bonwich Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Ha, maybe in different decades. More likely it's that our Virgins are perfectly aligned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 according to realtime rpi, we lost 10 rpi spots in our win last night. our strength of schedule ranking also was downgraded almost 50 places as well. gotta love these buy games. tell me why we play them again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 according to realtime rpi, we lost 10 rpi spots in our win last night. our strength of schedule ranking also was downgraded almost 50 places as well. gotta love these buy games. tell me why we play them again? 8,044 x ~$20 = ~$160k Don't worry about the RPI. We'll be fine as long as we end the regular season with 6 or fewer losses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlarry Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 tony harvey must just be a horrible coach. a few of those players last night were nice players but they had absolutely no plan, and they played horrible defense. i was just glad no one got hurt. there should be absolutely no reason to play a team like that. nothing good comes of it. I think they had a plan it just wasnt a very good one. I get that some coaches have a style of play and will never stray from that stlye, but don't you think that when you are down by 20+ at half you may want to try something different? That trapping press may work against some teams but not a well coahed team. I just dont get how a D1 BBall coach can be so one dimensional and either to dumb or stubborn to make in game changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 More likely it's that our Virgins are perfectly aligned. Bonwich and I have the same birthday (we're Virgos), just to clarify! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Pine Jim Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Bonwich and I have the same birthday (we're Virgos), just to clarify! Whew, I was wondering there for a while ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 according to realtime rpi, we lost 10 rpi spots in our win last night. our strength of schedule ranking also was downgraded almost 50 places as well. gotta love these buy games. tell me why we play them again? Good thing for us that the RPI plays a smaller role in tournament selection than it did a few years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 8,044 x ~$20 = ~$160k Don't worry about the RPI. We'll be fine as long as we end the regular season with 6 or fewer losses. you are a fool to not be concerned. it would be different if we were in a bcs conference where the rest of the games from here out were almost assured of top 50-75 foes. but the A-10 is not the case and if a couple of those 6 or fewer losses end up happening vs a 200+ rpi team from the A-10, you can bet we will be sweating on selection sunday. as to your financial math: 1. dont forget to factor in the expenses of buying and housing that team last night. and 2. think what it would have been had the opponent been someone more worthy in a true home and home. even if it was someone the ilk of say Indiana State or TCU or Central Florida or Valpo. i dont buy this "no one will play us crap." maybe the big boys wont play is, but the mid majors are all in the same boat as us and are dying for schedule cred. play the 100 rpi schools. not only will it bolster the ranking, it will make us even more money. it is a win win. the only way it isnt is if we lose. well guess what. if we cant beat indiana state, tcu, central florida, or whomever from midmajor land 9 times out of 10 we dont deserve to go on. and if we do, we just nutted the tourney as long as we take care of business in conference. just stupid. and i pray it doesnt come back and bite us in march. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 you are a fool to not be concerned. it would be different if we were in a bcs conference where the rest of the games from here out were almost assured of top 50-75 foes. but the A-10 is not the case and if a couple of those 6 or fewer losses end up happening vs a 200+ rpi team from the A-10, you can bet we will be sweating on selection sunday. as to your financial math: 1. dont forget to factor in the expenses of buying and housing that team last night. and 2. think what it would have been had the opponent been someone more worthy in a true home and home. even if it was someone the ilk of say Indiana State or TCU or Central Florida or Valpo. i dont buy this "no one will play us crap." maybe the big boys wont play is, but the mid majors are all in the same boat as us and are dying for schedule cred. play the 100 rpi schools. not only will it bolster the ranking, it will make us even more money. it is a win win. the only way it isnt is if we lose. well guess what. if we cant beat indiana state, tcu, central florida, or whomever from midmajor land 9 times out of 10 we dont deserve to go on. and if we do, we just nutted the tourney as long as we take care of business in conference. just stupid. and i pray it doesnt come back and bite us in march. Then I guess I am a fool. I just believe in the math that if we are 24-6 our RPI will be in the low 30s. After all, math is universal. I saw in another thread you say you don't care what the RPI forcast site says. I guess I'm going to go with the guy that has run the simulations rather than your gut feel. We will be fine at 24-6. I promise! Factor in that RPI is just one of the many computer tools used to determine a team's qualifications and that it rates us the lowest because our margin of victory is so good, I'm not worried. Pomeroy has us 13th right now and Sagarin has us 29th. As for the financial math, I also didn't include the parking, concessions, etc. Also, when we travel to play a home and home game it costs us money. So if you want to count the money we spend on the other team's hotel you probably need to factor in our travel costs. If it wasn't such a money making proposition than SLU and other teams like SLU wouldn't do it, but they do, so it must make money and lots of it. As for the idea that we need to be playing more home and homes with teams in the RPIs between 100 and 150, games such as Portland, Kent St., Loyola Maramount, Bowling Green, UW Milwaukee, Detroit, etc. come to mind. We end up losing on the road more times than not and the home game that we get doesn't excite anyone. I wish we hadn't played the LMU game this year, don't you?!? Ask the casual fan if they thought Portland was a buy game or a home and home and I doubt most will get the answer right. So you'll have to forgive me for thinking that the best way to solve SLU's financial issues is not to go out and take the 6 home games we currently have against teams nobody cares about and play 3 road games and 3 home games against teams that nobody cares about. It would be a financial disaster (we'd lose close to 1/6 of our revenue) and the chances of us coming out of those 6 games without a loss is pretty slim, as LMU proved earlier this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 -as i have said many times if we take care of our business, that is win our games, it will all work out -what a weaker schedule does is reduce the margin for error, but it all comes down to did you win your games so win the games -if a team is not winning games it will not get in the tourney and we are losing a couple of games to 200+ rpi teams we don't deserve a tourney invite -part of the buy feature is to present enough home games to season ticket holders as even if you are doing 3 for 1's with semo or whoever you would reduce the number of home games at some point -win the games Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iggy Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Since we do have to play these buy games, I just wish we would be playing more of the UMKC, SEMO, SIU-E's. Those would be more interesting than Texas Southern. Also, why not a pre-season match against Wash U.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Then I guess I am a fool. I just believe in the math that if we are 24-6 our RPI will be in the low 30s. After all, math is universal. I saw in another thread you say you don't care what the RPI forcast site says. I guess I'm going to go with the guy that has run the simulations rather than your gut feel. We will be fine at 24-6. I promise! Factor in that RPI is just one of the many computer tools used to determine a team's qualifications and that it rates us the lowest because our margin of victory is so good, I'm not worried. Pomeroy has us 13th right now and Sagarin has us 29th. As for the financial math, I also didn't include the parking, concessions, etc. Also, when we travel to play a home and home game it costs us money. So if you want to count the money we spend on the other team's hotel you probably need to factor in our travel costs. If it wasn't such a money making proposition than SLU and other teams like SLU wouldn't do it, but they do, so it must make money and lots of it. As for the idea that we need to be playing more home and homes with teams in the RPIs between 100 and 150, games such as Portland, Kent St., Loyola Maramount, Bowling Green, UW Milwaukee, Detroit, etc. come to mind. We end up losing on the road more times than not and the home game that we get doesn't excite anyone. I wish we hadn't played the LMU game this year, don't you?!? Ask the casual fan if they thought Portland was a buy game or a home and home and I doubt most will get the answer right. So you'll have to forgive me for thinking that the best way to solve SLU's financial issues is not to go out and take the 6 home games we currently have against teams nobody cares about and play 3 road games and 3 home games against teams that nobody cares about. It would be a financial disaster (we'd lose close to 1/6 of our revenue) and the chances of us coming out of those 6 games without a loss is pretty slim, as LMU proved earlier this year. p.s. Roy, since I see you'll be at the Fieldhouse on Saturday can we count on you to buy a round at the end of the game, even if we lose by 30, since our RPI and SOS will go up no matter what?