If this reporter is accurate looks like CSU will get a home game against Ohio State, http://ohiostate.247sports.com/Bolt/OSU-Basketball-Schedule-Coming-Into-Focus-29343469 (http://ohiostate.247sports.com/Bolt/OSU-Basketball-Schedule-Coming-Into-Focus-29343469)
Detroit released it's non-con schedule:
http://www.detroittitans.com/schedule.aspx?path=mbball (http://www.detroittitans.com/schedule.aspx?path=mbball)
Highlights include:
2 first round games in Legends Classic (Mich, Villanova, VCU, Oregon) - I think playing two of those teams.
2 sub regional Legends Classic (Bucknell, Detroit, Florida Atlantic and Toledo)
South Florida @ Detroit
Wichita State @ Detroit
@ Central Florida
@ Rhode Island
@ Arizona State
Oral Roberts @ Detroit
Maybe Belmont game?
Lowlights- Rochester College (non-exhibition); South Alabama (11-20 last year); Bowling Green (12-20 last year)
That's pretty great, UDM--we'd be happy to have something that looks like that.
I can only hope WH totals everyone's "points" again this year.
Very attractive non schedule titan. Now, win a bunch of those!
Unless someone knows differently, to my knowledge the HL still hasn't established its own OOC scheduling parameters. Until it does I'll continue to use the A-10's scoring system.
Greg Kampe informs about the following out-of-conference schedule for Oakland: Away - MSU, Arizona, Maryland, Clemson, Iowa State, Pitt, Morehead State, Eastern Michigan; Home - Western Michigan, Western Carolina, Chicago State, Georgia State, Toledo, and 2 non d-1's
Quote from: valpopal on July 27, 2014, 09:01:40 PMGreg Kampe informs about the following out-of-conference schedule for Oakland: Away - MSU, Arizona, Maryland, Clemson, Iowa State, Pitt, Morehead State, Eastern Michigan; Home - Western Michigan, Western Carolina, Chicago State, Georgia State, Toledo, and 2 non d-1's
For a program that said they were going to cut back on their non-conference power teams scheduling it doesn't seem like Kampe can resist when the big boys come calling. The pay days must be huge. This coming season's non-conference scheduling for Oakland seems slightly, if at all, easier than last season.
Are any of the top non-conference away games neutral court/arena tournaments, or are most of them pay days on the home courts of these schools?
Quote from: wh on July 23, 2014, 09:12:12 PM
Unless someone knows differently, to my knowledge the HL still hasn't established its own OOC scheduling parameters. Until it does I'll continue to use the A-10's scoring system.
You are comparing apples to oranges the way you are applying the A-10's scoring system to the HL. The A-10 does not allow it's members to schedule non-D1 games unless they have no control of it (ex: having to play a non-D1 team that is part of a MTE) and they are not allowed to play buy games on the road vs. BCS schools. Almost all of the BCS teams HL members are playing are buy games on the road. Historically, home teams win 71% of games played. The A-10 is smart enough to know that it isn't worth playing BCS teams unless they get return games even if it is a 2 for 1.
In the recent past every HL team has been scheduling a comparable number of non D-1 teams. So, although this may be apples to oranges from the A-10, its still apples to apples within the Horizon. The only HL team where the A-10 point system doesn't have any meaning is Oakland, who as you indicate sells their soul annually for 30 pieces of silver. At a minimum it should shine a light on those HL teams that assemble weak D-1 schedules (and do the league a disservice in the process).
WH,
If you look at the A-10 and MVC's scheduling guidelines, they have a few similarities in common that greatly affect each team's RPI and their conference's RPI. They try to play an all D1 schedule. They don't want their teams to play buy games on the road. They want their teams to play >50% of their OOC games at home. They do that because they know that you always have a better chance at winning at home than you do on the road and only D1 teams count into the RPI equation. RPI and conference RPI is all about winning percentages. SOS is really blown out of proportion by fans. It's all about winning games against D1 teams that are calculated into your RPI.
RPI is 25% your winning percentage, 50% your opponent's winning percentage, and 25% your opponent's opponent's winning percentage. So 25% is how you do and 75% is based on how your opponents do. The MVC and A-10 have figured out that 2/3 of that 75% number is made up of conference games. So everyone in the conference needs to have a pretty darn good OOC record if the conference and each individual member is going to have a good RPI. Oakland's 3-10 OOC record and UIC's 3-9 OOC record were anchors to the HL last year.
The HL finished ranked 14th last year as a conference. We had the 13th rated SOS, but we finished with an OOC record of 51-60 vs. D1 teams. The 6 conferences that finished directly in front of the HL all played weaker schedules than us, but had higher winning percentages, resulting in them finishing rated higher than us.
Conference RPI, D1 OOC record, SOS
8 American Athletic Conference 88-35 , 26
9 West Coast Conference 71-41 , 15
10 Mountain West Conference 76-46 , 16
11 Missouri Valley Conference 64-49, 20
12 Mid American Conference 72-59 , 19
13 Conference USA 105-97 , 22
14 Horizon League 51-60 , 13
Every team in the HL needs to start playing an all D1 schedule. We could have had 16-18 more D1 victories to add into the equation if we all would have played a few low majors at home and picked up an easy W instead of beating up on D2 and NAIA teams that didn't count into the equation.
Every team in the HL needs to start scheduling games against teams they can beat. If you can beat BCS schools great, but if you can't you at least need to be scheduling and winning games that can help the rest of the conference. I have said in the past and I will repeat it here again, I don't like the way my team scheduled last year. The HL needs to come up with a true scheduling model to prevent teams from scheduling like my team did or the way Oakland continues to schedule. If we want to take the next step as a conference we need to find a happy medium that makes sense for the conference.
All good points. If only the HL would implement its own scheduling policy, we could put this whole discussion to bed.
Quote from: Big D on August 02, 2014, 11:27:09 AMHistorically, home teams win 71% of games played.
I didn't think that seemed right...it IS one of the highest in sport, but it's a few points lower, depending on whom you ask.
QuoteThey report that the sport with the most extreme home-field advantage is Major League Soccer in the United States, where between 2002 and 2009, home teams won 69.1 percent of the time.
Nearly as lopsided is NCAA men's basketball, where home teams won 68.8 percent of the contests between 1947 and 2009. In college football, between 1869 and 2009, the home team had a winning percentage of 63 percent.
http://news.discovery.com/human/why-does-home-field-advantage-matter-131004.htm (http://news.discovery.com/human/why-does-home-field-advantage-matter-131004.htm)
QuoteThe midpoint of the current 349 home court winning percentages is 67.48%
That's median, not mean.
http://rpiratings.com/homecourtrec.php (http://rpiratings.com/homecourtrec.php)
FUN FACT: we're 135 in the country, winning over 70.3% of the time.
QuoteThe road winning percentage in major men's college basketball is .340
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB123612655303924107 (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB123612655303924107)
Later in the same article
QuoteOne old theory is that this figure is skewed by all the games early in the year where the prominent schools invite weak opponents to their arenas, only to flog them. But even if one discards that portion of the season and counts only intraconference play, the resulting .380 road-winning figure is still below every other major U.S. team sport.
Quote from: Big D on August 02, 2014, 02:22:38 PM
WH,
If you look at the A-10 and MVC's scheduling guidelines, they have a few similarities in common that greatly affect each team's RPI and their conference's RPI. They try to play an all D1 schedule. They don't want their teams to play buy games on the road. They want their teams to play >50% of their OOC games at home. They do that because they know that you always have a better chance at winning at home than you do on the road and only D1 teams count into the RPI equation. RPI and conference RPI is all about winning percentages. SOS is really blown out of proportion by fans. It's all about winning games against D1 teams that are calculated into your RPI.
RPI is 25% your winning percentage, 50% your opponent's winning percentage, and 25% your opponent's opponent's winning percentage. So 25% is how you do and 75% is based on how your opponents do. The MVC and A-10 have figured out that 2/3 of that 75% number is made up of conference games. So everyone in the conference needs to have a pretty darn good OOC record if the conference and each individual member is going to have a good RPI. Oakland's 3-10 OOC record and UIC's 3-9 OOC record were anchors to the HL last year.
