West
Wichita St
SMU
Tulsa
Houston

Central
Cincy
Memphis
USF
Tulane

East
UConn
Temple
UCF
East Carolina

Play everyone in your division home-home and then play everyone in the other divisions once, playing one of the top two teams listed at home and one of the bottom two teams listed at home. This will give you 14 conference games...but, there is a wrinkle. There would be 4 more TBD conference games depending on how you finish in your divisional games, with the top teams getting 2nd games against the top teams from the other divisions and the bottom teams getting 2nd games against the bottom teams. This will help ensure that the top teams get to enhance their tournament resumes while the lower teams get chances to improve their records.

These last 4 TBD games would happen over the last 2 weeks of the season and would help to ensure that the AAC has nationally-relevant games for TV. The game-times could already be slotted for TV, but the participating teams would be somewhat TBD. The 6 games within a division are solely what determine your standings for the 4 tBD games. You would complete these games by the end of January (perhaps, play them all within January), at which point the final matchups for the last 2 weeks are determined, so you have 3 weeks, or so, for the schools to make those travel and game arrangements.

As an example, let's suppose that the division standings are as listed above at the end of January, Memphis would then have their 4 TBD games against UConn, Temple, Wichita St, and SMU (Cincy, too). These are all high-level games, leading to an overall conference schedule for Memphis looking something like this:

Dec
@Wichita St
SMU
UConn
@Temple

Jan
@Cincy
USF
@Tulane
Cincy
@USF
Tulane
OOC Game

Feb
@Tulsa
Houston
@UCF
ECU
OOC Game

Late-Feb/Early-Mar TBD Games
Wichita St
@SMU
@UConn
Temple

Obviously, those games with the division in January are HUGE as they dictate your schedule for the last 4 games. So, not only are those December games against top conference opponents BIG, and the games against Cincy BIG (as always), those games against USF and Tulane take on increased significance. Then, assuming you take care of business in January, you get 4 more BIG games to close the season.

I know that this is a little outside the box and there are details to be checked, but I think this would be a cool idea that would help ensure that the best teams in the conference each year get to play each other twice to build their NCAA tourney resumes, while the lesser teams get a chance to get their records to 0.500 and possibly qualify for some sort of post-season action. Currently, we have an unbalance schedule where we only play Cincy and ECU once this year, playing everyone else twice. That is obviously not an optimal situation.

Make it happen!

No.

(12-18-2016 02:58 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  No.

Uh, OK...

(12-18-2016 02:58 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  No.

Care to expound?

Under this year's format, our conference games are (using Sagarin):
2 games:
32 Houston
46 SMU
72 Temple
80 UCF
94 UConn
148 Tulsa
246 USF
255 Tulane
1 game:
14 Cincy
166 ECU
Yielding:
1 Top 25 game (away)
5 Top 50 games
13 Top 100 games
18 Conf Games with Avg Sagarin: 118

Under my proposed format we'd have:
2 games:
14 Cincy
20 Wichita St
32 Houston
46 SMU
72 Temple
94 UConn
246 USF
255 Tulane
1 game:
32 Houston
80 UCF
148 Tulsa
166 ECU
Yielding:
4 Top 25 games (home/away)
9 Top 50 games
14 Top 100 games
20 Conf Games with Avg Sagarin: 99

So, we'd go from 1 to 4 Top 25 games (and ZERO to TWO Home Top 25 Games) and from 5 to 9 Top 5 games.

What is your argument?

Divisions are useless in basketball. Only two DI conferences (MAC, OVC) retain divisions. Three divisions just looks trashy and dysfunctional.

No need to expand either.

Yup you can schedule how you want but only one table

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using CSNbbs mobile app

(12-18-2016 05:18 PM)fsquid Wrote:  Yup you can schedule how you want but only one table

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using CSNbbs mobile app

What do you mean, only one table?

Anyway, I was just looking for a way to get more matchups against the better teams. That can mean more TV money because of a greater number of good matchups and more NCAA money because our better teams will have better resumes. Of course, we could just hold course and be happy with having ZERO Top25 home games.

