2010-11 Billikens

[JettFlight5]

When do they announce next year's schedule? I think we have ourselves a fun product to watch.

[billiken_roy]

When do they announce next year's schedule? I think we have ourselves a fun product to watch.

as long as i can remember we dont get the schedule until nearly school starts. we will get snipets here and there of some of the opponents, but not exact dates and locations and definitely not the whole banana.

[brianstl]

Who do we have for sure in OOC ?

I have @MSU and UGA. That is the only two I know opponents I know for sure.

[JettFlight5]

Thanks guys....I wasn't sure how that worked. I know they get some info over the summer to pump up season ticket sales. Big year for us to add some BCS teams if we can get them.

[Pistol]

Thanks guys....I wasn't sure how that worked. I know they get some info over the summer to pump up season ticket sales. Big year for us to add some BCS teams if we can get them.

Typically late August; seems like the finalized schedule comes out a little later every year, though.

[Box and Won]

Who do we have for sure in OOC ?

I have @MSU and UGA. That is the only two I know opponents I know for sure.

@Methdale?

Bowling Green?

[Pistol]

@Methdale?

Bowling Green?

@Bass Pro State

Georgia

[davidnark]

@Methdale?

Bowling Green?

I think Methdale is off the schedule for a year.

[brianstl]

@Methdale?

Bowling Green?

I think CDale is off the schedule for 1 year.

[slu72]

I think CDale is off the schedule for 1 year.

Pretty sure we get BG at home next year. Also, what was the deal w/ Belmont? Was it simply a buy game or a home and home? Wouldn't be surprised if RM tries to get KM a game in Wisconsin next year.... So UWGB being on the schedule wouldn't surprise me. I'd love to schedule at least two or three games w/ teams like VCU or an old CUSA foe with a decent RPI. Please make one of them the College of Charleston. They'll probably add a BCS team or two, however, we'll face a couple in Cancun so they may not. And I'd love to get either St. Mary's or the Zags back for a home and home.

[bsheldon]

I am whole-heartedly in agreement that we need to add some more quality opponents, but Rick has said many times that he just can't get anyone in the BCS programs to play us.

I really liked the tourney we did last year with ND, NW, & IAST--it just didn't pan out for us--mostly because we lost both of those games, but also because IASt kind of had a bust year.

Belmont is definitely a quality opponent that we should keep on the schedule, but they kind of had an off year last year also with only 19 wins--they are ususally good for at least 2 or 3 more than that.

I like the Bass Pro State and Saluki series and hope we continue them into the future. Both are quality programs and both have had recent sucess, especially the Salukis at the highest level.

I really liked the GA and the NE games last year--unfortuanately each of them finished at the bottom of their respective conferences. I would like to see us schedule a few more teams of that caliber though--Major conference opponents that are not necessarily the creme de la creme of those conferences--because we still need to win those games. Playing Syracuse or West Virginia doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but playing a St John's or Seton Hall type team does to me. However, I think we are having problems getting those type of teams to play us. We are kind of "tweener" for major programs. Beating us isn't really a huge feather in their cap, but losing is very detrimental. Plus we are good enough that we could sneak up and beat a top team. So they don't take the chance. They either schedule a top 25 and take a chance at a huge feather or a buy game where they are sure to win.

Winning those OOC games is the most important thing. Looking at teams such as KS and TX--they both only really had 2-4 "real" non-buy games before conference play. Obviously Teams in the B12, BE and ACC have plenty of opportunity to boost their RPI in conference. I feel so do we. Up until the last 2 weeks of the season, the A-10 had 6 teams in the top 50. I think next year is going to be more of the same. Obvioulsy we have to play the anchor Fordham which drops us 10 spots even if you beat them by 20, but hopefully they will get better. So I think we really only need to add 2 maybe 3 quality games to our schedule. We had 5-7 "buy" games last year and we lost one of those (BG.) I have no problem with the local flair of the schedule though. SEMO , UMKC and EIL are fine buy games. Rockhurst is D2 and doesn't help us at all, so we probably shouldn't even play it.

