Future Schedules

[vivid_dude]

Yep. Those games definitely didn't help. Had they of been able to eliminate the Deleware St game and say add a team like Norfolk St(225 RPI)instead that changes their RPI to 51 and SOS to 36. Looks quite a bit better than RPI 56 and SOS 45 wouldn't you say?

The point is, it looks like Michigan's OOC schedule isn't too dissimilar to Creighton's when you look at the buy-in/cupcake games, so to hold them up as any comparison arguing the point you are arguing doesn't make much sense. Another problem with this line of thinking is the idea that you can predict what a team's RPI is going to be with any certainty, especially teams in the 200-300+ range. There were a handful of opponents this season that, on paper, should have looked better on the resume. It certainly doesn't help the Jays' cause when UNL drags our SOS down nearly every year.

I'm all in favor of looking to improve scheduling, but I don't think we can expect to be rid of a few of those 250-300+ teams every year. Nearly every major conference team has those games, so Longwood shouldn't be so upsetting, IMO.

[McKinney's Neighbor]

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch/_/id/185

The Pac 12s scheduling conference-wide helped their RPI and therefore their seeding in the NCAA tournament. A big factor was scheduling less 200+ RPI teams. If Big East teams want better seed lines - and really how can we expect great tourney success when most of our teams are on the 6-9 seed lines? - we need to have better resumes in March.

How do you do that? Who the hell knows. It's a moving target. This year the committee really valued RPI, which benefitted the Pac 12 greatly. Some years they use different measures. And like vivid pointed out - it's impossible to know what teams RPIs will look like in some cases years after the game was scheduled. I think our schedule for this season - and almost all seasons under Mac - was solid when we put it together and that's the only way you can judge these things.

My only complaint is that we need to get into better tournies. It's an easy way to get resume building opportunities - yet this staff has done a very poor job capitalizing. Have we been in a good exempt tourney under Mac?

[1620Jay]

Yep. Those games definitely didn't help. Had they of been able to eliminate the Deleware St game and say add a team like Norfolk St(225 RPI)instead that changes their RPI to 51 and SOS to 36. Looks quite a bit better than RPI 56 and SOS 45 wouldn't you say?

The point is, it looks like Michigan's OOC schedule isn't too dissimilar to Creighton's when you look at the buy-in/cupcake games, so to hold them up as any comparison arguing the point you are arguing doesn't make much sense. Another problem with this line of thinking is the idea that you can predict what a team's RPI is going to be with any certainty, especially teams in the 200-300+ range. There were a handful of opponents this season that, on paper, should have looked better on the resume. It certainly doesn't help the Jays' cause when UNL drags our SOS down nearly every year.

I'm all in favor of looking to improve scheduling, but I don't think we can expect to be rid of a few of those 250-300+ teams every year. Nearly every major conference team has those games, so Longwood shouldn't be so upsetting, IMO.

No, I agree with what you're saying. It's likely very hard to forecast. I doubt the Mich staff was expecting a team like Elon to be close to a top 150 team when they were 266 the previous year. Mich also had four top 50 RPI games in the non con which helps if you have to schedule a few +300 RPI games. I just don't agree that it doesn't impact you if you find yourself on the bubble or possibly your seeding. At the end of the day if the Jays don't make the dance next year and were on the bubble the talk will be about the game they should have won or the last second loss to Xavier as opposed to an easy win over Longwood.

[jayball]

Yep. Those games definitely didn't help. Had they of been able to eliminate the Deleware St game and say add a team like Norfolk St(225 RPI)instead that changes their RPI to 51 and SOS to 36. Looks quite a bit better than RPI 56 and SOS 45 wouldn't you say?

The point is, it looks like Michigan's OOC schedule isn't too dissimilar to Creighton's when you look at the buy-in/cupcake games, so to hold them up as any comparison arguing the point you are arguing doesn't make much sense. Another problem with this line of thinking is the idea that you can predict what a team's RPI is going to be with any certainty, especially teams in the 200-300+ range. There were a handful of opponents this season that, on paper, should have looked better on the resume. It certainly doesn't help the Jays' cause when UNL drags our SOS down nearly every year.

I'm all in favor of looking to improve scheduling, but I don't think we can expect to be rid of a few of those 250-300+ teams every year. Nearly every major conference team has those games, so Longwood shouldn't be so upsetting, IMO.

