Fixing NCAA OOC scheduling

[MillenniumBull]

The Lansing reporter who refused to rank teams until they played a true road game got me thinking (I fully realize this was a click bait operation, but did bring further to light the problem.)

let me know your thoughts

so preconference scheduling is basically 5-6 weeks.  Finals and schools running tri vs quads do make things a little problematic but not overwhelming.

1st, schools apply and set up invite, neutral tournaments.  NCAA funnels all of these into 2 predetermined weeks.  A school can only participate in one of the 2 leaving roughly 4 open weeks.

2nd, each school uses two weeks to fill out their own schedule.  They can buy all home games, gimmes, travel for their seniors on the road to get them the family game, anything they want. Schedule up/down, home/away, your choice.

3rd, now the NCAA has 2 weeks of games they decide.  Let’s say 5 games a year.  They will do their best to keep things as regional and local as possible.  Odd years, half of D1 gets 3 home 2 away, next year the other half gets the same.  Here is where things can be evened out.  From a UB playing SU for example.  SU knows the NCAA will probably force the matchup.  They can buy the game and insure it is at home during step 2, or can roll the dice and maybe wind up playing in Buffalo.  UB also assumes that the matchup will be chosen by the NCAA, they can either a) when SU calls ask for way more money, or b) roll the dice and hope the powers at be send SU here.  As far as paying for the NCAA scheduled games, the visiting teams send the bill to the host, no profit, just cost of travel. Hence why location will also be prioritized by the NCAA, UB will never be paying for a California school to fly here.

problems: obviously this gives the NCAA a bit of power in the SOS department, especially for MidMajors, there would need to be a prerelease of the schedule to give teams feeling robbed a quick appeal process before officially releasing the schedule to the public.  A panel made of ADs across the spectrum would need oversight, maybe entirely new panel each year.  Also the BIG10 and any other conference who plays 20 game conference schedules would have to bite into their freedom of scheduling quite a bit and I’m not sure what level of protest they would amass but we all know how much pull they have.  Anyway, thoughts?

[DooleyBull06]

A few things about the non conference schedule.  I'm not going to get into stuff I don't know about like how the NCAA operates or whatever.  But my observations are these...

1) UB should try to get into some of these non conference tournaments more often.  Tournaments that feature high majors not teams like Milwaukee.  I understand why we chose this year's tournament bc it would net us two home games.  But we need more exposure against high majors.  For example how awesome would it be to go to Maui and play 3 games against teams from the SEC, ACC and Big 10.

2) We should try to get involved in any tournament, invitational or classic that takes place in MSG and or Barlcays.  Lets get some roots established in the NYC Metro area.  That will help with with recruiting and revenue.

3) The MAC as a conference has to establish a conference versus conference annual match up.  Think ACC/Big 10 challenge.  Other conferences are following this model and I'm afraid the MAC will get left out if it doesn't act quick.

4) Along the lines of #3 MAC teams have to schedule better and take on challenges.  This will build the conference as a whole and potentially move it from a one bid league to a multi bid league.

5) Back to UB, we just have to face the reality that we are not going to get good P5 teams or to come to Alumni.  It just is what it is right now.  We are viewed as a dangerous team to those P5 schools.  No one wants to come here...that's a badge of honor.  It's a known fact that under Boeheim SU never travels for a true road game.  So getting them to come to Alumni won't happen.  Honestly if we beat them this year I can see Boeheim not wanting to play us as long as we are good.  But that doesn't mean we shouldn't back down from going on the road.  As we are doing this season, lets go to high majors and beat them.  Plus that helps the metrics.  And its all about the metrics. I like the idea of getting a home and home, not an in season home and home.  But we won't get a home and home with power schools.  We have to think ahead and get up and coming teams that might be good in the near future.  Example...schedule a home and home against a team that is view as being a year or two away from contending.  If that makes any sense.

6) We should keep our annual games against our Big 4 rivals.  That establishes rivalries and is good for the community and local recruiting.  Plus gives us alternating home games.  Shame on Niagara for not playing us this season.