The HL finished ranked 14th last year as a conference. We had the 13th rated SOS, but we finished with an OOC record of 51-60 vs. D1 teams. The 6 conferences that finished directly in front of the HL all played weaker schedules than us, but had higher winning percentages, resulting in them finishing rated higher than us.
Conference RPI, D1 OOC record, SOS
8 American Athletic Conference 88-35 , 26
9 West Coast Conference 71-41 , 15
10 Mountain West Conference 76-46 , 16
11 Missouri Valley Conference 64-49, 20
12 Mid American Conference 72-59 , 19
13 Conference USA 105-97 , 22
14 Horizon League 51-60 , 13
Every team in the HL needs to start playing an all D1 schedule. We could have had 16-18 more D1 victories to add into the equation if we all would have played a few low majors at home and picked up an easy W instead of beating up on D2 and NAIA teams that didn't count into the equation.
Every team in the HL needs to start scheduling games against teams they can beat. If you can beat BCS schools great, but if you can't you at least need to be scheduling and winning games that can help the rest of the conference. I have said in the past and I will repeat it here again, I don't like the way my team scheduled last year. The HL needs to come up with a true scheduling model to prevent teams from scheduling like my team did or the way Oakland continues to schedule. If we want to take the next step as a conference we need to find a happy medium that makes sense for the conference.
Broken record, over and over again. Scheduling teams like North Carolina A&T is actually worse for your RPI than not scheduling anyone (or a D2 team). Beating horrible teams actually worsens your RPI. Losing to BCS teams actually improves your RPI. Scheduling D2 teams is better than scheduling MEAC and NEC teams.
Quote from: a3uge on August 02, 2014, 09:13:58 PM
Quote from: Big D on August 02, 2014, 02:22:38 PM
WH,
If you look at the A-10 and MVC's scheduling guidelines, they have a few similarities in common that greatly affect each team's RPI and their conference's RPI. They try to play an all D1 schedule. They don't want their teams to play buy games on the road. They want their teams to play >50% of their OOC games at home. They do that because they know that you always have a better chance at winning at home than you do on the road and only D1 teams count into the RPI equation. RPI and conference RPI is all about winning percentages. SOS is really blown out of proportion by fans. It's all about winning games against D1 teams that are calculated into your RPI.
RPI is 25% your winning percentage, 50% your opponent's winning percentage, and 25% your opponent's opponent's winning percentage. So 25% is how you do and 75% is based on how your opponents do. The MVC and A-10 have figured out that 2/3 of that 75% number is made up of conference games. So everyone in the conference needs to have a pretty darn good OOC record if the conference and each individual member is going to have a good RPI. Oakland's 3-10 OOC record and UIC's 3-9 OOC record were anchors to the HL last year.
The HL finished ranked 14th last year as a conference. We had the 13th rated SOS, but we finished with an OOC record of 51-60 vs. D1 teams. The 6 conferences that finished directly in front of the HL all played weaker schedules than us, but had higher winning percentages, resulting in them finishing rated higher than us.
Conference RPI, D1 OOC record, SOS
8 American Athletic Conference 88-35 , 26
9 West Coast Conference 71-41 , 15
10 Mountain West Conference 76-46 , 16
11 Missouri Valley Conference 64-49, 20
12 Mid American Conference 72-59 , 19
13 Conference USA 105-97 , 22
14 Horizon League 51-60 , 13
Every team in the HL needs to start playing an all D1 schedule. We could have had 16-18 more D1 victories to add into the equation if we all would have played a few low majors at home and picked up an easy W instead of beating up on D2 and NAIA teams that didn't count into the equation.
Every team in the HL needs to start scheduling games against teams they can beat. If you can beat BCS schools great, but if you can't you at least need to be scheduling and winning games that can help the rest of the conference. I have said in the past and I will repeat it here again, I don't like the way my team scheduled last year. The HL needs to come up with a true scheduling model to prevent teams from scheduling like my team did or the way Oakland continues to schedule. If we want to take the next step as a conference we need to find a happy medium that makes sense for the conference.
Broken record, over and over again. Scheduling teams like North Carolina A&T is actually worse for your RPI than not scheduling anyone (or a D2 team). Beating horrible teams actually worsens your RPI. Losing to BCS teams actually improves your RPI. Scheduling D2 teams is better than scheduling MEAC and NEC teams.
a3uge,
Take a look at the following article by Kirk Wessler, Executive Sports Editor of the Peoria Journal Star. It validates many of Big D's points:
http://www.pjstar.com/article/20140707/Sports/140709371 (http://www.pjstar.com/article/20140707/Sports/140709371)
The only inconsistency I see is that Big D said that the MVC tries to play an all D-1 schedule, whereas Wessler indicates that they are trending away from that. Even then, like Big D, Wessler contends that playing non D-1's represents a lost opportunity for more OOC wins for the conference. In every other respect, Big D's and Wessler's contentions pretty much mirror each other.
Quote from: wh on August 03, 2014, 09:42:41 AM
Quote from: a3uge on August 02, 2014, 09:13:58 PM
Quote from: Big D on August 02, 2014, 02:22:38 PM
WH,
If you look at the A-10 and MVC's scheduling guidelines, they have a few similarities in common that greatly affect each team's RPI and their conference's RPI. They try to play an all D1 schedule. They don't want their teams to play buy games on the road. They want their teams to play >50% of their OOC games at home. They do that because they know that you always have a better chance at winning at home than you do on the road and only D1 teams count into the RPI equation. RPI and conference RPI is all about winning percentages. SOS is really blown out of proportion by fans. It's all about winning games against D1 teams that are calculated into your RPI.
RPI is 25% your winning percentage, 50% your opponent's winning percentage, and 25% your opponent's opponent's winning percentage. So 25% is how you do and 75% is based on how your opponents do. The MVC and A-10 have figured out that 2/3 of that 75% number is made up of conference games. So everyone in the conference needs to have a pretty darn good OOC record if the conference and each individual member is going to have a good RPI. Oakland's 3-10 OOC record and UIC's 3-9 OOC record were anchors to the HL last year.
The HL finished ranked 14th last year as a conference. We had the 13th rated SOS, but we finished with an OOC record of 51-60 vs. D1 teams. The 6 conferences that finished directly in front of the HL all played weaker schedules than us, but had higher winning percentages, resulting in them finishing rated higher than us.
Conference RPI, D1 OOC record, SOS
8 American Athletic Conference 88-35 , 26
9 West Coast Conference 71-41 , 15
10 Mountain West Conference 76-46 , 16
11 Missouri Valley Conference 64-49, 20
12 Mid American Conference 72-59 , 19
13 Conference USA 105-97 , 22
14 Horizon League 51-60 , 13
Every team in the HL needs to start playing an all D1 schedule. We could have had 16-18 more D1 victories to add into the equation if we all would have played a few low majors at home and picked up an easy W instead of beating up on D2 and NAIA teams that didn't count into the equation.
Every team in the HL needs to start scheduling games against teams they can beat. If you can beat BCS schools great, but if you can't you at least need to be scheduling and winning games that can help the rest of the conference. I have said in the past and I will repeat it here again, I don't like the way my team scheduled last year. The HL needs to come up with a true scheduling model to prevent teams from scheduling like my team did or the way Oakland continues to schedule. If we want to take the next step as a conference we need to find a happy medium that makes sense for the conference.
Broken record, over and over again. Scheduling teams like North Carolina A&T is actually worse for your RPI than not scheduling anyone (or a D2 team). Beating horrible teams actually worsens your RPI. Losing to BCS teams actually improves your RPI. Scheduling D2 teams is better than scheduling MEAC and NEC teams.
a3uge,
Take a look at the following article by Kirk Wessler, Executive Sports Editor of the Peoria Journal Star. It validates many of Big D's points:
http://www.pjstar.com/article/20140707/Sports/140709371 (http://www.pjstar.com/article/20140707/Sports/140709371)
The only inconsistency I see is that Big D said that the MVC tries to play an all D-1 schedule, whereas Wessler indicates that they are trending away from that. Even then, like Big D, Wessler contends that playing non D-1's represents a lost opportunity for more OOC wins for the conference. In every other respect, Big D's and Wessler's contentions pretty much mirror each other.
