CSNbbs

Not sure how much it helps the SBC with its conference strength. The MAC is usually ranked below the Sun Belt in RPI.
But then again, when was the last time the CAA did anything like this?
Overall I would say it's a good thing.

Not quite following how this would work schedule wise.

It sounds like there is a home and away game for each team involved. Does this replace other SBC conference games or OOC games? Also a February game date?

I think historically they are pretty similar, as both are one-bid leagues. It’s a nice attempt at locking in a partnership for OOC game.

At first I was thinking Football games because of MACtion LOL. For basketball this might be interesting depending on the opponent drawn.

MAC and Sun Belt as someone noted above have been pretty similar leagues over the last number of years, though MAC has had a few good overall seasons in last 10. I like this overall as it gives each team 2 games against similar talent and hopefully will ensure that teams are scheduling less MEAC, SWAC, and non D-1 games.

With our scheduling woes, I'll take it.

It covers 2 OOC games out of 13 allowed annually so now coaches only need to schedule 11.

I like it as a first step to get programs out of scheduling the ridiculous DIII games. Will it be luck of the draw if you get solid D-1 opponents or if you get bottom feeders from the MAC? The range of the top to bottom is similar in the MAC as it is in the Sun Belt. For every solid Kent St game you could get a Western Michigan clunker.

It will be interesting how they pair them up. Hopefully it isn’t random. They could project team strength each year and try to get the #1’s to play, the #2’s… the #12’s to play. That makes the most sense to me for competition and elevating the NET rating for the best teams. Hopefully, travel cost is not a barrier to getting the best matchups.

(11-07-2022 10:30 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote: [ -> ]It will be interesting how they pair them up. Hopefully it isn’t random. They could project team strength each year and try to get the #1’s to play, the #2’s… the #12’s to play. That makes the most sense to me for competition and elevating the NET rating for the best teams. Hopefully, travel cost is not a barrier to getting the best matchups.

That’s like the old Bracketbuster format. It was good to pair up similarly rating programs leading to good games with a return game on the schedule the following season.

(11-07-2022 11:33 AM)Polish Hammer Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-07-2022 10:30 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote: [ -> ]It will be interesting how they pair them up. Hopefully it isn’t random. They could project team strength each year and try to get the #1’s to play, the #2’s… the #12’s to play. That makes the most sense to me for competition and elevating the NET rating for the best teams. Hopefully, travel cost is not a barrier to getting the best matchups.

That’s like the old Bracketbuster format. It was good to pair up similarly rating programs leading to good games with a return game on the schedule the following season.

My guess is that the game early in the season will be set and rotate each year and be less about matchups and the February game will be slotted based on performance and announced during the season. Should work as all games are same day and the home teams will know that prior but will just not know the opponent until closer to game.

(11-07-2022 10:16 AM)olddawg Wrote: [ -> ]With our scheduling woes, I'll take it.

this

If they do try to match top teams with top teams, sure would be nice to finish top of the heap this year in the Sun Belt. Give next years schedule a nice boost.

This sounds interesting they should be doing this on the WBB side also.

Brian

Who are the 2 SunBelt teams that will be left out? Places 13 and 14 this year?

(11-07-2022 10:30 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote: [ -> ]It covers 2 OOC games out of 13 allowed annually so now coaches only need to schedule 11.

I like it as a first step to get programs out of scheduling the ridiculous DIII games. Will it be luck of the draw if you get solid D-1 opponents or if you get bottom feeders from the MAC? The range of the top to bottom is similar in the MAC as it is in the Sun Belt. For every solid Kent St game you could get a Western Michigan clunker.

It will be interesting how they pair them up. Hopefully it isn’t random. They could project team strength each year and try to get the #1’s to play, the #2’s… the #12’s to play. That makes the most sense to me for competition and elevating the NET rating for the best teams. Hopefully, travel cost is not a barrier to getting the best matchups.

Leagues still finalizing how it works, but the 2 teams that sit out for the SBC each year will rotate. As you said, the idea is to find a way for teams to fill 2 of their 13 OOC slots each season, crucially, a D1 home game for every team. The absurd number of Non D1 games is because teams need to hit home game quotas, and can't find partners

Coach By said he was 100% on board with this and hinted that he thinks it may be the first of a few of these agreements that could be coming. He specifically mentioned CUSA and AAC. Would be huge if Keith Gill could get it done. Scheduling basketball is a nightmare right now and to lock down some guaranteed games will free up more time for coaches to do their primary job, coach.

What makes scheduling any harder now than say 10 years ago?

P7 schools have always played most of their OOC games at home and are willing to pay $75k to $100k guarantees to whatever school is willing to visit.

(11-07-2022 09:07 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote: [ -> ]What makes scheduling any harder now than say 10 years ago?

P7 schools have always played most of their OOC games at home and are willing to pay $75k to $100k guarantees to whatever school is willing to visit.

I would imagine the "wink wink" arrangements like the A-10 has, where they won't schedule certain conferences due to potential strength of schedule hit. Wouldn't be surprised if other upper end, mid major conferences are doing the same- The WCC, MTN West too. The Cartel has stacked the deck for NCAA Tournament bids and conferences are fighting for the crumbs.

(11-07-2022 09:22 PM)olddawg Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-07-2022 09:07 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote: [ -> ]What makes scheduling any harder now than say 10 years ago?

P7 schools have always played most of their OOC games at home and are willing to pay $75k to $100k guarantees to whatever school is willing to visit.

I would imagine the "wink wink" arrangements like the A-10 has where they won't schedule certain conferences due to potential strength of schedule hit. Wouldn't be surprised if other upper end, mid major conferences are doing the same- The WCC, MTN West too. The Cartel has stacked the deck for NCAA Tournament bids and conferences are fighting for the crumbs.

It certainly seems that way. Haven't run the numbers but feels like a lot fewer at large going to anyone outside the power confs now.

NET seems to be doing exactly what it was intended to do. RPI was a much fairer metric to use. I think the switch to NET by itself changed scheduling a ton.

After the P7 very few schools, if any, have the money to play all buy games at home. We are talking about schools that draw 5,000 fans per game if they have a good year. Take away the top 100 programs in the P7 and there are still 250 D-1 teams looking to play series.
You would think with 10 years of head coaching experience that Byington would have built some relationships to schedule decent mid majors both home and away.

I wonder if Bourne is limiting him on the OOC travel budget since Sun Belt conference games will involve more travel costs. That would certainly be penny wise and pound foolish.

Right now it is discouraging for JMU to have a $100 million Taj Mahal arena and not be playing a single home game that is enticing to the fanbase. Talk about wasting a huge asset.