Heard this from an administrator:

11/3 – vs. Catholic (Exhibition)

11/10 – vs. Youngstown St.

11/17 - @ Boston University

11/21 - @ Notre Dame

11/24 – vs. Hofstra

11/26 – vs. Mt. Saint Mary’s

11/28 - @ JMU

12/2 – vs. Manhattan (BB&T)

12/4 - @ Bradley

12/8 – vs. Kansas St.

12/11 - @ Rutgers

12/22 – vs. VMI

12/30 – vs. Sacred Heart

1/4 - @ Georgia

Not official, but this looks nearly confirmed.

9-4

Meh. Too many RPI drags for my taste.  I know the conference schedule is going to be much tougher, and the young team won't be to the point where RPI matters, but I'd like more Hofstras and fewer Sacred Hearts.  I guess it's also a sign that the coaching staff wants to get the kids some winnable games before running into the guantlet of the new A-10. 

I'd say somewhere aroun 9-4 or 8-5 seems right.  But I'd also gues this schedule strength will show much lower than last year because of those RPI drags  beucase of teams like mt. St. Mary's and Sacred Heart (though even some bad teams on here like VMI and Youngstown St. were roughly .500 teams last year so they dont destroy the RPI).

.

Youngstown St - 171
BU - 190
ND - 39
Hofstra - 254
MSM - 292
JMU - 261
Manhattan - 148
Bradley - 264
Kansas St - 49
Rutgers  - 163
VMI - 260
Sacred Heart - 237
Georgia -  101

Average 2011-12 RPI:  187

Very Meh RPI.  Uber Meh home game slate outside of KSU (without Frank Martin).

 THis schedule looks like a carbon copy from the Hobbs days. There are precisely two games on it that will draw any attention outside of this board, Notre Dame and K state. NO tournaments? No matchups with local rivals(Mason)? IF we want any hope of making a postseason tournament we better win at least 9 games. 

 VCU would have been on there (probably instead of one of the lame games) if they hadn't joined the A-10.  Still.

home vs Mt. Saint Mary's & Sacred Heart plus Catholic (exh). there are whispers Little Sisters of the Poor may visit next year.

i am glad that you guys are counting 8 and 9 "w's" in June (without knowing who is hurt, injured, suspended, in the dog-house, out of the dog-house, will start as a freshman, not in a sophmore slump, has a break out junior year . . . .). 

Notta, there's a difference betweeen making a prediction and "counting" wins.   Relax.

Don't forget ND, newtman. If you consider Catholicism the Great Whore of Babylon, which is a real popular opinion these days, ND is the queen of sluts. (Not implying anything here guys. Just noting other folks' opinions.)

Maybe, given the "special" relationship between Mike and Mike and the two schools, we can have some sort of continuing tradition here: we go to Indiana year in and year out until we beat them, then they drop us. I'd go for it.

I don't have a single thing against any of these schools, and wouldn't vote to veto any of them. I'd just like to see mor geographic "diversity," is all.

There should be games to the west coast or the gulf coast every other year, at least, and to the Pacific Northwest, too. There are plenty of schools in those states that would love a shot at playing in front of the president, and when it comes to that advantage, we're IT.

I'm OK with a middling schedule with as many as 5 frosh potentially getting 15+ mpg each

 This schedule is a real disappointment.I agree with the idea that we should have geographic diversity even if it's not the strongest opponents. When you break it down,

We play one top 25 team, one team that could be very good but who knows(new coach), a bottom feeder from the SEC, a bottom feeder from the Big East, two lower level CAA teams, two ok mid majors in BU and Bradley, and a bunch of scrubs. The most disappointing game by far is Manhattan. There's no excuse for playing a team like that in the one Verizon Center game.  They won't draw 2,500 people for that. 