"Palm says playing a low-DI opponent will negatively affect a team's RPI rank by only 5-10 spots, and he argues that's of negligible importance when the NCAA tournament committee compares teams."
The article even states that scheduling very low D1 teams negatively impact your RPI. Jerry Palm goes on to recommend scheduling the best team that your team can beat. Duh. But its not like when Valpo is scheduling they're deciding, hmm, should we schedule Belmont, or should we schedule Greendale Community College? They do have the power, however, to replace a crappy NC A&T team with a D2 team, because this will negatively impact RPI even if its a win, and cause a big RPI hit and absolute embarrassment in a loss. There's simply very little gain from playing a 300 RPI team (a team that will end with a horrible W/L percentage).
Last year Valpo finished at .500 in the regular season and Oakland finished 11-20. Oakland had a better RPI. Now Oakland no chance of breaking into the top 100 RPI, but if we're simply talking about RPI, the majority of the calculation is essentially SOS. Wright State's strategy of scheduling crappy teams like NC A&T instead of D2 teams didn't work out so well. They finished the regular season 18-14 and teams with below .500 RPIs like Long Beach State and High Point finished with better RPIs.
I will say that there's probably no secret formula to magically fix the conference through scheduling. Wright State was projected top 2 in conference and had a disappointing season. The projected top 2 teams should at least finish top 100 RPI. If you're a decent team, you should be able to beat NC A&T with your bench players. Green Bay should have been able to beat a .500 level in conference team at home. And of course Valpo should be able to properly box out at the end of the game instead of watching the opportunity to beat a round-of-32 team go down the drain. Also, how is Jerry Slocum still a D1 head coach?
These sort of things are far more outrageous than the composition of a teams schedule. Eventually it just comes down to winning the games you're supposed to, not necessarily scheduling the games you're supposed to.
Quote from: a3uge on August 02, 2014, 09:13:58 PM
Broken record, over and over again. Scheduling teams like North Carolina A&T is actually worse for your RPI than not scheduling anyone (or a D2 team). Beating horrible teams actually worsens your RPI. Losing to BCS teams actually improves your RPI. Scheduling D2 teams is better than scheduling MEAC and NEC teams.
That simply is not true especially if you apply the effect it has across the whole conference if everyone does it. If every team in the HL played 10 OOC games vs. the 10 worst D1 teams and went 10-0 vs. them everyone in the HL would have a high RPI and the conference would have a high RPI. RPI is 25% your winning percentage, 50% your opponent's winning percentage, and 25% your opponent's opponent's winning percentage. So 25% would be your 10-0 record. Out of the middle 50%, 2/3 of that would be the rest of the HL's winning %. Only 1/3 of that would be those 10 bottom feeders you beat. Out of the final 25%, 2/3 once again is made of the HL and 1/3 would be those 10 bottom feeders.
Look at the American Athletic Conference last year. They finished as the 8th rated conference last year and got 4 teams into the NCAAs. They had an 88-35 OOC record vs. a very poor OOC schedule that was ranked 26th overall. Because everyone in that conference did so well in their OOC schedule they all finished with high RPIs and even a high overall SOS because the games they played in conference raised their individual SOS.
RPI, Overall record, overall SOS, OOC SOS 20 Louisville 29-5, 79 , 149
21 Cincinnati 27-6 , 68 , 95
22 Connecticut 26-8 , 32 , 78
36 Memphis 22-9 , 41 , 55
55 South. Methodist 23-9 , 113 , 295
143 Houston 17-16 120 , 342
177 Temple 9-22, 44 , 45
197 Rutgers 11-21 , 64 , 131
218 UCF 11-18 , 112 , 344
230 South Florida 12-20 , 137 , 322
I'm not advocating everyone in the HL schedule the 10 worst D1 teams they can play to pick up wins. I was using that example to try to prove the math. As I mentioned in my last post, everyone needs to play as many D1 games as they can and schedule teams they have a reasonable chance at beating. More D1 wins helps your team and it helps everyone else in the conference too.
Quote from: a3uge on August 03, 2014, 11:39:34 AMThe article even states that scheduling very low D1 teams negatively impact your RPI.
But here's the key part from a conference standpoint:
"'You're probably better off with a non-DI for your own sake, but if you are in a conference, you're doing a disservice to the members. You're taking a win away from the record, which carries over to everyone.'"[/size][/size]Yes, an individual team will do better getting pounded by Kentucky on the road than beating a MEAC club at home (especially because the RPI awards a big bonus for road games - but only in determining a team's own W-L %, not for opponents' W-L), but it harms everyone else in the conference. If Oakland goes 3-10 against their killer non-conference schedule, they may have a higher RPI than going 8-5 against weaker competition, but in all 16 of their conference games they'll be dragging down the RPI of their conference opponent. So the league as a whole will benefit if everyone schedules winnable games. Yes, you need some good wins. You can't play all MEAC and SWAC teams with the occasional Summit squad thrown in. You need to schedule good mid-majors and try to get some high majors on the schedule (At one time the A-10 required their teams to participate in exempt tournaments, and that's usually a good way to get some high majors on the schedule, in some cases on neutral courts.) But Oakland's SOS does nothing to help the league unless they start winning those games. [/size][/size]I don't know how the Crusaders' final schedule will look, but I really like the first 5 games we know (or probably know) of: Murray State, Drake and Portland are respectable mid-majors on a neutral floor; assuming Eastern Kentucky as a bracket busters return, the Colonels are another good major, on the road. All 4 games are winnable. The 5th is New Mexico, a power team but one that is beatable in the ARC.
Greg Kampe commenting on his team's non-conference schedule:
"I always think you play as hard of a schedule as you can because it makes you better," Kampe said. "One of the things I thought last year was that we needed to back down (our schedule) a little bit this year because the Horizon League is a lot tougher. It is harder to get wins in the Horizon League than it was in the Summit. I felt having gone through that last year, I thought we should back the schedule down, but I really didn't do it. I don't know why I didn't do it. I want this type of schedule and the players want this type of schedule. The administrators didn't really want to back the schedule down either. They like that we are recognized as a team that will play anyone, anywhere. Also, we make money doing it, which helps."
Full article: http://www.theoaklandpress.com/sports/20140806/oakland-men-facing-another-tough-schedule-in-2014-15 (http://www.theoaklandpress.com/sports/20140806/oakland-men-facing-another-tough-schedule-in-2014-15)
Translation: Changing your habits is hard, n' stuff.
Translation: It's the money.
It's the $$ for sure and the opportunity for King Kampe to say look at what I do...no lack of ego with him!
Also good that he gets a pass by the OU administration for all those losses.
The HL really needs to come out with a scheduling mandate and hold schools accountable. If all 9 HL teams scheduled as irresponsibly as Oakland, we would be ranked between 25-30 as a conference instead of being ranked between 11-14 regularly. YSU promised the HL they would put more of their funding into basketball prior to their invite to the HL. They never followed through. Oakland promised to tone down their scheduling and now they are backing out of that agreement. I'm sick of this BS from new members. We don't need members that aren't willing to do what is in the best interest of the entire conference. The HL needs to establish a league wide scheduling policy. Don't follow our scheduling policy 1 year, you get a pass. Second offense results in you loosing your share of the HL's NCAA tournament money. 3rd offense and you aren't eligible for the league tournament that year. 4th offense and the HL can choose to kick you out of the conference.
I actually don't disagree with Big D for once.
In fact, I pretty much agree (although I may not go all the way with him on this sentence: "We don't need members that aren't willing to do what is in the best interest of the entire conference", as I think schools deserve some kind of autonomy even within a conference. Not an ND-like amount, mind you.). I think this is a pretty great idea. All right, fine, I'll say it: I agree with Big D.
I...I'm gonna go lie down for a bit.
