2022-23 Non-Con Schedule

[MU82]

Good perspective, Mr. N.

[The Lens]

Two less FF games will save me about $300 on beer, $60 on parking and $147 on soggy Chick Fil A.

I'm going to pocket half of that and mail the other $253.50 to Marquette to the Bring Back Football Fund.

[Ardmore Mug]

Someone asked earlier about the price of tix this upcoming season. It figured to be an Increase of about $20 per ticket in Sect 118..

[We R Final Four]

It wasn't that long ago we had 9 conference games. Exhibition game. 7 to 8 donkeys at home. Home schedule has been solid the last two years. I enjoy UConn coming in giving us 10 conference home games and losing 2 buy games.

Agreed.

[brewcity77]

It wasn't that long ago we had 9 conference games. Exhibition game. 7 to 8 donkeys at home. Home schedule has been solid the last two years. I enjoy UConn coming in giving us 10 conference home games and losing 2 buy games.

If STHs are going to lose content while paying the same price, the quality of those buys should be higher, not lower. Teams like Vermont, Fresno, Buffalo, you actually learn something about your team and get an entertaining game from. Picking the worst buy slate since 2015-16 while also reducing content is a failure by the athletic department.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

If STHs are going to lose content while paying the same price, the quality of those buys should be higher, not lower. Teams like Vermont, Fresno, Buffalo, you actually learn something about your team and get an entertaining game from. Picking the worst buy slate since 2015-16 while also reducing content is a failure by the athletic department.

Do most STH care about the quality of the buy game opponents? Don't get me wrong, I get the NET implications, but outside the outliers like Buffalo in 2018, my guess is that most really don't care if it's Vermont or Radford.

[We R Final Four]

Id take UConn over Vermont.

[brewcity77]

Do most STH care about the quality of the buy game opponents? Don't get me wrong, I get the NET implications, but outside the outliers like Buffalo in 2018, my guess is that most really don't care if it's Vermont or Radford.

If they don't know the difference, I don't care, and that's not the point. Putting together a quality product shouldn't be based on the dumbest person in your audience. We're all being charged the same amount for less content of a lower quality and that's BS.

[jfp61]

If they don't know the difference, I don't care, and that's not the point. Putting together a quality product shouldn't be based on the dumbest person in your audience. We're all being charged the same amount for less content of a lower quality and that's BS.

Its almost as if there has been a 9.1% inflation rate over the past 12 months.

Complaining about the schedule because of how it affects the team shouldn't be conflated with the external forces that have resulted in an increase in price per game. That's illogical.

[brewcity77]

Everyone needs games, and if they can't provide a comparable product with similar inventory and value, STH costs should go down.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

If they don't know the difference, I don't care, and that's not the point. Putting together a quality product shouldn't be based on the dumbest person in your audience. We're all being charged the same amount for less content of a lower quality and that's BS.

I said "most." Not the dumbest person. Don't be descending into Chicosesque goalpost shifting now.

My guess is that most STH care about the BE games and the high level non conference games. They don't give a rip about the quality of the buy games.

So from their POV the quantity going down stinks, but the quality is largely fine. Especially with a top five team in Baylor and Wisconsin coming to town.

Again it doesn't excuse the NET implications, but most fans aren't going to care all that much.

[Mu8891]

As  STH ... I don't like having less games.

Why did the prior Chicago St get canceled??  There's NO excuse for scheduling them.  They are the singular most consistent disgrace in " D 1 "

Would it not be better to schedule
UWGB or UWM ?  They both $uck too ...
But not 340 NET suckage

[panda]

I said "most." Not the dumbest person. Don't be descending into Chicosesque goalpost shifting now.

My guess is that most STH care about the BE games and the high level non conference games. They don't give a rip about the quality of the buy games.

So from their POV the quantity going down stinks, but the quality is largely fine. Especially with a top five team in Baylor and Wisconsin coming to town.

Again it doesn't excuse the NET implications, but most fans aren't going to care all that much.

This is spot on - casual fans (which encompass most of the fan base) see a 340 Kenpom team in the same light as a 240 Kenpom team. Directional state U and it's not putting butts in the seats.

Baylor and Wisconsin will both be great crowds.

Cmu at the AL does stink.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

This is spot on - casual fans (which encompass most of the fan base) see a 340 Kenpom team in the same light as a 240 Kenpom team. Directional state U and it's not putting butts in the seats.

Thank you.  You said this a lot better than I did. 

[brewcity77]

I said "most." Not the dumbest person. Don't be descending into Chicosesque goalpost shifting now.