- To play devils advocate to myself, the schedule makes sense. The A10 will be a war and piling up wins on a bunch of crap teams could be very good for a young team's confidence.(see LaSalle and UMass last year)

- Not playing out West and not playing in a preseason tournament makes no sense to me. It is very difficult to recruit kids from California when we don't play a game west of Illinois. Unfortunately, this smells like the coaches want to get a bunch of soft wins early so they can quiet the criticism that would come from two 20 loss seasons. Can't say I blame them really but it's certainly disappointing for the fans. 

 Schedule is somewhat disappointing, but we should never complain about any game against an SEC team or a Big East team.  Don't know that we are recruiting in California...we haven't had much success with the distant (American) recruits of late.  DC and international seems to be very fertile.  As for playing Manhattan, I could not agree with you more in expressing the disappointment.  Does anyone know if it is GW or the BB&T organizers who determine our opponant?   As for the RPI, I don't believe this is going to be a factor for us this year. Finally, in analyizing the schedule, if the A-10 schedule was the same as last year and we added VCU on the road and Butler at home to our OOC, then I think we would be praising our upcoming schedule.  

Interesting capsule on all A-10 teams, including key OOC games.  Seems like our key OOC games are competitive with most of the other conference members..

  http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/blog/eye-on-college-basketball/19402734/atlantic-10-offseason-rundown

Sacred Heart?!!!!! VMI?? Mt. St.Marys????? 

One would be okay, given the A-10 strength. A rather uninspiring trifecta that we will pay for, if we somehow catch lightining and get in the NCAA conversation.

The word I always like to use is balance.  It stands to reason that we are always going to play at least 1-2 top 50 schools each season.  We play two which is fine.  The next group which is a critical group towards building a competitive OOC schedule is the 51-125 group.  We only play one team (Georgia) in this range.  It stands to reason that a Manhattan or a Rutgers would have the opportunity to become such a team with a good season.  But based on last season, they are in that 126-200 group along with two other schools.  That leaves 6 games or almost half of the OOC games against sub-OOC schools.  By all objective measures, it can not be considered a high quality OOC schedule.

That said, BM, Mentzinger, DEA and LSF all make valid points.  We will have a lot of new players so throwing them into the fire could impair their confidence.  This is not supposed to be a NCAA bubble team so the schedule should not come back to bite them.  Finally, VCU would most certainly have been an OOC game had it not joined the conference which would have provided better balance. (Nothing suggests we also would have scheduled Butler but doing so would have further reinforced this.)  Also, LSF, I do believe that the BB&T organizers ultimately inviite and match-up schools although Maryland and GW certainly have the right to offer input.

 LSF's point about VCU and Butler is spot on.

What I am surprised no one here has mentioned is that the brother-in-law of the guy who lives in that big house just down Penn Ave from the GW campus is not on the schedule. Is there something beyond basketball that should be read in to that? 

It will be interesting to see how many of these OOC teams are scheduled in as part of a continuing relationship w. GW.

BU clearly is a life-time partner on our dance card.

I wouldn't mind seeing Youngstown State on the 2013-2014 schedule, even as an away game. Same thing w. Manhattan, Rutgers, Georgia and Bradley. (Actually, I think Rutgers and Georgia are locked in.) Heck, I'd be happy to play Bradley 4 years out of 5. They love basketball there, and they've got some tradition and name recognition.

The rest of the teams? Nothing against any of them, but I'd only want to see GWU playing them as necessary, to fill in scheduling gaps. Once every 3-5 years, max.

But unless and until we're playing for entree into the NCAA's, we're playing for competition and national prominence. You can't do that unless you're willing to travel. It's a big country, and travel is cheap and easy.

You can complain about the schedule all you want, but last year went with a tough schedule, where nearly every OOC game was played against teams RPI 150 or better and we got wrecked. A veteran team couldn't get wins and lost confidence. I don't have a problem with trying to make a bit of an easier schedule this year considering 6 guys who didn't suit up for us a year ago will be getting minutes this year. This schedule is a nice combination of more should be easy wins than last year, while still having enough challenges (4 BCS level teams) to prepare the team for the A-10.

