|
Post by motorcitysam on Oct 12, 2018 10:59:41 GMT -5
I wonder if the Horizon would consider a "Challenge". Lots of pros and cons. A lot would depend on what Conference you're challenging. Helps with scheduling, especially for the better teams, but for the better teams, it could lead to possibly eliminating themselves from an at large bid with a resume killing loss Yeah, lots to consider. Be a nice way to generate some buzz and conference pride.
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Oct 12, 2018 17:04:30 GMT -5
I wonder if the Horizon would consider a "Challenge". Lots of pros and cons. A lot would depend on what Conference you're challenging. Helps with scheduling, especially for the better teams, but for the better teams, it could lead to possibly eliminating themselves from an at large bid with a resume killing loss From a fan perspective, people have to care to really make it work. A Big10/ACC or Big 10/Big East challenge is a battle for conference bragging rights for fans who root for and care about their conferences. Which is the best conference is a good bar topic. That's just not very true for the Horizon. The number of fans who care is just too small. Even if we care about the Horizon (like many of us on this and other conference school boards), we don't care a whole lot about bragging rights over, say, the Ohio Valley. The one conference people might care about would be the MAC, but Horizon and MAC teams typically match up 20-30 times a year already. That said, there are still other reasons it might be worthwhile. Most obviously, as you say, it's one less game to schedule. Like you, I'm uncertain as to whether it's a good or bad thing for teams trying to snare an at large bid, or NIT bid, or higher seed. The old Bracket Busters was based on the idea that it would give mid-majors a chance for a good win to help them reach the NCAA. But that means another good mid-major picks up a loss to a mid-major, hurting their chances. If you're a mid-major hoping for at-large consideration, it's probably better to try for one more game with a high major than to play a middie that might beat you (of course, these days good mid-majors have trouble even scheduling road games with high majors). Anyway, it would be one less game to schedule, and hopefully it would be against a solid, upper-mid major. Here's a thought. Try to schedule it in mid-February, a la the old Bracket Busters. Then, around the 1st of February, you let the first place team in Conference A (the next year you start with Conference B) choose its opponent from Conference B. Then the top remaining team in Conference B chooses its opponent, and back and forth til you've got your 5 matchups. You can go for the easy win, or for the tough, resume building win that brings the risk of loss with it. I think that could stir up some fun fan debate. Anyway, if the Horizon were to try for this, I think the most likely opponent might be the Colonial. The MVC, I think, thinks it is too good for the Horizon. Like I say, we already play 20+ games a year with the MAC schools. The Summit would be another possibility, now that it has pretty much pulled even (if not ahead) of the HL But I think the Colonial would be best. It's a solid conference, and the travel wouldn't be too great. It's a 10 team league, so the numbers work out right. Like the Horizon, a lot of its best programs have defected in recent years (George Mason, VCU, Old Dominion). The Colonial currently consists of Charleston Delaware Drexel Elon Hofstra James Madison Northeastern Towson UNC-Wilmington William & Mary The Colonial was 12th in Conference RPI last year and it's champion, Charleston, was seeded 13 in the NCAA.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2018 11:22:23 GMT -5
I wonder if the Horizon would consider a "Challenge". Lots of pros and cons. A lot would depend on what Conference you're challenging. Helps with scheduling, especially for the better teams, but for the better teams, it could lead to possibly eliminating themselves from an at large bid with a resume killing loss From a fan perspective, people have to care to really make it work. A Big10/ACC or Big 10/Big East challenge is a battle for conference bragging rights for fans who root for and care about their conferences. Which is the best conference is a good bar topic. That's just not very true for the Horizon. The number of fans who care is just too small. Even if we care about