2014-15 scheduling............

[krak-r-jacks]

just asking an honest question here. what was the benefit of scheduling Stanford, Notre Dame, and Penn St in the same season? maybe someone that studies the rpi and all could explain that to me. i glance at that stuff once in awhile, but, don't make a study of it.

i just think there must be a better way of scheduling that allows playing very good teams and may benefit the jacks. let's be honest, Penn St was another notch in their belt, but, if PSU didn't turn out to be so bipolar this year, this could have been another bad defeat. from what i could tell listening to jj, another 30 seconds and jacks most likely would have lost that game. PSU had a lot of talent on that team, but imo, chemistry and arrogance brought them down.

i have no problem scheduling 1 top 5-10 team, but, i think 3 was overkill and can do more harm than good. that's just my opinion. thanks ahead of time for any responses.

[jackdaniel]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

I think AJ mentioned if we'd of got a couple more wins this year, and with our RPI as low as it is,we may have got an at-large bid if we lost the Summit Tournament,which we did.
That's one argument for a tough schedule I guess.

Looking at the Stanford loss for example,Stanford has beat ranked teams (like Gonzaga) by more than they did us,it certainly didn't hurt them (Gonzaga) all that much by losing to Stanford,nor us I assume.Stanford was part of a five team Tournament in Mexico,we had to play three games there to participate.

ND was a different story,but we got a return engagement out of the deal and they lose some good players after this year.It should be much more respectable next time we play them.Who wouldn't want a storied program like ND to come to Frost Arena to play the Jacks?It was a scheduling snafu that brought SDSU and ND together I thought I heard.We got killed by them though.

Penn State worked out alright.

[mitchellrabbit]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

I think AJ mentioned if we'd of got a couple more wins this year, and with our RPI as low as it is,we may have got an at-large bid if we lost the Summit Tournament,which we did.
That's one argument for a tough schedule I guess.Looking at the Stanford loss for example,Stanford has beat ranked teams (like Gonzaga) by more than they did us,it certainly didn't hurt them (Gonzaga) all that much by losing to Stanford,nor us I assume.
ND was a different story,but we got a return engagement out of the deal and they lose some good players after this year.It should be much more respectable next time we play them.It was a scheduling snafu that brought SDSU and ND together I thought I heard.We got killed by them though.

We didnt actually schedule Stanford, correct? That was one of the 3 games in Mexico. Or did we know we were playing them when they decided to do the Mexico thing? I think if we beat Creighton and Ark/LR we would have got an at large. It seems when we lost a game it was a big loss. Of our 9 losses only one was under 10 points and that was Creighton. All the other games we lost by 10 or more.

[bigticket1]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

I think it is probably easier for us to schedule top teams in major conferences than the middle of the pack teams in conferences like the Big 10 or Pac 12. The only hope the average teams in the multi-bid conferences have to make the Big Dance is to rack up enough wins to build their resume , and they know if they sign a home and home with the Jacks that the trip to Brookings is a likely loss. So we end up with a few big time games and a lot of mid-majors.

[jackdaniel]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

We didnt actually schedule Stanford, correct? That was one of the 3 games in Mexico. Or did we know we were playing them when they decided to do the Mexico thing? I think if we beat Creighton and Ark/LR we would have got an at large. It seems when we lost a game it was a big loss. Of our 9 losses only one was under 10 points and that was Creighton. All the other games we lost by 10 or more.

I'm not sure,I think we knew the teams in the Tournament,but not specifically the match ups until later.I know the teams were Stanford,TCU,Purdue, FGCU,JACKS .Purdue only got two games I think.

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

We didnt actually schedule Stanford, correct? That was one of the 3 games in Mexico. Or did we know we were playing them when they decided to do the Mexico thing? I think if we beat Creighton and Ark/LR we would have got an at large. It seems when we lost a game it was a big loss. Of our 9 losses only one was under 10 points and that was Creighton. All the other games we lost by 10 or more.

I think our schedule was too tough this year. It sure would be nice to have a couple games against a middle of the pack BCS conference school. If nothing else a win against a team like that at least has name recognition and it's likely their RPI is artificially inflated from just playing in a BCS conference. Whereas a win against a good mid-major just doesn't have the same appeal. And a big time loss to the same mid-major looks really bad.