Quote from: Big D on August 06, 2014, 07:01:52 PM
The HL really needs to come out with a scheduling mandate and hold schools accountable. If all 9 HL teams scheduled as irresponsibly as Oakland, we would be ranked between 25-30 as a conference instead of being ranked between 11-14 regularly. YSU promised the HL they would put more of their funding into basketball prior to their invite to the HL. They never followed through. Oakland promised to tone down their scheduling and now they are backing out of that agreement. I'm sick of this BS from new members. We don't need members that aren't willing to do what is in the best interest of the entire conference. The HL needs to establish a league wide scheduling policy. Don't follow our scheduling policy 1 year, you get a pass. Second offense results in you loosing your share of the HL's NCAA tournament money. 3rd offense and you aren't eligible for the league tournament that year. 4th offense and the HL can choose to kick you out of the conference.
I agree in general, but have a question. Most scheduling guidelines prevent teams from playing non-DI schools or very weak DI schools ... how do you prevent teams from scheduling too many upper level DI teams (like Oakland seems to do)? Do any leagues currently have something like this in place? Just wondering.
I'm sure this is a sensitive topic as HL teams always struggle to get quality home games and many (like Oakland) view taking buy-games against big time opponents as a way to fund their basketball programs (and entire athletic programs). But as BigD and others point out, until the league puts something in place, teams will continue to schedule the way that best benefits their own program.
Quote from: Big D on August 06, 2014, 07:01:52 PMThe HL needs to establish a league wide scheduling policy. Don't follow our scheduling policy 1 year, you get a pass. Second offense results in you loosing your share of the HL's NCAA tournament money. 3rd offense and you aren't eligible for the league tournament that year. 4th offense and the HL can choose to kick you out of the conference.
Quote from: LaPorteAveApostle on August 06, 2014, 08:37:27 PMI agree with Big D.
I...I'm gonna go lie down for a bit.
The first and most important step would be the choice of an open minded, independent thinking panel of school representatives whose stated goal is the strengthening of HL RPI. Next up is the establishment of a consensus opinion on how best this goal can be achieved followed then by a timetable for implementation. The severity of the penalties might need some adjustment but teeth are required and all member institutions need to be equally under the gun.
Before the HL sinks any further in its current every man for himself mode we all need to choose a common direction and start swimming towards it.
Quote from: zvillehaze on August 06, 2014, 10:59:31 PM
I agree in general, but have a question. Most scheduling guidelines prevent teams from playing non-DI schools or very weak DI schools ... how do you prevent teams from scheduling too many upper level DI teams (like Oakland seems to do)? Do any leagues currently have something like this in place? Just wondering.
The A-10 and MVC both have rules that would take care of this. The A-10 prohibits members from being bought to play games on the road. The MVC wants their member teams to play at least 50% of their OOC games at home. Neither is allowed to play non D1 teams. The HL could tweak those to suit our purpose. I think we should have 3 basic scheduling rules to start with. 1. We play an all D1 schedule. 2. We play at least 50% of our OOC games at home on average. (teams need to meet this criteria 2 out of 3 years or 3 out of 5 years). 3. You can only play 3 road buy games a year.
If teams want to play a few buy games vs BCS schools you can but rules 1 and 2 would mean that you have to buy 3 D1 teams to play at home to keep your schedule balanced. It would encourage teams to play in more tournaments to get a chance to play BCS schools on a neutral court or trying to get true home/homes and 2 for 1s with BCS schools instead of just playing buy games.
Hilarious that Oakland's scheduling is a huge problem, but Wright State's isnt. I've never heard of a conference putting requirements to have teams put together a weaker SOS. I had no idea that it's a good strategy to have a team with 19 wins finish +150 RPI. Do you honestly think Detroit's schedule bogged down the Horizon just as much as Oakland's? No. Oakland's SOS, while stupid for them, did not hurt the HL as much as Detroit's because their opponent's opponent's W/L record was high enough to elevate their RPI. Playing a pathetic OOC schedule is not good for Wright State or the Horizon league no matter how much you want to believe it's all Oakland's fault for the league's overall conference RPI being down. Conference RPI is literally the average of each team's RPI. Oakland wasn't projected to finish 2nd with a number of 1st place votes. Wright State was. And what happened? Wright State ended the season with a +150 RPI despite having 19 wins. The absolute garbage scheduling doomed Wright State, a decent team, from breaking in the top 100 RPI, something which the Horizon League runner up should be in.
The constant references to playing an all D1 schedule is hilarious. Had you played a D2 school instead of North Carolina A&T, you would've had a better RPI EVEN IF YOU WOULD HAVE WON THE GAME.
I think by inference that Big D is saying the same thing, whether it be suicidal buy games that result in bad losses or cupcake schedules that don't shore up the RPI for a team or the conference as a whole. It sounds to me that he's including all HL teams, Wright State too, in the argument about quality of schedule standards that to this point are absent. In that respect, along with LAA, I have to agree with him.
Quote from: a3uge on August 07, 2014, 10:47:35 AM
Hilarious that Oakland's scheduling is a huge problem, but Wright State's isnt. I've never heard of a conference putting requirements to have teams put together a weaker SOS. I had no idea that it's a good strategy to have a team with 19 wins finish +150 RPI. Do you honestly think Detroit's schedule bogged down the Horizon just as much as Oakland's? No. Oakland's SOS, while stupid for them, did not hurt the HL as much as Detroit's because their opponent's opponent's W/L record was high enough to elevate their RPI. Playing a pathetic OOC schedule is not good for Wright State or the Horizon league no matter how much you want to believe it's all Oakland's fault for the league's overall conference RPI being down. Conference RPI is literally the average of each team's RPI. Oakland wasn't projected to finish 2nd with a number of 1st place votes. Wright State was. And what happened? Wright State ended the season with a +150 RPI despite having 19 wins. The absolute garbage scheduling doomed Wright State, a decent team, from breaking in the top 100 RPI, something which the Horizon League runner up should be in.
The constant references to playing an all D1 schedule is hilarious. Had you played a D2 school instead of North Carolina A&T, you would've had a better RPI EVEN IF YOU WOULD HAVE WON THE GAME.
It's hilarious that you keep beating the same dead horse. I have clearly stated that WSU needs to play a tougher schedule. My exact quote in this thread was...
I have said in the past and I will repeat it here again, I don't like the way my team scheduled last year. The HL needs to come up with a true scheduling model to prevent teams from scheduling like my team did or the way Oakland continues to schedule. You just choose to ignore that. You also keep ignoring the fact that playing a low major is better for your RPI than a D2 school WHEN THE ENTIRE CONFERENCE DOES IT because it has an accumulative effect on every team's RPI. I laid that out pretty clearly on the last page using the AAC as an example.
What's the phrase? A rising tide floats all boats? This is such a case, but the tide ain't rising.
I think we all agree on this topic. The HL Commissioner and whomever the leadership is, has to come to grips with the fact that the HL is languishing in a form of mediocrity that is self-inflicted. It's due to a failure to be proactive and assertive on the issue of conference schools adhering to an appropriate scheduling standard that all schools must follow or suffer some consequences.
Unless action is taken soon, the world will pass us by, and this league will be forever thought of as a 1 bid pony no matter what it does further down the road.
We see these things. Why don't the ADs and Presidents? But where do we posters go from here? Light the torches and assault the HL citadel? Make up signs and picket the HL office? Draw up a petition?
My only concern is the pain involved. It'd be fine with me, if I could be convinced that it is doable for each team. There's a fairly decent reason why D-III and low-major games appear on teams' schedules, and there's a fairly decent reason why sacrificial lamb games are on teams' schedules.
And the reason in each case is the same: IT'S DAMN HARD TO FILL UP YOUR SCHEDULE COMPLETELY WITH THE IDEAL GAMES THAT BENEFIT YOUR W-L RECORD, YOUR RPI, AND YOUR CONFERENCE.
I think it's an outstanding goal. I just worry that it's going to turn out -- in the HL at least -- as the sports analog of an army general shooting deserting soldiers because they're fighting a losing war badly.
Are these requirements you lay out REALLY realistic, BigDWSU?