the Horizon (like many of us on this and other conference school boards), we don't care a whole lot about bragging rights over, say, the Ohio Valley. The one conference people might care about would be the MAC, but Horizon and MAC teams typically match up 20-30 times a year already. That said, there are still other reasons it might be worthwhile. Most obviously, as you say, it's one less game to schedule. Like you, I'm uncertain as to whether it's a good or bad thing for teams trying to snare an at large bid, or NIT bid, or higher seed. The old Bracket Busters was based on the idea that it would give mid-majors a chance for a good win to help them reach the NCAA. But that means another good mid-major picks up a loss to a mid-major, hurting their chances. If you're a mid-major hoping for at-large consideration, it's probably better to try for one more game with a high major than to play a middie that might beat you (of course, these days good mid-majors have trouble even scheduling road games with high majors). Anyway, it would be one less game to schedule, and hopefully it would be against a solid, upper-mid major. Here's a thought. Try to schedule it in mid-February, a la the old Bracket Busters. Then, around the 1st of February, you let the first place team in Conference A (the next year you start with Conference B) choose its opponent from Conference B. Then the top remaining team in Conference B chooses its opponent, and back and forth til you've got your 5 matchups. You can go for the easy win, or for the tough, resume building win that brings the risk of loss with it. I think that could stir up some fun fan debate. Anyway, if the Horizon were to try for this, I think the most likely opponent might be the Colonial. The MVC, I think, thinks it is too good for the Horizon. Like I say, we already play 20+ games a year with the MAC schools. The Summit would be another possibility, now that it has pretty much pulled even (if not ahead) of the HL But I think the Colonial would be best. It's a solid conference, and the travel wouldn't be too great. It's a 10 team league, so the numbers work out right. Like the Horizon, a lot of its best programs have defected in recent years (George Mason, VCU, Old Dominion). The Colonial currently consists of Charleston Delaware Drexel Elon Hofstra James Madison Northeastern Towson UNC-Wilmington William & Mary The Colonial was 12th in Conference RPI last year and it's champion, Charleston, was seeded 13 in the NCAA.
|
|
|
Post by motorcitysam on Oct 18, 2018 10:54:25 GMT -5
A-10 Preseason Poll:
1. Saint Louis 2. St. Joseph's 3. Davidson 4. George Mason 5. Rhode Island 6. Dayton 7. VCU 8. UMass 9. St. Bonnie's 10.Richmond 11.Duquesne 12.La Salle 13.George Washington 14.Fordham
|
|
|
Post by motorcitysam on Nov 9, 2018 23:36:53 GMT -5
Per Jon Rothstein, the A-10 has lost SIX buy games over the first four days of the season. Ouch.
|
|
|
Post by motorcitysam on Nov 22, 2018 15:49:07 GMT -5
So, the A-10 had a rough first few days, but is bouncing back a little. Dayton turned some heads with an upset of Butler. St. Louis had a nice win against Seton Hall before dropping a close on to Pitt. VCU is 4-1 with a nice win against Temple before dropping an OT game to St. John. UMass had a bad loss to Howard and also lost the match up to Harvard. The bottom of the conference is really struggling, as St. Bonnie, George Washington, and LaSalle are a combined 1-14 on the season.
|
|
|
Post by motorcitysam on Dec 7, 2018 18:02:24 GMT -5
George Washington keeps piling up losses, even on days it doesn't play. Forward Arnaldo Toro will miss the rest of the season after undergoing hip surgery. He was averaging 10 points and 9 rebounds per game this season.
|
|
|
Post by motorcitysam on Dec 27, 2018 21:04:38 GMT -5
From Jeff Goodman on Twitter: "Duquesne junior guard Mike Lewis told @watchstadium that he is transferring out of the program. Averaged 14 per game his first two years, production dipped this year to 5.6 ppg."
Seems like a strange time to transfer as he has probably already burned his second semester. I would think that he would be better off playing out this season and taking his time to find a good landing spot. Of course, he may already have a spot in mind.
|
|
|
Post by motorcitysam on Jan 21, 2019 2:37:40 GMT -5
Looking at the A-10 early on a Monday morning (mostly because I've got some downtime on this midnight shift I picked up for the overtime on job #2).
