(06-05-2018 08:22 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(06-05-2018 07:45 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  This makes absolutely no sense. Why would these be the two leagues with whom C-USA would want to schedule an agreement? C-USA has proven to have a decent shot of obtaining an at large. Sun Belt has a remote shot (i.e. has had one at large bid in the last 10 years and that was MT now in C-USA). Meanwhile, the Horizon has hasn't had one since Butler left years ago and hasn't really come close.

So, what is the point? Neither of these two leagues are going to help the one conference (C-USA) with a decent chance of getting an at large. The is like rearranging the chairs of the Titanic.

It helps if these games (I'm going to presume one against the Sun Belt and one against the Horizon for a CUSA team) replace ones against low-major teams with sub-150 or 200 RPIs. So let's say WKU, instead of playing Kentucky Wesleyan and Indiana State last season, get UTA and Northern Kentucky instead. Now that isn't going to be enough to get them an at-large on its own, but it definitely helps their SOS and RPI. And combined with the late-season pods, it potentially cuts four, five poor-RPI games from the schedule.

If a CUSA school is scheduling well enough on its own, can it opt out? Because with 14 CUSA schools vs. 10 Sun Belt and 10 Horizon, that's four CUSA teams with no date to the dance. Wonder if schools will have the ability to not participate, or would CUSA just not include its bottom four teams.

Sun Belt has 12 basketball schools, not 10.

With 36 teams that could mean 36 games with 1 home and 1 road for each team.
16 C-USA vs SBC
12 C-USA vs Horizon
8 SBC vs Horizon

If a Horizon team match-up replaces Ave Maria and the Idaho School for the Blind that FAU had on the schedule in 2017/2018, it would be beneficial.

(06-06-2018 12:33 AM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(06-05-2018 08:22 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(06-05-2018 07:45 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  This makes absolutely no sense. Why would these be the two leagues with whom C-USA would want to schedule an agreement? C-USA has proven to have a decent shot of obtaining an at large. Sun Belt has a remote shot (i.e. has had one at large bid in the last 10 years and that was MT now in C-USA). Meanwhile, the Horizon has hasn't had one since Butler left years ago and hasn't really come close.

So, what is the point? Neither of these two leagues are going to help the one conference (C-USA) with a decent chance of getting an at large. The is like rearranging the chairs of the Titanic.

It helps if these games (I'm going to presume one against the Sun Belt and one against the Horizon for a CUSA team) replace ones against low-major teams with sub-150 or 200 RPIs. So let's say WKU, instead of playing Kentucky Wesleyan and Indiana State last season, get UTA and Northern Kentucky instead. Now that isn't going to be enough to get them an at-large on its own, but it definitely helps their SOS and RPI. And combined with the late-season pods, it potentially cuts four, five poor-RPI games from the schedule.

If a CUSA school is scheduling well enough on its own, can it opt out? Because with 14 CUSA schools vs. 10 Sun Belt and 10 Horizon, that's four CUSA teams with no date to the dance. Wonder if schools will have the ability to not participate, or would CUSA just not include its bottom four teams.

Sun Belt has 12 basketball schools, not 10.

With 36 teams that could mean 36 games with 1 home and 1 road for each team.
16 C-USA vs SBC
12 C-USA vs Horizon
8 SBC vs Horizon

Oh right, thinking football where they have 10 now. But with more CUSA teams than Sun Belt or Horizon, wouldn't that mean each team couldn't have one game against both conferences? Like if each CUSA team gets a Horizon game, that would mean four Horizon teams would have to play twice against CUSA, which means those four wouldn't get a Sun Belt opponent (unless some teams end up playing three games in the scheduling alliance).

(06-06-2018 01:37 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(06-06-2018 12:33 AM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(06-05-2018 08:22 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(06-05-2018 07:45 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  This makes absolutely no sense. Why would these be the two leagues with whom C-USA would want to schedule an agreement? C-USA has proven to have a decent shot of obtaining an at large. Sun Belt has a remote shot (i.e. has had one at large bid in the last 10 years and that was MT now in C-USA). Meanwhile, the Horizon has hasn't had one since Butler left years ago and hasn't really come close.

So, what is the point? Neither of these two leagues are going to help the one conference (C-USA) with a decent chance of getting an at large. The is like rearranging the chairs of the Titanic.

It helps if these games (I'm going to presume one against the Sun Belt and one against the Horizon for a CUSA team) replace ones against low-major teams with sub-150 or 200 RPIs. So let's say WKU, instead of playing Kentucky Wesleyan and Indiana State last season, get UTA and Northern Kentucky instead. Now that isn't going to be enough to get them an at-large on its own, but it definitely helps their SOS and RPI. And combined with the late-season pods, it potentially cuts four, five poor-RPI games from the schedule.

If a CUSA school is scheduling well enough on its own, can it opt out? Because with 14 CUSA schools vs. 10 Sun Belt and 10 Horizon, that's four CUSA teams with no date to the dance. Wonder if schools will have the ability to not participate, or would CUSA just not include its bottom four teams.

Sun Belt has 12 basketball schools, not 10.