 Also, I think too many people are getting caught up in Rutgers' rich tradition of sucking and writing them off too easily. They have been steadily improving under Mike Rice and they have a stud in Eli Carter, who could be a first team all big east player as a sophomore. Rutgers could be NIT caliber come March. 

Meet the new boss ... same as the old boss.

Honestly, the most exciting thing about this schedule is the fact that playing on the road this year means we get both Georgia and Rutgers in the Smith Center next year, when the team should be thinking post-season.

I can hardly contain myself.

Hofstra had an RPI of 86 the previous year and was 146 and 104 the two preceeding years.  I like a home/home vs Hofstra (Colonial Conf) going forward.  Same with Bradley  (MVC) as they recently had a stretch of RPIs 39, 104, 98, 195 before falling off the last 2 seasons.  Decent programs in good mid-major conferces and lower teams from BCS conferences is where GW will find it's best opportunities to get home/home dates.  That probably includes Rutgers, Georgia (it they are comming to the Smith Center - very good moves), Youngstown St (Horizon League), KSU and maybe even JMU (RPI 88 the previous season in the Colonial).

Manhattan is not GW's choice, it's the BB&T.

I don't like the Sacret Heart or VMI, even those are probably non-return home games for GW.  Next year I'd rather 2 home & homes vs good mid-majors or low BCS (GMU, Drexel, Clemson, etc). 

Nobody should ever object to playing four sub-200 schools in a given season.  You want your team to have a few easy games (though Coppin State and Longwood have demonstrated that little is automatic anymore).  We have 6 of these which is two too many (but understandable given the reasons stated on this thread). 

Disapointing schedule that could turn out to be better than it looks in June. 

Hopefully Hofstra, JMU and Bradley can climb back into the RPI 125-199 range they used to be. 2 of them are road game, adding to the difficulty level. Maybe YSU takes a step back but they seemed to have a pretty young team and BU has consistently been in the RPI 100-190 range. 

KSU will probably take a step back from 49 but Rutgers seems much better than 163 next season.  I'm predicting the OOC RPI will be above the 187 talley above.

It's nice to occasionally play a #1 ranked Syracuse but that doesn't really help GW get into the NCAA Tourney.  Mostly those road sell games are highly probable losses.  The committee is looking for quality wins.  Beating RPI 75-150 both at home and on the road is GW's best chance of success.  Couple that with some bigger wins in the A10 and GW's on the bubble or in the Dance.  Not next year, but maybe the years to follow.

Actually, if they replaced a VMI/SH game for a 2-3 game tourney vs good teams and get a better team for the BB&T, I would like this schedule.  Maybe next year.

 It's better than the old regime's schedule - but not by much.  GW needs to get serious about men's basketball.  If they do it can be the engine that drives all of the other sports programs at the school.  GW basketball will not move forward if the school continues to schedule cupcakes.  One or two a year is fine, but going above that is basically holding the program back from what it could be.  

The college basketball world will not take GW seriously if the schedule isn't there to back up a real program.  Some good schools are on here, but it's not enough.  And if Manhattan is who we have to play now to be in the BB&T, then forget the BB&T.  GW beach Michigan State and Maryland in this tournament in the not too distant past.  An empty 20,000 seat arena is good for no one.  With this tournament going forward, let's go big or go home.

 can we turn the bb&t into an exempt MTE?  that might help bring back the tourney structure and entice bigger programs

LA Fan has it right about the BB&T. If they can't reenergize that tourney, let's jump. It's nice that it's "all about the kids," but its a wasted effort, if they're not going to put more energy, money, and high powered basketball in to it. Frankly, it raises concerns the way it just putters along based on its past performance (The BB&T) I'm all for a serious audit.

GW ought to bring back the Red Auerbach tournament, and do it first class. Or, if Red's family is nt keen on that, go back to the Presidential Classic, with Stephen Austin, Stetson, and JMU the first invitees.

