FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Oct 3, 2014 22:28:34 GMT -5
Pitt is a reprehensible organization whose athletic dealings demonstrate them to be an organization with absolutely zero morals. Add in that Dixon has Boeheim's whiny bitch at down without Boeheim's history with us or amusing press conferences, and we don't need to schedule them. Plenty of teams want to play in and recruit DC. Screw the Panthers. See, just me personally, when considering potential non-conference opponents, I'll always take "I've got a really specific, over-the-top, irrational (but maybe not!) grudge against this program because they WRONGED ME and my team's conference in a very specific way" over "Meh, Iowa, I guess". Keep this going, I'm kinda having fun picking random power conference teams that would be boring non-conference opponents.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,305
|
Post by tashoya on Oct 3, 2014 22:39:10 GMT -5
Pitt is a reprehensible organization whose athletic dealings demonstrate them to be an organization with absolutely zero morals. Add in that Dixon has Boeheim's whiny bitch at down without Boeheim's history with us or amusing press conferences, and we don't need to schedule them. Plenty of teams want to play in and recruit DC. Screw the Panthers. See, just me personally, when considering potential non-conference opponents, I'll always take "I've got a really specific, over-the-top, irrational (but maybe not!) grudge against this program because they WRONGED ME and my team's conference in a very specific way" over "Meh, Iowa, I guess". Keep this going, I'm kinda having fun picking random power conference teams that would be boring non-conference opponents. I think it's more along the lines of there are better opponents to be had than Pitt.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,663
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Oct 3, 2014 23:02:45 GMT -5
Pitt is a reprehensible organization whose athletic dealings demonstrate them to be an organization with absolutely zero morals. Add in that Dixon has Boeheim's whiny bitch at down without Boeheim's history with us or amusing press conferences, and we don't need to schedule them. Plenty of teams want to play in and recruit DC. Screw the Panthers. See, just me personally, when considering potential non-conference opponents, I'll always take "I've got a really specific, over-the-top, irrational (but maybe not!) grudge against this program because they WRONGED ME and my team's conference in a very specific way" over "Meh, Iowa, I guess". Keep this going, I'm kinda having fun picking random power conference teams that would be boring non-conference opponents. Yes, I hate Pitt. If any kind of hatred can be rational, it's rational. It just might be a bit intense. But that said, why is the alternative Iowa? EDIT: My one concession would if on the Jumbotron and on TV, they had an always-visible Jamie Dixon "Bitch Tracker" to see how many times he complained about a call, with bonus points where he does that thing where he's so shocked he puts his hands on his head and takes a step back while crouching a bit, then turns around and chuckles as if it is oh so obvious that he's getting screwed.
|
|
CaliHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,184
|
Post by CaliHoya on Oct 4, 2014 6:20:46 GMT -5
Add me to the list of people who don't want to schedule Pitt. I most would want to avoid them getting to recruit better in DC.
Also, they always tend to be a horrible matchup for us, as they just dirty the game up, chuck things up and offensive rebound (our eternal weakness). Say No to Pitt!!
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,351
|
Post by calhoya on Oct 4, 2014 7:42:10 GMT -5
I opposed scheduling Syracuse, but gave up that argument, though in my heart I still hate giving the ACC exposure. After watching the inaugural season of the Big East and the drop in attendance and viewership--both expected--I am now of the opinion that scheduling of quality teams needs to satisfy very specific criteria: national exposure, exposure within targeted recruiting areas and the provision of a respectable number of quality home games for fans. Playing 18 conference games assures that there are at most 12 out of conference games. Assuming that you need 4-5 developmental games in most years to allow new players to integrate and to allow some of the depth players to actually get some significant minutes before conference play (an area which I think JT III still falls short), there are no more than 7-8 games left for non-conference power opponents. JT III has always been good at getting the team some tough road tests prior to conference. Many are touranments or gimmick games at neutral sites, which are not always neutral. I hope that this continues as it provides guaranteed exposure. What is left is perhaps 3 games at home for quality opponents. The Big Ten Challenge may provide one along with the games with Syracuse. So with what is left, the issue is does Pitt bring to the table more value than a Florida, Kansas, Texas, UCLA, Northwestern, Memphis, Indiana, Temple or UConn. I can make an argument for each of those teams and even several others in the ACC--Louisville, UNC, Duke, NC State and Notre Dame before I would bring in Pitt.