With 36 teams that could mean 36 games with 1 home and 1 road for each team.
16 C-USA vs SBC
12 C-USA vs Horizon
8 SBC vs Horizon

Oh right, thinking football where they have 10 now. But with more CUSA teams than Sun Belt or Horizon, wouldn't that mean each team couldn't have one game against both conferences? Like if each CUSA team gets a Horizon game, that would mean four Horizon teams would have to play twice against CUSA, which means those four wouldn't get a Sun Belt opponent (unless some teams end up playing three games in the scheduling alliance).

From what I understand, he's setting it up where all 14 will be involved, its just that you may have a situation where one team plays two Sun Belt or Two Horizon.

I know his goal is to bring enough extra teams in before them, that it's not an issue.

(06-06-2018 02:54 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(06-06-2018 01:37 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(06-06-2018 12:33 AM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(06-05-2018 08:22 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(06-05-2018 07:45 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  This makes absolutely no sense. Why would these be the two leagues with whom C-USA would want to schedule an agreement? C-USA has proven to have a decent shot of obtaining an at large. Sun Belt has a remote shot (i.e. has had one at large bid in the last 10 years and that was MT now in C-USA). Meanwhile, the Horizon has hasn't had one since Butler left years ago and hasn't really come close.

So, what is the point? Neither of these two leagues are going to help the one conference (C-USA) with a decent chance of getting an at large. The is like rearranging the chairs of the Titanic.

It helps if these games (I'm going to presume one against the Sun Belt and one against the Horizon for a CUSA team) replace ones against low-major teams with sub-150 or 200 RPIs. So let's say WKU, instead of playing Kentucky Wesleyan and Indiana State last season, get UTA and Northern Kentucky instead. Now that isn't going to be enough to get them an at-large on its own, but it definitely helps their SOS and RPI. And combined with the late-season pods, it potentially cuts four, five poor-RPI games from the schedule.

If a CUSA school is scheduling well enough on its own, can it opt out? Because with 14 CUSA schools vs. 10 Sun Belt and 10 Horizon, that's four CUSA teams with no date to the dance. Wonder if schools will have the ability to not participate, or would CUSA just not include its bottom four teams.

Sun Belt has 12 basketball schools, not 10.

With 36 teams that could mean 36 games with 1 home and 1 road for each team.
16 C-USA vs SBC
12 C-USA vs Horizon
8 SBC vs Horizon

Oh right, thinking football where they have 10 now. But with more CUSA teams than Sun Belt or Horizon, wouldn't that mean each team couldn't have one game against both conferences? Like if each CUSA team gets a Horizon game, that would mean four Horizon teams would have to play twice against CUSA, which means those four wouldn't get a Sun Belt opponent (unless some teams end up playing three games in the scheduling alliance).

From what I understand, he's setting it up where all 14 will be involved, its just that you may have a situation where one team plays two Sun Belt or Two Horizon.

I know his goal is to bring enough extra teams in before them, that it's not an issue.

With my setup including all teams in all three conferences, two C-USA teams would play two Sun Belt teams and the other 12 C-USA teams would play one game vs the Sun Belt and one vs the Horizon.

In that scheduling scheme, four Sun Belt teams would play two games against C-USA and the other eight would play one C-USA game and one Horizon game. Two Horizon teams would play two C-USA games and the other eight would play one C-USA game and one Sun Belt game.

Just the fact that I haven't heard any of the power (hoops) conferences make a peep about this tells me this might just be a fantastic idea.

Being from Indy, it would be cool to see my Tops play IUPUI

(06-10-2018 08:24 AM)BKTopper Wrote:  Being from Indy, it would be cool to see my Tops play IUPUI

clt says you can celebrate at circle center.

I have no desire to play any horizon schools, and 3/4 of sunbelt schools.

(06-10-2018 06:54 PM)Jack Bauer Wrote:  I have no desire to play any horizon schools, and 3/4 of sunbelt schools.

I agree. This is a good idea but we are much better than the 2 leagues we are doing this with. That part kind of stinks.

I hate all of this crap.

I dont want to play just non power conferences pre-season
i went to the Bahamas this past year and saw WKU play Villianova close and beat Purdue and SMU,,,

What we should be lobbing for is every regular season champ makes in the tourney,
Then the Conference Tourney does not even include the conference champ. The winner of the tourney goes as well,

How about the NCAA scheduling 2 home and 2 away games for each team to level the playing field.

Whats happening is so obvious. In football ...no chance for non power 5 to ever play in the 4 team playoff, most bowl games are being set up so a non power 5 rarely plays a power 5,

Basketball all the at large going to power fives,

This has all been a plan since Bosie State got too close years back and the Butlers and and VCU etc got too close a few years back.

the MVC used to get several teams in years back, in the 80s I remember the Sun Belt got 4 teams in.

This whole thing is totally bogus, .loyola of chicago and UCF proved it in basketball and football last year,,,,,,its all just a crock

We will play with anybody from CUSA, G5, P5, or wherever in basketball. GSU aint skeeeerred. Bring it.