I doubt YSU had a choice. They needed money games. Having said that, id be fine with playing a roadie P5 game once a year. Get the money and a chance to compete in a tough environment.

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

I foresee a home and home with big schools that Calhoun has connections with.

SLB wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:20 am

I foresee a home and home with big schools that Calhoun has connections with.

Starts with UC ends with LA

bigblue32 wrote:

SLB wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:20 am

I foresee a home and home with big schools that Calhoun has connections with.

Starts with UC ends with LA

Or UAB……..or the Boston Celtics. ;-)

AGGIEinIOWA wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 12:21 pm

bigblue32 wrote:

SLB wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:20 am

I foresee a home and home with big schools that Calhoun has connections with.

Starts with UC ends with LA

Or UAB……..or the Boston Celtics. ;-)

I'm sure queta would love to come back to the spectrum for another game

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:01 am

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

LSU or Oklahoma begs to differ.

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:22 pm

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:01 am

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

LSU or Oklahoma begs to differ.

Weren't those both neutral games?

GameFAQSAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:33 pm

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:24 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:22 pm

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:01 am

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

LSU or Oklahoma begs to differ.

Weren't those both neutral games?

Yes.

Still proves we can beat those teams.

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 3:10 pm

GameFAQSAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:33 pm

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:24 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:22 pm

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:01 am

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

LSU or Oklahoma begs to differ.

Weren't those both neutral games?

Yes.

Still proves we can beat those teams.

Neutral court games are far easier to win than true road games. A good USU team certainly can beat a good P5 team on the road, but the chances are so low that it's not worth it. You will lose those games 90-95% of the time, especially since most coaches won't schedule such a game unless they are confident that they will win.

GameFAQSAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 3:27 pm

bigblue32 wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:22 am

SLB wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:20 am

I foresee a home and home with big schools that Calhoun has connections with.

Starts with UC ends with LA

You have to wonder if Cronin's friendship would make him WANT to schedule a game against him, or make him all the MORE not wanting to schedule a game against him. I do remember that when Mike Montgomery was at Stanford, it was mentioned that his friendship with Stew was all the MORE reason for not want to schedule a game in Logan against him.

Another factor is Cronin while being on the hot seat has more reason to not schedule a game against that would be tragic for him getting heat from the fan base if he lost.

If he will only do a game at their home court for our home game being at the Delta Center, I would take that.

I wouldn't. Not for UCLA, at least. If UNC offered a game in Chapel Hill and a game in SLC, then maybe we think about it. But not for a sub-.500 team that isn't in the top 100 of the NET. I'd rather just keep playing Bradley and St. Mary's home and home. Not only will they play us in Logan, they are better teams in the first place.

I would like to see home/away with all the teams that are close enough to bus to. It’s a damn shame we aren’t playing the yewts, ybu, uvu, weber, idaho st. every year. They should all be rivals, generally have good programs, and close enough to be able to have the fans travel to. It would help keep travel costs down. I remember along with a lot of you, we played the 3 bigger schools down south twice a year each, h/a. Doesn’t need to be twice a year each but it should at least be once yearly each.

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 4:11 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 3:10 pm

GameFAQSAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:33 pm

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:24 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:22 pm

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:01 am

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

LSU or Oklahoma begs to differ.

Weren't those both neutral games?

Yes.

Still proves we can beat those teams.

Neutral court games are far easier to win than true road games. A good USU team certainly can beat a good P5 team on the road, but the chances are so low that it's not worth it. You will lose those games 90-95% of the time, especially since most coaches won't schedule such a game unless they are confident that they will win.

That's a looser mentality. I say anytime, anywhere.

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

April 1st, 2024, 11:13 am

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 4:11 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 3:10 pm

GameFAQSAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:33 pm

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:24 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:22 pm

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:01 am

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

LSU or Oklahoma begs to differ.

Weren't those both neutral games?

Yes.

Still proves we can beat those teams.

Neutral court games are far easier to win than true road games. A good USU team certainly can beat a good P5 team on the road, but the chances are so low that it's not worth it. You will lose those games 90-95% of the time, especially since most coaches won't schedule such a game unless they are confident that they will win.

That's a looser mentality. I say anytime, anywhere.

Yes, we should all have tight mentalities.

In my opinion
Ideal non-conference schedule
7 home games
1 Idaho Falls game
1 Salt Lake game
1 road game
1 of the big early season tournaments

SLB wrote: ↑

April 1st, 2024, 11:24 am

In my opinion
Ideal non-conference schedule
7 home games
1 Idaho Falls game
1 Salt Lake game
1 road game
1 of the big early season tournaments

That would put us at 13 non con games. Going forward with 20 conference games we will only have 11 non con games to schedule.

