I know that some of the MAC coaches are strongly in favor of reducing the number of conference basketball games. Currently, each team plays 18 games.
What are the reasons for wanting this change? And, what are the reasons for staying at 18? I suspect one reason for reducing the conference games is that some teams would attempt to schedule more high profile out of conference games so that they might improve their RPI. This would enhance their chances for getting an NCAA tournament bid. If that's so, then why not reduce the number of conference games?
On the C-USA board, people are discussing how Memphis coach John Calipari is against further expansion because it would likely lead to more conference games. He is against this because it would lower the number of home games Memphis can play and reduce their revenue.
As a side note, if the MAC were to seek to attract Memphis, I'm sure the number of conference basketball games would be a big issue.
I'm not sure if this issue also has relevance for football scheduling. But look, for example, at the number of home games Ohio State plays. It's really ridiculous. This enhances their chances of winning and also gives them a huge boost in revenue.
When Marshall leaves look for the conference schedule to go to 16 games. One game against each cross-over (6 games) and home and home against schools in your division (10 games).
I'm all for fewer MAC conference games. Until the MAC has more than three or four strong teams each season, we are doomed to be a one bid conference without significant OOC wins. If Kent can replace the two Marshall games next year with two quality OOC games, I'd be very happy. Getting a quality OOC game is a different story for us...takes ESPN to force the issue.
I'm sure one argument for 18 confrence games is the fact that many of the schools are so close together. Travel costs from say Kent to Miami or even Ball state are relatively low. Those two extra non-confrence games would probably not be against other local schools (big 10) because many of those institutions do not want to lose to us.
Santa Fe Falcon Wrote:I'm not sure if this issue also has relevance for football scheduling. But look, for example, at the number of home games Ohio State plays. It's really ridiculous. This enhances their chances of winning and also gives them a huge boost in revenue.
OSU nets over $9million per home FB game. They supposedly paid $3million to SD State to move their game to Columbus, because they can.
They can spend thousands of dollars on you for 48 hours, hiring private jets and letting you have the entire menu at expensive steakhouses. Once you're on campus, you get training table, work your butt off and study like crazy, then they tell you that it's questionable that you're hanging out with a young soon-to-be rich athlete and that you're not supposed to accept a free sandwich from the restaurant down the street.
Maurice Clarett may be a doofus, but it's not hard to understand why he feels disenfranchised and used by OSU. Only more reason for the NFL to create a minor league for developmental prospects. Just take out all the NCAA bureaucracy for kids that want to train to be a football player.
With all the leagues expanding into mega-conferences, who will be left to play in January and February except teams in your own league? The ACC teams will be tied up just trying to add BC, V.T , Miami (Fla) to their schedules. That eliminates 3 to 6 games available to play non-conference teams.
Then again, Gonzaga manages plenty of quality non-conference games.
klingon288 Wrote:With all the leagues expanding into mega-conferences, who will be left to play in January and February except teams in your own league? The ACC teams will be tied up just trying to add BC, V.T , Miami (Fla) to their schedules. That eliminates 3 to 6 games available to play non-conference teams.
Then again, Gonzaga manages plenty of quality non-conference games.
The ACC was playing a double round robin schedule before with 9 teams, 16 games.
Now with 12, the ACC is playing double round robin intradivisional, with one game against the opposite division for 16 games.
FlashFan Wrote:I'm all for fewer MAC conference games. Until the MAC has more than three or four strong teams each season, we are doomed to be a one bid conference without significant OOC wins. If Kent can replace the two Marshall games next year with two quality OOC games, I'd be very happy. Getting a quality OOC game is a different story for us...takes ESPN to force the issue.
Or even if the extra 2 OOC games end up being low major schools, it provides the MAC an opportunity to prove its dominance over low major competion. Many high major schools load up on a diet of weak division 1 programs for overinflated win-loss records and RPI.
Won't hurt the MAC to try the same approach.
Over on the Kent board, someone suggested a MAC-MVC challenge similar to the ACC-Big Ten. I think that this in coordination with or instead of the Bracket Buster would help both conferences out.