I will say that if things continue to progress the way they are, there's a chance they will be come much more realistic, since the Power schools really seem to want to have less and less contact with us mosquitoes. It's going to take all the mosquitoes *getting that* and saying, "Well then, to hell with you too." Right now, I don't see that happening yet.
It's going to take a movement, and it's going to take a lot of sacrifice, and I'm not sure inflicting harsh punishment along the way is the way to go. But then, maybe there's no other way, I don't know.
Quote from: StlVUFan on August 11, 2014, 06:12:37 PM
Are these requirements you lay out REALLY realistic, BigDWSU?
The A-10 announced their scheduling policy in 2007. The MVC announced theirs the year before in 2006. If you really go back and look at those conferences before that they really weren't much different than the HL. The MVC and HL used to flip back and forth between who was ranked higher the decade before that. I believe those conferences drawing a line in the sand and saying this is how we are going to do things was the catalyst that elevated them to become consistent top 10 conferences while our decisions have made us flounder.
Are these requirements realistic? The answer to that is obviously yes. Those conferences have already shown that it can be done. The real question is--does the HL want to take that next step up the ladder because if we are going to move up the ladder in conference rankings we are going to have to start making some hard decisions that will most likely effect our finances in the short term. Playing less buy games on the road is going to take revenue out of our pockets. Paying D1 teams to play at our arenas instead of D2 teams is going to cost us more money. In the long run we will start coming up with better schedules which will bring in more paying fans to games and better TV contracts which will offset those losses.
All I can say is: I completely understand the hesitancy to take those bold steps, because it is a really hard choice to make.
YSU OOC schedule
http://www.ysusports.com/sports/mbkb/2014-15/releases/non-league-announcement (http://www.ysusports.com/sports/mbkb/2014-15/releases/non-league-announcement)
Complete garbage...
YSU never ceases to disappoint. Unfortunately, they're like bad teachers with tenure; we're stuck with 'em.
some good, some REALLY bad! Wilberforce?? ???
This may be the worst D-1 OOC schedule in the country this year:
Opponent/Last Year's RPI
119 Robert Morris
87 Eastern Michigan
147 Texas A&M
133 Illinois State
212 Kent State
303 UNC Greensboro
254 UMKC
259 South Dakota
310 Northern Kentucky
294 Central Michigan
336 Longwood
325 Kennesaw State
Avg.Opp.RPI 232---1 Top 100 Opp.(barely)---4 Top 150 Opp's.---7 Opp's. >250
And for good measure - 3 non D-1 opponents.
For those who think scheduling is hard, think again. Putting together a HARD schedule is hard. I could contract these teams on my lunch hour. This schedule is the epitome of laziness. Is this conference ever going to wake up and put some rules in place, or is the conference office as lazy as this schedule?
Quote"Our staff has done a tremendous job putting together another challenging schedule for the 2014-15 season," Slocum said. "Each season we attempt to piece together a schedule that prepares us for Horizon League play, which improves every year, and I think we've done that."
Quote from: wh on August 17, 2014, 10:22:18 PM
This may be the worst D-1 OOC schedule in the country this year:
Opponent/Last Year's RPI
92 Robert Morris
127 Eastern Michigan
152 Texas A&M
159 Illinois State
180 Kent State
245 UNC Greensboro
268 UMKC
274 South Dakota
293 Northern Kentucky
301 Central Michigan
339 Longwood
340 Kennesaw State
Avg.Opp.RPI 231---1 Top 100 Opp.(barely)---2 Top 150 Opp's.---7 Opp's. 245 or higher
And for good measure - 3 non D-1 opponents.
For those who think scheduling is hard, think again. Putting together a HARD schedule is hard. I could contract these teams on my lunch hour. This schedule is the epitome of laziness. Is this conference ever going to wake up and put some rules in place, or is the conference office as lazy as this schedule?
Looks like a lot more wins. If only they replaced their 3 non-D1 games with Lamar, Citadel, and Binghamton, they'd have even more.
Eastern Michigan had an 87 RPI rank last year. http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-rpi (http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-rpi)
YSU's schedule still sucks.
Quote from: Pathfinder on August 18, 2014, 09:11:55 PM
Eastern Michigan had an 87 RPI rank last year. http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-rpi (http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-rpi)
YSU's schedule still sucks.
I was looking at W/L rank rather than RPI rank. I fixed it in my original. Their overall Opp. RPI actually increased by 1 afteraking the adjustments. Plus, now 7 of their 12 D-1 opponents have an RPI >250, even worse than I originally noted.
Milwaukee schedule released:
http://www.uwmpanthers.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/090314aab.html (http://www.uwmpanthers.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/090314aab.html)
Quote from: EddieCabot on September 03, 2014, 10:52:00 AM
Milwaukee schedule released:
http://www.uwmpanthers.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/090314aab.html (http://www.uwmpanthers.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/090314aab.html)
I see they have not released the conference part of the schedule. I guess that isn't as important to the Panthers this year.
Wonder if they are expecting Belmont to show up on the conference schedule.
Kind of a mixed result. Five name opponents but 3 non-D1 and a couple of D1 cupcakes.
Where is this "Panther Arena" located? Why have the Montana game at Klotsche, while playing Minnesota-Crookston and Concordia-St. Paul at this "Panther Arena"? Plus, why leave Klotsche this year, when the team can't do anything for the conference or NCAA tournament, but be a pain in the butt to the RPI, while being academically ineligible for postseason play? I mean they can't do anything more than keep a good team out of a good seed by beating the top HL teams, while not having a chance to return to the NCAA tourney.
Quote from: valporun on September 04, 2014, 01:52:39 AM
Where is this "Panther Arena" located? Why have the Montana game at Klotsche, while playing Minnesota-Crookston and Concordia-St. Paul at this "Panther Arena"? Plus, why leave Klotsche this year, when the team can't do anything for the conference or NCAA tournament, but be a pain in the butt to the RPI, while being academically ineligible for postseason play? I mean they can't do anything more than keep a good team out of a good seed by beating the top HL teams, while not having a chance to return to the NCAA tourney.
Panther Arena is simply the new name for the off campus downtown arena that UWM has been using. It's former name was US Cellular Arena and way back when the Bucks were playing there it was called the MECCA or Milwaukee Arena. The new official name is University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Panther Arena.
http://www5.uwm.edu/news/2014/06/26/arena/#.VAgdi1ko7cc (http://www5.uwm.edu/news/2014/06/26/arena/#.VAgdi1ko7cc)
Quote from: historyman on September 04, 2014, 03:12:50 AM
Quote from: valporun on September 04, 2014, 01:52:39 AM
Where is this "Panther Arena" located? Why have the Montana game at Klotsche, while playing Minnesota-Crookston and Concordia-St. Paul at this "Panther Arena"? Plus, why leave Klotsche this year, when the team can't do anything for the conference or NCAA tournament, but be a pain in the butt to the RPI, while being academically ineligible for postseason play? I mean they can't do anything more than keep a good team out of a good seed by beating the top HL teams, while not having a chance to return to the NCAA tourney.
Panther Arena is simply the new name for the off campus downtown arena that UWM has been using. It's former name was US Cellular Arena and way back when the Bucks were playing there it was called the MECCA or Milwaukee Arena. The new official name is University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Panther Arena.
http://www5.uwm.edu/news/2014/06/26/arena/#.VAgdi1ko7cc (http://www5.uwm.edu/news/2014/06/26/arena/#.VAgdi1ko7cc)
Quote from: valporun on September 04, 2014, 01:52:39 AM
Where is this "Panther Arena" located? Why have the Montana game at Klotsche, while playing Minnesota-Crookston and Concordia-St. Paul at this "Panther Arena"? Plus, why leave Klotsche this year, when the team can't do anything for the conference or NCAA tournament, but be a pain in the butt to the RPI, while being academically ineligible for postseason play? I mean they can't do anything more than keep a good team out of a good seed by beating the top HL teams, while not having a chance to return to the NCAA tourney.