(12-18-2016 04:17 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  Divisions are useless in basketball. Only two DI conferences (MAC, OVC) retain divisions. Three divisions just looks trashy and dysfunctional.

No need to expand either.

What looks trashy and dysfunctional is having an unbalanced scheduled based on nothing but randomness.

CUSA already tried that with the red white and blue divisions

It's a cluster fug no matter which way you do it when you can't play everyone home and home

(12-18-2016 05:55 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  CUSA already tried that with the red white and blue divisions

It's a cluster fug no matter which way you do it when you can't play everyone home and home

They did try that with the Red, White, and Blue, but this takes it a step further by allowing the top teams from each division play 4 more high-quality games (while the bottom teams play 4 more games against teams on their level).

Another option with the current configuration is to play 20 conference games. I know that would reduce the number of home games a team can play by 1 because 2 buy games are replaced by one home and one away conference game (and we are required by the Grizz to play a certain number of home games - 19 might be the number). However, for us this year, it would mean a home game against Cincinnati and the cancellation of two home games against, let's say, McNeese St and Incarnate Word. I don't know of anyone who wouldn't like to trade one home game against Cincy for home games against McNeese St and Incarnate Word.

Bottom line, the AAC needs to ensure that the top teams in the conference play each other twice. Otherwise, you are hurting your better teams' chance of making the dance and losing money for the conference.

(12-18-2016 05:33 PM)hsvtiger Wrote:  

(12-18-2016 04:17 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  Divisions are useless in basketball. Only two DI conferences (MAC, OVC) retain divisions. Three divisions just looks trashy and dysfunctional.

No need to expand either.

What looks trashy and dysfunctional is having an unbalanced scheduled based on nothing but randomness.

It is unbalanced but only slightly.

Eleven AAC teams, eighteen games. Play eight teams home-and-home, one team once at home, one team once away. It's not much of an imbalance.

But this is how pretty much every DI conference is, at least those with more than ten programs.

(12-18-2016 07:12 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  

(12-18-2016 05:33 PM)hsvtiger Wrote:  

(12-18-2016 04:17 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  Divisions are useless in basketball. Only two DI conferences (MAC, OVC) retain divisions. Three divisions just looks trashy and dysfunctional.

No need to expand either.

What looks trashy and dysfunctional is having an unbalanced scheduled based on nothing but randomness.

It is unbalanced but only slightly.

Eleven AAC teams, eighteen games. Play eight teams home-and-home, one team once at home, one team once away. It's not much of an imbalance.

But this is how pretty much every DI conference is, at least those with more than ten programs.

I understand that and I think that the top 3-4 conferences can do that as most of their teams have top 100 ratings. The AAC doesn't have that top-to-bottom strength, so we could use a way to maximize the opportunities for our better teams to play each other twice.

I am just looking that this comparison and it looks A LOT better!

Our Current Conf Schedule:
1 Top 25 game (0 home / 1 away)
5 Top 50 games
13 Top 100 games
18 Conf Games with Avg Sagarin: 118

Our Conf Schedule this year with WSU and this method:
4 Top 25 games (2 home / 2 away)
9 Top 50 games
14 Top 100 games
20 Conf Games with Avg Sagarin: 99

The 3 divisions are really just a method to objectively identify the upper and lower teams to ensure that the better teams play each other a 2nd time.

Anyway, I'm just screwing around, but I think this would be a cool way to do it. YBNormal?

I kind of like the TBD games. But just don't like divisions in basketball. And more divisions is worse. Not a fan of split conferences depending upon the sport either.

Good thoughts though.

We were in something like that before. Red, White and Blue divisions anyone. How did that turn out?

I like what New Mexico and New Mexico State do.

Different leagues, so they play each other home and home non conference every year. Every year. Non conference. Home and home. Great idea.

Be nice to find a couple of teams - Gonzaga, St. Mary's, San Diego State, Xavier, Dayton, Rhode Island, VCU, Wichita, Creighton, Butler, etc. - to set that up with on the regular.