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Since we do have to play these buy games, I just wish we would be playing more of the UMKC, SEMO, SIU-E's. ++ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 8,044 x ~$20 = ~$160k Don't worry about the RPI. We'll be fine as long as we end the regular season with 6 or fewer losses. Also, don't we need a certain number of home games to make the season ticket price point work? I thought that point has been raised on the board. That can't work if you have to schedule too many home/homes. We have to be very selective with the ones we schedule. I really like the New Mexico games and Washington was a no-brainer. I didn't like scheduling the LMU series and said so before the fact. Portland made sense because of Conklin. Save the home/homes for schools like New Mexico or Gonzaga or Butler... not the likes of Detroit or Central Florida. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 you are a fool to not be concerned. it would be different if we were in a bcs conference where the rest of the games from here out were almost assured of top 50-75 foes. but the A-10 is not the case and if a couple of those 6 or fewer losses end up happening vs a 200+ rpi team from the A-10, you can bet we will be sweating on selection sunday. as to your financial math: 1. dont forget to factor in the expenses of buying and housing that team last night. and 2. think what it would have been had the opponent been someone more worthy in a true home and home. even if it was someone the ilk of say Indiana State or TCU or Central Florida or Valpo. i dont buy this "no one will play us crap." maybe the big boys wont play is, but the mid majors are all in the same boat as us and are dying for schedule cred. play the 100 rpi schools. not only will it bolster the ranking, it will make us even more money. it is a win win. the only way it isnt is if we lose. well guess what. if we cant beat indiana state, tcu, central florida, or whomever from midmajor land 9 times out of 10 we dont deserve to go on. and if we do, we just nutted the tourney as long as we take care of business in conference. just stupid. and i pray it doesnt come back and bite us in march. I understand why you get all pissy about buy games. I get it. You want a tough schedule so that SOS can't be used as an excuse come tourney selection time. However, in this case, I think it is much ado about nothing. The next two games are true road games against New Mexico (10-2; Realtime RPI 74) and Dayton (9-4; Realtime RPI 52.) This was a perfect position to place an easy buy game, as you have two tough road games ahaead and this was going to be the last non-conf home game you can schedule. Best to place an easy win there than a tough game that could potentially be a loss. Of course, there are a lot of cream puffs on the non-conf slate this season and the SOS is pretty weak. However, I don't think it was set up totally to be that way and we hit some bad luck. Washington was supposed to be a big feather in the cap. The 76 Classic presented 3 BCS schools in 3 days. However, only Oklahoma has been playing up to par, with BC a terrible team and 'Nova not playing like a tourney team. We setup the SIU series again, but this season they are beyond awful. Vermont is not as good as they were the past 2 seasons (NCAA and NIT.) Portland also is not the 20 win team they were the past two years. Basically, I believe that the schedule was setup before the season started to be the kind that you wanted. You would have a some big names (Washington at home, New Mexico on the road, 76 Classic games), some decent mid-major teams (Vermont, Portland, LMU, SIU) and then your buy games (Ark St., Alabama St., TX Southern, TSU, I-S.) You will always have about 5 buy games on the schedule. It just happens that the the other teams did not turn out to be as good as we hoped this season, and dragged down the SOS worse than we thought it would. There is a silver lining, though. The next two games will give us a big jump in SOS and RPI, especially if both result in wins. Also, everyone is starting their conference seasons. Thus, the SOS's of UW, 'Nova. Oklahoma and BC will most likely go up, and with them, most likely their RPIs. On top of that, teams like TSU, TX Southern and Ark St. will probably do well in their conferences, and perhaps one (or more) can make some kind of post-season tournament. That can help improve the SOS throughout the season as they do better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusicCityBilliken Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Since we do have to play these buy games, I just wish we would be playing more of the UMKC, SEMO, SIU-E's. Those would be more interesting than Texas Southern. Also, why not a pre-season match against Wash U.? When I was down in Florida 2 weeks ago (New Smyrna Beach) I caught this article in Daytona Beach News on what typical buy team, in this case Bethune Cookman, makes. http://www.news-journalonline.com/sports/college/2011/12/14/guarantee-games-provide-b-cu-revenue-visibility-memories.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 you act as though we sold out those buy games. we did not. and the two best attended games had the benefit of the season tix holders giving out 2 tix each to pump up the gate and a heavy discount groupon game last night. you also have to remember when the big boys like kentucky, syracuse and north carolina are playing all home games with a load of buy games, they are selling far far more tickets with their mega arena's. we are capped at 10,000 seats. you also really downplay the cost of a buygame. i would venture to guess slu is paying upwards of $50k per game to bring each team in to play. i.e. we really are not making a lot of money on these guarantee games like you want to project. as to portland, that was scheduled to benefit conklin and yes it was a home and home. most mid majors are not going to bomb to that degree after a very good season the year before like portland did. the other 4 buy games (besides ark state and texas southern) averaged about 6100 fans. and the added seats for arkansas state and south texas were definitely not an average of $20 per ticket. not even close. the ncaa says we can play 27 games plus two exhibition games for a total of 29 games (besides sanctioned tourney games) this season we have 18 home games and 11 road games. At home: we have 18 games. 