Jump to content
Buffalo Bulls - UB Fan Forum

'21-'22 Schedule


Recommended Posts

When UB beats Michigan, it can get choosy. But until then it should schedule tough opponents whenever possible even if they are all on the road. Show some confidence that you are a competitor. Beating Daemen at home doesn’t cut it. Schedule the toughest teams possible every year, even if you’ve got to go on the road. Every year. Show that you will mix it up. The MAC just doesn’t cut it anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, squire17 said:

Who was the AD when Oats was the coach? Check out how he did it. Even go back to when Reggie was coach. Michigan we got because of Manuel. Bona is recurring. No idea about WK…is Bearden in their employ? But that’s it? Are you kidding me? Your’e satisfied with that? What a joke.

Who said satisfied? I think the home schedule especially is bad. I don’t like it. But you literally said they’re not trying. They are. Those are two different things. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaBulls99 said:

Who said satisfied? I think the home schedule especially is bad. I don’t like it. But you literally said they’re not trying. They are. Those are two different things. 

I agree that the home schedule is disappointing.  However, from an overall perspective, this schedule is a challenging schedule. At a minimum, it prepares us well for the MAC and at its best, it could put us in position to be considered for an at large (this outcome will be very difficult - see below comparison of this year to 2018-19 to see what it will take this year)

2018-19

741214739_Screenshot_20211023-2210312.thumb.png.525f4b1ac247cb68c454d2fc92233b6a.png

2021-22

1170706874_Screenshot_20211023-2205292.thumb.png.d38acde7b6c08c977dffa9856b3399fa.png

If UB plays St. Louis, they will have two quad 1 games and  7 quad 2 games.  This compares to 3 quad 1 and 6 quad 2.  Both have 9 quad 1/2 games.  This year we have more quad 4 games due to bottom 5 teams being so weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don’t get at large bid or consideration by just playing Q1/2 games. You gotta win them. For UB to even sniff an at large we gotta pretty much win every non conference game except for Michigan (although a win there goes a looong way). Then not lose more than 3 conference games and make the conference title game. Tough ask. I think for the most part the schedule is good. I just really hate the two glorified exhibition games. Would rather play a Q4 home game or go on the road and play a tough Q1/2 game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DooleyBull06 said:

You don’t get at large bid or consideration by just playing Q1/2 games. You gotta win them. For UB to even sniff an at large we gotta pretty much win every non conference game except for Michigan (although a win there goes a looong way). Then not lose more than 3 conference games and make the conference title game. Tough ask. I think for the most part the schedule is good. I just really hate the two glorified exhibition games. Would rather play a Q4 home game or go on the road and play a tough Q1/2 game. 

Of course you need to win.  If this team does as expected,  3-6 in quad 1 / 2 games...they will be ranked around 80 and would have to win MAC to get into tournament.

To get a sense at what an at large bid would take, I looked at the profile of Indiana (#30).

1093945885_Screenshot_20211024-1010372.thumb.png.6afd49d16b49dd914cedf24cb83eff0a.png

This resume would imply UB would need to go 1 -1 against St. Bonaventure / Michigan.   Then they would likely need to go 5-2 in quad 2 games and 18-2 rest of games.  This is a very tall order and I am not personally expecting it.  However, I do feel the schedule pushes the team and will prepare them well for MAC.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone here is making it seem like this team turned down a bunch of road opportunities to play these non-DI games.  I don't believe that is the case.  The P5 schools don't buy teams like Buffalo because they know there is a chance they could lose them.. A $75K check and a loss isn't a good look when they can go ahead and play CMU or WMU instead and get the win.

As for the home game scenario, it again I think one comes down to money.  A D-I Q4 game probably costs UB about $50k to bring them in.  They can bring a non-D1 in for $5K. And again a home win over a Q4 probably drops you about 15 spots in the NET rankings...The non-D1 doesn't factor in to the NET.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t mind playing an exhibition game before heading to Michigan, let’s the team try plays out and also let’s some of the new guys get playing time. Even though they’re a d2 opponent, winning the game gives them confidence heading to the next game. I’m not a fan of playing Fisher or point park, I’d rather see them play a good MAAC school like Iona or Siena. Overall it is a tough schedule but I’d like to see more quality home games 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BullBoy said:

Everyone here is making it seem like this team turned down a bunch of road opportunities to play these non-DI games.  I don't believe that is the case.  The P5 schools don't buy teams like Buffalo because they know there is a chance they could lose them.. A $75K check and a loss isn't a good look when they can go ahead and play CMU or WMU instead and get the win.