And, seriously, GWU ought to to something to memorialize not just Red, but also Babe McCarthy. Both guys did what they could to chase racism out of their sport. They deserve more praise with each passing, dreary day.

The BB&T, in its old format, should have been considered an exempt MTE.  (Of course, it only guaranteed two games rather than 3 or 4, but such animals do exist.)  This format went away for two reasons: First, the tournament used to be held on a Sunday and a Monday.  The Sunday game that Maryland played in would be nationally televised thereby creating an unbalanced tournament where this matchup was typically a better match-up than the tournament final.  Unfortunately, Maryland slipped as a program and the nationally televised game was no longer part of the package, making it less desirable for a "name" program to participate.  Secondly, we beat Michigan State and Maryland in December, 2004.  That opened up plenty of eyes.  Now, "name" teams faced the realization that they could conceivably return home going 0-2.  The notion of playing two road games that would be counted as neutral court games, and the very real possibility of losing both games, made the BB&T unattractive to many programs.  The neutral court aspect is very important because RPI rewards road victories over neutral court victories.  Today, booking an extra home date or scheduling a tough road game are each preferable to these schools as opposed to playing under the old BB&T format.

So since this time, we have played Virginia Tech and Auburn (with return dates on the road), Maryland twice, Navy twice, and VCU.  Unfortunately, in years where we've played Navy or now Manhattan, the schedule really hasn't "made up" the high quality game with another "high quality" team.  The net effect is a soft schedule, or certainly softer than it needs to be.

is our game at Notre Dame a return for them playing Maryland in the BB&T?  I seem to remember hearing something about that, that the only way to get ND to play was for us to give them a return game.  Talk about a bad deal.

Yes sir. Mr. Free Quebec. As I said ... Meet the new boss same as the old boss.

 I'd just add to MV's pretty good summary of the Charity Tournament's downgrade to add that College Park CC has also built a fancy arena and each date played in downtown DC is a date less played at their revenue-generating facility (whereas for GW it means one less "crowd" of 1,200 to see The Mount).

And those dates are precious for a team with a now more limited OOC. One suspects the Terps wanted George Mason as much as the Colonials wanted Manhattan. It wouldn't surprise me if the event gets moved to Comcast or is just outright canceled after this go-round. 

For years GW was a free-rider on the BB&T Tournament, playing teams we had no business playing at a neutral site and adding very little back in terms of fan attendence or TV marketability.  It was a good deal for GW to play Michigan State and others in DC.  It was also for a very good charity and everyone was better for it.

Now that that string of quality opponents agreeing to play GW at a neutral site in DC may have come to an end, people want to dump the tournament and the charity it supports. 

Merry Fucking Christmas to ya all!

Wait, Cappy, if that's accurate, that deal would have been cut beore ML got here. I can't imagine he'd be happy with that kind of arrangement.

I'd say most likely is that ML got saddled (or gifted, depending on your perspective) with the Notre Dame road game and the K St. 2 for 1.  He probably scheduled the Rutgers and Georgia games with the expectation that we'd set up the schedule for next year for when we are good so we could have some decent home games.   He also had the road games at JMU and Bradley left over from last year's schedule (whether they were set before he was hired or not I have no idea), plus the BB&T game vs. Manhattan was out of his hands. 

That basically left him with a schedule of @Notre Dame, @Georgia. @Rutgers, vs. Kansas St., @JMU, @Bradley, BB&T vs. Manhattan, and 6-7 games to fill.  I'm sure he needed several of those to be home games to fill out the scheudle and he's thinking we have a tough set of games already and this team needs wins.  

So he gets Hofstra becuase he needs a home and home with a mid-major who is willing to start here. Then, he does the same with BU, but starting there (that could have pre-dated him too given how often we play), and then fills the last 4 spots with a bunch of winnable teams that will play us one time at home : Youngstown, Sacred Heart, VMI, Mt. St. Mary's.

