Coach Martin.....

[catsfan20052006]

on 810 at 9:30

[catsfan20052006]

1. Thinks every team should be Independent if the non conference schedule is more important than the conference schedule

2. Hates the RPI because we would have been better off losing to Duke and N. Carolina by 50 than we are because we lost to Iowa and Oregon at the buzzer

3. Can't shorten the non conference schedule and make it so that you play everybody in the Big XII because then people would say you played the weaker Big XII teams more

4. On Darren Kent: "I'm so proud of him. When we got here he had no idea what we were going to be about. He has stayed the course and done everything we've asked of him. He has accepted the responsibility of being a leader".

[mcmwcat]

3. Can't shorten the non conference schedule and make it so that you play everybody in the Big XII because then people would say you played the weaker Big XII teams more

 

[catzacker]

3. Can't shorten the non conference schedule and make it so that you play everybody in the Big XII because then people would say you played the weaker Big XII teams more

 

basically, if the Big 12 sucks (which is the perception, reality) what does playing sucky teams twice do?  He's saying that we dont' get credit for beating ISU twice or CU twice, why would OU or UT.  And this year, would we get "more" credit for beating TT twice? 

Franks theory is flawed because (IIRC) outside of CU, most of the teams that we didn't play twice that we would end up playing twice have better RPI's than the OOC opponents.  For example, take out NC Central and replace it with Tech...but do that for the other 3 team with 300+ RPI's and replace it with teams that have a <200 RPI possibly <125 RPI, and your RPI number is better. 

[ksu_FAN]

3. Can't shorten the non conference schedule and make it so that you play everybody in the Big XII because then people would say you played the weaker Big XII teams more

 

basically, if the Big 12 sucks (which is the perception, reality) what does playing sucky teams twice do?  He's saying that we dont' get credit for beating ISU twice or CU twice, why would OU or UT.  And this year, would we get "more" credit for beating TT twice? 

Franks theory is flawed because (IIRC) outside of CU, most of the teams that we didn't play twice that we would end up playing twice have better RPI's than the OOC opponents.  For example, take out NC Central and replace it with Tech...but do that for the other 3 team with 300+ RPI's and replace it with teams that have a <200 RPI possibly <125 RPI, and your RPI number is better. 

Agreed.

Frank just needs to say we scheduled this way b/c we knew we'd have a team in transition.  And several of the teams we thought would be better (Oregon, Iowa, and Wagner) didn't turn out to be very good.  Its okay, it happens.

And his point on the Big 12 doesn't make much sense.  It would make Big 12 schedules completely equal b/c everyone's schedule would be the same.  This takes away the "unbalanced league schedule" argument, even though its much less magnified this season.  Still an average fan would look at the league and say we got to play ISU and CU twice while South teams only had Tech once, by far the 3 worst teams in the league.  So that perception is probalby still there with many.

Overall, doesn't sound like a great radio performance by Frank there.

[fatty fat fat]

he needs to bring up my rpi argument (no computer ranking ranks us lower, the compositie rankings have us around 46)

[catzacker]

3. Can't shorten the non conference schedule and make it so that you play everybody in the Big XII because then people would say you played the weaker Big XII teams more

 

basically, if the Big 12 sucks (which is the perception, reality) what does playing sucky teams twice do?  He's saying that we dont' get credit for beating ISU twice or CU twice, why would OU or UT.  And this year, would we get "more" credit for beating TT twice? 

Franks theory is flawed because (IIRC) outside of CU, most of the teams that we didn't play twice that we would end up playing twice have better RPI's than the OOC opponents.  For example, take out NC Central and replace it with Tech...but do that for the other 3 team with 300+ RPI's and replace it with teams that have a <200 RPI possibly <125 RPI, and your RPI number is better. 

Agreed.

Frank just needs to say we scheduled this way b/c we knew we'd have a team in transition.  And several of the teams we thought would be better (Oregon, Iowa, and Wagner) didn't turn out to be very good.  Its okay, it happens.

And his point on the Big 12 doesn't make much sense.  It would make Big 12 schedules completely equal b/c everyone's schedule would be the same.  This takes away the "unbalanced league schedule" argument, even though its much less magnified this season.  Still an average fan would look at the league and say we got to play ISU and CU twice while South teams only had Tech once, by far the 3 worst teams in the league.  So that perception is probalby still there with many.

Overall, doesn't sound like a great radio performance by Frank there.

I don't know why the conference wouldn't want to do this.  Though it'd make the conference season an incredible grind.  We would gain 6 games against quality opponents who's RPI would be much better than who would normally face and probably 3-4 of those games against top 50/75 opponents.   So, in our OOC we could go play all home games against terribleness and still be okay. 