As for the home game scenario, it again I think one comes down to money.  A D-I Q4 game probably costs UB about $50k to bring them in.  They can bring a non-D1 in for $5K. And again a home win over a Q4 probably drops you about 15 spots in the NET rankings...The non-D1 doesn't factor in to the NET.

I would like to know from any insider here what other schedule options may have been in play? I don’t believe there wasn’t any D-1 school we could’ve played. Now to your point about the net…should we care? We most likely aren’t gonna be in at large consideration. Win the MAC tourney. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DooleyBull06 said:

I would like to know from any insider here what other schedule options may have been in play? I don’t believe there wasn’t any D-1 school we could’ve played. Now to your point about the net…should we care? We most likely aren’t gonna be in at large consideration. Win the MAC tourney. 

A good out of conference schedule and good offensive/defensive metrics plus 4 or less losses in conference would do exactly that

There are years where with a weak bubble they could sneak in

Edited by Tee4three
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Tee4three said:

A good out of conference schedule and good offensive/defensive metrics plus 4 or less losses in conference would do exactly that

There are years where with a weak bubble they could sneak in

Four or less conference wins has to be paired with a stellar OOC record/results.  Need some big wins OOC if you have losses or need to run the table against weak OOC teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dutchcountry7 said:

Four or less conference wins has to be paired with a stellar OOC record/results.  Need some big wins OOC if you have losses or need to run the table against weak OOC teams.

Using just quads as references

Quad 1: 0-2

quad 2: 2-1

Quad 3: 8-2

Quad 4: 13-1

Say the quad 3 and 4 losses are mac teams. Getting to and losing the mac championship game puts that team in the conversation for an at large. They can sneak in based on their metrics and how they looked against the q1 opponents 

Its a resume that at least gets your logo on the bubble watch 

Biggest issue to me is I'm not sure we have enough quad 2 games. Could really use a mac team to step up or a team like uc irvine to take off. Better yet western kentucky to play to their usual standards 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tee4three said:

Using just quads as references

Quad 1: 0-2

quad 2: 2-1

Quad 3: 8-2

Quad 4: 13-1

Say the quad 3 and 4 losses are mac teams. Getting to and losing the mac championship game puts that team in the conversation for an at large. They can sneak in based on their metrics and how they looked against the q1 opponents 

Its a resume that at least gets your logo on the bubble watch 

Biggest issue to me is I'm not sure we have enough quad 2 games. Could really use a mac team to step up or a team like uc irvine to take off. Better yet western kentucky to play to their usual standards 

 

 

That’s not getting you on the bubble

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2019/net-nitty-team

That was worse that NM State for instance and they were below the at last play in game despite winning their conference and the conference tournament.  They already weren’t getting in.  They couldn’t afford a quad 4 loss and not winning their conference tournament. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, dutchcountry7 said:

That’s not getting you on the bubble

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2019/net-nitty-team

That was worse that NM State for instance and they were below the at last play in game despite winning their conference and the conference tournament.  They already weren’t getting in.  They couldn’t afford a quad 4 loss and not winning their conference tournament. 

Here is my take on it - first I have tried to identify potential quad 1 / quad 2 games using rankings from Massey, Barttorvik and Kenpom.  I may have the wrong formulas, but this resulted in the following games as quad 1 / quad 2 in our schedule:

image.png.be5aa39020e3e0227d9d0388e35e5015.png

 

I used the approach to split quad 3/ quad 4 as well.  I then pulled bt projections for Indiana (whom they rank 30) and UCF (rank 40).  I debated leaving off my #40 estimate - as I think we will have to do better 22 or 23 wins.  I could be wrong, but I think the floor for an at large would be 23 wins.  

Edited by DocCas86
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dutchcountry7 said:

That’s not getting you on the bubble

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2019/net-nitty-team

That was worse that NM State for instance and they were below the at last play in game despite winning their conference and the conference tournament.  They already weren’t getting in.  They couldn’t afford a quad 4 loss and not winning their conference tournament. 

You are underestimating what good metrics will do for a team. Which buffalo will have (they have had since oats)

New Mexico in offense and defense efficiency they were 134 offense and 184 defense while buffalo last year was 97 offense and 64 defense (per kenpom) not to include top 5 rebounding team in the nation

So while new mexico had the q1 and q2 they didn't put up good efficiency numbers which with each year is becoming increasingly important.

I agree with you a quad 4 loss will make it very difficult but that resume with good metrics will be a bubble team. Its how ub got an at large NIT bid last year

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DocCas86 said:

Here is my take on it - first I have tried to identify potential quad 1 / quad 2 games using rankings from Massey, Barttorvik and Kenpom.  I may have the wrong formulas, but this resulted in the following games as quad 1 / quad 2 in our schedule:

image.png.be5aa39020e3e0227d9d0388e35e5015.png

 

I used the approach to split quad 3/ quad 4 as well.  I then pulled bt projections for Indiana (whom they rank 30) and UCF (rank 40).  I debated leaving off my #40 estimate - as I think we will have to do better 22 or 23 wins.  I could be wrong, but I think the floor for an at large would be 23 wins.  

The projection said 0-2 vs quad 1 and you’ve now changed it to 1-1 to try to get the data to the conclusion you want. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tee4three said:

You are underestimating what good metrics will do for a team. Which buffalo will have (they have had since oats)

New Mexico in offense and defense efficiency they were 134 offense and 184 defense while buffalo last year was 97 offense and 64 defense (per kenpom) not to include top 5 rebounding team in the nation

So while new mexico had the q1 and q2 they didn't put up good efficiency numbers which with each year is becoming increasingly important.

I agree with you a quad 4 loss will make it very difficult but that resume with good metrics will be a bubble team. Its how ub got an at large NIT bid last year

 

You need the wins. 
 

Metrics don’t get you in without some notable wins.  
 

when a .500 Cuse gets in and they point to metrics it is because Cuse also has a few wins against top teams to go with their quad three losses. 
 

You’re not getting an at large without a marquee win. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tee4three said:

You are underestimating what good metrics will do for a team. Which buffalo will have (they have had since oats)

New Mexico in offense and defense efficiency they were 134 offense and 184 defense while buffalo last year was 97 offense and 64 defense (per kenpom) not to include top 5 rebounding team in the nation

So while new mexico had the q1 and q2 they didn't put up good efficiency numbers which with each year is becoming increasingly important.

I agree with you a quad 4 loss will make it very difficult but that resume with good metrics will be a bubble team. Its how ub got an at large NIT bid last year

 

That and many teams saying that they would not play in the NIT last year, like St. John's and Duke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, dutchcountry7 said:

The projection said 0-2 vs quad 1 and you’ve now changed it to 1-1 to try to get the data to the conclusion you want. 

I am not saying this will happen.  I am trying to illustrate a potential way the team could be ranked 30-40 and be considered a potential at large team.   I was using projections for Indiana and UCF as a guide to show what record it would take.  For example, splitting games with Michigan and St. Bonaventure would be what a team ranked 30 might be expected to do since Indiana is expected to win 3 out of 8 (round to 50% for us due to only 2 games).  I suppose there are scenarios where we go 0-2 in those games and still are considered for at large, but it becomes less likely.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, trueblue32 said:

NIT field was half the size that it usually is. They would’ve been in in a normal year regardless

That isn’t certain. 
 

The field was half the size but they didn’t award NIT auto-bids last year.  If you win the regular season conference championship you earn a bid to the NIT.  A lot of teams would have normally taken bids to the NIT even though they weren’t good enough to earn at at-large bid to the NIT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, dutchcountry7 said:

You need the wins. 
 

Metrics don’t get you in without some notable wins.  
 

when a .500 Cuse gets in and they point to metrics it is because Cuse also has a few wins against top teams to go with their quad three losses. 
 

You’re not getting an at large without a marquee win. 

My post agrees with the bolded part of your post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...