|
|
miracles87
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,150
|
Post by miracles87 on Oct 4, 2014 8:42:51 GMT -5
I'd love to schedule any of our old friends, as they are typically pretty good teams. I really do not care about any of the meta considerations, except I do think it's obvious that potential recruits would want a more exciting schedule to play, to showcase their talents. Bottom line, I want as many tough games as possible to prepare us for the postseason.
|
|
FrazierFanatic
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,521
Member is Online
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Oct 4, 2014 8:50:53 GMT -5
Pitt is a reprehensible organization whose athletic dealings demonstrate them to be an organization with absolutely zero morals. Add in that Dixon has Boeheim's whiny bitch at down without Boeheim's history with us or amusing press conferences, and we don't need to schedule them. Plenty of teams want to play in and recruit DC. Screw the Panthers. See, just me personally, when considering potential non-conference opponents, I'll always take "I've got a really specific, over-the-top, irrational (but maybe not!) grudge against this program because they WRONGED ME and my team's conference in a very specific way" over "Meh, Iowa, I guess". Keep this going, I'm kinda having fun picking random power conference teams that would be boring non-conference opponents. Play one close game against Iowa and Fran McCaffrey will make Dixon seem mild and cool-headed.
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Oct 4, 2014 9:09:17 GMT -5
Yes, I hate Pitt. If any kind of hatred can be rational, it's rational. It just might be a bit intense. But that said, why is the alternative Iowa? It doesn't have to be Iowa of course, though it would be mildly entertaining to see if we could be the game when Fran McCaffery's head finally explodes and I think Karl Hess is just the man for the job. There are more than enough quality non-conference opponents out there that would be interesting for a variety of reasons. My specific gripe is with the argument not to play a team because we dislike them/their coach a lot, and specifically because certain teams defected from the Big East. To go back to the wrestling analogy, not every match has to be like that time Hulk Hogan fought Ultimate Warrior at Wrestlemania when they were both basically good guys. It'll certainly be entertaining to watch Georgetown vs. Kansas this year even though I have no specific gripe against the Jayhawks. But once in a while, I want to watch the Hulkster fight the Iron Sheik, ya know? It seems from Hoyatalk like Pitt's in a small group of villain teams that have really strong heat; we're not white-hot nuclear about Pitt like we are about Syracuse, Maryland, or Duke (and I think that dude on the recruiting board is trying to get Memphis there), but Pitt still generates enough of a reaction 4 years after they announced they were bolting the conference that I reckon it'd be a good time. What can I say, I like watching the heels more than the faces. Now, if the argument is you don't think Pitt will be any good by the time we'd play them, that's different. I still think the anger over the Big East breaking up would make it interesting. However, I'll concede one thing in the interest of disclosure: last night when I was talking about Pitt with someone, we had to look up how they did in the Tournament last year (and kinda needed to remember if they even made the Tournament). We could be doing pretty well over the next few seasons mixing different kinds of compelling home games: the white-hot nuclear Syracuse whatever it is, a Kansas team that will be consistently great, a probably high quality Big Ten opponent in the challenge, and the rumors about Pitt/UConn/Maryland/UVA/etc. Better than...mmmmmmm, let's say Mississippi this time.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,663
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Oct 4, 2014 9:54:42 GMT -5
I'd play Duke, Syracuse, Maryland, etc. I simply don't think we should play Pitt.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,158
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 5, 2014 16:05:59 GMT -5
I'd love to schedule any of our old friends, as they are typically pretty good teams. I really do not care about any of the meta considerations, except I do think it's obvious that potential recruits would want a more exciting schedule to play, to showcase their talents. Bottom line, I want as many tough games as possible to prepare us for the postseason. Our schedules over the last seasons have been one of the toughest in the nation, yet the post-season results have been about the same. What I would like to see, if the TV schedule allows, is an OOC game in February against a team with a similar profile to what we have seen recently in the post-season. It would break the familiarity of games vs the BE teams and we could see a different style of officiating than in the BE (and more similar to what we would see in the NCAA Tournament). Both would better prepare us for the NCAA tournament.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,158
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 5, 2014 16:16:09 GMT -5
I'd play Duke, Syracuse, Maryland, etc. I simply don't think we should play Pitt. Add me to this list. Also, we have been recruiting in Illinois, Florida, California, etc... Maybe we should schedule games against teams in those areas to get the exposure.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,158
|
Post by prhoya on Oct 5, 2014 16:23:48 GMT -5
