DoubleJayAlum wrote:Here is where your argument fails you - you continually look past recent data and instead rely on older data to support your arguments about the state of the conference and its history. Times are significantly different now. Getting into the NCAA tournament is much harder coming out of the MVC now than it was even as recently as six years ago. This past season was the first time that the Mvc got more than a single bid in the last five years. MSU missed out on an autobid even after winning a conference title.
No, it is absolutely not harder. For the most part, the depth of quality teams was simply just not as good as it was then, and most certainly the scheduling was much, much weaker. Can you honestly say that MSU 2011 was as good as those teams that made it during the multi-bid years? I don't think they probably were. But even if they were, they simply did not schedule well enough and they did not win enough on their non-conf schedule. Creighton didn't make it as a co-champ in '09, and a lot of that had to do with their weak ass schedule.
My argument doesn't fail because of the data I use, yours does. You cannot look at such small window of time (2-3 years) to make such a bold statement. Six years ago, we were flying high, and other conferences were down. We were up 6 years ago, and then we went through a down stretch. We will be up again (maybe right now), and we will be down again. These things often go in cycles. If you schedule well, and win games, you will make the NCAA tournament.
The problem with the MVC as it currently sits is that you do not get much of an opportunity for top 50 RPI wins within the conference. That wasn't true as recently as six years ago, when we got several bids. And, pay attention now because this answers another one of your questions, many of our schools can't either afford to schedule in a way that allows for a better RPI or don't want to spend the extra money that it takes to do so. They don't want to have to travel far to away games (meaning they will pass up quality match-ups just to save money) and they book home games against D2 or even D3 programs just so that they can make some revenue from playing at home. The net result is that schedule strength will continue to be weak going forward, perhaps even trending further downward, meaning that teams get next to no benefit to their NCAA resume by playing conference foes. On top of that, you get a stain on your resume when you eventually lose a game or two in conference.
That is just categorically false, and makes no sense whatsoever. Money has very little to do with putting together a quality schedule. In fact, in many cases its just the opposite. You get PAID to go out and play good teams on the road. (buy games like Syracuse, Vandy, Lousiville, ect that several MVC have taken here and there) It does not "cost money" to put together a good schedule. Please provide to us some examples of MVC schools not scheduling good games because of money.
Tell me DJA, since Creighton has an apparent never ending river of money flowing toward their school that puts the rest of conference to shame, please give me a list of these great games that Creighton has scheduled that has both helped boost their resume AND the conference resume. Since Creighton is so infinitely more committed to scheduling and has so much more money to do so than the rest of us peons, I would love to see that list, and I'm sure it puts everyone else's schedules to shame. In accordance with your claims that other schools in the MVC don't want to "spend the money to do what it takes" and "dont want to travel", Creighton's non-conference games over the years should certainly BY FAR trump the rest of the league, right?
If you were WSU or Creighton last year, the only in conference game that you could possibly book as a top 50 win on your NCAA tourney resume was a game against the other. That's it. On top of that only one other team even provided a top 100 win - UNI. That's it. That essentially means that your postseason is either made during the noncon only to be put in jeopardy by what happens in conference, or it is essentially over after the noncon unless you win in St Louis. Because of the bad in conference RPIs, you have no chance whatsoever of redemption from a mediocre or average noncon by winning games within your conference like you do in other midmajor conferences.
What you just said is basically true of
any mid-major conference. You have to schedule well, and win games period. MVC teams just started losing too many games last year once conference play started. IIRC, going into conference this year there were several top 50 RPI teams in the MVC, it was only after we started playing each other and accumulating some losses that the RPI's begun to drop. Despite that, the Valley STILL ranked as the #8 RPI league in the country last season, ahead of the PAC12, CUSA, and the WCC which you applauded earlier. The MVC is perennially a top 8 conference, and has often ranked in the top 6-7. Stop acting like the Valley is some weak ass conference that is hurting profiles.
