I just discovered that Gonzaga finished 16-0 in a 10 team conference. A balanced schedule could have been played with 18 games. I understand playing 16 rather than 18 if there are more than 10 teams so you're not going to play every opponent twice either way, but every conference with 10 or fewer teams should make you play every opponent twice.
(03-04-2019 03:19 PM)EvanJ Wrote: [ -> ]I just discovered that Gonzaga finished 16-0 in a 10 team conference. A balanced schedule could have been played with 18 games. I understand playing 16 rather than 18 if there are more than 10 teams so you're not going to play every opponent twice either way, but every conference with 10 or fewer teams should make you play every opponent twice.
It was a concession to Gonzaga after the Mountain West flirtation — fewer conference games mean more big-time OOC games. It's also why the Zags and St. Mary's got the double-bye to the WCC semis. The other schools probably realize that without Gonzaga, the conference is no better than the Big West or WAC, and play along.
It’s a terrific conference. Not from a competitive standpoint but culturally, geographically, academically, and relationally it is a cohesive group. Gonzaga happens to love being in the conference. I don’t anticipate us (Gonzaga) leaving. In fact, I could see expansion with Seattle and Denver down the road. Even Grand Canyon seems like it could be an option at some point.
The WCC will never be a world beater. Gonzaga cannot sustain its success and brand recognition. It’s not Florida or Texas or Ohio St. The school needs to decide where it wants to be if and when it’s success fades which is with its overall peers. People forget that San Francisco, a WCC school, has two men’s basketball national titles under its belt. But the program is not anywhere near that level and probably never will be again.
FYI BYU got the 2 seed, not St. Mary's who will be the 3 seed, USF is the 4 seed.
and actually Gonzaga and BYU get three rounds of byes, and wont play until next Monday. USF and St. Mary's get two rounds of byes and play on Saturday. Also LMU (5) and SCU (6) get one round of bye and play on Friday. The bottom 4 (USD, Pepperdine, UOP, Portland) "play-in" on Thursday's first round. It's a ladder bracket, two games a night.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_West_...Tournament
I don't know how ridiculous that is. They maximize their TV slots in west coast prime time, and they get their semi-final and Championship game son Monday and Tuesday nights when there is less TV competition.
This is a one bid conference, and Gonzaga wanted to reduce the number of low RPI schools it would have to play. Setting the conference to 16 games (similar concession thee MWC made to Fisher's SDSU) and not playing in the tournament until the semi-finals reduces by 3 the number of low RPI teams Gonzaga has to face. They can and do replace those with high RPI non conference opponents. Getting a 1 or 2 seed in the NCAA is the objective here for Gonzaga.
(03-04-2019 04:15 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: [ -> ]This is a one bid conference, and Gonzaga wanted to reduce the number of low RPI schools it would have to play. Setting the conference to 16 games (similar concession thee MWC made to Fisher's SDSU) and not playing in the tournament until the semi-finals reduces by 3 the number of low RPI teams Gonzaga has to face. They can and do replace those with high RPI non conference opponents. Getting a 1 or 2 seed in the NCAA is the objective here for Gonzaga.
Those are 2 very different concessions. Gonzaga received concessions to stay in the WCC, whatever you’re referring to with Fisher and SDSU was to make the league better overall. SDSU didn’t have a better conference waiting for them like Gonzaga did. SDSU was going nowhere.
(03-04-2019 03:19 PM)EvanJ Wrote: [ -> ]I just discovered that Gonzaga finished 16-0 in a 10 team conference. A balanced schedule could have been played with 18 games. I understand playing 16 rather than 18 if there are more than 10 teams so you're not going to play every opponent twice either way, but every conference with 10 or fewer teams should make you play every opponent twice.
I always question how a school no one (hyperbole) wants to go to has suddenly transformed into this men's and women's basketball powerhouse.
Fisher concession was his demand. Most of the rest of the league wanted 20 game round robin. But Fisher was the star. MWC made football concessions to Ksutra and Petersen when they were at Boise State to keep them happy. This was part of pulling BSU and SDSU back in from the Big East.
(03-04-2019 05:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: [ -> ]Fisher concession was his demand. Most of the rest of the league wanted 20 game round robin. But Fisher was the star. MWC made football concessions to Ksutra and Petersen when they were at Boise State to keep them happy. This was part of pulling BSU and SDSU back in from the Big East.
So without this concession, San Diego St would have “remained” in the Big West for basketball and some other league for football? That’s not plausible. SDSU wasn’t going anywhere without Big East football.
Looked at their schedule looks like only true non conference road games were Creighton and UNC .
Extra home games and tournaments along with 16 conference games.
(03-04-2019 06:25 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote: [ -> ] (03-04-2019 05:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: [ -> ]Fisher concession was his demand. Most of the rest of the league wanted 20 game round robin. But Fisher was the star. MWC made football concessions to Ksutra and Petersen when they were at Boise State to keep them happy. This was part of pulling BSU and SDSU back in from the Big East.