2 home and home games (washington and portland), 2 exhibition games, 8 conferenence games and 6 buy games. on the road: we have 11 games. 8 conference games and 3 home and home games (loyola, siu and new mexico). so overall we play 16 conference games, two exhibition games, 5 home and home series games, and 6 buy games. i understand in the name of just giving us fans games, we will need to play some buys. but 6? why not cut that back to 3 and play 3 more home and home for a total of 8 home and homes for the entire season? if scheduled correctly, we still get the 2 exhibitions, 8 conference games, 4 home and home, and 3 buys for a total of 17 games. i.e. one less home game and a far better schedule. considering the likelihood that the home and homes will be more profitable than the buy games, i really dont see how it becomes a financial disaster to play one less home game overall in the name of scheduling 3 more home and home series games. and the biggest benefit, a schedule that if we take care of business will not be as rpi sensitive as the junk schedule we have now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 the way you j.o.'s treat me, you want me to buy a round? you all should be buying my rounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 you act as though we sold out those buy games. we did not. and the two best attended games had the benefit of the season tix holders giving out 2 tix each to pump up the gate and a heavy discount groupon game last night. you also have to remember when the big boys like kentucky, syracuse and north carolina are playing all home games with a load of buy games, they are selling far far more tickets with their mega arena's. we are capped at 10,000 seats. you also really downplay the cost of a buygame. i would venture to guess slu is paying upwards of $50k per game to bring each team in to play. i.e. we really are not making a lot of money on these guarantee games like you want to project. as to portland, that was scheduled to benefit conklin and yes it was a home and home. most mid majors are not going to bomb to that degree after a very good season the year before like portland did. the other 4 buy games (besides ark state and texas southern) averaged about 6100 fans. and the added seats for arkansas state and south texas were definitely not an average of $20 per ticket. not even close. the ncaa says we can play 27 games plus two exhibition games for a total of 29 games (besides sanctioned tourney games) this season we have 18 home games and 11 road games. At home: we have 18 games. 2 home and home games (washington and portland), 2 exhibition games, 8 conferenence games and 6 buy games. on the road: we have 11 games. 8 conference games and 3 home and home games (loyola, siu and new mexico). so overall we play 16 conference games, two exhibition games, 5 home and home series games, and 6 buy games. i understand in the name of just giving us fans games, we will need to play some buys. but 6? why not cut that back to 3 and play 3 more home and home for a total of 8 home and homes for the entire season? if scheduled correctly, we still get the 2 exhibitions, 8 conference games, 4 home and home, and 3 buys for a total of 17 games. i.e. one less home game and a far better schedule. considering the likelihood that the home and homes will be more profitable than the buy games, i really dont see how it becomes a financial disaster to play one less home game overall in the name of scheduling 3 more home and home series games. and the biggest benefit, a schedule that if we take care of business will not be as rpi sensitive as the junk schedule we have now. Your math is off in that if you get rid of 3 buy games in favor of home and homes it doesn't reduce you by 1 game, it reduces by 1.5 on average over two years. If season ticket holders are willing to pay $450 per seat for 16 or 17 games, rather than 18 games, than by all means go ahead and do it. Good luck telling them they'll get 2 less games but we've got Illinois St. and TCU comign to town! But if they aren't, then hard decisions need to be made and an 18 game home schedule is an economic necessity for a school like SLU that has to fund its entire athletic department off those season tickets and the donations that come with them... I, and I expect most Billiken fans, am all in favor of more home and homes if they are with good teams that will increase fan interest. The teams like Portland, Bowling Green, Kent St., UW Milwaukee, Detroit, Loyola don't excite anyone yet you want more of those games! Once we have made the dance a couple years in a row and can schedule more like Gonzaga, Butler and