Heck, had we won all 4 chances we had at BCS teams last year (we went 1-3) (and not lost to BG) we would have been dancing. Again winning those opportunities is the most important thing. I feel next year we are going to be able to play with anyone in the country, the year after that we should be able to beat anyone in the country. Scheduleling, just like just about everything else, gets much easier when you win. Winning truly does solve a lot of problems and I see our problems getting fewer and fewer going forwrd. It is fun program and a great time to be a fan.

[DeSmetBilliken]

In a press conference Majerus said that he wanted to get Conklin a game in Oregon, but Oregon and Oregon State didn't want to play us, so we'll probably be playing at Portland next year.

[billiken_roy]

bsheldon if the bcs wont play, schedule other mid majors home and away. just quit the 200+ buy games. it amazes me that more season ticket holders have been willing to pay the much increased costs of our tickets/billiken club fees and stayed quiet about the dumbing down of our schedule the last couple of seasons. my gosh if nothing else dont you want to see better competition for the sake of your entertainment dollars?

[drkelsey55]

bsheldon if the bcs wont play, schedule other mid majors home and away. just quit the 200+ buy games. it amazes me that more season ticket holders have been willing to pay the much increased costs of our tickets/billiken club fees and stayed quiet about the dumbing down of our schedule the last couple of seasons. my gosh if nothing else dont you want to see better competition for the sake of your entertainment dollars?

If you are truely a Billiken fan(this applies to everyone and is not aimed just at you Roy) you go to the games to see the Billikens play and don't give a hoot who they are playing!!!!

JMHO

[billiken_roy]

If you are truely a Billiken fan(this applies to everyone and is not aimed just at you Roy) you go to the games to see the Billikens play and don't give a hoot who they are playing!!!!

JMHO

drk, i have maybe missed 10 games since 1989. and i wont miss many going forward either. that doesnt mean i cannot be disappointed with the caliber of competition our schedule has been taken to the last two seasons. no one is suggesting dont come. please show me where i said quit coming.

we have our core of hardcores that will come blindly myself included. i am one that has a vision of trying to sell the place out with season ticket holders. imo, we need to upgrade the schedule. but we need more than a few of us willing to speak up to tell slu our true thoughts. just accepting what they dish out isnt going to help the program.

[bsheldon]

bsheldon if the bcs wont play, schedule other mid majors home and away. just quit the 200+ buy games. it amazes me that more season ticket holders have been willing to pay the much increased costs of our tickets/billiken club fees and stayed quiet about the dumbing down of our schedule the last couple of seasons. my gosh if nothing else dont you want to see better competition for the sake of your entertainment dollars?

Absolutely agree. Again, I want better competition and playing the 200 or even 150+ rpi type teams doesn't do anything for your rpi in the long run anyway. I just don't think we need to have 10 games against top 25 teams to start the season--it would never happen anyway.

Also, you remind me of a good point that I haven't mentioned yet. I brought a couple of newbies to some games this year to experience the "Fetz." The one guy is a huge Mizzou fan. We won both games, but both were against teams that he had never heard of--Fordham and Belmont. I really didn't have an answer to his question of "who are these guys." Playing teams no one has heard of is a much tougher sell to attract new fans. That is why I really liked the UGA, NEB, and IAST games. They may not be the best teams to play, but at least people know who they are. I doubt seriously that the average fan can tell you where Kennesaw State even is. But, if we played Wash St or Miami (fl) people are familiar with those teams. UGA and NEB are the perfect examples--poeple definitely know those teams, but they are the bottom feeders in ther respectve conferences. I think if we have to play some buy games--these are better for our exposure--and better for the team. Granted we did lose to UGA last year which hurts, but that is the price of playing at a higher level--better opponents--even your buy games. Hopefully we can schedule 1 or 2 mid level BCS schools, but it doesn't look good.

Playing mid majors: We run the risk that major BCS schools would take if they played us. If we play a mid level mid major and win--so what, we should win(assuming we are headed in the direction we all feel we are.) But playing a 130 rpi ranked mid major and losing--which is very possible is very detrimental. Playing some of the top Mid majors would be good though, but a lot of those are going to view us just as the major BCS programs do. Most of the top level mid majors are already playing some major BCS shools early in the season. Why? because they have a record of success and teams want to play them. Just as will happen with us in the next couple of years. We just have to keep winning.