My guess is that most STH care about the BE games and the high level non conference games. They don't give a rip about the quality of the buy games.

So from their POV the quantity going down stinks, but the quality is largely fine. Especially with a top five team in Baylor and Wisconsin coming to town.

Again it doesn't excuse the NET implications, but most fans aren't going to care all that much.

When they brought in a crap non-con slate in 2015-16, I panned it. They largely missed the postseason because of it. Not saying a tougher schedule would've got them the NCAA bid admin told the team they expected (according to Duane Wilson) but they probably at least make the NIT.

When they trimmed down on cupcakes and added quality buys like Fresno, Vermont, Buffalo, and North Dakota State, I praised it, and we were on track for our fourth consecutive postseason trip when the pandemic hit.

Now we're playing the worst non-con since 2015-16 and the combination of maximum garbage buy games coupled with a similarly weak MTE and the only quality games being the ones Marquette has no control over is irritating to me.

Since Buzz left, when we schedule garbage, we finish with garbage results. When we schedule with confidence, we do well. I don't care about what any other fan thinks. I know garbage when I see it, and MU served STHs a massive steaming plate of it.

Considering my costs don't change with reduced inventory and quality, I'm displeased. If you want to celebrate the Battle assigning us Baylor and the annual UWM game being at home, I guess, but in terms of what MARQUETTE actually did, it's crap, and I'm going to acknowledge that.

[Newsdreams]

When they brought in a crap non-con slate in 2015-16, I panned it. They largely missed the postseason because of it. Not saying a tougher schedule would've got them the NCAA bid admin told the team they expected (according to Duane Wilson) but they probably at least make the NIT.

When they trimmed down on cupcakes and added quality buys like Fresno, Vermont, Buffalo, and North Dakota State, I praised it, and we were on track for our fourth consecutive postseason trip when the pandemic hit.

Now we're playing the worst non-con since 2015-16 and the combination of maximum garbage buy games coupled with a similarly weak MTE and the only quality games being the ones Marquette has no control over is irritating to me.

Since Buzz left, when we schedule garbage, we finish with garbage results. When we schedule with confidence, we do well. I don't care about what any other fan thinks. I know garbage when I see it, and MU served STHs a massive steaming plate of it.

Considering my costs don't change with reduced inventory and quality, I'm displeased. If you want to celebrate the Battle assigning us Baylor and the annual UWM game being at home, I guess, but in terms of what MARQUETTE actually did, it's crap, and I'm going to acknowledge that.

From that schedule I would assume they're not very confident on team at start of season.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

When they brought in a crap non-con slate in 2015-16, I panned it. They largely missed the postseason because of it. Not saying a tougher schedule would've got them the NCAA bid admin told the team they expected (according to Duane Wilson) but they probably at least make the NIT.

When they trimmed down on cupcakes and added quality buys like Fresno, Vermont, Buffalo, and North Dakota State, I praised it, and we were on track for our fourth consecutive postseason trip when the pandemic hit.

Now we're playing the worst non-con since 2015-16 and the combination of maximum garbage buy games coupled with a similarly weak MTE and the only quality games being the ones Marquette has no control over is irritating to me.

Since Buzz left, when we schedule garbage, we finish with garbage results. When we schedule with confidence, we do well. I don't care about what any other fan thinks. I know garbage when I see it, and MU served STHs a massive steaming plate of it.

Considering my costs don't change with reduced inventory and quality, I'm displeased. If you want to celebrate the Battle assigning us Baylor and the annual UWM game being at home, I guess, but in terms of what MARQUETTE actually did, it's crap, and I'm going to acknowledge that.

Ok. You are countering an argument I am not making.

[panda]

From that schedule I would assume they're not very confident on team at start of season.

This schedule isn't complicated. Young, inexperienced team with Wisconsin, Purdue, Baylor, Notre Dame and pre season tournament already locked in.

No need to make things uglier than they possibly could be by scheduling and risking losses to decent low major teams.

[Dr. Blackheart]

This schedule isn't complicated. Young, inexperienced team with Wisconsin, Purdue, Baylor, Notre Dame and pre season tournament already locked in.

No need to make things uglier than they possibly could be by scheduling and risking losses to decent low major teams.

As a STH, the home OOC schedule stinks for the money they asked (essentially they are asking me to pay the buy for the four crappy SOS teams and the one game I am not allowed to attend).

Separately, the OOC schedule is hurt mainly that it was MU's BE turn for the crappy Ft. Myers holiday tournament including LIU. That's on the BE and MU. MU hasn't been consistently good for a long time but still was banking on being invited to the Knight. Get better!