No, I agree with what you're saying. It's likely very hard to forecast. I doubt the Mich staff was expecting a team like Elon to be close to a top 150 team when they were 266 the previous year. Mich also had four top 50 RPI games in the non con which helps if you have to schedule a few +300 RPI games. I just don't agree that it doesn't impact you if you find yourself on the bubble or possibly your seeding. At the end of the day if the Jays don't make the dance next year and were on the bubble the talk will be about the game they should have won or the last second loss to Xavier as opposed to an easy win over Longwood.

Listen if this was the 5th shitburger announced for next years schedule, you have a point. However, based on WBR this is the first one announced for next year. I agree with McK that we could use better tournaments, but I think it is splitting hairs to focus heavily on the 3-4 cupcakes we will play at home. Those games don't have any effect unless you happen to lose one of them. virtually every team in the country plays 3-4 cupcakes at home in the early season. They will mostly cancel each other out. We will make our hay with other games.

Is it better to play #200 than #300....sure, but how the hell do predict that and is it worth the time trying to do that? I'd rather Merf call high level teams to try to get new H and Hs set up, instead of spending hours on ken pom trying to decide if he should go with coppin St or elon.

[Panhandle Jay]

I'm curious those of you who are defending our game against Longwood, who would you have on our schedule?

[vivid_dude]

I'm curious those of you who are defending our game against Longwood, who would you have on our schedule?

Nobody is saying they are thrilled to have Longwood on the schedule. They are acknowledging the reality that major conference teams schedule these types of games. ALL OF THEM! It's the first one on the schedule, and people are freaking out. There will probably be 1-3 more. The hope is that there aren't 4-5 more, and that other OOC games make up some of the difference. That's where we failed last season, and part of that wasn't necessarily our fault. It was our opponents having disappointing seasons.

But to answer your question, I'll go with North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas, the late 1960's UCLA teams, the '95 Bulls, and the Dream Team. But since that's not realistic, I'm fine with Longwood and hope for upgrades in the other slots.

[bluejaydano]

Is it better to play #200 than #300....sure, but how the hell do predict that and is it worth the time trying to do that? I'd rather Merf call high level teams to try to get new H and Hs set up, instead of spending hours on ken pom trying to decide if he should go with coppin St or elon.

Definitely Elon. Hands down.

[Panhandle Jay]

I'm curious those of you who are defending our game against Longwood, who would you have on our schedule?

Nobody is saying they are thrilled to have Longwood on the schedule.

And I didn't say anybody was....

Is it better to play #200 than #300....sure, but how the hell do predict that and is it worth the time trying to do that?

It's pretty simple actually. You see, Coppin State is almost always atrocious. Meanwhile, Elon isn't nearly as bad usually. Holy smokes, I just predicted it!

[JayPak]

You see, Coppin State is almost always atrocious.

The "almost" exception would be 1997, when Coppin State was 2 points away from upsetting their way into the Sweet Sixteen.

[vivid_dude]

I'm curious those of you who are defending our game against Longwood, who would you have on our schedule?

Nobody is saying they are thrilled to have Longwood on the schedule.

And I didn't say anybody was....

You took my words a little too literally. You certainly implied that there was a group who seemed satisfied with a Longwood game, when that's not the case at all. It's not a satisfaction, but an acceptance, since that is how ALL big conference teams schedule. There are seemingly some, perhaps you, who don't quite understand that.

Is it better to play #200 than #300....sure, but how the hell do predict that and is it worth the time trying to do that?

It's pretty simple actually. You see, Coppin State is almost always atrocious. Meanwhile, Elon isn't nearly as bad usually. Holy smokes, I just predicted it!

Who would you have predicted to have higher RPI's this past season?
- Missouri or a school called Grand Canyon?
- St. John's or UNO?
- Minnesota or Texas-Arlington?

If you're being honest, you would have been wrong on all three, by a lot. There are countless other examples. So, I'm with jayball. ESPECIALLY when talking about teams in that 200-300+ range, It's a futile and inefficient exercise. I really hope our staff and athletic department aren't committing a bunch of time trying to predict the respective RPIs of 200-300+ teams like Coppin St. and Elon for our buy-in games when setting our schedule.

Elon is getting a lot of run. Good for them.