I've always thought they should do a deal with San Diego State or Boise for home and home football and basketball too. Or similar - whoever projects to be good in the next few years in both sports out of non power leagues - Bowling Green, Colorado State, Fresno State, whoever.

(12-18-2016 05:55 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  CUSA already tried that with the red white and blue divisions

It's a cluster fug no matter which way you do it when you can't play everyone home and home

Beat me to it. The Red/White/Blue divisions was a great Marketing idea, but awful idea from a execution standpoint.

(12-20-2016 11:07 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  I like what New Mexico and New Mexico State do.

Different leagues, so they play each other home and home non conference every year. Every year. Non conference. Home and home. Great idea.

Be nice to find a couple of teams - Gonzaga, St. Mary's, San Diego State, Xavier, Dayton, Rhode Island, VCU, Wichita, Creighton, Butler, etc. - to set that up with on the regular.

I've always thought they should do a deal with San Diego State or Boise for home and home football and basketball too. Or similar - whoever projects to be good in the next few years in both sports out of non power leagues - Bowling Green, Colorado State, Fresno State, whoever.

I like that idea. It may work better with a regional rival type team - would have been good with Vandy the last few years. Maybe Arkansas?

(12-20-2016 11:07 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  I like what New Mexico and New Mexico State do.

Different leagues, so they play each other home and home non conference every year. Every year. Non conference. Home and home. Great idea.

Be nice to find a couple of teams - Gonzaga, St. Mary's, San Diego State, Xavier, Dayton, Rhode Island, VCU, Wichita, Creighton, Butler, etc. - to set that up with on the regular.

I've always thought they should do a deal with San Diego State or Boise for home and home football and basketball too. Or similar - whoever projects to be good in the next few years in both sports out of non power leagues - Bowling Green, Colorado State, Fresno State, whoever.

I quite like this idea and I am curious myself as well why (seemingly) no one else has picked up on the New Mexico.New Mexico State series.

Leave the MAC out of this though - whatever strength they had as a mid-major years ago is long gone. Mountain West has very recently turned rancid, but that's not irreversible.

(12-20-2016 05:25 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 11:07 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  I like what New Mexico and New Mexico State do.

Different leagues, so they play each other home and home non conference every year. Every year. Non conference. Home and home. Great idea.

Be nice to find a couple of teams - Gonzaga, St. Mary's, San Diego State, Xavier, Dayton, Rhode Island, VCU, Wichita, Creighton, Butler, etc. - to set that up with on the regular.

I've always thought they should do a deal with San Diego State or Boise for home and home football and basketball too. Or similar - whoever projects to be good in the next few years in both sports out of non power leagues - Bowling Green, Colorado State, Fresno State, whoever.

I quite like this idea and I am curious myself as well why (seemingly) no one else has picked up on the New Mexico.New Mexico State series.

Leave the MAC out of this though - whatever strength they had as a mid-major years ago is long gone. Mountain West has very recently turned rancid, but that's not irreversible.

You just have to find the right teams.

San Diego State would be a good thought - they played at Grand Canyon - probably means they are willing to play anyone.

I'd do a H&H for both sports for 2 years with them and do the H&H in basketball at both places each year.

Either way, whatever it takes to schedule better.

(12-20-2016 12:43 PM)Trapper John Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 11:07 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  I like what New Mexico and New Mexico State do.

Different leagues, so they play each other home and home non conference every year. Every year. Non conference. Home and home. Great idea.

Be nice to find a couple of teams - Gonzaga, St. Mary's, San Diego State, Xavier, Dayton, Rhode Island, VCU, Wichita, Creighton, Butler, etc. - to set that up with on the regular.

I've always thought they should do a deal with San Diego State or Boise for home and home football and basketball too. Or similar - whoever projects to be good in the next few years in both sports out of non power leagues - Bowling Green, Colorado State, Fresno State, whoever.

I like that idea. It may work better with a regional rival type team - would have been good with Vandy the last few years. Maybe Arkansas?

Really, a Vanderbilt home and home basketball series while Tennessee is trying to get the Vol/Tiger series rolling again could be sold in a number of ways.

We should be playing Vanderbilt in both sports.