All this is just a theory of how it came together, but when you look at it that way, it seems logical and at least somewhat strategic.

I should add the big question -- this is 13 OOC games, bringing us to 29 total. Does this mean we are leaving a game on the table again? 

Why Fucking Christmas, and not "Fuck the Children!" Bobo?

1) I also said, audit the event. its been fizzling several years running. What is the gross? What percentage of the gross goes to the kids? And what goes to the dinners/cocktails/trinkets/goodie bags for all the hengers on? As Dr. Lee said, "Something wrong here."

2) MV gave some solid reasons why the BB&T is in decline. But, if that's so, there are remedies for most everything. Why are the event's honchos letting it fizzle?

There's no doubt about it. It's just another conspiracy to screw GWU and keep the Colonials down.

Heck, I have nothing against Manhattan, and am happy to see them on the GW schedule. But for a "special" game, right now, Vermont would have been a better opponent.

Back to Christmas, the coats for the kids, and so on. I have no idea why we always have to do "something"....eat, drink, dance, take a boat ride, screw, play ball, or slap ourselves on the back  ... in order to raise money for the kids. What's wrong with simply writing a check to the charity of your choice? I have no money these days, and I can do that, bball game or not. Why can't we all?

 There is a double standard here that needs to be addressed:

To the best of my knowledge, Hobbs and co. scheduled Syracuse, Cal, Harvard etc.. last year with K State being the only series that the new regime set up. The new coaches/admin were given credit for " a challenging schedule that the previous coaches would have never faced" when they actually had little to nothing to do with the schedule.

This year's schedule is all new. There is nothing on here that can be blamed on Hobbs/Kvancz. I understand increasing the cupcakes because last year's schedule was very challenging but the lack of marquis opponents is stark and something which would have been harped on incessantly if it was the previous regime, especially by posters like Bobo. Again, the Manhattan in the Verizon Center is unsconscionable. That tournament has truly become a joke and if the organizers can't get us a better opponent than that than we should leave. Manhattan is a no-win situation, because they aren't a terrible team so we could easily lose, yet they're in a tiny conference so we will look bad by losing.  

I've never asked GW to play a "marquis opponents". Not a single time.  I actually don't think they do any good because loosing to a SU or UCLA on the road (with no return date) does nothing to help GW's chances of getting in the Tourney.  The committee's criteria is always "who'd ya beat?" not "did you lose to any really good teams this year?" For GW, it's beating mid-majors home and home and lower BCS teams that will agree to schedule home/home.

My criticism of Hobbs' schedule was that he always avoided the harder mid-major home/home matchups.  Generally he had no problem scheduling a Kansas/UCLA/WF on the road because it's a no lose situation: either a shocking upset or an understandable loss.  But he would largely avoid the tough mid-major home/homes because those could result in 2 losses to teams the public believes GW should beat twice.  Hobbs always avoided anything that would add extra pressure to him and the team (who he would constantly call too young and inexperienced).

Bradley and JMU are return games for what was scheduled last year and Bradley has generally been a strong program.  Hofstra has been a good over the last 5 years (RPI 86 the preceeding year) but struggled last season.  If they can get home games vs UGA and Rutgers after landing KSU than the scheduling is clearly on the rise because that string of quality home opponents never happened under Hobbs. 

As I said, take out 1 or 2 cupcakes and replace them with a pre-season tournament, GW's schedule looks good.

2 more things to FQ's post: 

1.  I think Youngstown State is home/home.  Horizon league is a decent mid-major and we don't get to buy that good of teams.  

2.  I have no problem playing ND as a return game for the BB&T.  If we can get quality opponents in the BB&T with a promise of a return date at their place, I'd do it all day long vs getting matched up with a Navy (twice) or Manhattan.

Not exactly true, DEA. But nice try. 

First, and most importantly, ML got us home and homes with Georgia and Rutgers (at least, I'm pretty sure they are home and homes). I think that's more BCS home and homes than Hobbs got in 10 years.

