I will pissed if the Tigers and Blazers don't play twice next season. There still has not been an announcement as to who each team's three mirror opponents will be in 2005-06. I would hope that Memphis vs. UAB is an automatic.
Personally, I hope to see Memphis play UAB, Houston and UTEP twice next season. What three C-USA schools would you all like to see UAB play twice next year?
Memphis, UTEP, and Houston ... we'll need all the RPI help we can get if we dont win the CUSA tourney.
I concur.
Memphis, Houston, and UTEP.
UCF may not be that bad but I'm worried about how they'll do considering they have been in the horrible A-Sun.
It is a joke that in a twelve team conference that we have mirror games. Thanks John Calipari. We should have two divisions and play it like the SEC does. It is fairer that way.
Why don't we use the divisions that are going to be in place for football. That would solve a few problems. But I think that if the mirror crap stays in place, UAB, Memphis, Houston, and UTEP should be the mirrors. JMO.
I think that every team that's half competitive is going to want those teams plus us as mirrors for SOS and RPI reasons. We'll just have to see how it shakes out.
Please tell me the league (and the other 11 coaches) did not let Calipari make that decision by himself.
Calipari sold his story that with a 14 game schedule rather than a 16 game schedule, everyone will be able to get better out of conference games.
Isn't this the same Calipari who said his OOC was too hard this year and wanted to lighten it up this season?
So, why not play divisions and four of the six from the other side?
I think the easiest way to do the conference schedule is to leave it at 16 games per year, keep the same division as in football, and then each team plays the other 5 in their division twice and then the team in the opposite division once. That seems to be the simplest way. No matter what happens, and as bad as I hate Calipari, I think we should play Memphis twice (mainly, for Anderson Alley). It would probably be better for the league as far as publicity if the top 2 teams in the league play twice. Not to mention, it would help both of our RPI's. I sure don't want to play Toolame twice in a season.
I like the division format for the long term. I think that it stengthens both the "rivalries" between the schools and the conference. The scheduling of "mirror" games for rpi purposes seems to me to be self serving for a few teams that are currently "good".
CUSA already tried the divisions and it did not work. Once we got rid of the divisions CUSA received a record number of bids into the NCAA tourney, 6.
If one division is loaded and the other is very weak then it will just hurt everyone from a record and rpi standpoint.
Then again, looking at it right now the divisions might actually be fairly equal if the followed the football model but I still think we should just keep it the way it is that way we know who the clear-cut #1 is at the end of next season, UAB. :D
The way the divisions were set up did not work because all the teams did not play each other because there were 14 teams. There would be a couple of teams in the other division that you did not play, which made it inequitable.
In a 12 team conference, everyone would play each other and it would be fair. Every other major conference can work it out, why can't CUSA.
I don't see the need for divisions in basketball, but I do think it would be better for the conference as a whole if we played 16 league games instead of 14.
If you go divisionless with 16 games, you would play every other C-USA team once (11 games), then you could have 2 permanent mirror games and 3 that rotate.
Permanent and rotating mirror games causes the same problems that you have in divisions when a school doesn't play everyone else.
We need to make sure we play Memphis to add to the victories.
seriously, it should be two divisions in football just like we have it and one division in basketball and play everyone.
f-the BCS and bama up the :moon: :moon: :moon: :moon: