(07-22-2016 11:09 AM)stever20 Wrote: 1st off- ESPN isn't crying about losing at most 30 what will almost be all dreg OOC games. But you better believe they are happy as anything getting 15 quality conference games. 30 ESPN3 games vs 15 games that will have at least 3-4 real fun games.
Just looking at Duke as an example. They would get to add 2 games from this group for this year-
BC, Clemson, Ga Tech, NC State, Pittsburgh
Syracuse, Notre Dame, Louisville, Virginia, Virginia Tech
yeah ESPN wouldn't be crying about that at all. Duke/NC State and Duke/any of the teams on the 2nd list are huge winners.
UNC could add a game with one of FSU, Va Tech, Louisville, Syracuse, or Notre Dame.
Now with SOS- There isn't much of a difference at all in SOS of a team who loses to a top 50 team or a team who beats a sub 300 team.
the parts in bold above are how you take your conference down a path results you did not expect and end up not being happy with
again there is more to the number of conference games than just "ESPN is happy happy happy"
in addition to the strength of schedule issue that is real there is the issue of what the longer term consequences are
using general numbers of a team plays 30 games per season and you have 15 teams in that conference playing those games lets look at winning % possibilities
first we will look at 30 games with 18 conference games and 12 OOC games
again we are talking about total
POSSIBLE winning % for the conference
15 teams X 30 games = 450 games
12 OOC X 15 teams = 180
18 conference X 15 = 270
a conference has the POSSIBILITY to go 180-0 in those OOC games....is that PROBABLE no of course not, but it is still relevant
the ONLY thing a conference can do in conference games is go 1-1 or .500 because every win is a loss
so with 15 teams playing 30 games with 18 conference and 12 OOC the best POSSIBLE winning % is 135 conference wins and 180 OOC wins for a total of 315 wins out of 450 games and 315/450 is a total POSSIBLE conference winning % of 70%
now lets look at that same setup with 20 conference games and 10 OOC games
you have 300 conference and 150 OOC and the best POSSIBLE number of wins is not 300/450 or a best possible winning % of 67%
so playing those extra two conference games to make ESPN happy happy happy has cost the conference the POSSIBILITY of one additional win per team in the conference because you went from a POSSIBLE 315 wins to a POSSIBLE 300 wins
now the first thing someone will say is "well you do not win all your conference games so "don't matter"
well the first thing YOU said was "getting rid of dreg OOC games" and getting "great conference games"
so right off YOU were the one that makes the assumption that a "dreg" OOC game will be given up and I think it is fair to say that a "dreg" game should be a WIN correct?
so you are saying to give up an OOC game that might not be "exciting" especially for the all important 'what makes ESPN happy happy happy" and the probably WIN that should come with a "dreg" game and instead make sure that one conference team wins and also guarantee that another conference team loses
and really when it comes down to it when you start doing the math and you start trying to say "well we would only win X % of those OOC games anyway" well again when you are giving up "dreg" OOC games as you move towards "tough exciting conference games" wouldn't that mean that you are still keeping the exciting tougher OOC games as well and thus it would be expected that the overall winning % of OOC games might decline with fewer OOC games and fewer "dreg" OOC games that should be wins
and even if you hold the OOC winning % the same for the change in conference games Vs non conference games holding that OOC winning % the same still means you have cost the conference a chance to win 15 more games per season or on average 1 win per conference member
the only way you can pretend that you have not cost the conference possible wins if you somehow make the assumption that by moving to more conference games and thus cutting down on the total POSSIBLE number of wins by 15 you will somehow make up for that reduction in POSSIBLE wins by getting rid of "dreg" OOC games that should be wins and playing tougher conference games and then somehow with the fewer remaining OOC games win a higher overall % of those "not as much of a dreg" OOC games (which should be tougher to win) and thus you somehow come out with a higher overall OOC winning % than if you were playing more OOC "dreg" games
that does not really seem like a distinct possibility that seems like a long shot at best especially since at least in my opinion "winning" is contagious and thus when you get on a roll with some "dreg" OOC wins you can carry that to win some "non-dreg" OOC games especially if you are a better overall basketball program
and some might also say "well 15 wins out of 450 total games is meaningless" or "reducing the number of POSSIBLE wins by one per team really does not matter", but in basketball where getting into the NCAAs can hinge on a single win difference making it less likely or more difficult for all the teams in the conference to win 1 additional game can make a big difference to those on the cusp
and then of course will come the argument about "well more conference games will be a better overall conference strength than those OOC dreg wins"
but that gets back to what has already been proven at least for the PC 12 and football.....the strength of YOUR schedule is much more related to the actual number of WINS of those teams you play Vs the strength of their schedule especially if they are losing more
the first thing that matters to strength of schedule is WINS it is not about who you lost to or how tough the teams you lost to were and that is even kore so the case when you are talking about your conference mate that you play helping YOUR strength of schedule....there is little to no transitive effect to "wow they are 10-20 but look at all those good teams they lost to" there is much more benefit to YOU from "the were 20-10 even if against some "dregs" "
but ESPN is happy so