(12-18-2017 12:44 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 12:00 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Yep. And for the reason I stated this has been (and may continue to be) an issue for this program no matter who is doing the scheduling.

And while true road games against MAC teams is a great idea, lose the ticket, ad, and concessions revenue from these buy games and an athletic department that is living off of credit cards in the form of subsidies in the mid 40%s and you have an even worse financial situation.

New arena revenue may change all of this, however.

These games are the reason I'm thinking of cancelling my tickets next year, so there can be a case made that they also don't bring in revenue. It is a lot cheaper to buy mini plan with all the big games (X, Wich. St., etc.) and just buy tickets to the games I want to see. Anyways, I still think there is a case to get a little more creative, by doing some research on these teams ahead if time. Typically schools from conferences like the SOCON and Big South all suck really bad, with 300+RPIs.

Scheduling is a two way street.. the other team has to agree to play you. Fact of the matter is P5 and Big East teams can pay 150-200 RPI teams more money, hence pushing our options down on the scale.

Second, many have brought up Huggins era to show how it can be done. The fact of the matter is our brand is not as strong as it was back then--- we aren't getting on the cover of SI or getting mentioned on College Gameday. The Bucknells of the world (currently at #149) have a better chance of getting their game on TV or mentioned in a magazine playing Arkansas or Maryland than us unfortunately.

(12-18-2017 12:44 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 12:00 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Yep. And for the reason I stated this has been (and may continue to be) an issue for this program no matter who is doing the scheduling.

And while true road games against MAC teams is a great idea, lose the ticket, ad, and concessions revenue from these buy games and an athletic department that is living off of credit cards in the form of subsidies in the mid 40%s and you have an even worse financial situation.

New arena revenue may change all of this, however.

These games are the reason I'm thinking of cancelling my tickets next year, so there can be a case made that they also don't bring in revenue. It is a lot cheaper to buy mini plan with all the big games (X, Wich. St., etc.) and just buy tickets to the games I want to see. Anyways, I still think there is a case to get a little more creative, by doing some research on these teams ahead if time. Typically schools from conferences like the SOCON and Big South all suck really bad, with 300+RPIs.

Doss? Is that you?

I think you guys take for granted how difficult a job it is to schedule basketball games when your conference schedule comes out when it does. The fact that the American schedule comes out so late, has got to be a huge boon.

Not to mention, UC wasn't going to pay a ton of money to teams to play at NKU, when they can pay for them to come visit next year.

Next year's home slate has OSU, X, and UCLA on it already OOC.

(12-18-2017 12:57 PM)djtothemoney Wrote:  I think you guys take for granted how difficult a job it is to schedule basketball games when your conference schedule comes out when it does. The fact that the American schedule comes out so late, has got to be a huge boon.

Not to mention, UC wasn't going to pay a ton of money to teams to play at NKU, when they can pay for them to come visit next year.

That's why I thought this would be a great year to schedule the away portion of local home and homes or 2 for 1's with the Dayton's, Wright State's, Ohio U's, etc.

(12-18-2017 12:57 PM)djtothemoney Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 12:44 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 12:00 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Yep. And for the reason I stated this has been (and may continue to be) an issue for this program no matter who is doing the scheduling.

And while true road games against MAC teams is a great idea, lose the ticket, ad, and concessions revenue from these buy games and an athletic department that is living off of credit cards in the form of subsidies in the mid 40%s and you have an even worse financial situation.

New arena revenue may change all of this, however.

These games are the reason I'm thinking of cancelling my tickets next year, so there can be a case made that they also don't bring in revenue. It is a lot cheaper to buy mini plan with all the big games (X, Wich. St., etc.) and just buy tickets to the games I want to see. Anyways, I still think there is a case to get a little more creative, by doing some research on these teams ahead if time. Typically schools from conferences like the SOCON and Big South all suck really bad, with 300+RPIs.

Doss? Is that you?

I think you guys take for granted how difficult a job it is to schedule basketball games when your conference schedule comes out when it does. The fact that the American schedule comes out so late, has got to be a huge boon.

Not to mention, UC wasn't going to pay a ton of money to teams to play at NKU, when they can pay for them to come visit next year.

Next year's home slate has OSU, X, and UCLA on it already OOC.