[ksu_FAN]

3. Can't shorten the non conference schedule and make it so that you play everybody in the Big XII because then people would say you played the weaker Big XII teams more

 

basically, if the Big 12 sucks (which is the perception, reality) what does playing sucky teams twice do?  He's saying that we dont' get credit for beating ISU twice or CU twice, why would OU or UT.  And this year, would we get "more" credit for beating TT twice? 

Franks theory is flawed because (IIRC) outside of CU, most of the teams that we didn't play twice that we would end up playing twice have better RPI's than the OOC opponents.  For example, take out NC Central and replace it with Tech...but do that for the other 3 team with 300+ RPI's and replace it with teams that have a <200 RPI possibly <125 RPI, and your RPI number is better. 

Agreed.

Frank just needs to say we scheduled this way b/c we knew we'd have a team in transition.  And several of the teams we thought would be better (Oregon, Iowa, and Wagner) didn't turn out to be very good.  Its okay, it happens.

And his point on the Big 12 doesn't make much sense.  It would make Big 12 schedules completely equal b/c everyone's schedule would be the same.  This takes away the "unbalanced league schedule" argument, even though its much less magnified this season.  Still an average fan would look at the league and say we got to play ISU and CU twice while South teams only had Tech once, by far the 3 worst teams in the league.  So that perception is probalby still there with many.

Overall, doesn't sound like a great radio performance by Frank there.

I don't know why the conference wouldn't want to do this.  Though it'd make the conference season an incredible grind.  We would gain 6 games against quality opponents who's RPI would be much better than who would normally face and probably 3-4 of those games against top 50/75 opponents.   So, in our OOC we could go play all home games against terribleness and still be okay. 

Probably money.  Teams would be losing 2-3 home games each with this, and then league teams would be much less likely to play tougher games in the OOC.  This would limit you to only 8 or 9 OOC games, and that's with an exempt Tournament, so there are 2-3 games that will be neutral site.  I would imagine that would be the big complaint.  It would be nice, but I don't think we'll ever see it.

[mcmwcat]

3. Can't shorten the non conference schedule and make it so that you play everybody in the Big XII because then people would say you played the weaker Big XII teams more

 

basically, if the Big 12 sucks (which is the perception, reality) what does playing sucky teams twice do?  He's saying that we dont' get credit for beating ISU twice or CU twice, why would OU or UT.  And this year, would we get "more" credit for beating TT twice? 

Franks theory is flawed because (IIRC) outside of CU, most of the teams that we didn't play twice that we would end up playing twice have better RPI's than the OOC opponents.  For example, take out NC Central and replace it with Tech...but do that for the other 3 team with 300+ RPI's and replace it with teams that have a <200 RPI possibly <125 RPI, and your RPI number is better. 

Agreed.

Frank just needs to say we scheduled this way b/c we knew we'd have a team in transition.  And several of the teams we thought would be better (Oregon, Iowa, and Wagner) didn't turn out to be very good.  Its okay, it happens.

And his point on the Big 12 doesn't make much sense.  It would make Big 12 schedules completely equal b/c everyone's schedule would be the same.  This takes away the "unbalanced league schedule" argument, even though its much less magnified this season.  Still an average fan would look at the league and say we got to play ISU and CU twice while South teams only had Tech once, by far the 3 worst teams in the league.  So that perception is probalby still there with many.

Overall, doesn't sound like a great radio performance by Frank there.

I don't know why the conference wouldn't want to do this.  Though it'd make the conference season an incredible grind.  We would gain 6 games against quality opponents who's RPI would be much better than who would normally face and probably 3-4 of those games against top 50/75 opponents.   So, in our OOC we could go play all home games against terribleness and still be okay. 

Probably money.  Teams would be losing 2-3 home games each with this, and then league teams would be much less likely to play tougher games in the OOC.  This would limit you to only 8 or 9 OOC games, and that's with an exempt Tournament, so there are 2-3 games that will be neutral site.  I would imagine that would be the big complaint.  It would be nice, but I don't think we'll ever see it.

if the idiots at the ncaa would up the amount of games allowed by 5 or 6 then this wouldn't be an issue.  and we wouldn't have a scheduling problem where only 1 game a week is played for a good stretch of 5 weeks each year.

[Pett]

1. Thinks every team should be Independent if the non conference schedule is more important than the conference schedule.

Frank better not start turning to Prince in the sense of when he creates a "clever saying" that he repeats it in EVERY single interview.