MVC Loses 56% of Top-150 RPI Games

by **JayPak** » October 2nd, 2013, 12:50 pm

From the Springfield News-Leader:
http://www.news-leader.com/article/20131002/SPORTS0401/310020027/Lyndal-Scranton-MVC-Insider-Missouri-State-basketball?nclick_check=1

The Valley is screwed this season in terms of RPI. With these schedules, there's little margin for error and scant hope of being a multi-bid league. Three takeaways:

1. Not only does the MVC lose the 30% of RPI games provided by Creighton, but they're being "replaced" with Loyola's #10-in-the-league schedule, Loyola's average non-con opponent having an RPI of 260. The Valley's strongest scheduling team is therefore replaced by its new weakest scheduling team. Elgin said he thinks Loyola will "grow into the Valley," scheduling-wise. He'd better hope they do so, fast. It goes to illustrate that there really was no quality team out there to replace Creighton. (In Loyola's defense, they had lined up most of this year's schedule before joining the MVC.)

2. Losing the Mountain West Challenge series and its 11% of quality RPI games will hurt, but doubly so when combined with losing the Bracketbuster in the same year. While fans loathed the Bracketbuster and it usually failed to help teams' resumé, the 15% of RPI games provided by the Bracketbuster have been replaced with games that are much worse. Teams are unable to fill the Mountain West/Bracketbuster hole with anything other than 2 patsies.

3. The only options for the MVC (outside of Wichita St.) to schedule quality games now are MTE's and laying themselves out for 1-and-done road games vs. the BCS. Credit Wichita for being able to schedule 4 OOC nationally televised games (1 of them at midnight), and getting a BCS school to come to town this year and next. But even Wichita has its difficulties. With the Final Four under their belt, they might find it easier to get into good MTE's, but the home-and-home's will be harder to come by. To get Tennessee into town, they had to play at INTRUST rather than Koch.

**Sponsor**

by **TheAsianSensation** » October 2nd, 2013, 7:59 pm

Some scattered thoughts which really don't flow together but might be worth exploring:

I'm not sure the BB part of the math holds up. Wichita can replace a premier BB game with a premier non-con game, bad teams can replace bad BB games with bad non-con games.

But the other 41%, that is of major concern. Especially the MWC/MVC challenge. That's a bigger problem than everyone realizes.

The notice is out on SoS. Especially the Illinois schools as a whole. ISU's getting better, recovering from the Jank era though. Loyola will need to get up to speed quick. SIU's has been down for awhile. And I'm about one year away from really blasting Ford for his non-con schedule - I don't mind it in a true rebuilding year but I'm expecting the meat of the schedule to toughen up faster than it has so far.

Optimal strategy would be to lean on top mid-majors from like and below conferences. Problem is, the even bigger schools in the power conferences are starting to schedule them too. If you're Murray State, you can play Wichita St for a solid opponent, but you've probably got some attractive offers from very big schools.

The expansion of D1 isn't helping. There's more options for the top schools for scheduling. More schools who are likely to go 12-6 in their conference and provide decent SoS help without having to risk a loss against a UNI or InSU.

I understand the desire for MTTs, but we need to be careful. Many come with some very, very ugly cupcakes. There is simply not enough MTTs available in a season to make it worthwhile for everyone.

We need a source of decent opponents. WCC challenge. MWC challenge. A-10 challenge. Heck, MAAC challenge if we have to go that low. Let's get something on the board.

I've talked about the effect of realignment and how the middle tier is getting squeezed - everyone is either going to end up in the high tier with the big boys or in the morass with the SWACs of the world. Same concept with scheduling. The assets we can offer other schools in scheduling are quickly becoming very plentiful. Law of supply and demand. We can no longer supply a unique set of assets to the top schools.

by **shoxrox** » October 2nd, 2013, 8:49 pm

The big blow is losing the MWC Challenge and even BB's to a certain extent. Creighton is an insignificant loss when compared to those two events.

by **rlh04d** » October 3rd, 2013, 2:15 am

JayPak wrote:To get Tennessee into town, they had to play at INTRUST rather than Koch.

Lowers the home court advantage, most likely.

Considering WSU intends to play at Intrust once every season, I don't see how that's a big deal, though.

by **2livewu** » October 3rd, 2013, 5:05 am

rlh04d wrote:
JayPak wrote:To get Tennessee into town, they had to play at INTRUST rather than Koch.

Lowers the home court advantage, most likely.

Considering WSU intends to play at Intrust once every season, I don't see how that's a big deal, though.

And beats the living hell out of having to play ALL your games at a rented facility.

by **DoubleJayAlum** » October 3rd, 2013, 6:25 am

shoxrox wrote:The big blow is losing the MWC Challenge and even BB's to a certain extent. Creighton is an insignificant loss when compared to those two events.

Let me help you with math as you apparently need it.

A. MVC-MWC challenge events provided 11% of the top 150 games.
B. Bracketbusters provided 15% of the top 150 games.
C. Creighton provided 30% of the top 150 games.
D. 30% is greater than 26%.

Net Conclusion: WSU better improve its traditional choking in St Louis as at large bids are going to become much more scarce for the conference in the future.

by **DoubleJayAlum** » October 3rd, 2013, 6:28 am

2livewu wrote:
rlh04d wrote:
JayPak wrote:To get Tennessee into town, they had to play at INTRUST rather than Koch.

Lowers the home court advantage, most likely.

Considering WSU intends to play at Intrust once every season, I don't see how that's a big deal, though.

And beats the living hell out of having to play ALL your games at a rented facility.

Since every single one of those games will be on national TV, and because recruits have said they like playing in an NBA caliber arena, I'd say that the "living hell" we have to endure seems much more like heaven.

by **shoxrox** » October 3rd, 2013, 7:05 am

And this is what obsession and insecurity looks like folks.

LOL at "national" tv.

by **Khan4Cats** » October 3rd, 2013, 7:47 am

And yet, 6 MVC teams have tougher non-conference slates then Creighton who comes in with a 170.6 RPI average and stellar opponents such as Alcorn State, Chicago State, UMKC and Arkansas-Pine Bluff. Only one NCAA tournament team from last year on their schedule and none from the top 50 RPI. Must be counting on the rest of their new butt-buddies to pick up the slack.

by **Cdizzle** » October 3rd, 2013, 8:34 am

DoubleJayAlum wrote:
shoxrox wrote:The big blow is losing the MWC Challenge and even BB's to a certain extent. Creighton is an insignificant loss when compared to those two events.

Let me help you with math as you apparently need it.

A. MVC-MWC challenge events provided 11% of the top 150 games.
B. Bracketbusters provided 15% of the top 150 games.
C. Creighton provided 30% of the top 150 games.
D. 30% is greater than 26%.

Net Conclusion: WSU better improve its traditional choking in St Louis as at large bids are going to become much more scarce for the conference in the future.