Conclusion...of course I want SU to come to Alumni but the reality is they won't.  I love what Oats has done with the non conference the last two years but there's room for growth and more exposure.  And we may have to put the idea of a sold out Alumni for a battle of two top 25 teams for a little bit.  At least until we sustain this current level of success for a few more years. 

[dutchcountry7]

That is what the intention of the Quad system is to address.

 

You can get a quad 1 win by beating a top-75 team on the road, but you can only get a quad-1 win at home if they are a top-30 team.

Until the committee leaves out a team because of their lack of road game quality, this won't be addressed.

Remember when Syracuse got in to the Dance in 2016 and they had a 3-8 record in road games?

 

[dutchcountry7]

19 minutes ago, DooleyBull06 said:

1) UB should try to get into some of these non conference tournaments more often.  Tournaments that feature high majors not teams like Milwaukee.  I understand why we chose this year's tournament bc it would net us two home games.  But we need more exposure against high majors.  For example how awesome would it be to go to Maui and play 3 games against teams from the SEC, ACC and Big 10.

Easier said than done.  There aren't many options for the Bulls.  The best events are filled years in advance and the number of non-major slots are few and far between.  Everyone wants to go to Maui.  Everyone wants to go to Atlantis.  That is why the Bulls have played in first year events (Caymen and Belfast) or an event that was cancelled because they no longer can get teams and sponsors (Alaska).

19 minutes ago, DooleyBull06 said:

2) We should try to get involved in any tournament, invitational or classic that takes place in MSG and or Barlcays.  Lets get some roots established in the NYC Metro area.  That will help with with recruiting and revenue.

Again, easier said than done.  Everyone wants to play there.  It is the media center and a recruiting center.  MSG is the most booked arena in the world.  And the Barclays Center is becoming the same way.  Two years ago Minnesota, UMass, BYU, and Alabama played in the Barclays Classic.  The teams signed on for a four team, two game tournament.  Great, right?  Well, The Barclays Center needs to make room for other events, so the first day of the two day tournament was played at LUI-Brooklyn in their 1,800 seat gym.  They got the games they were contracted to get.

My point: It is really hard to get into these facilities for a game.  

19 minutes ago, DooleyBull06 said:

3) The MAC as a conference has to establish a conference versus conference annual match up.  Think ACC/Big 10 challenge.  Other conferences are following this model and I'm afraid the MAC will get left out if it doesn't act quick.

The two conferences that would be the best fit are the MAAC (which I don't think we want) and the Missouri Valley.  The Missouri Valley was just dropped from their challenge with the Mountain West and the Mountain West is starting one with the A10 so they may be open to it.  Plus they are close to each other so travel will be easy. 

19 minutes ago, DooleyBull06 said:

5)  Example...schedule a home and home against a team that is view as being a year or two away from contending.  If that makes any sense.

Easier said than done.  

31 minutes ago, DooleyBull06 said:

6) We should keep our annual games against our Big 4 rivals.  That establishes rivalries and is good for the community and local recruiting.  Plus gives us alternating home games.  Shame on Niagara for not playing us this season.

Yes!  Especially Bonas.  We need to keep Bonas.  That is a big game!  Niagara and Canisius help save us money.  Though I can understand Niagara not wanting to play the Bulls.  It makes more sense for them to go on the road for a paycheck against a big school and then bring in some weak school to home for a competitive game.  They already play Bonas every year so they have a big local game.  I am glad Reggie didn't drop the game too.  That would have been a big hit.  Having to fill two games would be really hard. 

[dutchcountry7]

Here are the quadrant (group) results for all the teams.

And the Team Sheets the committee uses.

 

[MKBullsfan]

Totally agree with the need to play in msg or barclay more often. It’s a disgrace how we havent been able to tap into this market. When i went to UB, it felt like half the school was from downstate nyc. So many alumni in the area. We can get into the 2k classic or preseason nit etc 

[dutchcountry7]

2 minutes ago, MKBullsfan said:

Totally agree with the need to play in msg or barclay more often. It’s a disgrace how we havent been able to tap into this market. When i went to UB, it felt like half the school was from downstate nyc. So many alumni in the area. We can get into the 2k classic or preseason nit etc 

Nassau Coliseum is more feasible. 