With the tourney at 96 next year (which appears all but certain at this point) we are in, if we play even close to our potential in conference. The scheduling isn't going to be as huge of a factor as it always has been(again assuming we play well in conference.) It is still important and we can't play exclusively 200+ plus teams and rack up a high, but really soft winning percentage--that will hurt us in the long run with rpi computations. Again if we can keep playing 4 or so BCS schools and then maybe add 2 to 3 more quality OOC (<100rpi) games we should be more than set--assuming we do well in those games. Say, 4-2ish. Now the goal is to get one of the coveted top 32 spots where you get the buy game. Essentially they are adding a round of 64 play-in games to get to a field of 64.

[billiken_roy]

if we consistently lose to other mid majors we dont deserve post season.

[slufanskip]

Absolutely agree. Again, I want better competition and playing the 200 or even 150+ rpi type teams doesn't do anything for your rpi in the long run anyway. I just don't think we need to have 10 games against top 25 teams to start the season--it would never happen anyway.

Also, you remind me of a good point that I haven't mentioned yet. I brought a couple of newbies to some games this year to experience the "Fetz." The one guy is a huge Mizzou fan. We won both games, but both were against teams that he had never heard of--Fordham and Belmont. I really didn't have an answer to his question of "who are these guys." Playing teams no one has heard of is a much tougher sell to attract new fans. That is why I really liked the UGA, NEB, and IAST games. They may not be the best teams to play, but at least people know who they are. I doubt seriously that the average fan can tell you where Kennesaw State even is. But, if we played Wash St or Miami (fl) people are familiar with those teams. UGA and NEB are the perfect examples--poeple definitely know those teams, but they are the bottom feeders in ther respectve conferences. I think if we have to play some buy games--these are better for our exposure--and better for the team. Granted we did lose to UGA last year which hurts, but that is the price of playing at a higher level--better opponents--even your buy games. Hopefully we can schedule 1 or 2 mid level BCS schools, but it doesn't look good.

Playing mid majors: We run the risk that major BCS schools would take if they played us. If we play a mid level mid major and win--so what, we should win(assuming we are headed in the direction we all feel we are.) But playing a 130 rpi ranked mid major and losing--which is very possible is very detrimental. Playing some of the top Mid majors would be good though, but a lot of those are going to view us just as the major BCS programs do. Most of the top level mid majors are already playing some major BCS shools early in the season. Why? because they have a record of success and teams want to play them. Just as will happen with us in the next couple of years. We just have to keep winning.

With the tourney at 96 next year (which appears all but certain at this point) we are in, if we play even close to our potential in conference. The scheduling isn't going to be as huge of a factor as it always has been(again assuming we play well in conference.) It is still important and we can't play exclusively 200+ plus teams and rack up a high, but really soft winning percentage--that will hurt us in the long run with rpi computations. Again if we can keep playing 4 or so BCS schools and then maybe add 2 to 3 more quality OOC (<100rpi) games we should be more than set--assuming we do well in those games. Say, 4-2ish. Now the goal is to get one of the coveted top 32 spots where you get the buy game. Essentially they are adding a round of 64 play-in games to get to a field of 64.

A Mizzou fan probably didn't want to remember Belmont. Didn't Belmont beat Mizzou a couple of years back?

[Bishop]

Just got done listening to a Notre Dame podcast and they were talking about Next Years OOC Schedule and were begging for Brey to schedule a better and more interesting schedule.

Asked for teams like IU, Northwestern and SLU every year.

Lets make it happen Rick.

[bauman]

drk, i have maybe missed 10 games since 1989. and i wont miss many going forward either. that doesnt mean i cannot be disappointed with the caliber of competition our schedule has been taken to the last two seasons. no one is suggesting dont come. please show me where i said quit coming.

we have our core of hardcores that will come blindly myself included. i am one that has a vision of trying to sell the place out with season ticket holders. imo, we need to upgrade the schedule. but we need more than a few of us willing to speak up to tell slu our true thoughts. just accepting what they dish out isnt going to help the program.

I agree with you Roy, I would like to see a much improved schedule next year, but I think Rick did the right thing the past two years given our talent/experience level-we were just too young to play a big-time schedule.

