(10-20-2022 02:42 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(10-20-2022 01:05 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  I think many coaches setup their respective basketball schedule with the intent of putting their team in the best position to be mentally ready for postseason play. There is probably a fear that late season non-conference games against opponents of not their own choosing, could undo all the confidence they instilled in their respective teams.

How does it really change things though? NMSU forgoes games against University of the Southwest and Alcorn State, and instead plays Montana and Drake. What does NMSU gain for beating SW and Alcorn? Nothing. If they lost to Montana and Drake, is your season any different because you lost those games instead of beating 2 cream puffs? Nope.

Only difference is Jans (I know he’s not your coach) has 2 more wins and 2 less losses. That’s it.

I'm not talking about who they play but more about the timing of the games; when they are played. If a coach has his team rolling through their conference late in the season, OOC games thrown into the mix against unfamiliar opponents (possibly on the road) could unravel a team's momentum leading into their conference tournament. Keep in mind, these games would be not announced until a few weeks before they are scheduled to be played. Unlike conference games against familiar opponents, coaches would have a limited time to scout out these OOC opponents. Momentum and confidence play a big part in leading a team to a conference championship. Some coaches don't want that type of obstacle late in a season. Coaches like to pick the opponent and when they are played.

If the NCAA ever grew a pair of Onions... The first mandate would be... No non-D1 opponents on your schedule for OLYMPIC Sports ONLY! The second mandate would be any school scheduling a non-D1 would pay a fine of 100K. Last mandate let chaos scheduling ensue.

(10-20-2022 11:31 PM)WACfan86 Wrote:  If the NCAA ever grew a pair of Onions... The first mandate would be... No non-D1 opponents on your schedule for OLYMPIC Sports ONLY! The second mandate would be any school scheduling a non-D1 would pay a fine of 100K. Last mandate let chaos scheduling ensue.

Maybe as a start toward that, a rule that opponents have to have a total enrollment of at least 100 students, and their team has to have a website showing a current roster and schedule.

Some of our opponents during the Covid year didn't even meet those criteria. It literally would have been more serious to schedule a 5A high school.

This commissioner seems intent to use us to make his mark tinkering around with ideas that other leagues want tested out on someone else before they adopt them. First the tourney, now scheduling. Seems like he wants to use our conference as his toys so he can move on to a bigger job based on how he “revolutionized” something that was fine. I’m sure he’s already got “bold” and “innovative” added to his resume.

(10-21-2022 01:00 PM)Todor Wrote:  This commissioner seems intent to use us to make his mark tinkering around with ideas that other leagues want tested out on someone else before they adopt them. First the tourney, now scheduling. Seems like he wants to use our conference as his toys so he can move on to a bigger job based on how he “revolutionized” something that was fine. I’m sure he’s already got “bold” and “innovative” added to his resume.

He has no street cred. Why should other leagues listen to a brand new commissioner that hasn't been on the job for even a year? He was hired to make decisions for the WAC, not all of the NCAA.

He reminds me of Weir. Full of ideas that could be brilliant, but becomes impatient when others do not immediately warm up to the ideas. Wonder if he'll burn out in 5 years?

In order to address strength of schedule concerns, the NCAA just needs to implement a scheduling criteria that is needed to be NCAA tournament eligible. Setting a minimum number of road games required in a season and reducing the number of meaningless lower division patsies allowed on a schedule. of course, this will never happen.

(10-21-2022 04:05 PM)NMSUPistolPete Wrote:  In order to address strength of schedule concerns, the NCAA just needs to implement a scheduling criteria that is needed to be NCAA tournament eligible. Setting a minimum number of road games required in a season and reducing the number of meaningless lower division patsies allowed on a schedule. of course, this will never happen.

Cause it makes too much sense.

(10-21-2022 03:57 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(10-21-2022 01:00 PM)Todor Wrote:  This commissioner seems intent to use us to make his mark tinkering around with ideas that other leagues want tested out on someone else before they adopt them. First the tourney, now scheduling. Seems like he wants to use our conference as his toys so he can move on to a bigger job based on how he “revolutionized” something that was fine. I’m sure he’s already got “bold” and “innovative” added to his resume.

He has no street cred. Why should other leagues listen to a brand new commissioner that hasn't been on the job for even a year? He was hired to make decisions for the WAC, not all of the NCAA.

He reminds me of Weir. Full of ideas that could be brilliant, but becomes impatient when others do not immediately warm up to the ideas. Wonder if he'll burn out in 5 years?

They wouldn’t. But I’m not sure he knows that. At any rate, conference commissioner jobs come up so infrequently that he’s more likely to move on to some other administrative position than another commissionership. But I don’t predict him to leave anytime soon. I’m just wondering what’s the rush to change some of these standard things in the very first year. To me, his is not a job where you shake things up much.

I am fine with scheduling 1 D2 team a year. 2 in certain circumstances. If a team on your schedule cancels because of “COVID” and the game is unable to be re-scheduled, replacing them with a D2 is fine. Schools like Tarleton and Dixie, going through transition, is fine with scheduling more than 2 D2 teams. Other than that, D1 schools shouldn’t be playing 4 D2 a season.

(10-21-2022 10:10 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  I am fine with scheduling 1 D2 team a year. 2 in certain circumstances. If a team on your schedule cancels because of “COVID” and the game is unable to be re-scheduled, replacing them with a D2 is fine. Schools like Tarleton and Dixie, going through transition, is fine with scheduling more than 2 D2 teams. Other than that, D1 schools shouldn’t be playing 4 D2 a season.

What about sub D2 schools. Or sub NAIA schools?

(10-21-2022 10:41 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(10-21-2022 10:10 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  I am fine with scheduling 1 D2 team a year. 2 in certain circumstances. If a team on your schedule cancels because of “COVID” and the game is unable to be re-scheduled, replacing them with a D2 is fine. Schools like Tarleton and Dixie, going through transition, is fine with scheduling more than 2 D2 teams. Other than that, D1 schools shouldn’t be playing 4 D2 a season.

What about sub D2 schools. Or sub NAIA schools?

Depends on your level and what you think your team is going to be. NMSU for instance, shouldn’t be scheduling those teams. A horrible team like UIW or Lamar, more acceptable.

I think it was Jans who said there is much braggadocio amongst coaches saying "we will play anyone, anywhere" but behind closed doors, that was not the case. That's what I see with this proposal. Coaches all over the country, particularly mid-majors, say over and over that they can't schedule games. Yet they don't want to play one another. They want the right team, at the right time, at the right place. This proposal doesn't give them that.

I still stand by my comments that this was a great proposal with little to no downside. Matching up top non-P6 teams is always a good thing.