Second, while it is accurate that the tougher schedule was, mostly, set while Hobbs was still the coach, he was forced into it by an administration who was tired of the cupcake schedules and the negative effect they were having on the program. I don't give Hobbs credit for sometihng he was forced to do.

Third, I know this is an old debate about who was responsible, but Kvancz just played the schedule his coach wanted. When he had a coach who wanted a tougher schedule, he gave him one, but when Hobbs wanted a UCONN OOC, he gave him one too.  

Fourth, I 

may be wrong, but I think that ML 

did fill in some of the open dates when he was he was hired with a couple of decent opponents last year.  May be wrong, but I am pretty sure he was responsible for some of them (like at least Loyola, and one or two others). 

Fifth, if Hobbs inhereited a schedule that included road games at Notre Dame and Bradley, and a home game vs. Kansas St., do you think he would have gone on the road to Rutgers and Georgia and started a home and home with Hofstra?  No way man. Hobbs publicly admitted he wouldn't play Northeastern home and home because it was too hard, and now we have Hofstra home and home.

But, yeah, go back to your false equivalence game.

I'm really indifferent to the OOC schedule next year. We've got a massive influx of new players next year who should benefit greatly from the early practices prior to the Italy trip as well as the mixed bag collection of November-December NCAA games before entering A-10 play. Conference opposition should provide plenty of RPI-building opportunities. As always, I'm optimistic about next year but I suspect that the 2013-14 season is when Lonergan realistically expects to have it all come together for his program. Hobbs, Kvancz, Lonergan, Nero -- will the bickering over the schedule never end? It all seems to be coming together for men's basketball but everyone appears to be reluctant to board the happy train in the summer. Even more exciting is the transformation going on with the women's program. GW has put together a very impressive coaching staff that should bring the team back to its previous days of glory. Hopefully, the results will be seen immediately next year.

And Poog hits the nail on the head. Folks, it really won't matter what ML or PN do short of winning a national championship. Just like it doesn't matter what KH or JK did. Being a GW fan means never having to be happy, satisfied or appreciative about anything apparently. Too hot, too cold, too big, too small, too hard, too easy. This thread reintroduces the disfunction of Foggy Bottom basketball fandom after a short hiatus.

 C'mon. What's the difference between Oregon State and Providence vs . Rutgers and Georgia? At least with O State Obama came to the game. The new regime got suckered into a "home and home" with VCU where our "home" game was at the Verizon Center. Thank god they joined our conference to save us the embarrassment. 

I criticized Hobbs's scheduling as much as anybody and it's only fair to do the same for this. This team will probably play one top 25 team in the non-conf and who knows how good they will even be. Compare us to Richmond who's playing Kansas, Florida and a few other big-time schools. Do you think freshman guards get better playing against the Florida's of the world or Sacred Heart and VMI?

- And spare me the "it doesn't matter" routine for next year. This isn't the pros, GW isn't going to win a national championship any time soon, so every season matters. If the games don't matter then why should we pay to come? 

Who said the season doesn't matter next year, DEA? Another straw man argument?

 http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/7767401/indiana-hoosiers-continue-moving-2012-13

http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/03/indiana-louisville-top-our-too-early-2012-13-preseason-top-25/

Each of these sites list K St and ND as preseason ranked teams. Had VCU remained a non-conference game that would have made three. You're ignoring these games exist in your Rutgers and Georgia = Providence and Oregon St argument DEA. Those were the marquee games that year. The next year the marquee non-conference games were UAB and Harvard. In 08-09 the marquee games were Maryland, which the BB&T scheduled us for, and Auburn. We will play more ranked teams in the non-conference (2) this year probably than we did from 07-08 through 10-11 (just UCLA). Trashing this schedule is just silly.