SLB wrote: ↑

April 1st, 2024, 11:24 am

In my opinion
Ideal non-conference schedule
7 home games
1 Idaho Falls game
1 Salt Lake game
1 road game
1 of the big early season tournaments

I’d removed the Idaho falls game, and only play 5 home games.

One in Salt Lake.

An in season tournament

The rest True Road games against A10 or P6s.

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

April 1st, 2024, 11:13 am

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 4:11 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 3:10 pm

GameFAQSAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:33 pm

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:24 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:22 pm

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:01 am

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

LSU or Oklahoma begs to differ.

Weren't those both neutral games?

Yes.

Still proves we can beat those teams.

Neutral court games are far easier to win than true road games. A good USU team certainly can beat a good P5 team on the road, but the chances are so low that it's not worth it. You will lose those games 90-95% of the time, especially since most coaches won't schedule such a game unless they are confident that they will win.

That's a looser mentality. I say anytime, anywhere.

No, it's simply being smart. I want to play in the NCAA tournament. Losing games does not do anything to help you get an NCAA bid. So playing games that are basically a guaranteed loss (I'm think of Duryea playing Duke in Cameron) is just a waste of an OOC game. UConn would probably lose in Cameron at least 60-70% of the time, and USU is not UConn. Now if we can get a neutral court game against a big name opponent, I would jump all over that. Indeed, if Duke gave us one game in Cameron and one game in SLC, we should at least think about that one. But no one and done's against P5's on the road. Home and home's against the likes of Bradley or USF are a much better way to build an NCAA resume.

Aggies were just bad that year. Aggies would have been competitive had they played Duke this year

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑

April 1st, 2024, 11:36 pm

Aggies were just bad that year. Aggies would have been competitive had they played Duke this year

I don't know how you definite "competitive," but we almost certainly would have lost to Duke in Cameron this year. Like I said, even UConn and Purdue would most likely be underdogs if they played Duke in Cameron this year. Beating a top 10 on the road is incredibly difficult to do.

GameFAQSAggie wrote: ↑

April 2nd, 2024, 4:32 pm

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

April 1st, 2024, 7:19 pm

Indeed, if Duke gave us one game in Cameron and one game in SLC, we should at least think about that one. But no one and done's against P5's on the road.

If Duke offered us one in Cameron and one in SLC, I would say no "at least think about it". More like jump all over it.

GameFAQSAggie wrote: ↑

April 2nd, 2024, 4:37 pm

I do think that when we have plenty of slots, we can use just ONE for a P5 one and done. Especially when there are plenty of home games that should be wins to balance those out, if not outweigh them.

And rather than playing a home game in Idaho Falls, I would just as soon say play Idaho State home and home.

A loss is a wasted OOC game. I'm not interested in playing a game that USU will almost certainly lose just because it is a sexy opponent. If Duke offered a game in Durham and a game in SLC and we know that we had a team strong enough to beat Duke in SLC, then I would think about it. But I still don't like scheduling the guaranteed loss in Durham. And if it is two guaranteed losses, then it's a hard no.

As for one and done's on the road with P5 teams, they basically fall into two categories: 1) Games we have almost no chance of winning. 2) Games that won't help our NCAA profile much. There's no reason to play those games when schools like Bradley, USF, and St. Mary's will give us home and homes.

At this stage, we have been competing for tournament bids consistently, and we play in a conference that just sent six teams to the NCAA. We should be past the point where we accept one-sided OOC scheduling deals to prove ourselves. Our sole focus in OOC scheduling should be maximizing our chances of making the tournament. And accepting one-sided scheduling deals will almost always hurt us rather than help us on Selection Sunday.

That said, I would be in favor of scheduling almost anyone in the country if we can play them on a neutral court. Most of the power conference schools play almost no true road games in OOC play. If they play a strong opponent, they play them on a neutral court. USU should take the same scheduling philosophy. Don't play road games unless they give us a home game in return, but play as many quality neutral games as we can. My guess is that more teams would be more willing to play in SLC than Idaho Falls, but if a quality team wants to play us in Idaho Falls for whatever reason, I would jump all over that.

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:01 am

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

playing cupcake non-con schedules isn't what makes a mid major program into a powerhouse program. It's great publicity and i think it can help recruiting. It wouldn't hurt to play tough opponents on national television. Eventually the big schools will want to come play at the spectrum. Demanding home and homes with every good opponent isn't going to help our program get any better. I'd rather create some sort of relationships with this big programs instead of playing a WCC/MVC schedule. It was good for this year because we needed our guy to build chemistry but if we want to be a big dog we gotta play the big dogs it doesn't matter where.

and I love the idea of playing cupcake non con games so we can look good for the tournament. But I want us to be a program that wins in the tournament. Time to see the bigger perspective. Our stubborness about home and homes has gone on for too long and it hasn't done us enough good for me to want it to stay that way.

