Anyone still thinking we should have Princeton
- Thread starter HallX2
- Start date
meltdown on the rutgers board after losing to the tigers--would have been the same had we lost to St Pete's
Candidly I don't know much about Princeton's roster this season. And what they lost from the team last year that went to the Sweet 16 and won the Ivy (I know the big guy is gone, but not sure what else left or returned). But they are probably multiple levels above St. Pete's.
If a big east team doesn’t want to schedule the best Ivy team, you’re probably in for a long year. I can’t picture UConn or Marquette saying let’s stay away from Princeton.
Tons of P6 teams want no part of Princeton.
I‘d play them, but doing so in the first game of the season is asking for trouble
Yea I know Rutgers is one of the 3 or 4 schools half this board loathes and loses all objectivity towards, but Princeton is probably several levels above SPU. I wouldn't have flipped even if we lost tonight because its so early, but a loss to SPU is way, way worse IMO than losing to a team like Princeton game 1.
Definitely based on last year they were many floors above them. Only the full season will say whether that are that far apart this year.
Losing to SPU would have also included the added face plant of a coach leaving his gig for supposedly greener pastures and then losing to the school he left. That would be pretty hard to live down and the worst possible way(minus the injury of a player) to begin the season.
I would avoid all Ivy League teams, especially Princeton. No upside plus you prepare for a style you won’t see again. There are good reasons we avoid Princeton.
I hear you in concept, but that would have really mattered to like 10 people. We are a "greener pasture" than SPU regardless of who won the game tonight. A few of our fans here would have flipped, but most would have chalked it up to a bad game 1 loss in a long season with plenty of room for improvement. I mean as I'm typing this I saw the bottom line which showed Michigan State, ranked #4, just loss to James Madison. Sha isn't Izzo and we aren't Michigan State, but does anyone think MSU won't have a really good season or that Izzo won't get them to where they usually are, if not more?
Of course losing to St. Peter’s would have been a bad loss, but I couldn’t help but think that it would haunt us all season long if we were to land squarely on the bubble when all is said and done. A Q4 loss, even though only the first game of the season, would have carried a lot of negative weight. Glad we escaped with the victory. Easy to say “long season, we can get better,” but that loss was not going to go away.
The thing is I think the Big East schools are going to be ranked so well overall this year there will be plenty of changes to help the resume and offset bad losses early.
Agreed on the Big East front but not so sure how many resume changing games we’ll be able to win. I hope I’m wrong and we do pull off a few upsets but if we can repeat last year where we beat the teams we should beat and come up short against the cream of the crop, then the St. Peter’s loss would have been detrimental. Glad it’s a moot point and not something we have hanging over our heads. These buy games are absolute musts for us.
The problem playing the top Ivy’s isn’t just the actual game outcome… in the new world of NET and KenPom and Quads, there’s no value in playing them because it’s so hard for them to schedule good teams, and the Ivy schedule pulls them all down.
Its all a matter of scheduling philosophy and also when you can play them.
Its all a matter of scheduling philosophy and also when you can play them.
And Gonzo DID play them.
In the PJ days, it was all about facing Carrill, and the fact that SHU had really only played Princeton a handful of times prior to the NJ-NY 7 in the late 70s.
Princeton doesn’t play the same way anymore under Henderson. It’s like the way people associated the Devils with the neutral zone trap years after they stopped using it. Princeton is just a good, well-coached, fundamentally sound program….and let’s not forget with talented players.
there’s only 7 or 8 games you get to schedule, did we avoid 200+ programs or are we not playing them because there’s only so many games. Are big east teams afraid of Penn, Dartmouth, and Columbia too? All of us haven’t scheduled those teams. Must be because we are avoiding them by your logic.
I’m not drawing any conclusions. I just noted they don’t play them after you asked if they are afraid of them. And I doubt Northern Arizona is sub 200
After Princeton's March Madness heroics, Rutgers, Seton Hall need to play Tigers again
With Princeton's magical run in March Madness, it's time for Rutgers and Seton Hall to start putting the Tigers back on the schedule again.
www.app.com
NJ should have a version of the Big 5. SHU, Rutgers, Princeton, Monmouth. Heck of a couple days most years.
If you use the common sense philosophy of using the non conference schedule to prepare your team for the conference schedule, what was the point of playing Princeton. Who in the big east were you preparing for by playing Princeton. You’d have been better off preparing against a team who played a crappy 2-3 zone just to get ready for Syracuse. Waste of 5 days in practice preparing for something you’ll never see again all year. That would be a reason not to play Princeton in the 80s and 90s. It’s not old school Princeton basketball anymore.
No P5+ Big East school should avoid playing Princeton or anyone else from a smaller conference. If you lose, that's your problem. If you're afraid to play them, you have bigger problems.
I hear what you are saying, but that is not realistic given the pressure of coaching at P6 level and all the analytics that play into it.
Zero in Playing St Peter’s every year.
Zero in Playing St Peter’s every year.
This. You play these games for other reasons than "getting something" out of it. FWIW I think that Kadary would have feasted on Princeton, not impressed with rutgers' guard play.
This about where I land on it, especially since they are not running Pete Carrill's offense anymore. I understand the NET argument, but I also think that a team that aspires to big things isn't cowed by that. There's nothing wrong with a little early-season pressure and it also teaches a team to adapt to something somewhat out of the ordinary.
I think Rutgers would've beaten Princeton at either the LBAC or at Jadwin, but playing in that mausoleum last night forced them to create their own energy, whereas Princeton already had it, lining up against a (very local) Big Ten foe. But they didn't beat them and that's a discredit to a team that aspires to bigger things.
Are the analytics so much better to have Albany, Wagner and FDU. Glad we got those game for the analytics.
Princeton is the best team in the state right now.
If there is a good chance Rutgers could lose, it is better to play at a neutral site than at home from a NET standpoint.
Willard peaked his teams going into each season each year and front loaded the ooc schedule. KENTUCKY, Michigan, Michigan State. It was great for Seton Hall to get to the tourney. I also think it is why we had swoons in Jan and Feb and tourney.
Sha said it last night. If you are peaking now, you are in trouble.