CBO, that was truly an asinine post.  I like to believe that one of the integral things that separates this site from the cliched sports fan message board is that people here hold real views regardless of whether you or I may agree or not agree with these views.  That said, why don't you reread your post and replace the hyperbole with something more meaningful?  Or in case you need clarification, I can't think of a single regular poster here who needs GW to win a national championship in order to feel satisfaction from this program.  Not one.

I am just happy that the "marquee" OOC home game vs Kansas St is 12/8 and not the week between Xmas and New Years which typically does wonders for attendance....

I am just happy that the "marquee" OOC home game vs Kansas St is 12/8 and not the week between Xmas and New Years which typically does wonders for attendance....

Why is it that MV gets his panties in a bunch when no one referred to him? Is he the self annointed defender of GW internet fandom?

CBO, it has no bearing that I wasn't referred to.  Your post seemed to suggest that GW basketball fans will never be satisfied (short of a national championship) which is a ridiculous statement.  Not sure what's wrong with pointing that out.

Yawn

I expected more.  Not sure why, but I did.

CBO-you are 100% correct

MV/The MV/mailvan/Blue Seats/Seneca/Plato--there are woodworking, sailing, "reading is fun," Cub Scouts, orienteering, canoeing, needlepoint, squash, and horseshoeing camps that still have openings, first and second sessions.

On the other hand, I appreciated your comments on the BB&T. I am afraid, though, it's in its death throes. What will those kids do to keep warm all winter?

Congratulations CBO; you've got Ziik defending you.  Personally, I just did not see this coming but I guess you never know.

I am Swiss, and neutral. You are hyperbolic, MV, and unnecessarily so.

Bottom line though, who cares?

Ziik, you are about as neutral as Romney comes across as being genuine.

MV-CBO is exactly correct about you and your panties, and about your self-appointed role here. Virtually any random poster would agree with him on those points. Beyond that, I think you have little self restraint, and you are hyperbolic, and I don't care for many of your posts. So what?

I'll tell you what, though. I could post here for a year under a different name, and you'd never guess it was me. The reverse--you as BS, Seneca, Plato, etc.--never would happen. We'd all know.

As for Romney, I love the guy. He's convinced himself he came up the hard way. Convinced himself that the $100,000.00 his family was given in the early 20th century for having to leave Mexico for the U.S. as political refugees kept them "poor."  Convinced himself that we won't notice that none of his remaining "black" hair will turn grey for the next 8 years. Convinced himself that if he uses 3 syllable words, or correct french pronunciation, we'll think he's not one of us. Convinced we'll believe his shit doesn't stink, just smells exactly like that of an "average" American.

MV, I've got Obama's ears. I think we're cousins. You can wear the Romney mask.

Now, I'm not trying to be mean. I just think CBO got you on that one. And, since we're all waay past 4th grade, how about not worrying so much about slamming the other guy, or the other guy's neutrality, or his allies, or whatever. Take each day, and each post, as it comes is my suggestion, for you to take or walk away from.

I'm having a great summer. I actually hope you are too. We can meet at Cooperstown or in Westport, Ct., North Carolina or Padre Island. I'm back from the dead, for a few more weeks of swimming, and loving it. You should too.

I always wanted to ask MV - U mad bro? Angry, repetitive and in everyone's business is no way to go through life.

Not angry in the slightest CBO.  You posted a ridiculously unfair sweeping generalization characterizing GW fans as being perpetually unsatisfied and dysfunctional.  I chose to comment on it, referring to it as asinine, which it was.  Nothing more or nothing less to it.

Well MV if you read this board carefully you wouldn't find my post that ridiculously unfair. I've asked several non-GW fans to read this board and they walked away with the same impression - go figure. You may not see yourself in this group but if you are reasonable you'll admit that there are plenty of folks in that category.

CBO, there are a few folks that fall under this category the same way there are irrational sports fans who follow any team.  However, your post seemed to imply that "all" GW fans were like this.  One of the things I like most about this board, despite what you or your friends feel, is that the people who appear to be the most devoted fans really aren't like this at all.  The consensus hope for a team who can realistically compete for an NCAA bid most years.  Reaching the tournament is a goal, winning a game is something to shoot for, reaching the Sweet 16 is a bonus, and anything beyond this is nothing short of a fantasy (as it has never happened).