A few of the games that have been played there since the renovation are: Villanova vs Hofstra and Maryland vs Stony Brook. 

[MKBullsfan]

57 minutes ago, dutchcountry7 said:

Nassau Coliseum is more feasible. 

A few of the games that have been played there since the renovation are: Villanova vs Hofstra and Maryland vs Stony Brook. 

I hear that about Nassau but I rather play power 5 programs than Hofstra and Stony Brook. If people see us playing them they’ll think we are on their level. We should aim higher and play syracuse or uconn every year.

[UB92]

53 minutes ago, dutchcountry7 said:

Nassau Coliseum is more feasible. 

A few of the games that have been played there since the renovation are: Villanova vs Hofstra and Maryland vs Stony Brook. 

I am all for playing games in MSG,  Barclays and the Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum.  We have to keep trying and trying to tap into the NYC/metro market.  There is a lot of good that can happen if UB athletics can do that (even in a small way).

And...I don't want UB to play Stony Brook. I want them to play P5 or equivalent at one of those venues.

 But....gotta keep winning.  When you win, good things happen.  Big game on Saturday.

 

 

 

 

[dutchcountry7]

8 minutes ago, MKBullsfan said:

I hear that about Nassau but I rather play power 5 programs than Hofstra and Stony Brook. If people see us playing them they’ll think we are on their level. We should aim higher and play syracuse or uconn every year.

Why do you assume the game would be against those teams and not the likes of a Maryland or Nova?

it would be a team with a large nyc/Long island alumni base. 

[rma]

I feel like we played vs Manhattan a few years ago and nobody (including Manhattan fans) showed up.  Maybe I'm just making stuff up.

[MillenniumBull]

So no thoughts on the NCAA taking control of a third of the on conference scheduling. Got it.

[dutchcountry7]

5 minutes ago, MillenniumBull said:

So no thoughts on the NCAA taking control of a third of the on conference scheduling. Got it.

No.  Not worth discussing. 

[DooleyBull06]

43 minutes ago, MillenniumBull said:

So no thoughts on the NCAA taking control of a third of the on conference scheduling. Got it.

I don’t know how I feel about the NCAA taking control. Ultimately the selection committee holds the power. If come selection Sunday they penalize teams for not scheduleing tough games then teams will adapt. Take St. John’s for example. They are undefeated but they have beaten no one. Our resume is stronger than theirs. Therefore logically you would think we would get a higher seed. As we know things don’t always work out that way bc of money, bias or in some cases corruption. Which is why I tend to not want the ncaa to intervene as much. Let the big schools schedule cupcakes we will battle the big dogs and come March we will be battle tested.

[121Merrimac]

I think allowing the NCAA to control a small portion of the scheduling does have merit.  Continuous improvement requires occasional brainstorming sessions.  Dismissing it off the cuff is appalling, imo.

[BrooklynBull]

2 hours ago, rma said:

I feel like we played vs Manhattan a few years ago and nobody (including Manhattan fans) showed up.  Maybe I'm just making stuff up.

We played Manhattan seven and five years ago.. Seven years ago at home and five years ago in the Barclays as the return game for  the ESPN Bracketbuster.  That was part of a tripleheader at the Barclays.  That was up against the  Potato Bowl as predicted in May 2013, http://www.ubfan.com/board/index.php/topic,14167.msg161931.html#msg161931

[dutchcountry7]

10 hours ago, DooleyBull06 said:

I don’t know how I feel about the NCAA taking control. Ultimately the selection committee holds the power. If come selection Sunday they penalize teams for not scheduleing tough games then teams will adapt. Take St. John’s for example. They are undefeated but they have beaten no one. Our resume is stronger than theirs. Therefore logically you would think we would get a higher seed. As we know things don’t always work out that way bc of money, bias or in some cases corruption. Which is why I tend to not want the ncaa to intervene as much. Let the big schools schedule cupcakes we will battle the big dogs and come March we will be battle tested.

