Sporting News CBB Preview

[Valley_Fan]

So one question. How are Bradley and SIU going to get and stay relevant?

two different answers:
SIU:

One reason SIU went downhill was because Lowery recruited prima donnas that thought they were better than the team and soon defected for bigger spotlights.
SIU's blueprint for their successful teams were the ones driven by defense and senior leadership...no easy shots and one shot per possession. Recruit hard working players that are truly committed to the team and hard nosed D.

Bradley:

Bradley is much more on the fast track to the top of the MVC than SIU. When Bradley's ship is right they are bringing in the 'higher' rated MVC recruits...athletes at the point and wings, solid bigs, and normally one player that can take over a game (e.g.: Anthony Parker). Is Jordan Swoopshire that guy?
Butts in the seats is a must.

Those are the obvious answers. Both Bradley and SIU Have been good before and could not sustain it. Its easy to be a flash in the plan, but how do you sustain it for 20 years?

[hoopsfan1234]

How are Bradley and SIU going to get and stay relevant? That's on them. But they've done it before and can do it again. WSU certainly figured it out.

IMHO, Bradley made great strides just by hiring the right coach. And I like the SIU hire as well. BH is a class individual who loves this league and had a successful run at Missouri State. He was set up for a deep run in the 2006 NCAAs. It's not his fault the NCAA selection committee blew it. Since he left there, he has worked under Bill Self and now is on a campus that in theory should be easier to recruit good athletes to than Springfield. I may be the only one, but I'm not buying it that SIU is going to be terrible this year. It's his second year. A good coach generally has changed the culture of the program by midway through his second year.

And if you get good, raise big $$$ to keep your coach.

[glm38]

Those are the obvious answers. Both Bradley and SIU Have been good before and could not sustain it. Its easy to be a flash in the plan, but how do you sustain it for 20 years?

Sustained excellence for 20 or more years is very difficult. Who in the Valley has done that except for Creighton? And even their excellence doesn't extend to the post season (NCAA's) at all.

I see a long hard road ahead for SIU. But I still think the original scenario of a better more nationally prominent Valley is possible. Just substitute MSU and/or Northern Iowa at the top along with Wichita and Bradley. Regarding MSU - we have great facilities. Our fanbase is kind of fickle at times but we will support a winner. This year will tell if we are headed the right way like most of our fans think we are.

[Valley_Fan]

Those are the obvious answers. Both Bradley and SIU Have been good before and could not sustain it. Its easy to be a flash in the plan, but how do you sustain it for 20 years?

Sustained excellence for 20 or more years is very difficult. Who in the Valley has done that except for Creighton? And even their excellence doesn't extend to the post season (NCAA's) at all.

I see a long hard road ahead for SIU. But I still think the original scenario of a better more nationally prominent Valley is possible. Just substitute MSU and/or Northern Iowa at the top along with Wichita and Bradley. Regarding MSU - we have great facilities. Our fanbase is kind of fickle at times but we will support a winner. This year will tell if we are headed the right way like most of our fans think we are.

I guess that is my point. We need teams to be good for 20 years. That raises the profile of the conference, adds more TV games, gets more recruits, etc. Hate on Creighton for the lack of NCAA success, but they were still in the ratings every year, still on TV every year, and still on covers of magazines and websites every year. WSU is doing that now. We need Bradley, MSU, UNI etc to do the same thing.

In order for that to happen, you need to ask the deeper questions. Take MSU. New stadium, donor support, young coach. Seems like a good foundation. Will it take you to sustained success, or will you start over in 3 years?

[agrinut]

How are Bradley and SIU going to get and stay relevant? That's on them. But they've done it before and can do it again. WSU certainly figured it out.

IMHO, Bradley made great strides just by hiring the right coach. And I like the SIU hire as well. BH is a class individual who loves this league and had a successful run at Missouri State. He was set up for a deep run in the 2006 NCAAs. It's not his fault the NCAA selection committee blew it. Since he left there, he has worked under Bill Self and now is on a campus that in theory should be easier to recruit good athletes to than Springfield. I may be the only one, but I'm not buying it that SIU is going to be terrible this year. It's his second year. A good coach generally has changed the culture of the program by midway through his second year.

And if you get good, raise big $$$ to keep your coach.

Why in the world would Carbondale be easier to recruit to then springfield?

[Wufan]

Give me 10 year like SIU had any day! They have name recognition over multiple classes. UNI is one more sweet 16 away from that IMO.

20 years of success is reserved for the Blue Bloods right now. Maybe the Valley can change that.

[Cdizzle]

Those are the obvious answers. Both Bradley and SIU Have been good before and could not sustain it. Its easy to be a flash in the plan, but how do you sustain it for 20 years?