Yeah UWM bought the naming rights just this last year for the arena. They will also rebrand the arena for UWM (black and gold seats, etc). US Cell's contract with the arena ended and they didn't renew. That arena doesn't really have any other tenants... Maybe an indoor soccer team and occasional roller derby. Its downtown, across from the Bradley Center where the Bucks and Marquette play, but it's 5 miles from campus. It might get torn down when the new arena is built, but probably not.
The Klotsche is their impossible to find on-campus arena. Two years ago their agreement with the downtown arena ended and they played every home game in the on campus arena. Turns out, even less students went to games, and alumni also stopped going (its a huge school). The new A.D. took over and signed a new contract with the downtown arena and bought the naming rights a year later. UWM was playing downtown last year, not at their on campus arena.
UWM has always played 1-2 games at the on campus arena because of scheduling conflicts and to gather on campus support. Student attendance increases about 300% when these games are played on campus (6-7 students).
I do remember UWM playing a non D-1 game or two at the Klotsche Center because they knew it wouldn't be a huge draw, but I didn't know about the arena naming rights deal and such, which is why I was so confused. Thanks for the input!
Quote from: Big D on August 02, 2014, 02:22:38 PM
Every team in the HL needs to start scheduling games against teams they can beat. If you can beat BCS schools great, but if you can't you at least need to be scheduling and winning games that can help the rest of the conference. I have said in the past and I will repeat it here again, I don't like the way my team scheduled last year. The HL needs to come up with a true scheduling model to prevent teams from scheduling like my team did or the way Oakland continues to schedule. If we want to take the next step as a conference we need to find a happy medium that makes sense for the conference.
I came across this article that completely supports Big D's contention. It goes back a few years but it's still applicable to the discussion we were having about the damage Oakland is doing to the conference by scheduling opponents it absolutely has no chance to beat:
http://www.commercialappeal.com/sports/tigers/mens-basketball/c-usa-fine-tuning-rpi (http://www.commercialappeal.com/sports/tigers/mens-basketball/c-usa-fine-tuning-rpi)
"C-USA needs to elevate the bottom of their league, and they can start by going out and playing teams they can beat," Palm said. "A lot of people think that RPI is three-fourths strength of schedule, so if you want to get better, you have to go out and play better teams even if you lose. That's not necessarily true. It's just like everything else, winning is going to help you more than anything, even if you have to play somebody not as good to win.
"A team like Rice, if they play a bunch of (BCS conference teams) and go 3-9, it's an anchor dragging everybody down. If the bottom half of your league is all doing that, it's hard for anybody to build up your RPI, and your league schedule is 60 percent of your schedule. If Rice goes out and plays much worse teams but goes 9-3, they're still not going to do well in the league because they're still rebuilding, but it's better for the league. Everybody's boat floats."Oakland's 3-10 D-1 OOC record includes predestined losses to 6 teams: Iowa State, Michigan State, Arizona, Pittsburgh, Clemson and Maryland. From now to the end of the season every conference opponent's RPI will suffer more than it should with every game against Oakland. Remember, 50% of the RPI calculation is your opponent's winning percentage.
The league office needs to force Oakland to quit prostituting itself for $85,000 paydays and get on board with the rest of the league. Who knows, they might even find that if they win a few more games and schedule a few more home games, they could generate enough revenue through ticket sales to be able to quit pimping themselves out. But like I said sometime back, it takes a lot more effort to find teams to come into your place than it does to put an ad in the scheduling service that says, "Looking for big payday to play at your place; guaranteed win; date and time at your convenience."
Nothing sickens me more than tuning into an Oakland "payday" game and hear some broadcaster regurgitate the tired Kampe mantra about how they aren't afraid to play anybody, how the players like playing these games (and getting their brains beat out), and how playing these games better prepares them for conference (which history doesn't support). Kampe isn't some creative genius with a winning scheduling formula that everyone else in the mid major world is too dumb to figure out. He's just a guy that likes hobnobbing with the big boys, make some easy money that keeps his AD happy, and avoid putting any effort into lining up potentially winnable games against challenging opponents. When Oakland was in the Mid Con/Summit, this was all cute stuff because none of it mattered. Well, it matters now, and it isn't cute any more.
I hear you and we'll said.
Does their program need the big paydays? Maybe the university needs it to keep not only the bball team afloat but all athletic programs. Although they should be saving a lot of money in travel compared to the summit league days.
Let's send this to oakland's AD and kempe. At least copy and paste it to their fan forum.
Quote from: wh on December 28, 2014, 11:40:58 PM
The league office needs to force Oakland to quit prostituting itself for $85,000 paydays and get on board with the rest of the league.
Speaking of which, has anyone heard from LeCrone lately? He's been very quiet, especially when it comes to important topics like scheduling and league expansion.
On a side note, are we still sure that adding Oakland to replace Loyola was a net positive for the league?
wh you hit the nail on the head..."King Kampe" and his ego just seem to get in the way...I too am tired of hearing every interview or comment about him include the comment about scheduling the "big" programs to prepare his team for the conference schedule. His record in the Horizon speaks clearly of the success, or should we say lack of success, his approach has done for his program. His problem is that he is his biggest fan.
Quote from: EddieCabot on December 29, 2014, 11:05:01 AMSpeaking of which, has anyone heard from LeCrone lately? He's been very quiet, especially when it comes to important topics like scheduling and league expansion.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7_hLDG2J9hw/U5bkiWpLGPI/AAAAAAAAiSc/Gj9Krc8-Mnw/s1600/elmershh.png)
Shhhhh! I hav twoo bwe wery kwiet. I'm hwunting gwolden gwizzlies.(http://www.alaskabearsandwolves.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/MG_1129fishing-grizzly-1.jpg)
There's 3 more D1 non-con games left, but since our non-con is done let's break down the rest of the league's schedule. I'll be using KenPom's rankings for this because I like them best (obviously)
#42 Green Bay (10-3)
Average Opponent: 158
Average Win: 169
Average Loss: 67 (4, 68 and 129)
Best Win: #68 Georgia State (Home)
Worst Lost: #129 UC Irvine (Neutral/Las Vegas)
Remaining: Wed, vs 343 Chicago St.
#77 Valparaiso (13-2)
Average Opponent: 202
Average Win: 216.6
Average Loss: 130.5 (89 and 172)
Best Win: #91 Eastern Kentucky (Away)
Worst Lost: #172 Missouri (Away)
#135 Cleveland St. (6-8)
Average Opponent: 156.4 (3 teams in the top 20 are lifting this up)
Average Win: 252.5 (1 win over a sub-200 team)
Average Loss: 108.3
Best Win: #136 San Francisco (Home)
Worst Lost: #324 Savannah St. (Away)
#147 Wright St. (8-6)
Average Opponent: 164.4
Average Win: 189.5
Average Loss: 139.3
Best Win: #124 Belmont x2 (Home/Away)
Worst Lost: #245 Cal St. Fullerton (Neutral, Spartanburg NC)
#159 Detroit (6-7)
Average Opponent: 139
Average Win: 219.5
Average Loss: 93
Best Win: #96 Toledo (Away)
Worst Lost: #275 UCF (Away)
Remaining: Tue, vs 203 Oral Roberts
#202 Oakland (4-10)
Average Opponent: 115.2
Average Win: 222
Average Loss: 83.2
Best Win: #96 Toledo (Home)
Worst Lost: #238 Western Carolina (Away)
#230 Youngstown St. (8-6)
Average Opponent: 203
Average Win: 279.2
Average Loss: 139.6
Best Win: #212 South Dakota (Away)
Worst Lost: #329 Kennesaw St. (Home)
Remaining: Wed, vs 261 Northern Kentucky
#266 Milwaukee (5-9)
Average Opponent: 175.4
Average Win: 223
Average Loss: 159.5
Best Win: #157 Louisiana-Lafayette (Neutral, Las Vegas)
Worst Lost: #312 IUPUI (Home)
#315 UIC (3-11) We gave away the wrong Chicago team.