You act like the regular season is ending today.

We we are talking about one game at Marquette being huge to determine where the team is nationally.

St. John’s plays Marquette twice and all the other Big East powers. We will know where they stand at the end of the season. It doesn’t matter their OOC schedule. 

[dutchcountry7]

10 hours ago, 121Merrimac said:

I think allowing the NCAA to control a small portion of the scheduling does have merit.  Continuous improvement requires occasional brainstorming sessions.  Dismissing it off the cuff is appalling, imo.

You want to turn over control to the NCAA?  That’s insane. 

Buffalo would be harmed by such a move. Plus, it won’t happen. Who will vote to support it?  No school will vote for the proposal. 

[MillenniumBull]

2 hours ago, dutchcountry7 said:

You want to turn over control to the NCAA?  That’s insane. 

Buffalo would be harmed by such a move. Plus, it won’t happen. Who will vote to support it?  No school will vote for the proposal. 

I would want the NCAA to identify preseason, potential teams across the country who have the highest probability of being bubble teams and use this control over 1/7th of their total schedule to give them a better measuring stick and get programs who can’t find home games a couple in the process.  When they snubbed st Mary there was backlash in the sports media.  They went from AP top 25 to snub.  This would help the selection committee enforce their bias just as often as it forces their hands in the Mid major direction, at least this way it is decided on the court.  Don’t see how it would hurt UB, please explain.

[Jeseph]

Bring back ESPNs Bracket Buster!

[weareub46]

I loved the bracketbuster games. I remember when I was at UB we had some of the best turnouts for those. Always a ton of fun and kinda guaranteed a decent opponent 

[MillenniumBull]

I liked the bracket buster to an extent, but in the end of the day it was just a way for the best mid majors to cannabolize each other.  As far as the all mighty dollar, NCAA’s true god goes, basketball is the one sport they need the smaller programs. I can see football’s top division breaking in two.  The P5s don’t need the G5s for interest or money. An NCAA tourney made up of just the power programs would not net the NCAA their billions they currently enjoy.  Nor the fan interest and broad spectrum appeal.  If the small schools were cut out, and your end of the season tourney had half the teams with barely winning records or worse, would you watch the opening weekend?  If the new version of a Cinderella was 16-18 Purdue?  A 12-22 Pittsburg? Would a P6 fan pay top dollar for regular season tickets knowing the pool for the tourney took 64 of 90 teams?  Small schools need to use their weight in the only sport where they have it.  In the FBS, the G5 sold out any chance of winning anything for 1 million dollars a school.  I think the basketball side can ask for a few home games.

[dutchcountry7]

2 hours ago, MillenniumBull said:

I would want the NCAA to identify preseason, potential teams across the country who have the highest probability of being bubble teams and use this control over 1/7th of their total schedule to give them a better measuring stick and get programs who can’t find home games a couple in the process.  When they snubbed st Mary there was backlash in the sports media.  They went from AP top 25 to snub.  This would help the selection committee enforce their bias just as often as it forces their hands in the Mid major direction, at least this way it is decided on the court.  Don’t see how it would hurt UB, please explain.

The NCAA doesn't have any authority over scheduling.  So you'd have to convince schools and conferences that it is in their best interest to take scheduling out of their hands and put it into the hands of bureaucrats.  All while knowing that once they have this power, they can expand the power so they can control more scheduling and even move in to other sports. 

None of the top programs and conferences would support such a measure.  And none of the bottom teams and conferences would support the measure.  The bottom conferences want to be paid for games.  Take a look at the last few seasons of Texas Southern. They don't want home/home games even when they are good (which they often are).  They want to fund their budgets.  Buffalo was one of these very teams for many years.  Buffalo wouldn't have supported this proposal when they weren't good.  Nor would Eastern Michigan, Niagara, or any of the programs like them who the Bulls are willing to play home/home games with.  Those schools don't want to play a home game with Syracuse, even if they are good.  They want the check from Syracuse and then to play for their conference auto-bid.  