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

April 1st, 2024, 11:13 am

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 4:11 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 3:10 pm

GameFAQSAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:33 pm

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:24 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 2:22 pm

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:01 am

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

LSU or Oklahoma begs to differ.

Weren't those both neutral games?

Yes.

Still proves we can beat those teams.

Neutral court games are far easier to win than true road games. A good USU team certainly can beat a good P5 team on the road, but the chances are so low that it's not worth it. You will lose those games 90-95% of the time, especially since most coaches won't schedule such a game unless they are confident that they will win.

That's a looser mentality. I say anytime, anywhere.

AMEN BROTHER THANK YOU

Neutral site games are our best bets at getting possible good non-con wins on the schedule.

I personally love the idea of an Idaho Falls game (in large part because I live here), because it's a neutral site venue that will be a very USU friendly crowd in a market that is "reachable" for USU to really grow in. Get a game here against a WCC, A10, or solid Missouri Valley team, and I think it would do very well and likely sellout the MACU Center.

I think it was a major win for Boise to schedule a game here against SMC. It attracted a lot of casual fans. Drew a crowd of about 5,000 in a 6,000 seat arena. Got Boise probably it's best non-con win last year.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-baske ... s-boise-st

Just pick up the phone and everything will work itself out.

We lost to Bradley on the road. Would it not have been better to lose to a Duke or even an Auburn on the road even it was set up as a one and done?

brian5562 wrote: ↑

April 3rd, 2024, 1:22 pm

We lost to Bradley on the road. Would it not have been better to lose to a Duke or even an Auburn on the road even it was set up as a one and done?

Perhaps. If we lose to Duke by 30 on the road but lose in overtime to Bradley it isn't any better to lose to Duke. Also, I would say that if we played that Bradley game 10 times last year we win 50% of the time. If we played away at Duke last year I'd be surprised if we won once. The question you should be asking is: Was it better to beat USF on a neutral court or to lose at Duke? I think we all know the answer to that.

twentytwocactus wrote: ↑

April 3rd, 2024, 12:54 pm

StanfordAggie wrote: ↑

March 31st, 2024, 11:01 am

I will go on the record and say that I don't want to see USU play one and done's on the road against power conference schools. You're going to lose almost all of those matchups. Plus I feel like a conference that can send 6 teams to the NCAA's should not have to play that type of game. If we can get a neutral game (or a home and home on "neutral" courts like we did with USF), I would support that. (It would probably be much easier to convince a team to play in SLC than Logan.) Otherwise let's keep scheduling home and homes with A10/MVC/AAC/WCC schools like we have been doing.

playing cupcake non-con schedules isn't what makes a mid major program into a powerhouse program. It's great publicity and i think it can help recruiting. It wouldn't hurt to play tough opponents on national television. Eventually the big schools will want to come play at the spectrum. Demanding home and homes with every good opponent isn't going to help our program get any better. I'd rather create some sort of relationships with this big programs instead of playing a WCC/MVC schedule. It was good for this year because we needed our guy to build chemistry but if we want to be a big dog we gotta play the big dogs it doesn't matter where.

Nobody is advocating playing "cupcakes." I want to schedule the best opponents we can realistically beat. But a one and done on the road against a P5 opponent is a loss at least 80% of the time. And against an opponent who would help us on Selection Sunday, it's a loss closer to 90-95% of the time (or more).

And don't kid yourself. P5 programs will never play in Logan. They very rarely play on the road in OOC play even against other P5 opponents. There is zero chance that a quality P5 program will agree to play against a strong MWC team in a town that is a long distance from the nearest airport. These days basically all marquee OOC matchups are on neutral courts. If we want to play P5 opponents, neutral court games are the only realistic option unless we want to play one and dones on the road. If USU has a strong team, I would play any team in the country on a neutral court. But no unwinnable (or nearly unwinnable) one and done road games.

And the reason I mentioned the A10/MVC/AAC/WCC are because these are the strongest non-P5 conferences. If you schedule a game against a top-tier team from any of these conferences, usually they are at worst Q2 at home, and often the road game will be Q1. So these are not "cupcakes" by any stretch of the imagination. I would much rather play two winnable games, both of which will help our NCAA resume, then schedule a guaranteed road loss against a P5 school.

How did BSU get Clemson to come to Boise next November for a true road game?