OK I get the NKU thing, but this has been an issue since MC has taken over as HC. I also do think we've done a good job getting some marquee OOC games the last few years (UCLA, OSU, etc.), and this was not what my critique was about, it is about the filler buy games against the absolute worst teams in D1. If this is truly the best that they can put together, then so be it. Myself, I'm just not buying it.

(12-18-2017 01:27 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 12:57 PM)djtothemoney Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 12:44 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 12:00 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Yep. And for the reason I stated this has been (and may continue to be) an issue for this program no matter who is doing the scheduling.

And while true road games against MAC teams is a great idea, lose the ticket, ad, and concessions revenue from these buy games and an athletic department that is living off of credit cards in the form of subsidies in the mid 40%s and you have an even worse financial situation.

New arena revenue may change all of this, however.

These games are the reason I'm thinking of cancelling my tickets next year, so there can be a case made that they also don't bring in revenue. It is a lot cheaper to buy mini plan with all the big games (X, Wich. St., etc.) and just buy tickets to the games I want to see. Anyways, I still think there is a case to get a little more creative, by doing some research on these teams ahead if time. Typically schools from conferences like the SOCON and Big South all suck really bad, with 300+RPIs.

Doss? Is that you?

I think you guys take for granted how difficult a job it is to schedule basketball games when your conference schedule comes out when it does. The fact that the American schedule comes out so late, has got to be a huge boon.

Not to mention, UC wasn't going to pay a ton of money to teams to play at NKU, when they can pay for them to come visit next year.

Next year's home slate has OSU, X, and UCLA on it already OOC.

OK I get the NKU thing, but this has been an issue since MC has taken over as HC. I also do think we've done a good job getting some marquee OOC games the last few years (UCLA, OSU, etc.), and this was not what my critique was about, it is about the filler buy games against the absolute worst teams in D1. If this is truly the best that they can put together, then so be it. Myself, I'm just not buying it.

We've nailed the marquee games for sure. I just don't get why we can't schedule more MAC, CUSA, Summit, and A10 games. Hell, even play a road game or two (as others have suggested) at schools like St. Joseph's, Charlotte, DePaul, etc. in markets that have a chunk of alumni and serve as ripe recruiting grounds.

(12-18-2017 01:27 PM)jarr Wrote:  OK I get the NKU thing, but this has been an issue since MC has taken over as HC. I also do think we've done a good job getting some marquee OOC games the last few years (UCLA, OSU, etc.), and this was not what my critique was about, it is about the filler buy games against the absolute worst teams in D1. If this is truly the best that they can put together, then so be it. Myself, I'm just not buying it.

You don't buy that it's too expensive to get better teams. Fair enough.

What's your theory behind the scheduling then? Cronin and his staff are too dumb to figure out this whole RPI thing? Too lazy? Cronin actually likes scheduling the Arkansas Pine Bluffs over the Valpos because he thinks UC might actually lose to bad-but-not-horrible teams?

I don't know much about how UC hoops schedules these games, or how any college program creates its schedule, but none of those possible explanations strikes me as plausible. On the other hand, UC not having the money strikes me as very plausible.

UC did a really good job of this last year actually. A lot of good it did them. Take a look at the schedule from 2016-2017. UC scheduled correctly, and it helped them absolutely zero come tourney time.

The committee is getting smarter and starting to see past this strategy. That said, I still don't condone playing this many 300+ games since it doesn't help the team get better or prepared for the meat of the non con schedule, but still, people are wising up to this. Committee is only focusing on your top tier games.

(12-18-2017 03:52 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  UC did a really good job of this last year actually. A lot of good it did them. Take a look at the schedule from 2016-2017. UC scheduled correctly, and it helped them absolutely zero come tourney time.

The committee is getting smarter and starting to see past this strategy. That said, I still don't condone playing this many 300+ games since it doesn't help the team get better or prepared for the meat of the non con schedule, but still, people are wising up to this. Committee is only focusing on your top tier games.

I think this is pretty accurate. The committee doesn't give a damn about a top 30 RPI anymore if you don't have top 50 wins to show for it. You can shuck and jive your way to a gaudy RPI number by beating mediocre teams with no big wins, but that doesn't fly anymore.

(12-18-2017 02:29 PM)levydl Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 01:27 PM)jarr Wrote:  OK I get the NKU thing, but this has been an issue since MC has taken over as HC. I also do think we've done a good job getting some marquee OOC games the last few years (UCLA, OSU, etc.), and this was not what my critique was about, it is about the filler buy games against the absolute worst teams in D1. If this is truly the best that they can put together, then so be it. Myself, I'm just not buying it.