Add me to the list of people who don't want to schedule Pitt. I most would want to avoid them getting to recruit better in DC. Also, they always tend to be a horrible matchup for us, as they just dirty the game up, chuck things up and offensive rebound (our eternal weakness). Say No to Pitt!! True about the ugly games. About recruiting, Pitt has 4 players from MD. Let's close the door here.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,305
|
Post by tashoya on Oct 5, 2014 20:39:03 GMT -5
I'd love to schedule any of our old friends, as they are typically pretty good teams. I really do not care about any of the meta considerations, except I do think it's obvious that potential recruits would want a more exciting schedule to play, to showcase their talents. Bottom line, I want as many tough games as possible to prepare us for the postseason. Our schedules over the last seasons have been one of the toughest in the nation, yet the post-season results have been about the same. What I would like to see, if the TV schedule allows, is an OOC game in February against a team with a similar profile to what we have seen recently in the post-season. It would break the familiarity of games vs the BE teams and we could see a different style of officiating than in the BE (and more similar to what we would see in the NCAA Tournament). Both would better prepare us for the NCAA tournament. I like the idea of this but the teams we've lost to have been pretty diverse so how does one come up with a list of possible opponents? I'm in full agreement on the officiating. Though, last year, it was so schizophrenic. Add to that that our team was so foul prone to begin with that it was a big disadvantage form the tip. As you mentioned in the other thread, hopefully, with all of the possible lineups, we'll have a deeper rotation. Not just last year but in years prior, it has seemed like our Hoyas have skidded into the end of the season as opposed to playing their best at the right time. Maybe that's more just me having a bad taste in my mouth from how the seasons ended but, in the back of my head, it seems like we kind of falter and sputter a bit. That could be due to short-ish rotations or just coincidence or maybe I'm just flat-out wrong. Having said that, there are plenty of quality opponents outside of the BE. Heck, from reading some of the posts here, almost all of the quality opponents are outside of the BE. So that should help on the officiating front. It's why I'd love a Duke game every year in Cameron just for the guys to get a sense of the homecooking/jobbing that can happen. Granted, that's a bit strong but they're good every year and definitely tend to get favorable in-game calls. That sort of hostile environment against a good team in a game that doesn't mean that much could be great for a team early on in the year.
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Oct 5, 2014 21:12:06 GMT -5
Our schedules over the last seasons have been one of the toughest in the nation, yet the post-season results have been about the same. What I would like to see, if the TV schedule allows, is an OOC game in February against a team with a similar profile to what we have seen recently in the post-season. It would break the familiarity of games vs the BE teams and we could see a different style of officiating than in the BE (and more similar to what we would see in the NCAA Tournament). Both would better prepare us for the NCAA tournament. Non-conference tournaments (like the Battle 4 Atlantis) are a better venue to see a "different style of officiating than in the BE" since the officials are pulled from a bunch of conferences. That's probably the closest you'll get to NCAA-style officiating crews. In one-off non-conference games, one of the two conferences involved assigns the officials, and since officials work in multiple conferences, it's kinda the same general pool if we play anywhere in Big East/ACC/Big Ten country. For instance, all three of the officials from our game last year against MSU work in both the Big Ten and Big East. And last year at Kansas, the three officials each later worked 2 or more of our conference games.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,305
|
Post by tashoya on Oct 5, 2014 21:38:57 GMT -5
Our schedules over the last seasons have been one of the toughest in the nation, yet the post-season results have been about the same. What I would like to see, if the TV schedule allows, is an OOC game in February against a team with a similar profile to what we have seen recently in the post-season. It would break the familiarity of games vs the BE teams and we could see a different style of officiating than in the BE (and more similar to what we would see in the NCAA Tournament). Both would better prepare us for the NCAA tournament. Non-conference tournaments (like the Battle 4 Atlantis) are a better venue to see a "different style of officiating than in the BE" since the officials are pulled from a bunch of conferences. That's probably the closest you'll get to NCAA-style officiating crews. In one-off non-conference games, one of the two conferences involved assigns the officials, and since officials work in multiple conferences, it's kinda the same general pool if we play anywhere in Big East/ACC/Big Ten country. For instance, all three of the officials from our game last year against MSU work in both the Big Ten and Big East. And last year at Kansas, the three officials each later worked 2 or more of our conference games. Solid points. I hadn't even thought about the preseason tourneys.