The Commissioner wondered in the scoreboard thread how long it had been since Duquesne started conference play 4-1, as they have done this season. Actually, it was last year, as the Dukes sat at 4-1 on January 13, 2018 with a triple overtime win over LaSalle. The Dukes were eventually 5-2 before they dropped 11 out of their last 12 conference games. Kind of easy to forget they had a good start after that finish. This year's team should avoid that kind of flop. The conference is down this year, and the Dukes are playing well.
The top of the A-10 is jammed up, with St. Louis leading the way at 5-0, George Mason at 5-1, and four other teams at 4-1. The bottom is tight, too. Three teams have 1 win, and two teams are winless. With wins over Oregon State, Butler, and Seton Hall, along with closes losses to Pitt and Houston, the Billikens are the class of the conference so far. However, after losing a couple of good players to transfer, the rest of the St. Louis season is up in the air.
Couple of A-10 notes with local ties: Former MSU Spartan Javon Bess is the leading scorer for St. Louis, and Port Huron native Eric Williams is the leading scorer and rebounder for Duquesne as a sophomore.
Big A-10 game of the week: 5-0 St. Louis at 4-1 Duquesne on Wednesday night.
Be nice to get some of those A-10 teams back on the schedule. Hope we see it soon.
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Jan 21, 2019 9:05:46 GMT -5
Be nice to get some of those A-10 teams back on the schedule. Hope we see it soon. I know Coach Davis's ideal non-conference schedule would be to play the 13 best teams in the country on the road, but in fact we will want some home games. I want us to dominate the Horizon, but once we do that, the Atlantic 10 seems to me like where I would want this program to end up if we ever got our act together, with the MVC as a #2 option. (I think the Horizon missed its chance around 2010 to 2012 to solidify its spot in the top dozen or so conference; I can't see it happening now. So if we did get our act together, I think we'd want to move on). Anyway, recognizing what a long shot either move would be (leaving aside everything else, unless something changes in the A10's philosophy, I don't see them expanding back west even if they wanted to add teams, and they've already got 14), I still think we need to start scheduling those teams when we can. Duquesne strikes me as team we might be able to schedule home and home. Right now they're putting a lot of money into buying a low-major non-conference home schedule. I think Dambrot's idea is to pile up the wins, create a "winning culture," and if he can even go .500 in A10 play hope that gets an NIT bid, build from there. But we'd be a good opponent for them, better than their "buys" of schools like NJIT, Maryland Eastern Shore, Radford, UMass-Lowell, Longwood and such. And it's relatively close. Another A10 foe I would think might be a H&H possibility is St. Bonaventure. Again, not so far as their east coast or southern members. George Mason and La Salle are a couple others that might be open to H&H (unlike Dayton--I don't see that happening soon). In the MVC, I'd like to see us try to schedule H&H series with our old friends Loyola or Valpo. Scheduling such teams is a very small part of the picture, but I think if you want to move to those leagues, you need to start associating with them.
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Jan 21, 2019 9:12:30 GMT -5
Another thought on Duquesne, by the way. I see them as one of the more similar programs to ours, right down to the logo (though theirs is better). A one-time power (moreso than we), urban Catholic institution, relatively low endowment (vis e.g. Dayton, St. Louis, etc., though about 3x our paltry endowment), briefly a conference rival in MCC, The Dukes haven't been to the NCAA since 1977 (the team that snapped our 21 game winning streak). But playing in the A10 gives them a better chance for renewed relevancy, better home opponents, more NCAA revenue.
