|
Post by Guido13 on Jan 27, 2005 16:53:23 GMT -6
Easy now, I didn't say the entire BB is a waste, but if a team like UWM can sked decent opp's for those two open slots, maybe they should look into it.
I think they are out as far as atlarge goes too, agreed.
ESPN should invite 8 mid major conference champions to a tournament at the begining of the year, play it off, have a Bracket Buster Champion, the champion gets to return, with the rule being you can't appear in the tournament two consecutive years (unless you win it).
Now I'm pipe dreaming, I'm lost.
|
|
|
Post by pnthr30 on Jan 27, 2005 17:11:17 GMT -6
Butler just passed on the whole thing..... I am not saying it is right or wrong, but Butler apparently has/had the same feelings towards it you do. In other words, they will just take their chances scheduling their own games.
|
|
|
Post by PANTHERfan on Jan 27, 2005 18:01:00 GMT -6
i'd say overall the BB is a good thing for UWM. Butler is in a fairly unique situation in that they have some history to fall back on... we don't. granted that history means zero for Butler this year, i can still see why they chose to pass on this. UWM needs exposure, national exposure. a win over GB all but guarantees that our game will be on TV. the return game next year will be a good thing... plus we'll be hosting the BB assuming we stick with it.
the at large is but a dream right now... not an impossibility, but it's a reach. any loss be it non-conference or conference kills our chances all together save maybe the tourney title game.
|
|
|
Post by uwfenske aka hardhat on Jan 27, 2005 19:32:10 GMT -6
I don't disagree with the BB. When it started it was great exposure. The problem I have with it this year, and even last year somewhat, is the number of teams in the BB. I guess I would rather see a lower number of teams to be in the event. I guess YSU and CSU are trying to grow into a higher level and the BB is what can get them there. ps. The words that I wanted to express in this post did not come together right. Please bare through the grammar and composition.
|
|
kaygee
Sophomore
Panther Pride since 1994!
|
Post by kaygee on Jan 27, 2005 22:42:10 GMT -6
Bowling Green would be a quality opponent to play at home next year , adding a quality mid-major team on the home schedule. In addition, to go to suburban Toledo and win a game has recruiting ramifications . Ohio and Michigan are areas we recruit heavily (ie. Rob Sanders & Derrick Ford - Toledo, Ed McCants, Ryan Childress - Ohio, Walter Waters, James Douglas - Detroit) so to go in there and take a win would be a coup for BP and TJ on the recruiting trail. Whether you know it or not, UWM is recruiting against Bowling Green, Toledo, Detroit, Wright State, etc., in this area, and in Chicago, Indiana etc.
|
|
|
Post by Hack on Jan 28, 2005 10:52:54 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Guido13 on Jan 28, 2005 11:15:41 GMT -6
Bowling Green would be a quality opponent to play at home next year , adding a quality mid-major team on the home schedule. In addition, to go to suburban Toledo and win a game has recruiting ramifications . Ohio and Michigan are areas we recruit heavily (ie. Rob Sanders & Derrick Ford - Toledo, Ed McCants, Ryan Childress - Ohio, Walter Waters, James Douglas - Detroit) so to go in there and take a win would be a coup for BP and TJ on the recruiting trail. Whether you know it or not, UWM is recruiting against Bowling Green, Toledo, Detroit, Wright State, etc., in this area, and in Chicago, Indiana etc. I understand your point, but wouldn't it be more impressive to those recruits (and to the selection committee) if UWM came into Ohio State and beat them? or went to Michigan and beat them? It's not hard to imagine being able to put one of those two on the sked.
|
|
kaygee
Sophomore
Panther Pride since 1994!
|
Post by kaygee on Jan 28, 2005 13:48:47 GMT -6
MilWindy, I understand what you are saying as well. (I really like your idea of 8 great mid-major teams battling it out at the beginning of the season.) However, your point about Ohio State and Michigan is another point entirely. From what I have heard UWM has been having a hard time scheduling home games as it is, so for now that is the benefit of getting the return game from the Bracket Buster. My point is that UWM is recruiting against the Bowling Green's of the world so if a recruit is deciding between the two, a win in Ohio could be a recruiting victory as well. I have thought for quite awhile that the Horizon League, Mid-American, Missouri Valley and Ohio Valley should form some sort of alliance (ie. the ACC-Big Ten Challenge) and play guaranteed games between the conferences. In reference to your point regarding playing Ohio State and Michigan, I am Not sure we are going to be playing a Big ten other than Wisconsin for quite some time after beating Purdue on the road. Personally, I would love to see UWM play 2 games against Big Ten teams every year, with one in Milwaukee every once in awhile, but good luck to Bruce and staff trying to schedule another Big Ten game in the near future. Now that UWM has become a quality mid-major program there is no reason for Big Ten schools to bring them into their arena if there is a possibility to lose. My feelings are bring on Northwestern, Ohio State, Minnesota, Iowa, etc. This seasons non-conference schedule was amazing in the fact that BP and staff got a Big Ten team other than Wisconsin, a Conf USA team, Big 12 and Air Force all on the schedule, but that also includes playing the South Dakota State's, Parksides and Prairie View's. I am not sure everyone understands that a lot goes into scheduling and that the high major teams don't have a lot of extra games on their schedules so they look for some gimme non-conference home games. I think UWM has showed in recent years vs. Kansas, Va. Tech, NC State, etc. that at least for now there are not a gimme game.
|
|
|
Post by Guido13 on Jan 28, 2005 14:04:41 GMT -6
All very good kaygee, all very good.
I also agree that this year's non-conf. sked was amazing, hopefully it wasn't an anomily (sp?)...
...all of your statements are well put.
On a further note, I'm guessing you won't find too many in-depth and thoughtful discussions about the BB like this anywhere on the web.
This board is good.
|
|
|
Post by pnthr30 on Jan 28, 2005 14:04:56 GMT -6
I agree with Kaygee - I know that UWM has a heck of a time putting together a decent/quality schedule as a whole, and trying to get decent/good home games..........that is a whole nother issue all together. Simply put, not an easy thing to do. What makes getting home games even more difficult is that fact that we have to schedule home-home series, because up to this point, we have never "bought" a home game (i.e. buy game). Until BP gets the OK to start scheduling "buy" games, we will continue to have a considerable amount more road games at times due to hte flip flopping of games. With that being said, I think this years schedule is pretty darn good.
|
|
|
Post by uwmfootball on Jan 28, 2005 14:19:30 GMT -6
When you think about it, did any of us think that Pudue and St. Louis would have fallen off the map like they have? When we saw these games on the schedule early in the season, we were expecting tough games and/or losses. Given that NO ONE wants to come to the Cell, our schedule was high quality, and as long as we keep winning in the HL.
|
|
|
Post by uwfenske aka hardhat on Jan 28, 2005 14:44:19 GMT -6
Another note on scheduling. For this season, N.C. State did not want to play us, because of how tough we played them the year before. How is scheduling teams going to be for next year when we gave (at the time) No.2 Kansas a run for their money and beat Purdue on the road.
|
|
|
Post by WIBballfan on Jan 29, 2005 10:42:18 GMT -6
The BB is great for 2 reasons. You have a chance for a TV game and you get a quality home game next year. Looking forward to 3 quality home (non-conference) games next year.
The unfortunate thing about the BB game is that it has a better chance of hurting an at-large than helping.
|
|