Teams are free to work together to schedule in ways that are mutually beneficial.  This is what SIU and UB did.  This is what the Bracket Buster was about.  And this is also what the MidMajor Scheduling Alliance is being created to accomplish.  They are filling the void left by the Bracket Buster.  But I have a feeling Buffalo is going to be too proud to join it.  Even though there are high quality teams like Lipscomb in it, I expect UB to be too proud and to not want to turn over their scheduling to a third party that will have them going to play a game at Lipscomb for no money when they could go to Marquette and get a paycheck.  Does Buffalo really want to pay someone else a fee to schedule games for the 'collective good' when they could have their own person working for only their own interest?

There was a minimal backlash until it was revealed that St Mary's was offered games and turned them all down.  It is important to remember that the AP poll is not the committee.  The committee might have very different views on a team than the AP.  Just like how the AP poll has Furman at #23 right now yet KenPom has Furman at #115 and Sagarin has them at #112.  What do you think of Furman?  Are they outside the top-100 or are they a potential Sweet 16 team?  And if you disagree with someone, is it fair for them to say you have bias?  If you think they deserve their AP ranking, are you just letting your mid-major bias show through?  And if you assume the computer rankings are right, are letting your bias blind you to the results on the court?

The whole premise of this is based on the assumption that some committee can accurately project how good teams are going to be a year before they play.  You want a committee to decide schedules in the spring and to predict how good a team is going to be the next season based on the previous year and their recruiting class.  And then you want this committee to assign dates for games for teams all around the country.  Never mind that many teams (St. John's, Providence, Georgetown, etc) all play their games in arenas that have to coordinate schedules with many different teams making it extremely hard to fill games.  But even without that little hiccup thrown in, do you realize how problematic that is?  It will lead to even more politicking and bias.  It is significantly harder to forecast a team than it is to look at their body of results.  

You think a committee that has a season of games to look at has bias and is political but don't think a committee with no game results to look at won't be bias or political?  

At the end of this season, the committee can't say West Virginia is better than Buffalo.  But before this season they could have very well said "West Virginia has some good recruits coming in, they are going to be very good and they should be matched up with other good programs."  That was the whole premise of the AP pre-season ranking for WVU.  The same poll that ignored Buffalo.  

We see every year where teams are picked in their conference pre-season polls to be good and then aren't good.  If their own conferences, who know the teams, players, recruits, and coaches can't even forecast the season accurately, how is some national committee suppose to accomplish this?

[squire17]

21 hours ago, rma said:

I feel like we played vs Manhattan a few years ago and nobody (including Manhattan fans) showed up.  Maybe I'm just making stuff up.

In 2014. Hurley’s first year at UB and Javon McCrae’s last. OT loss to ultimate MAAC champ which lost to Louisville in first round at NCAAs. St John’s seems to be legitimate again, but other than them I can’t think of any teams in the NYC area that would be worth playing. 

[DooleyBull06]

13 hours ago, dutchcountry7 said:

You act like the regular season is ending today.

We we are talking about one game at Marquette being huge to determine where the team is nationally.

St. John’s plays Marquette twice and all the other Big East powers. We will know where they stand at the end of the season. It doesn’t matter their OOC schedule. 

I’m not acting as though the season is ending today. Merely using today’s state of affairs as a means to discuss the non conference schedule and future seasons.

As for the St. John’s example, they have the inherent benefit of playing Marquette and other big east powers only bc that’s their conference. They are forced to play them. Therefore they don’t challenge themselves in the non conference. They get fat in non conference, pick off a few big conference wins and have a lofty win loss record and rest on their laurels. Which is what the selection committee has attempted to devalue in recent seasons. Thus trying to level the playing field for us the little guys. Bc the non conference portion is the only chance we get to face some power teams. So will we know where St. John’s stands at seasons end if they are 23-8 overall 11-7 in conference play? 

So scheduling is beginning to matter for all teams regardless of conference. And that’s what the committee is trying to establish.