(07-16-2017 08:12 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-16-2017 03:35 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(07-15-2017 06:13 PM)SactoHornetAlum Wrote:  Regarding your earlier statement about 20 conference games, the coaches are not for it anymore after they experimented with it several years ago. It only left 8-9 non-conference games and it destroyed the conference RPI. That and the fact it's very difficult for Big Sky schools to try and get higher name programs to come to a Big Sky facility, the coaches need every help they can get. The 20 game schedule is dead in the water.

"Several years ago" is the operative word. The Big Sky is a one bid conference, and one of the lower rated ones. The conference RPI is in the toilet, unless you have not looked:
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2017/conferencerpi

The highest was 144, 9 of 12 were over 200, 3 over 300. Protecting RPI is a joke argument
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketba...rence/BSKY

The info came from a Weber State "insider." So it may not be conference wide. But for Weber it would be no great loss. They would just replace a home game against Presentation college with a Big Sky opponent. Even though they have the largest Basketball budget and are the most consistent school, they have real trouble scheduling quality opponents. They do get a couple road games against some high mid-majors (BYU, and Fresno State this year). They are not going to get invited to the big tournaments with Michigan State, Duke, UCLA, or whomever. This is typical of the Big Sky schedules.

If there is any strong opposition I would expect it to come from Eastern Washington. Although Jim Hayward left for Seattle U, EWU may still schedule like it matters. I don't have this year's schedule, but last year they had the best OOC by far, playing a pre-season tourney with Texas and Northwestern, and road games at Colorado and Xavier. But even so, an extra Big Sky home game simply means replacing the Great Falls game.

http://goeags.com/schedule.aspx?path=mbball

The world has changed since several years ago, and there are ZERO at-large slots for conferences like the Big Sky. Adding a conference home game over a weak D-II home game (since majors wont visit) will add more butts in seats, perhaps $50K ($100K in the most optimistic scenarios) to the bottom line. Small money, but this is a msall time conference.

Only one conference at the D1 level played a 20 game conference schedule last season and they are switching to an 18 game season:

http://blog.timesunion.com/collegesports...ule/22227/

Playing 20 conference games is a bad idea. The Sun Belt played a 20
game conference schedule until recently and it was not working. Playing more games against mediocre conference competition was not
helping the conference RPI. The non-conference wins help, especially against decent competition. There were also times when schools were playing five conference games in ten days.

But moreover, once the league decided to invite all teams to the post-season tournament, there was no point in a 20 game regular season schedule. The Conference RPI ranking improved from 17th to 13th in the first year of the 18 game schedule and hopefully the improvements will continue.

Given the recent domination of at-large bids by the P5/6 on Selection Sunday, RPI is meaningless and current one bid conference will remain that way indefinitely. RPI really just gives folks on message boards something to beat their chests about. The reality is all these low RPI one bid conferences aren't much different when it all boils down.

Stu is right in that BSC members need home games, and going 20 games guarantees everyone 10 home games. In the BSC's case, I think that easily trumps the RPI concerns. As a MBB Hornet season ticket holder, I would be fine with this as it guarantees that the programs worth seeing will always be on the slate (even though they have been on the schedule anyways because they need to get in front of CA recruits).