I wouldn't begin to defend GW fans as being amongst the greatest sports fans.  However, to characterize them as perpetually unhappy is also unfair.  Our good times may be fewer than many, but our good times are that much better than most, perhaps because they are more rare.

Awesome- MV takes exception to somebody's post..it turns into a battle.  I feel like I've watched this movie before.

Dan - no way!!!!

THIS is considered a battle??? Good thing my sensitivity training sessions start in the morning.

Come on boys, this discussion is a big zero.

HAHAHAHA MV- another post to nitpick over.....you can't help but disagree with everything...except LFO

I stumbled upon this on the GW Sports site. They're running a video series on the OOC schedule. The series is titled 14 games in 14 days, so I imagine there will be a new video each day.

People are complaining; I get it, but I disagree. I love this schedule for two main reasons. One, it's not super easy or super hard, but it has some challenges and some easier stretches. It looks like an appropriate schedule for this team. We hit the near South, the Midwest, and also manage to have a few games against significant schools from our base in the Northeast. Which brings me to my second point: I've heard of most of these schools, and have friends who went to many of them. Finally, no more St. Francis (which state?)! BU and ND? We compete for those kids academically. Hofstra? I'm sure tons of GW kids have friends who go there. Bradley? Very respectable engineering school for kids in the Midwest, and its home court is where Illinois holds its state championships (yes, not Chicago, Peoria). KSU, Rutgers, and UGA? Going to have good SOS, Rutgers is double bonus points for being in New Jersey, and people in places that say "George who?" will start remembering the name as the team (hopefully) improves.

Quite frankly, I'm kind of shocked people are complaining about this schedule. It's team appropriate, it serves a purpose greater than schedule padding or cashing a check, and there's no game on there I call as a guaranteed dog ('Dawg? OK, there is one of those. There's even a Terrier and a 'Cat, for good measure).

Exception: Manhattan in the BB&T, but that tournament's just broken for us at this point. Something needs to happen, and I'm hoping Nero has the mojo to do that.

Would anyone have a problem with returning to the previous policy of GW agreeing to a return home game (with no Smith Center date) for a decent team playing GW at the Verizon Center in the BB&T?  GW played Auburn and Michigan State and now ND as return agreements, I believe.  Even though GW's trading a neutral site (in DC) for a pure road game, I'd take it in a second over playing Navy or Manhattan in the BB&T. 

I agree with SDF. A trip South is all I'd add to the current schedule, but we've got our games. Bobo, we've used the BB&T as a crutch, to our advantage. It's been nice, but it's time for GW to walk on it's own, and build a better group of teams for regular scheduling.  I'd be pleased to see Bradley and BU on the schedule 4 years out of 5; same with Rutgers. Georgia and Youngstown- 3 years out of 5. Navy and Manhattan? I think they mean the BB&T is dead. if it can't be brought back to life, it's not GW's fault.

Bobo - I agree with that. If we can get a top 25 team on a "neutral" court that is just blocks from GW, I take that deal in a minute because I doubt those teams are going to ever play in Smitty.

Bobo, I may be wrong, but I think we're playing a return game at Notre Dame even though we didn't play them in the BB&T. I think in order to get them to come play Maryland, we had to agree to a return game for Maryland  Someone please correct me if I have that wrong.

That said, I'm fine going to Michigan St. or someone like that, but not so much into having to play a road date at a Manhattan or Princeton just to get them at the Verizon Center.  Also not into playing return games to help Maryland land an opponent.

All that said, we've gotten more out of the BB&T than they've given us, so I think we should honor oour commitment to conitnue helping the charity and strengthening the tourney.

According to this and twitter, the opponent for the BB&T isn't finalized yet.  There is still hope!