Sustained excellence for 20 or more years is very difficult. Who in the Valley has done that except for Creighton? And even their excellence doesn't extend to the post season (NCAA's) at all.

I see a long hard road ahead for SIU. But I still think the original scenario of a better more nationally prominent Valley is possible. Just substitute MSU and/or Northern Iowa at the top along with Wichita and Bradley. Regarding MSU - we have great facilities. Our fanbase is kind of fickle at times but we will support a winner. This year will tell if we are headed the right way like most of our fans think we are.

I guess that is my point. We need teams to be good for 20 years. That raises the profile of the conference, adds more TV games, gets more recruits, etc. Hate on Creighton for the lack of NCAA success, but they were still in the ratings every year, still on TV every year, and still on covers of magazines and websites every year. WSU is doing that now. We need Bradley, MSU, UNI etc to do the same thing.

In order for that to happen, you need to ask the deeper questions. Take MSU. New stadium, donor support, young coach. Seems like a good foundation. Will it take you to sustained success, or will you start over in 3 years

I will hate on Creighton. Say what you want about their ratings?, TV?, and "magazing covers?", but they were part of, if not the biggest part of the overall problem. Nobody thought teams from the Valley could do anything on the national stage. They continually underperformed in the non-con and NCAA tournament. They were the proof of everyone else's perception; "those leagues are okay, but they can't compete against the big boys". The rest of the Valley has done a much better job representing on the national scene, and especially when everyone is watching, in March.

That doesn't mean I'm glad to lose a very good team from the league. But at least they won't be tanking the non-con, grabbing the auto-bid in March and then doing nothing with it as they did for much of the 00's.

[hoopsfan1234]

My reasoning for saying Carbondale could be easier to recruit to than Springfield is because of its proximity to St. Louis and that they have done it before. Not in any way a slam on MSU who has a better basketball facility. It would be great if MSU could string together several years of NCAA success. More power to you.

And SIU brings a huge number of fans to the MVC Tourney when the Salukis are good. I remember a final in which they almost filled the place. MSU has a good fan base but I doubt they will ever travel in those kinds of numbers. Feel free to prove me wrong.

20 years of sustained excellence is not the standard. Even Duke, NC, and Kentucky have missed the NCAA Tourney during that time frame. Remember when Kentucky lost in the first round of the NIT recently?

If three teams could go on a nice 3-4 year run in which they were all national powers at the same time, the Valley would get some kind of TV deal. And it is doable. I stand by my original post.

[Valley_Fan]

I will hate on Creighton. Say what you want about their ratings?, TV?, and "magazing covers?", but they were part of, if not the biggest part of the overall problem. Nobody thought teams from the Valley could do anything on the national stage. They continually underperformed in the non-con and NCAA tournament. They were the proof of everyone else's perception; "those leagues are okay, but they can't compete against the big boys". The rest of the Valley has done a much better job representing on the national scene, and especially when everyone is watching, in March.

That doesn't mean I'm glad to lose a very good team from the league. But at least they won't be tanking the non-con, grabbing the auto-bid in March and then doing nothing with it as they did for much of the 00's.

Besides being factually wrong, that makes no sense. CU tanks in February, not the non-con. They under-performed and ruined the valley's reputation yet were cherry-picked for another higher-profile conference? You think BU and SIU have a higher national perception in 2013 because of a sweet 16 run? WSU I'll give you, and not only because of the F4, but you are stretching with your response.

My point is CU, WSU, Gonzaga, Davidson, Butler, Xavier, and others have been able to achieve long-term sustained success. We need BU, SIU, UNI, and the rest of the valley to put 4 or 5 years in a stretch and my question is how to do that beyond just getting better recruits. How do you get the better recruits.

[Valley_Fan]

My reasoning for saying Carbondale could be easier to recruit to than Springfield is because of its proximity to St. Louis and that they have done it before. Not in any way a slam on MSU who has a better basketball facility. It would be great if MSU could string together several years of NCAA success. More power to you.

And SIU brings a huge number of fans to the MVC Tourney when the Salukis are good. I remember a final in which they almost filled the place. MSU has a good fan base but I doubt they will ever travel in those kinds of numbers. Feel free to prove me wrong.

20 years of sustained excellence is not the standard. Even Duke, NC, and Kentucky have missed the NCAA Tourney during that time frame. Remember when Kentucky lost in the first round of the NIT recently?

If three teams could go on a nice 3-4 year run in which they were all national powers at the same time, the Valley would get some kind of TV deal. And it is doable. I stand by my original post.

SIU was great for the league when they were good. Rabid fans, great games, national reputation. Gameday even went there. We need that again. Can you imagine SIU and WSU both in their prime? Would be as good if not better than their respective rivalries with Creighton.