Xavier I think we'll see the # of buy games go down but for now the idea of playing away games in front of 500-1,000 people and watching a crappy internet feed as we play those teams doesn't excite me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Your math is off in that if you get rid of 3 buy games in favor of home and homes it doesn't reduce you by 1 game, it reduces by 1.5 on average over two years. If season ticket holders are willing to pay $450 per seat for 16 or 17 games, rather than 18 games, than by all means go ahead and do it. Good luck telling them they'll get 2 less games but we've got Illinois St. and TCU comign to town! But if they aren't, then hard decisions need to be made and an 18 game home schedule is an economic necessity for a school like SLU that has to fund its entire athletic department off those season tickets and the donations that come with them... I, and I expect most Billiken fans, am all in favor of more home and homes if they are with good teams that will increase fan interest. The teams like Portland, Bowling Green, Kent St., UW Milwaukee, Detroit, Loyola don't excite anyone yet you want more of those games! Once we have made the dance a couple years in a row and can schedule more like Gonzaga, Butler and Xavier I think we'll see the # of buy games go down but for now the idea of playing away games in front of 500-1,000 people and watching a crappy internet feed as we play those teams doesn't excite me. i just laid out the math. it is only one less home game. what you are not taking into consideration is that we already are playing 5 home and home games. and this year we have 3 on the road. the trick is to make sure that we have 4 of the 8 always at home. second i would take 4 of your list of mid majors plus 3 buy games over 2 on your list and 6 buy games every year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Roy. I, for one, fully agree with you. In the past, these "buy" games were needed to make sure we had a winning season (except for last year). Also, over these past 10 years, these buy games have not been, for the most part, 30 to 40 point wins. Off the top of my head, I'd say most of the buy games have probably been 10 to 20 point wins. Now that our program has improved under RM, and with the newfound expectations that our program will continue to mature and improve, we will need to ugrade our competition. We are not at Duke's level, but we were their "buy" game last year. The good teams like Duke are not playing 6 buy games against the likes of Arkansas State and Texas Southern - and nor should we. Sorry, but 40 point wins over no name teams don't interest me. SLU got by season ticket money for these past 3 buy games but they did not get my $10/game parking or my concessions money. And no, games against the locals such as UMSL and SIUE also don't interest me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 i just laid out the math. it is only one less home game. what you are not taking into consideration is that we already are playing 5 home and home games. and this year we have 3 on the road. the trick is to make sure that we have 4 of the 8 always at home. second i would take 4 of your list of mid majors plus 3 buy games over 2 on your list and 6 buy games every year. If we are playing 5 home and homes this year plus 6 buys it means that this year we get 8 home games and next year we get 9 (3 HH and 6 buy). The following year, we'd get 8 and the year after 9 again. The average is 8.5. With your model we get 7 home games every year. Hence a decrease of 1.5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 If we are playing 5 home and homes this year plus 6 buys it means that this year we get 8 home games and next year we get 9 (3 HH and 6 buy). The following year, we'd get 8 and the year after 9 again. The average is 8.5. With your model we get 7 home games every year. Hence a decrease of 1.5. as the home and homes run off (for example, we are done with portland) the new home and homes need to be set up so there is a balance. assuming as you do above that next year we have to be 3 home and 2 away next year, take the 3 new series we should set up and schedule 2 of them away and 1 starting at home. then you have 4 at home and 4 on the road. going forward be sure to renew or start a new series in the appropriate home or away to keep it balanced. if you still dont see it. i could come over and do an illustration with rocks or beer caps to symbolize home and away games for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 Right now, I see our SOS is projected to be at 109, which means as long as we have a decent record (23-7 or better) we will be fine RPI-wise. Our SOS can get stronger if teams we've already faced that have been underperforming start doing better. Also, I think it is kind of wrong to heap Vermont in with the other 'buy' games. Vermont is typically a pretty strong program, with 4 NCAA appearances in the past 10 seasons, along with 2 NITs and a CBI. Generally, they are a program that you would like to schedule if you can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soderball Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Why aren't we playing Wichita State or Creighton or something? I never could figure this out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.