I might be off on my numbers a bit, but I think we played 14 OOC games last year, including the Chicago tournament. I think we have BG, Mo St. and Georgia as done deals for next year. Add in 3 Cancun games and we are at 6. Schedule 4 buy games with reasonable quality talent (or local interest, such as SEMO or SIU-Edw) and we are at 10 games with about 4 more available.

Suggestions for the remaining 4 games:

St. Mary's (old coaching tie and a good team who shouldn't be afraid to play us)

VCU (why not? they need good opponents too)

Bradley (a good old time rival)

mid level teams from the Pac 10/Big 12/Big 10 /Big East. Surely some of those type teams are looking to upgrade their schedules e.g. SJU/Prov/SH/Rutgers/BC again with their new coach/ Depaul-needs some big wins/ Ia St/ Tex Tch/UCLA or USC.

UW-Mil for KM

Oregon has a new coach and might be looking for some meaningful opposition.

Col of Char (for slu72)

Gonzaga (Few shouldn't be afraid to schedule another good Jebbie school)

Finally, I'm sure we can always count on State U. in Col. to want to schedule us as a sure win for them.

Can't we get 4 of the above possibilities to have some guts?

(If in fact SIU-C is off the schedule next year that's too bad-they are a fun opponent.)

Whoever we play, next yr should be fun.

[ACE]

bsheldon if the bcs wont play, schedule other mid majors home and away. just quit the 200+ buy games. it amazes me that more season ticket holders have been willing to pay the much increased costs of our tickets/billiken club fees and stayed quiet about the dumbing down of our schedule the last couple of seasons. my gosh if nothing else dont you want to see better competition for the sake of your entertainment dollars?

Regarding the "dumbing down" of our home schedule, it does not seem all that different from the recent past

2006-07

Quincy

Houston

Western Illinois

Tenn-Martin

Missouri State (also on this year's schedule)

UNC (* Only here because of Hansborough)

Ole Miss (Lower level BCS program, like Nebraska from this past season)

** Like this past year, the Bills essentially played two buy games as part of a tournament, the difference is in 06-07 they were played at Texas A&M

2004-05

Truman State

Oral Roberts

Hawaii

UW-Milwaukee

Oakland

Dayton (before we were in A10)

SEMO (BTW, We lost by 16 points! Perhaps the worst loss ever)

IPFW

[billiken_roy]

i assume we are taking a year off of siu in order to get them and missouri state on opposite years and have one at home and one away each year.

bauman, personally i would only schedule 2 buys games (and let's try to hold our exhibitions to 2 games this year as well instead of 3) and then we would have 6 to try to schedule with other mid majors.

as to doing the right thing the past two seasons, well first off, again we arent talking about scheduling the top 15 as our ooc schedule. i agree that would have been suicide but scheduling 100-200 rpi teams in place of 3 or 4 buy games and the 1 extra exhibition game i think would not have been too much for our team. i think it would have only made the billikens better. nothing is accomplished in the exhibition and buy games but create bad habits and loss of focus.

[TheA_Bomb]

IF the NCAA tournament expands it could effect scheduling. Maybe schools will be looser with the OOC because a loss will not be as devastating. Or maybe they won't loosen up and play tougher teams because they won't have to.

I don't want the tourney to expand. For years I wanted SLU to get in now it seems like we should make it and the tourney expands and everyone will make it anyway.

[drkelsey55]

IF the NCAA tournament expands it could effect scheduling. Maybe schools will be looser with the OOC because a loss will not be as devastating. Or maybe they won't loosen up and play tougher teams because they won't have to.

I don't want the tourney to expand. For years I wanted SLU to get in now it seems like we should make it and the tourney expands and everyone will make it anyway.

the big thing with the expansion would be wanting to be one of the 32 bye teams.

[bsheldon]

the big thing with the expansion would be wanting to be one of the 32 bye teams.

This is the goal, but a very tall order. Depending on how they do the seeding, it may be very, very difficult. Essentially you would have to be a top 25 team to get one of those spots--if they give conference winners automatic spots--who knows. Even if they don't and go by some arbitrary ranking system or some convoluted closed door session like they do now we would essentially have to be ranked in the top 32. I am not saying that is not possible, but a big jump from where were where last year--which is expected. Again, we don't know how it is going to shake out. I expect us to be a top 40 team for sure, top 25 would be very, very nice and a ton of fun. Here's hoping.