Maybe it's impossible to get a middle of the road BCS school to schedule us.

We got rocked in almost all of our non-conference losses this year (except Creighton). That was incredibly frustrating for me. If we had performed better in some of those games maybe we would get an at-large. On the other hand, maybe our women just weren't as good this year. A big part of me thinks that's the case. We dominated the Summit regular season but the Summit was not that good this year.

[rabidrabbit]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

ND was a replacement game for Oakland, when they joined the Horizon league. Stanford in a neutral court, near perfection. IMHO, this was the best team since 2008-2009. Unfortunately, they did have an ability to all go cold at the same time, as they proved 8 times. Still, in all best in the Summit by 2 games. But all it takes to not dance, is 1 loss in Sioux Falls.

If the Jacks get a nice run in the WNIT, then this could be great for all the returners. Further, we may be able to HOST a lot of these games. It would be wonderful for the women this year to enjoy the atmosphere that the 2006-2007 teams had for playing post season in front of large Rabid, RABBIT FANS.

[bigticket1]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

ND was a replacement game for Oakland, when they joined the Horizon league. Stanford in a neutral court, near perfection. IMHO, this was the best team since 2008-2009.

I guess we evaluate teams much differently. I looked at the rosters from the teams from 07-08 on and I would roll with every one of them over this team. Why ? Everyone of them had at least 1, and many times 2 better post players than anyone on this team , plus those teams had two or more consistent scorers on them ,which this team lacked. Last year would maybe be a toss-up with this team , but Eide, Dietel and Lingle would give 12-13 the edge for me. This year's team has a lot of very good players who can be as good as many of the past teams if they can develop more consistency .

[poppa1]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

I think this team lacked a take charge leader, last year Eide did it, this year no one.

[krak-r-jacks]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

We didnt actually schedule Stanford, correct? That was one of the 3 games in Mexico. Or did we know we were playing them when they decided to do the Mexico thing? I think if we beat Creighton and Ark/LR we would have got an at large. It seems when we lost a game it was a big loss. Of our 9 losses only one was under 10 points and that was Creighton. All the other games we lost by 10 or more.

oh, you are probably right on that one. i think participating in the "preseason tourneys" have been and are wonderful for the jacks. correct in matchups can vary.

[jackmd]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

We didnt actually schedule Stanford, correct? That was one of the 3 games in Mexico. Or did we know we were playing them when they decided to do the Mexico thing? I think if we beat Creighton and Ark/LR we would have got an at large. It seems when we lost a game it was a big loss. Of our 9 losses only one was under 10 points and that was Creighton. All the other games we lost by 10 or more.

I have seen and read several conversations along these lines. Most end with the same conclusion, Summit is a 1 bid league. Any team losing in the semifinal or quarters is not getting in. A top 20 team losing in the championship might. So, I don't think this years team had any chance at an at large.

Now, watch them get one this year just to spite me. I'd be great with that.

[mitchellrabbit]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

I have seen and read several conversations along these lines. Most end with the same conclusion, Summit is a 1 bid league. Any team losing in the semifinal or quarters is not getting in. A top 20 team losing in the championship might. So, I don't think this years team had any chance at an at large.

Now, watch them get one this year just to spite me. I'd be great with that.

We had some good wins this year. Penn St, TCU, Green Bay, Central Michigan. But i think our bad losses outweigh our good wins. Hope we get a WNIT home game(s)

[jackdaniel]

Re: 2014-15 scheduling............

Man ,just looking at the roster for next yr.It is awesome.

We'll have great seniors,Waytashek,Stuart,Clarin, Boever,Walters .Great newcomers,Macy Miller, Ellie Thompson,Alexis Alexander, Kaitlin Severyn, Rfr Tiffany Flaata.Great sophomore class,Stevens,Young And Ober.Great Jr class,Cornemann and Hart.

We'll have full 15 player roster.Who starts?Can we have two complete five man rotations?Can we get everyone of these great players some time on the court?AJ must love having these problems to sort through.We should be awesome next year.

First things first though,we've got to make some noise this post season yet,send the seniors out on a winning spree.Let's terrorize the WNIT