|
|
|
Post by grokamok on Oct 6, 2014 11:00:13 GMT -5
Is the game considered neutral court if we split ticket sales? If it's at a court on which we play more than 3 regular season games, then it counts as a home court, whether or not ticket sales are split. If we have to play the Terps, better to play them on a truly neutral site. Maybe at the Patriot Center? <Ducks head & runs for cover...> Plenty of teams want to play in and recruit DC. Screw the Panthers. Very much the case. And I'd rather give a little DC exposure to a team like, ahem, Iowa, which isn't as likely to profit from it. Make Pitt play UMD in a home & home if they want DC exposure. If we wanted to tussle with an Iron Sheik or Nikita Volkoff every year, we'd be better off taking that show on the road to please our far-flung but devoted alumni base in areas that we wouldn't otherwise visit. Syracuse in the DFW area one year, Pitt in SFO the next, BC in London. I'd hope that the point of the OP -- that it wouldn't be in our strategic interest to play UMD or Pitt in a home & home under current circumstances -- doesn't get lost in the nod to the fact that we harbor a grudge against Pitt's underhanded dealings.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,663
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Oct 6, 2014 13:15:16 GMT -5
Is the game considered neutral court if we split ticket sales? If it's at a court on which we play more than 3 regular season games, then it counts as a home court, whether or not ticket sales are split. If we have to play the Terps, better to play them on a truly neutral site. Maybe at the Patriot Center? <Ducks head & runs for cover...> Plenty of teams want to play in and recruit DC. Screw the Panthers. Very much the case. And I'd rather give a little DC exposure to a team like, ahem, Iowa, which isn't as likely to profit from it. Make Pitt play UMD in a home & home if they want DC exposure. If we wanted to tussle with an Iron Sheik or Nikita Volkoff every year, we'd be better off taking that show on the road to please our far-flung but devoted alumni base in areas that we wouldn't otherwise visit. Syracuse in the DFW area one year, Pitt in SFO the next, BC in London. I'd hope that the point of the OP -- that it wouldn't be in our strategic interest to play UMD or Pitt in a home & home under current circumstances -- doesn't get lost in the nod to the fact that we harbor a grudge against Pitt's underhanded dealings. There's no point in playing these teams remotely. Playing them at home will sell tickets, which funds the program. We have no issues with strength of schedule, frankly, so the primary driver to DO this should be home attendance and cash flow. I think in some cases that's absolutely worth the recruiting hit. I think my decision point of this is: would this be a more attractive proposition to our own fans than another top program, or is it simply taking advantage of opposing fans? For example: Syracuse -- Yes, I think our fans, grudges aside, are more likely to attend the Syracuse game than Michigan State, as an example. Maryland -- Yes, I think our fans, grudges aside, are more likely to attend the Maryland game than Michigan State. Pitt -- No, I think all incremental ticket sales are from Panthers fans versus Michigan State or Kansas. Duke -- Yes, I think our fans, grudges aside, are more likely to attend the Duke game than Michigan State. This is how I'd do it. Grudge aside, teams like Pitt and WVU don't draw extra Hoya fans versus a non-traditional but strong program. I don't know why we keep using Iowa or something like that as an example -- Kansas, Duke, Memphis, Kentucky, Michigan State, Indiana, UCLA, Michigan, UNC etc., are all teams we can pull in non-conference. Schedule Syracuse & Maryland. Add 2-3 Home and Homes of strong teams like Kansas, Duke, UNC, etc. Attend a tourney and the remainder can be start up and finals creampuffs. The problem with the home attendance aren't going to be solved by it, but having all our top non-conference games away from home is costing us ~20,000 tickets/year.
|
|