Average Opponent: 178.5
Average Win: 291.5
Average Loss: 158
Best Win: #275 UCF (Home)
Worst Lost: #285 Grand Canyon (Home)
Does Old Dominion have as close to the perfect schedule that a mid-major can have? I think so!
http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Old%20Dominion.html (http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Old%20Dominion.html)
Their RPI is 12 and their SOS is 36 and did not play a single Duke, North Carolina, Kentucky, Ohio State, Kansas, Arizona, etc. They played mid-major teams that are likely to be at the top of their conferences, A10 competition, and sub-par BCS schools. HL schools would probably have to go on the road 1-2 more games than Old Dominion, but this is a schedule to model ourselves after.
What do you think our record would be if we played this schedule? My guess is 3 loses to LSU, VCU, and Illinois State. That gives us 1 more loss then we have now and our RPI would be in the low 40's instead of the 70's.
All of the AD's should meet for a weekend of pizza and beer and analyze teams who schedule like this. This is the secret. Even if your team goes .500 with this schedule you still have an RPI under 150 to start conference play!
Now let's take a look at the scheduling for the conference.
There were 18 non D-1 home games in the conference. I can accept that as part of the scheduling, it's normal to get some non D-1s on your schedule, even the power 5 do it. We didn't lose any of these games which is acceptable. Any loss would be devastating for our conference's reputation. You don't lose at home to an inferior opponent.
There were 18 Neutral court games in the conference. That's pretty nice to get that many tourney/showcase invites for the conference. The average opponent in these games were 215. That kind of sucks since you usually expect a higher class of opponent in those games. We went 12-6 in these games with an average win of 232.8. The best win was Valpo's defeat of #104 Murray St
We were able to schedule 35 home games in the conference (~4 per team). That's rough. You expect to have to get a lower opponent to come to your court to play you and that's exactly what happened. An average of 202.5 ranked teams came to play in home buildings. Our best win was Green Bay's victory over #68 Georgia St. We went 19-16 at home with an average win of 238.5.
There were 3 losses at home I could count as inexcusable losses. As a conference we shouldn't lose to teams ranked over 275. UIC lost to #285 Grand Canyon, Milwaukee lost to #312, and Youngstown St. lost to #329 Kennesaw St. That hurts us as a conference.
There were no real "shocking" wins at home. If Milwaukee pulled off an upset vs. #4 Wisconsin that would have counted. Instead they got their doors blown off 93-54. Detroit also played #13 Wichita St and lost, this was a return game from the BracketBusters game two years ago when Detroit was a returning tournament team.
We had to go out and play 54 games on the road this season. Usually you'd like to see more home games than road games, but right now we're at the point that teams don't want to come to our stadium for fear of either losing to what they see as a low quality opponent or hurting RPI by beating a lower level opponent. The average road opponent was ranked 121.1. As is often the case when you go on the road we struggled with a 14-40 record. The average victory was over an opponent ranked 180.7 with our best road win coming in Green Bay's victory over #78 Miami.
While going out on the road is difficult, you really shouldn't lose to any team ranked higher than 275. Again we lost 3 games to this caliber of opponent; Detroit vs. #275 UCF, Milwaukee vs #292 SIU-Edwardsville, and Cleveland St vs. #324 Savannah St.
Here's a breakdown against the different caliber of opponent
| 1-50 | 0-14 |
| 51-100 | 5-14 |
| 101-125 | 5-9 |
| 125-150 | 3-7 |
| 151-200 | 3-2 |
| 201-225 | 4-7 |
| 226-250 | 6-2 |
| 251-275 | 4-3 |
| 275+ | 15-5 |
| Non D-1 | 18-0 |
| D1 Record | 45-62 |
Analysis: Until that 251+ record is undefeated our conference is going to be in the middling teens for RPI and our conference champion will either have to have an Oakland-like schedule and go 10-4, or run the table in conference play with a schedule like ours to ever see a seed higher than 10. Even then we should probably have 45% of our schedule in the 101-200 range not the 28% we have right now.
Quote from: SanityLost17 on December 30, 2014, 10:26:19 AMMy guess is 3 loses to LSU, VCU, and Illinois State.
I don't think we would lose to Illinois St. They beat IPFW by 20+ but that was at Normal. They lost to Murray St in KY and barely beat YSU in OT at Redbird Arena. With Peters having all his buddies attending from the Peoria area I don't think we lose that game.
Quote from: historyman on December 30, 2014, 10:52:43 AM
Quote from: SanityLost17 on December 30, 2014, 10:26:19 AMMy guess is 3 loses to LSU, VCU, and Illinois State.
I don't think we would lose to Illinois St. They beat IPFW by 20+ but that was at Normal. They lost to Murray St in KY and barely beat YSU in OT at Redbird Arena. With Peters having all his buddies attending from the Peoria area I don't think we lose that game.
Either way, doesn't matter. The key to my argument is that whether we would have 2, 3, or even 4 losses, our SOS would be very respectable and our RPI would be better than it is now, and you can't label a single game on that schedule as "unwinnable".
The Ill St. game was in the Virgin Islands. It'd be a long trip from Washington, IL to get there.
It's not like Old Dominion is that far ahead of us in the rankings. They are #50 in KenPom and we're #77. If we had won the Missouri game we'd be ahead of them for sure and possibly ahead of Green Bay at #42. Would have, could have, should have. Right now our schedule is lacking the key top 25 game they have, otherwise it's pretty similar. Trade Arkansas Pine Bluff for a San Diego St, SMU, George Washington or Butler and we've got practically the same SOS.
Chances are if GB doesn't win the HL tournament they won't get an invite, the same holds true for Valpo. The only way this is a 2 bid league is if either GB or Valpo goes undefeated or just one loss in conference play and loses in the championship to the other.
If I were a betting man I'd say GB isn't dancing this season, I don't think they are coached well enough to go undefeated or just one-loss in the HL. Chances are they'll be 14-2 to 12-4 in HL play, more likely 12-4 and lose in the semi's to Wright State. This is why teams like Wright State and Valpo have been among the better in the league and have been to the HL championship game in the last 3 seasons if you combine the two.
In order to win the league you need good coaching, Donlon and Drew are the two best in the league. So it'll be Valpo vs WSU in the HL championship.
Quote from: classof2014 on December 30, 2014, 12:05:08 PM
Chances are if GB doesn't win the HL tournament they won't get an invite, the same holds true for Valpo. The only way this is a 2 bid league is if either GB or Valpo goes undefeated or just one loss in conference play and loses in the championship to the other.
This is interesting. I ran an RPI Wizard, and an undefeated season would mean a ~40 RPI with a 27-3 record for Valpo (assuming a loss at home to GB in the championship game). With a 26-4 record assuming a loss on the road @GB, the RPI drops to 46.
Green Bay going undefeated would be a 27 RPI with a 26-4 record, or 34 RPI with a 25-5 record assuming the conf loss is @ Valpo.
In 2013, Southern Miss had a 31 RPI, but wasn't an at-large, and the next year, had a 34 RPI and still didn't make it. Toledo also with a 38 didn't make it. Harvard had a 35 RPI record in 2010 and didn't make it.
But Iona in the MAAC with a 40 RPI and a 25-7 record did it in 2011. It really depends on how many teams lose their conf tourneys, and how strong the bubble teams are. So theoretically, I think you might be right with Valpo losing only 1 more game, and GB losing 2 more games, but it's not going to happen. This conference has historically played each other very tight. Valpo's best HL team lost to YSU and Loyola, Detroit's best HL team lost 5 conference games and had a buzzer beater vs Loyola, and Green Bay last year lost to UWM and a freshman Valpo team before losing to UWM again at home, in the conference tourney, yes, with two NBA players, at home, to UWM, in the conference tournament.
Quote from: classof2014 on December 30, 2014, 12:05:08 PM
Chances are if GB doesn't win the HL tournament they won't get an invite, the same holds true for Valpo. The only way this is a 2 bid league is if either GB or Valpo goes undefeated or just one loss in conference play and loses in the championship to the other.
If I were a betting man I'd say GB isn't dancing this season, I don't think they are coached well enough to go undefeated or just one-loss in the HL. Chances are they'll be 14-2 to 12-4 in HL play, more likely 12-4 and lose in the semi's to Wright State. This is why teams like Wright State and Valpo have been among the better in the league and have been to the HL championship game in the last 3 seasons if you combine the two.
