduled well in recent years. Illinois State has scheduled well in recent years. Northern Iowa is an absolute glutton for punishment and if anything should probably ease up a bit in recent times. The rest of the league simply needs to (i) get better talent so that they will win more, and (ii) schedule in a way that provides them with a non-powerball chance at an at-large if their talent rises to that level during the season.

I would probably be supportive of reinstating a league-wide mandate again but it needs to be reasonable.