Back when we had the Stag 6th Man, and Doc's Roundtables with TOT, we used to have a discussion on who should be on our schedule with Gene Doris and the coaches. At that time, It resulted in us getting series with Fordham and Holy Cross. It also planted a seed in getting the SHU series started, along with setting the ground work for Games with BC, PC and Georgetown. And the fans also let it know that we wanted a UCONN series, but we wanted a game in Bridgeport. There were also other games requested, but did not come to fruition. I will summarize and send the fans preferences to Gene Doris and coaches, if people will reply to this message. This is the time of the season that scheduling contacts are made. Here is my 1st cut in order of priority:
1. Start a series with Fordham and Holy Cross (Jesuit and academic rivals)
2. Continue series with Loyola and SHU (Rivals)
3. Start series with Yale for top team in CT. Could be a double header with Fairfield vs Yale, Quinnipiac vs SHU (BPT - New Haven Classic) . QU and SHU have not played since QU joined the MAAC…. ridiculous.
4. Try to get a 2 for 1 series with Providence, or BC, Georgetown. We have the Sydney and Cooley connection with them
5. UCONN game only if they play once in Bridgeport. Give them the good seats, except for Fairfield Season ticket Holders. If not play UMASS or Rhody or St Joes in a 3 for 2 series
6. Play CAA teams. If we are truly interested in joining the CAA, we have to play a couple games vs CAA teams like ….Drexel, Delaware, Hofstra, Northeastern or Towson.
7. I do not like these pseudo Tourney games vs North Carolina, Duke or Louisville….. or games vs UMES. Getting rid of the CT-6 triple header should give us some more flexibility in dates.
Thats 9 games that should be the main goal. I realize that these are tough games to get, but its a goal to work for. I also like the Bucknell, Columbia, Ivy's.
Last Edit: Mar 21, 2016 10:04:05 GMT -5 by JoeStag
Post by redseastag on Mar 21, 2016 10:59:43 GMT -5
Anything in Massachusetts would be great for the alumni base up here. Also, I agree on the big name team once a year. It definitely helps with recruiting at this level.
Playing in the Philly area would be great too, since there are so many potential Catholic rivals. Philly is a great college basketball city and I think it would increase our name recognition in that area among the many Catholic high schools and their students. Lasalle and St. Joe's are perfect targets, but games against Temple, Drexel, and Penn would be good as well. Plus, the Palestra is a fun visit.
Post by brokenboat on Mar 21, 2016 11:39:11 GMT -5
We should play more "guarantee" games 3 or 4. We might not get any W's but they will challenge the team and the basketball program will make a few $$$ to reinvest in the program. Playing against the big boys doesn't hurt with recruiting either.
To me, scheduling depends on what you want Fairfield basketball to be in the future. Should there be aspirations to move out of the MAAC, either up (CAA) or down (Patriot) I would move scheduling in that direction as JS stated in #6. If you are satisfied with Fairfield's current standing of lower mid-major, then go right ahead and schedule all the CT schools you want. For me, the only CT school I would schedule is UCONN, and I don't care where the game is played.
Scheduling down (CT schools) makes no sense to me when there are natural rivals as Fordham, GT, BC, etc., as well as Philly and Washington DC schools that are up-scheduling.
I would gauge next year's prospects for some of the mid-majors in MD, VA and Carolinas. If we schedule a couple of games against teams that are likely to be at the head of their conferences that helps us develop, and I would not mind a Southern road trip. The other tack is to play a couple of high majors when they are in a "down" year.
I hate the Sacred Heart series -- does nothing for us. Bragging rights for the town of Fairfield maybe? Might as well be Hartford or Central, or even Bryant.
Post by ctghostman on Mar 21, 2016 12:26:57 GMT -5
Get to Boston - BU/BC/Northeastern & Philly. Holy Cross & Fordham should always be on the schedule. Get a Big East team too-Providence/St Johns or Seton Hall. We also need to be in a Christmas tournament.
I like playing 2 teams from big conferences like we did this year with a top 5 team(UNC) and then a middle of the pack program(NW). In between I do agree there is some good competitions in our area we should be trying to schedule with. I was not too fond of the 3 Ivy's this year and thought it was a little repetitive but Yale and Columbia turned out to be good opponents. I agree with how frustrating playing a UMES type team is but seniors to play close to home is a good opportunity and gives our guys a chance to play an easier opponent.
Would love to play BC, Rutgers, St. Johns, PC or Gtown this coming year.