So without this concession, San Diego St would have “remained” in the Big West for basketball and some other league for football? That’s not plausible. SDSU wasn’t going anywhere without Big East football.
SDSU had some negotiating leverage. After all they could have stayed in the Big East. Actually it cost them $5 million to leave the Big East, so they could have used that as a reason to stay.
The MWC wanted SDSU back at least as much as SDSU wanted to be back.
I don't know if what Stugray2 is saying is true, but it's certainly plausible.
(03-05-2019 08:14 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ] (03-04-2019 06:25 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote: [ -> ] (03-04-2019 05:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: [ -> ]Fisher concession was his demand. Most of the rest of the league wanted 20 game round robin. But Fisher was the star. MWC made football concessions to Ksutra and Petersen when they were at Boise State to keep them happy. This was part of pulling BSU and SDSU back in from the Big East.
So without this concession, San Diego St would have “remained” in the Big West for basketball and some other league for football? That’s not plausible. SDSU wasn’t going anywhere without Big East football.
SDSU had some negotiating leverage. After all they could have stayed in the Big East. Actually it cost them $5 million to leave the Big East, so they could have used that as a reason to stay.
The MWC wanted SDSU back at least as much as SDSU wanted to be back.
I don't know if what Stugray2 is saying is true, but it's certainly plausible.
I'm pretty sure the Aresco LEague waived the SDSU exit fee--with Boise gone, both sides agreed that the project was dead (I was about the only one pushing SDSU "staying" in the Aresco League to separate their branding from Fresno State and SJSU)
(03-05-2019 09:20 AM)johnbragg Wrote: [ -> ] (03-05-2019 08:14 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ] (03-04-2019 06:25 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote: [ -> ] (03-04-2019 05:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: [ -> ]Fisher concession was his demand. Most of the rest of the league wanted 20 game round robin. But Fisher was the star. MWC made football concessions to Ksutra and Petersen when they were at Boise State to keep them happy. This was part of pulling BSU and SDSU back in from the Big East.
So without this concession, San Diego St would have “remained” in the Big West for basketball and some other league for football? That’s not plausible. SDSU wasn’t going anywhere without Big East football.
SDSU had some negotiating leverage. After all they could have stayed in the Big East. Actually it cost them $5 million to leave the Big East, so they could have used that as a reason to stay.
The MWC wanted SDSU back at least as much as SDSU wanted to be back.
I don't know if what Stugray2 is saying is true, but it's certainly plausible.
I'm pretty sure the Aresco LEague waived the SDSU exit fee--with Boise gone, both sides agreed that the project was dead (I was about the only one pushing SDSU "staying" in the Aresco League to separate their branding from Fresno State and SJSU)
I didn't know that. I looked it up and you're right. SDSU had a clause that allowed them to leave the Big East without an exit fee if they were the only team West of the Rocky Mountains. However, SDSU owed a $1.5 million exit fee to the Big West.
Exactly. San Diego St had nowhere to go once Boise left. The MWC did not make any concessions to prevent SDSU from staying in the Big West and who knows for their football program. They might have suggested some things, but they weren’t leaving if they didn’t get their way. Totally opposite of the Gonzaga-MWC situation, like I said
(03-04-2019 04:15 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: [ -> ]FYI BYU got the 2 seed, not St. Mary's who will be the 3 seed, USF is the 4 seed.
and actually Gonzaga and BYU get three rounds of byes, and wont play until next Monday. USF and St. Mary's get two rounds of byes and play on Saturday. Also LMU (5) and SCU (6) get one round of bye and play on Friday. The bottom 4 (USD, Pepperdine, UOP, Portland) "play-in" on Thursday's first round. It's a ladder bracket, two games a night.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_West_...Tournament
I don't know how ridiculous that is. They maximize their TV slots in west coast prime time, and they get their semi-final and Championship game son Monday and Tuesday nights when there is less TV competition.
This is a one bid conference, and Gonzaga wanted to reduce the number of low RPI schools it would have to play. Setting the conference to 16 games (similar concession thee MWC made to Fisher's SDSU) and not playing in the tournament until the semi-finals reduces by 3 the number of low RPI teams Gonzaga has to face. They can and do replace those with high RPI non conference opponents. Getting a 1 or 2 seed in the NCAA is the objective here for Gonzaga.
Saint Mary's is the #2 seed. They tied with BYU for second in the conference standings, but have the edge in the third tie-breaker because they split the season series with #4 San Francisco - whereas BYU lost both games v. USF.
FWIW, the 16-game WCC schedule also benefited BYU. BYU had 2 fewer low-RPI games as well and for the first time did not have a WCC loss against a WCC team with a 150+ RPI; however, BYU lost to both Weber State and Illinois State in December, so BYU's NCAA tournament hopes were pretty slim even before conference play started.
I'm not sure I understand why anybody cares about how the WCC schedules. Nobody complains when other schools aspiring to high NCAAT seeds arrange their schedules to their advantage. If this means we get to see more regular season games against the likes of Duke, UNC and Tennessee (all of which the Zags played this year) the sport is better for it IMO.