You don't buy that it's too expensive to get better teams. Fair enough.

What's your theory behind the scheduling then? Cronin and his staff are too dumb to figure out this whole RPI thing? Too lazy? Cronin actually likes scheduling the Arkansas Pine Bluffs over the Valpos because he thinks UC might actually lose to bad-but-not-horrible teams?

I don't know much about how UC hoops schedules these games, or how any college program creates its schedule, but none of those possible explanations strikes me as plausible. On the other hand, UC not having the money strikes me as very plausible.

This topic came up in a town hall, a couple of years ago. Bohn put most of the blame on Mick. Bohn said he was going get involved. Looks as if he has not.

My opinion is Mick cannot win 20 plus games without these teams on the sched. Most of his wins come from playing directional schools.

LOL. Off we go just 36 hours after the UCLA win. Wasn’t enough to complain about on Saturday, I guess.

(12-18-2017 04:47 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  LOL. Off we go just 36 hours after the UCLA win. Wasn’t enough to complain about on Saturday, I guess.

Not to mention having a 30 win season and Mick needs those games to get 20 wins. While I think MC leaves something to be desired, some of these posts are insane.

(12-18-2017 04:47 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  LOL. Off we go just 36 hours after the UCLA win. Wasn’t enough to complain about on Saturday, I guess.

No one is complaining about Saturday. Good win and Mick deserves credit for that. Guess since Mick beat UCLA he's now the second coming of Wooden.

My point proven, ‘spose.

Oh No! UC has money problems? Not in the AAC.

(12-18-2017 09:25 PM)Ragpicker Wrote:  Oh No! UC has money problems? Not in the AAC.

Dear Ragpicker:

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Best,

Santa

(12-18-2017 09:19 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  My point proven, ‘spose.

But seriously, how good is UCLA this year?

I think the posts kind of reflect the team... good enough on any given night to beat just about anyone, teasing the fan-base with visions of past glory full of 1-4 seeds and SI covers...

Bad/inconsistent enough on any given night to make a 200 RPI team look like a tournament team and the fan-base goes bi-polar and the jumping off cliffs and fire/sipping Mick posts flourish...

(12-19-2017 08:28 AM)Crewdogz Wrote:  I think the posts kind of reflect the team... good enough on any given night to beat just about anyone, teasing the fan-base with visions of past glory full of 1-4 seeds and SI covers...

Bad/inconsistent enough on any given night to make a 200 RPI team look like a tournament team and the fan-base goes bi-polar and the jumping off cliffs and fire/sipping Mick posts flourish...

Good observations. Sports fan bases are a strange breed on so many different levels. I find it most interesting that some of our posters on here felt Luke Fickell was not a good hire or a good coach in his FIRST year transitioning from the Coaching Dead years. For me, he will get every opportunity to show that he was the right hire. For others, that patience isn't there.

On the flip, you have Cronin in his 12th year at the helm. The Mick apologists still bring up the early post-Huggs years. Well, just start from our 7 consecutive tournament runs and you have 1 S16 appearance, 1 conference co-championship, 0 conference tournament championships and a 4-8 record against our arch-rivals. For many programs that is enough to say we're moving on to someone else. I'm not suggesting that for Mick/UC but I think folks are in denial to at least not consider the possibilities of a change. This is a "what have you done for me lately business." Coaches get paid big bucks. Expectations are just as big. If that reality bothers folks, then poop or get off the pot.

We’re racing towards the end of December and UC has played only one team that is currently ranked - X - and they throttled the Bearcats. I don’t think it is unreasonable to examine the rest of the schedule given UC’s somewhat underwhelming performance thus far.

(12-19-2017 08:49 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  We’re racing towards the end of December and UC has played only one team that is currently ranked - X - and they throttled the Bearcats. I don’t think it is unreasonable to examine the rest of the schedule given UC’s somewhat underwhelming performance thus far.

DISCLAIMER: I say the following words with all due respect...But do we really need to examine the remaining schedule to know what we have? Isn't this what we've become under Cronin? Solid but not spectacular? Struggle against the better teams? Finish toward the top but not at it? Making the tournament but not making it past the first weekend? Again, maybe that is what we're destined to be from now on. The UC higher ups and fan base will ultimately have to determine that.