Post by jenningsbeach on Mar 21, 2016 13:29:54 GMT -5
I like the idea of Fordham, Holy Cross and Yale annually. Agree that we should also target schools in Boston, Philadelphia and DC in most years. And I would love to pick off a "down" St. John's, Rutgers or BC next year. Obviously, a four-for-one tournament, with a couple of Power 5 opponents, works every year.
Lots of wiggle room, of course. But I would like to see Fairfield schedule realistically. We are still young next season so a number of "winnable" games should be the focus. If things go well, we can take a shot at some bigger schools/tougher opponents in 2017/18.
Get to Boston - BU/BC/Northeastern & Philly. Holy Cross & Fordham should always be on the schedule. Get a Big East team too-Providence/St Johns or Seton Hall. We also need to be in a Christmas tournament.....
Not sure about a Christmas Tournament unless it is at MSG or the Barclays Center in Brooklyn but Boston and Philly should always be on the schedule for our alumni and recruits. Maybe hosting a Jesuit Classic at the WBA might draw? Also as "The Jesuit University of Connecticut" (my "branding" suggestion to Fr. von Arx that he doesn't agree with) we should always be playing against Fordham, Holy Cross, Loyola and maybe often even BC.
Getting clobbered with a limited chance to win early in the season by a Top 10 big name program is probably not a bad thing if the money is right.
The other tack is to play a couple of high majors when they are in a "down" year.
I see some people have "Beer Muscles" when talking about the schedule…… that happens in spring time. We have tried scheduling a lot of High majors before in the TOT era. Did not work out. And I would almost say it was a disaster. I feel having 1 High Major (UCONN, Notre Dame, Villanova, Duke) is fine. Why do we need more than 1 opportunity to beat our head against the wall and start the season 0-4. Playing a 2nd Major that is in a down year does make sense…. Boston College, St Johns, Depaul, Rutgers. If we have a team that we feel is 1st place MAAC…. like in 2 years with Tyler and our frosh class as upper classmen, then it would make sense. But we are talking 2016 here:
IMO, the schedule needs to be "Balanced" across a lot dimensions….. Strength, winnable games, home vs away, Rivals, avoid a long losing streak, good prep games for MAAC December schedule, And if we have a lot of newcomers/frosh, we need "easy" games to build confidence and chemistry. And most important wins. I feel that our OOC schedule should be planned so that we end up 1 game over .500…… Challenging but Winnable.
I also agree with Party in playing High Majors in a down year. Seeing Boston College, St Johns and UMASS on the schedule for 2016. Rutgers might be too far down.
Last Edit: Mar 21, 2016 13:56:56 GMT -5 by JoeStag
I always enjoyed the games in Madison Square Garden and to further increase visibility in the New York Metropolitan Area a game at Barclays Center and the A10 tournament isn't going to be there forever!
I hate the Sacred Heart series -- does nothing for us. Bragging rights for the town of Fairfield maybe? Might as well be Hartford or Central, or even Bryant. .
The sacred heart series will continue to be considered a good one by many people until we lose to them. Then those same posters that love the series will talk about the loss being the end of the world as we know it.
I was never in favor of the game, but I would play it as long as the game draws well. When the novelty fades and the game stops drawing I would drop it. So far it hasn't happened yet, attendance this year was 3,251, that's a good crowd especially given the average attendance figures this year.
The other tack is to play a couple of high majors when they are in a "down" year.
I see some people have "Beer Muscles" when talking about the schedule…… that happens in spring time. We have tried scheduling a lot of High majors before in the TOT era. Did not work out. And I would almost say it was a disaster. I feel having 1 High Major (UCONN, Notre Dame, Villanova, Duke) is fine. Why do we need more than 1 opportunity to beat our head against the wall and start the season 0-4. Playing a 2nd Major that is in a down year does make sense…. Boston College, St Johns, Depaul, Rutgers. If we have a team that we feel is 1st place MAAC…. like in 2 years with Tyler and our frosh class as upper classmen, then it would make sense. But we are talking 2016 here:
IMO, the schedule needs to be "Balanced" across a lot dimensions….. Strength, winnable games, home vs away, Rivals, avoid a long losing streak, good prep games for MAAC December schedule, And if we have a lot of newcomers/frosh, we need "easy" games to build confidence and chemistry. And most important wins. I feel that our OOC schedule should be planned so that we end up 1 game over .500…… Challenging but Winnable.
I also agree with Party in playing High Majors in a down year. Seeing Boston College, St Johns and UMASS on the schedule for 2016. Rutgers might be too far down.
I'm not for playing 4 games against high majors but I like 2. I also like to try and schedule a high major that is probably going to have a down year, so that there is a chance we might win.