That said, with the expanded BE schedule, MU adds more quality games versus 15-16 as someone pointed out.

[Newsdreams]

This schedule isn't complicated. Young, inexperienced team with Wisconsin, Purdue, Baylor, Notre Dame and pre season tournament already locked in.

No need to make things uglier than they possibly could be by scheduling and risking losses to decent low major teams.

Baylor, Purdue not MU's choice....

[brewcity77]

Baylor, Purdue not MU's choice....

Bucky really isn't either, as that's just a series we renew. And Notre Dame was scheduled in November 2019, when Wojo, Markus, and Anim were all still here and Justin Lewis was starting his senior year of high school. The only player on this team who was a consideration was Oso, who committed 2 months earlier.

When you talk about what Marquette actually did for this schedule, it's really just the 4 games against Radford, Chicago State, Central Michigan, and NC Central. The rest was assigned or scheduled long ago.

[panda]

Baylor, Purdue not MU's choice....

Correct but the program knows they'll be playing high major opponents from the Big10/B12 due to conferences previous scheduling commitments as well as Wisconsin.

Knowing these opponents and the youth of the squad this year, I understand taking the easy route in the buy game schedule. It certainly won't elevate the computer numbers at all - But a young team building confidence with wins/avoiding losses to decent low major teams may help them more come conference season.

Who knows, but I'm a strong believer in team spirit and compounding losses early for a young team can be a back breaker as the season drags on.

[tower912]

MU has enough games against high majors on their schedule.    Beat the cupcakes by 20+, go 15-11 against high majors, go to the tourney.

[The Equalizer]

Bucky really isn't either, as that's just a series we renew. And Notre Dame was scheduled in November 2019, when Wojo, Markus, and Anim were all still here and Justin Lewis was starting his senior year of high school. The only player on this team who was a consideration was Oso, who committed 2 months earlier.

When you talk about what Marquette actually did for this schedule, it's really just the 4 games against Radford, Chicago State, Central Michigan, and NC Central. The rest was assigned or scheduled long ago.

So you're simply stating that you schedule differently when you expect to have better players on the roster. Thank you Captain Obvious.

I suspect the schedule might have been more to your liking had we retained more of Wojo's roster. A core of Carton as a senior, Oso and Garcia as juniors, Jones, Mitchell and Aidoo as a sophs would probably have provided greater confidence to play a more challenging schedule.

As it stands, given our top returning scorer is a soph who played 18 minutes per game, it's more than reasonable to ease up on the schedule this year. Which we largely can't do becuase we don't control so much of our schedule.

And if you're not going to give MU credit for anything outside of what they impact this year, why should they do anything in advance?  If you're not going to give them credit for having Wisconsin on the schedule, then  drop the Wisconsin series (because it's long-standing).  Beg out of the Big Ten and Big 12 challenges (since those are conference-wide initiatives), turn down pre-conference tournaments (because MU doesn't control the opponents), and cancel the Notre Dame contract (since it was negotiated several years ago). 

[brewcity77]

Correct but the program knows they'll be playing high major opponents from the Big10/B12 due to conferences previous scheduling commitments as well as Wisconsin.

Knowing these opponents and the youth of the squad this year, I understand taking the easy route in the buy game schedule. It certainly won't elevate the computer numbers at all - But a young team building confidence with wins/avoiding losses to decent low major teams may help them more come conference season.

Who knows, but I'm a strong believer in team spirit and compounding losses early for a young team can be a back breaker as the season drags on.

1-2 of these types of games, sure. But scheduling all sub-275 teams hurts the resume in terms of Quadrant records, means you need to absolutely drub your opponents, and is providing a worse product for paying fans (less inventory and lower quality).

I don't think the expectation when playing teams projected in the 150-250 range at home should be a loss anyway, and 25 point wins are the minimum for these games to be a success, 30-40 point wins should be the goal, which is tough for a young team. In 2015-16, we played 6 teams that were 299th in RPI or worse and averaged exactly a 25-point win, though that was heavily offset by beating Grambling and Maine by a combined 83 points (55.3% of the margin in just two of the six games).

If this young team plays those four games at comfortable but inadequate 10-20 point margins, they will kill their NET early on and then, just like 2015-16, their NCAA hopes will basically be dashed by the end of December. If you play better opponents, there might be a little more risk, but you also don't have to win by 30. In the NET era, winning is no longer the measure of success. We've lost home non-con games to sub-100 teams twice in the past 15 years. Those were in Wojo's first two seasons (Nebraska-Omaha & Belmont) and I don't think we should live in fear of that happening when it is so infrequent.