Conference USA uses a similar tactic, to get their higher teams to play each other more and avoid extra games against teams that will drag down their RPI or NET ratings.
Conferences should make rules for teams, not the other way around. They still play an 18 game balanced schedule for Women's Basketball. When a conference has a sport with the same amount of teams in both genders, the schedule frequency should be the same. Would Gonzaga leave and would any conference want them? Would the Pac-12 (2 private schools neither of which is Christian) or Mountain West (entirely public) want a Christian school? Would either of them want a school that doesn't play Football? Pac-13 adds a syllable to the name.
What the WCC and Conference USA do are different. I don't know if the two teams Gonzaga faced once were chosen as teams expected to be bad, but quality can't always be predicted. I also don't know if it's a rotation or if the schools each team plays once will be the same every season. If the opponent frequency is the same every season, two schools would get to host Gonzaga half as much as the other seven. With nine opponents, a rotation would need nine seasons to play every opponent the same amount of times, which would be 16. Conference USA having near-equal teams play each other a second time is done after it is known how good the teams are. It's not done to favor any specific school(s). If I had to guess, I would think Conference USA schools would be happier with what Conference USA does than WCC teams other than Gonzaga would be happy with what the WCC does.
18 conference games is the most common amount. Making Gonzaga play 18 conference games rather than 16 wouldn't be an unfair restriction on how many out of conference games they play.
(03-14-2019 02:57 PM)EvanJ Wrote: [ -> ]Conferences should make rules for teams, not the other way around. They still play an 18 game balanced schedule for Women's Basketball. When a conference has a sport with the same amount of teams in both genders, the schedule frequency should be the same. Would Gonzaga leave and would any conference want them? Would the Pac-12 (2 private schools neither of which is Christian) or Mountain West (entirely public) want a Christian school?
Last year, the Mountain West made a play for Gonzaga.
Gonzaga is not joining Mountain WEst next year, March 2018
(03-14-2019 03:16 PM)johnbragg Wrote: [ -> ]What the WCC and Conference USA do are different. I don't know if the two teams Gonzaga faced once were chosen as teams expected to be bad, but quality can't always be predicted. I also don't know if it's a rotation or if the schools each team plays once will be the same every season. If the opponent frequency is the same every season, two schools would get to host Gonzaga half as much as the other seven. With nine opponents, a rotation would need nine seasons to play every opponent the same amount of times, which would be 16. Conference USA having near-equal teams play each other a second time is done after it is known how good the teams are. It's not done to favor any specific school(s). If I had to guess, I would think Conference USA schools would be happier with what Conference USA does than WCC teams other than Gonzaga would be happy with what the WCC does.
The criteria to determine the 16-game WCC schedule include multi-year RPI, last year's WCC tournament seeding, and a spring survey of the conference's coaches. My hunch is they will eventually replace the multi-year RPI with multi-year NET rankings. This is why Gonzaga only played Portland and Pepperdine once during the regular season - they were the #9 and #10 teams last year (they finished #8 and #10 this year).
The changes also include a requirement that each team play in at least one multiteam event, more home games than road games, no more than 2 non-Div 1 opponents, and teams must receive conference approval for any guarantee "pay day" games.
The new 16-team WCC schedule format allows teams to schedule as they see fit to improve their win-loss records, which helps the entire conference. Gonzaga, BYU and St. Mary's had more quality OOC games in December. Could be coincidence, but this is the first time that the WCC had 5 teams ranked in the top-100 and 6 teams ranked in the top-150.
(03-14-2019 03:16 PM)johnbragg Wrote: [ -> ]18 conference games is the most common amount. Making Gonzaga play 18 conference games rather than 16 wouldn't be an unfair restriction on how many out of conference games they play.
WCC conference play used to start in late December, which limited some OOC opportunities. Instead, this year, Gonzaga was able to play Texas A&M, Illinois, Arizona, Duke, Washington, Tennessee, North Carolina in December. BYU had the opportunity to play Mississippi St., Nevada, Houston, Utah, Utah St., SDSU, and UNLV. Even St. Mary's umped up its OOC schedule and actually left the state of California in OOC play, with Mississippi St., Cal, LSU, New Mexico, NMSU, Utah St., and Western Kentucky.
(03-04-2019 03:19 PM)EvanJ Wrote: [ -> ]I just discovered that Gonzaga finished 16-0 in a 10 team conference. A balanced schedule could have been played with 18 games. I understand playing 16 rather than 18 if there are more than 10 teams so you're not going to play every opponent twice either way, but every conference with 10 or fewer teams should make you play every opponent twice.
BUMP to say that it wouldn't be a perfect solution to the inherent inequity of sub-double round robin scheduling (far from it) but I believe things would be somewhat
more fair by simply halving the worth of some games relative to others.
Let each game between teams who play each other twice be worth one half point to the victor in the standings while all other games are worth one point to the victor.