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Jan 21, 2019 9:33:57 GMT -5
What a foolish thing to do UMass, firing that coach. They had 3 freshmen starting, 6 on the roster, from what, as you note, was considered a superb class. The had a total of 4 minutes played by seniors all year. And they weren't godawful- they were 15-18, with wins over Dayton, Temple, Harvard. A bright future tossed away. I agree. Looks like they were set up nicely for the future, and Kellogg is a coach who has proven he could get them to the post season. Dumb move to throw that away. And then they hired the guy from Winthrop who changed his mind and decided he wouldn't accept the job AFTER the press conference to announce his hiring. What a mess. Another example from the "gotta go for more" school of hard knocks. UMass ended up with Matt McCall. I don't know anything about McCall, really, except a few raw numbers. As his first head coaching job he had taken over a loaded Chattanooga team (15-3 in the Southern conference the year before, only 1 meaningful graduation) in 2015. He got them to 29 wins and an NCAA appearance his first year, but then dropped by 10 wins in his second year, then got the Mass job. Recruitment-wise, after two years at the helm he left almost nothing for his successor when he took the Mass job. UMass lost 20 games last year (his first at the helm) and is 7-11 overall and 0-5 in a really down A10 this year. Most of his best players are still guys recruited by his predecessor, Derrick Kellogg. He does have only 1 senior making major contributions, so maybe he's gonna turn this around--it's only his 2nd year, after all. But you gotta wonder. UMass struggled in Kellogg's last two years (14-18, 15-18) but had an excellent incoming recruiting class. In the 4 years prior to that Kellogg's teams had averaged 22 wins, made the Minutemen's first NCAA appearance since 1998, and been nationally ranked for the first time since 1999. Kellogg landed at Long Island, and got them to the NCAA tournament last year.
|
|
|
Post by motorcitysam on Jan 21, 2019 15:33:31 GMT -5
Another thought on Duquesne, by the way. I see them as one of the more similar programs to ours, right down to the logo (though theirs is better). A one-time power (moreso than we), urban Catholic institution, relatively low endowment (vis e.g. Dayton, St. Louis, etc., though about 3x our paltry endowment), briefly a conference rival in MCC, The Dukes haven't been to the NCAA since 1977 (the team that snapped our 21 game winning streak). But playing in the A10 gives them a better chance for renewed relevancy, better home opponents, more NCAA revenue. Good point. I keep expecting a lawsuit from Duquesne accusing us of stealing their logo and defacing it with an "m". :-) That does seem like a program that can take off with the right coach and a few breaks.
|
|
|
Post by motorcitysam on Jan 21, 2019 15:47:38 GMT -5
I agree. Looks like they were set up nicely for the future, and Kellogg is a coach who has proven he could get them to the post season. Dumb move to throw that away. And then they hired the guy from Winthrop who changed his mind and decided he wouldn't accept the job AFTER the press conference to announce his hiring. What a mess. Another example from the "gotta go for more" school of hard knocks. UMass ended up with Matt McCall. I don't know anything about McCall, really, except a few raw numbers. As his first head coaching job he had taken over a loaded Chattanooga team (15-3 in the Southern conference the year before, only 1 meaningful graduation) in 2015. He got them to 29 wins and an NCAA appearance his first year, but then dropped by 10 wins in his second year, then got the Mass job. Recruitment-wise, after two years at the helm he left almost nothing for his successor when he took the Mass job. UMass lost 20 games last year (his first at the helm) and is 7-11 overall and 0-5 in a really down A10 this year. Most of his best players are still guys recruited by his predecessor, Derrick Kellogg. He does have only 1 senior making major contributions, so maybe he's gonna turn this around--it's only his 2nd year, after all. But you gotta wonder. UMass struggled in Kellogg's last two years (14-18, 15-18) but had an excellent incoming recruiting class. In the 4 years prior to that Kellogg's teams had averaged 22 wins, made the Minutemen's first NCAA appearance since 1998, and been nationally ranked for the first time since 1999. Kellogg landed at Long Island, and got them to the NCAA tournament last year. Yeah, there is always that group that pushes for a program to "dare to be great" by firing a coach who has had success in order to catch that lightening in the bottle. That group usually is pretty quiet when things backfire, like in Minnesota and Boston College. Not sure what will happen in the future at UMass, but I never would have fired Kellogg. Seems like he could recruit and coach, and I am glad to hear he has had some success at Long Island.
|
|
|
Post by motorcitysam on Mar 8, 2019 4:52:49 GMT -5
|
|