In order to win the league you need good coaching, Donlon and Drew are the two best in the league. So it'll be Valpo vs WSU in the HL championship.
The team getting the at-large bid would also need to be in the top 40 in RPI, preferably in the top 35.
Quote from: SanityLost17 on December 30, 2014, 11:03:25 AM
Quote from: historyman on December 30, 2014, 10:52:43 AM
Quote from: SanityLost17 on December 30, 2014, 10:26:19 AMMy guess is 3 loses to LSU, VCU, and Illinois State.
I don't think we would lose to Illinois St. They beat IPFW by 20+ but that was at Normal. They lost to Murray St in KY and barely beat YSU in OT at Redbird Arena. With Peters having all his buddies attending from the Peoria area I don't think we lose that game.
Either way, doesn't matter. The key to my argument is that whether we would have 2, 3, or even 4 losses, our SOS would be very respectable and our RPI would be better than it is now, and you can't label a single game on that schedule as "unwinnable".
For next season we need to keep in mind for our scheduling that that there might be no team in the country that I would classify as being unbeatable! I think if we take 4 of these "unwinnable" road games we get 1 win and maybe with a little luck- well who knows? I don't care how it is structured and accomplished but next years team deserves the best challenge we can find them and I am not going to be prepared to listen to a bunch of excuses in August explaining the poor quality of our opponents!
Get err done!
Problem with next years schedule is that more than 60% of it is already completed. When sitting the schedule you have some games already guaranteed through previous contracts. Have to keep in mind travel budget. Opportunity cost of playing a st.louis might be not flying to Green Bay or etc. do we find someone that would be willing to pay us to come play? (Oakland strategy). There are a lot of variables and different combinations when setting the schedule. I used to set the non conference schedule when I coached soccer at oru. And talk about a tough budget...especially being so geographically isolated from other di men's soccer programs.
Quote from: wh on December 28, 2014, 11:40:58 PMOakland's 3-10 D-1 OOC record includes predestined losses to 6 teams: Iowa State, Michigan State, Arizona, Pittsburgh, Clemson and Maryland.
Not for nothing, but 2 of those losses were anything but predestined as it turned out.
At least he's not playing Duke, North Carolina, or Kansas every year. Those are what I would call predestined losses. This year's game against the Spartans was ghastly, but in years past they've come darn close to upsetting them (I don't blame him for playing MSU every year anyway, there's a relationship there).
I'm not a big fan of playing such games, either. On top of everything else, there's a decent chance you're going to get hosed repeatedly by the zebras (this year's Pitt game, for example) -- that for me, by the way, is what makes the prostitution analogy so vivid and compelling.
There's one good way to put an end to this practice: win some of these games. I guarantee the big boys will "solve" this "problem" for us, if that happens. Until then, you've got to come up with a solution that meets Kampe's reasons for doing this. I do hate the whole "it gives our players a chance to play in great arenas so they can tell stories to their grandkids" argument, and I also remember Kampe hinting that he would tone this down now that he's in the HL (though you've got to remember that coaches start building schedules a few years in advance, so this will take time).
In the meantime, isn't this precisely the means by which Butler rose to national prominence? I'm not extremely familiar with their history prior to Valpo entering the conference, but wasn't there a time when they played a similar schedule (only they didn't walk into big venues all starry-eyed with scrapbooks for future descendants)?
Quote from: StlVUFan on January 01, 2015, 01:12:50 PMI do hate the whole "it gives our players a chance to play in great arenas so they can tell stories to their grandkids" argument, and I also remember Kampe hinting that he would tone this down now that he's in the HL (though you've got to remember that coaches start building schedules a few years in advance, so this will take time).
This is not exactly what Kampe said. He said that he had planned to scale back the schedule when he got in the HL but he then decided not to pull back because the players really enjoyed playing these teams in the big arenas and the AD said he was happy with the income. Kampe caved to the forces at OU--recruiting and budget needs.
Quote from: bbtds on January 01, 2015, 03:53:23 PM
Quote from: StlVUFan on January 01, 2015, 01:12:50 PMI do hate the whole "it gives our players a chance to play in great arenas so they can tell stories to their grandkids" argument, and I also remember Kampe hinting that he would tone this down now that he's in the HL (though you've got to remember that coaches start building schedules a few years in advance, so this will take time).
This is not exactly what Kampe said. He said that he had planned to scale back the schedule when he got in the HL but he then decided not to pull back because the players really enjoyed playing these teams in the big arenas and the AD said he was happy with the income. Kampe caved to the forces at OU--recruiting and budget needs.
Something easily addressed if the HL commissioner and the member schools mandated a more HL-oriented scheduling policy. "Hey, you want in on the HL, adhere to our rules or find another conference." Ah, but, unfortunately there aren't many rules.
Here are some of the Oakland Athletic Director's comments on this topic from their fan board:
I have read through the recent conversations on non-conference scheduling philosophies as it pertains to men's basketball. Please understand this is very complex issue because there are so many competing interests for a mid-major like Oakland. To list them in no particular order: financial, time away from the classroom, right number of home games, student-athlete experiences, perceived or actual recruiting advantages, exposure in the multimedia, the availability or scheduling of the O'Rena around University events, no competitions during finals week, the right mix for RPI purposes, any value to regional rivals, what could help marketing and ticket sales, playing in historic venues, paying or receiving game guarantees, etc.
That said, and being transparent, my personal philosophy is two fold. First, as a program, do what you believe will put you in a RPI advantage situation and allow the growth of the team to occur to put the team in the best position to succeed in the conference. Second, and of lesser importance, and this is very difficult to accomplish these days, create a home/road slate of games that makes sense in terms of relatively equal numbers and spaced out strategically through November and December.
My personal philosophy is that I think everything needs to be BALANCED in the non-conference schedule. I do think you need to play a few Power 5/ BCS level institutions because it does help the maturation of a team, and exposes a team to what they would likely face in any post-season play. There is tremendous value to playing these games and Coach Kampe has done a very nice job in securing these games on the one hand, and being competitive in the vast majority, on the other. But, and again this is my personal opinion, I also think you need to play more schools that are similar to where you are as a program to use as a gauge, and you can define this in terms of your own relative institutional position or the competition that you would likely see in the Horizon League. Again, this is in line with the preparation of the team mentality for conference play.
Here is the caveat. For those years that you believe you have a special team, then you may schedule up in hopes of putting a possible "at large" resume together. For years that there are a few more questions, then I think you take that into account. I believe the right philosophy is a balanced approach but that it ultimately does account for "special years." If you look at Butler's success a few years ago, their non-conference schedule became more ambitious in lock step with the relative strength of those Butler teams, and they did that while being a member of the Horizon League.
One item that is proven, and does not make much intuitive sense I grant you, is that local or regional teams playing at the O'Rena do not draw substantially better than other 'less known" programs outside of our Metro Series "frenemy" UDM. Hence, while fans may suggest playing more MAC or Missouri Valley or Conference X schools would help in attendance, that does not necessarily show up in the bottom line, at least when reviewing recent history. I also think that the gap is shrinking between institutions and this year, there have been more major upsets than in previous years. This is a long way of saying, winning in Division I is hard, and there are no easy games. As a preface, even the "best laid plans" can go up in smoke.
Read more: http://goldengrizzlyhoops.proboards.com/thread/1509/oakland-ad?page=4#ixzz3Nbv7xu3K (http://goldengrizzlyhoops.proboards.com/thread/1509/oakland-ad?page=4#ixzz3Nbv7xu3K)
Interesting. I kind of feel either he is talking out of both sides of his mouth, though, or he has a serious difference of opinion from Kampe on the topic.
http://www.valpofanzone.com/2015/01/02/horizon-league-the-non-con-2014/ (http://www.valpofanzone.com/2015/01/02/horizon-league-the-non-con-2014/)
Cross-posting my annual write-up over here too--hope you enjoy, learn something, are amused. Whatever.
Let's go get 'em, Crusaders!