MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: CrackedSidewalksSays on January 06, 2013, 08:15:05 AM
-
The Future of Non-Conference Scheduling
Written by: noreply@blogger.com (Alan Bykowski)
As the seven non-football schools breaking away from the Big East, one change will be how Marquette handles non-conference scheduling. Over the past five years, Marquette played on average more than 6 teams ranked in the RPI top-25 in Big East play alone, which will be a rarity in the new conference. To make up for this, non-conference scheduling will need to fill the gaps.
I broke down the number of opponents in five RPI classes and assigned a point value to each, with the categories of top-25 (3), 26-50 (2), 51-100 (1), 101-200 (0), and 201+ (-1) over the past 5 full seasons in both conference play and non-conference play. I also broke down numbers for a 10-team "New Big East" with Xavier, Butler, and a Dayton/Creighton/St. Louis average.
The point value is clearly not exact, but it provides a rough guideline for scheduling. What it shows is that there is on average a 5-point shortfall from our current Big East conference schedule to the New Big East, which means we need to raise our average non-conference difficulty by around 5 point.
There are two other factors. You want to play at least 16 home games, which means 7 home non-conference games every year. You also want to get more nationally televised games. We averaged 4.5 nationally televised games from 2007-08 through 2011-12 and probably need to raise that to 7 or more to offset the new league's likely lessened exposure. So how do we get there?
We'll start with the non-conference tournament, which gives 4 games total, one at home. The average RPI of those 4 opponents was 234.5, 149.8, 100, and 23.5. We will also keep the Wisconsin series, and should push hard for a regular series with Notre Dame that alternates home/away with Wisconsin. The exempt tourney and these perennial series would give us 6 games, 2 at home, a +8 schedule rating, and 5 games on national television.
Now it gets tough. Of the remaining 7 games, I'm going to assume 4 home buy games against sub-200 opponents. This brings us to 10 games, 6 at home, a +4 schedule rating, and 5 games on national television.
From the last 3 games, we need 1 home game, +4 to the schedule, and 2 national games, which means all three teams should be top-100 RPI. I would hope the league will be proactive and create an annual series with another league, similar to the current Big East/SEC Challenge. Couple that with an alternating high-major home-and-home as we've done with NC State and LSU in recent years and we can assume 1 home game, +3 to the schedule, and 2 national games. For the last game I think there are two options as it cannot be a RPI drag. Either add another series against a high-major opponent or schedule a high-profile neutral site game, such as the Carrier Classic or the Jimmy V.
Breaking it all down, here's what I feel the blueprint should be:
- Exempt Tournament: 4 games
- Perennial home-and-homes: 2 games, Wisconsin and Notre Dame
- High-major home-and-home: 1 game NC State, Vanderbilt, LSU, alternating home site with...
- League Challenge: 1 game, similar to Big East/SEC Challenge
- Neutral Site: 1 game, similar to Carrier Classic, or high-major home-and-home
- Buy Games: 4 games, mid and low-major opponents
This all but eliminates the Milwaukee and Green Bay series, unless they want to play at the Bradley Center as buy games. There just isn't room to have road games at their buildings. Politically, you can't play one and not the other, and with Wisconsin playing at their buildings, it's unlikely they'd be willing to give up home dates. If they want to come here every year as 2 of our buy games, so be it. Otherwise, simply remove both from the schedule. It's too important to keep our early-season profile high in this new league. If you aren't getting us on national television, you have to come here as a buy game.
| 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 | 2011-12 | Average |
| BE 1-25 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 9 | 4 | 6.4 |
| BE 26-50 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 2.4 |
| BE 51-100 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 4 | 3 |
| BE 101-200 | 8 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 5.2 |
| BE 201+ | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| BE Points | 25 | 24 | 25 | 32 | 24 | 26 |
| | | | | | |
| NC 1-25 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1.8 |
| NC 26-50 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.8 |
| NC 51-100 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| NC 101-200 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 2.2 |
| NC 201+ | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 5.6 |
| NC Points | 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3.4 |
| | | | | | |
| Total 1-25 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 11 | 6 | 8.2 |
| Total 26-50 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3.2 |
| Total 51-100 | 3 | 6 | 6 | 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Total 101-200 | 9 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 10 | 7.4 |
| Total 201+ | 6 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 4 | 6.6 |
| Total Points | 27 | 26 | 28 | 37 | 29 | 29.4 |
| | | | | | |
| NBE 1-25 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 4.4 |
| NBE 26-50 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 2.8 |
| NBE 51-100 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 3.6 |
| NBE 101-200 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 6 |
| NBE 201+ | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1.2 |
| NBE Points | 18 | 14 | 22 | 28 | 24 | 21.2 |
| | | | | | |
| FNC 1-25 | | | | | | 2 |
| FNC 26-50 | | | | | | 2 |
| FNC 51-100 | | | | | | 3 |
| FNC 101-200 | | | | | | 1 |
| FNC 201+ | | | | | | 5 |
| FNC Points | | | | | | 8 |
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2013/01/the-future-of-non-conference-scheduling.html
-
Thanks for the analysis Brew. So let's discuss the 'delta' from what we do now.
Here's what we already try to do:
-Wisc H/H check
-Pre-season tourney with a 4th add game at the BC. check
-Home/Home with high major. check
-Conference challenge game alternating site. check
-Charity game (Jimmy V or similar) at neutral. check
I think in essence what this means is that we're adding a high major home/home (Notre Dame) to our permanent plans and sacrificing one home buy game in the years two of our 3 high major H/Hs are on the road. Getting a bit complicated but I'd try like heck to get the conference challenge game at home in the Wisconsin year and on the road in the year ND and our other H/H pairing comes to the BC.
-
Another alternative is to try to get better buy games. Schools like Weber State, Oral Roberts, Vermont, Oakland, and UNC-Asheville are rarely outside 200 RPI, and occasionally are top-100 teams.
If you get the exempt tournament, UW/ND series, and 2 teams like that with 4 sub-200 buy games, you could play 17-18 games at home each year. Obviously getting a buy game with Oral Roberts will be more costly than one with UMBC, and likely won't draw many more fans to the Bradley Center, but it will improve our odds of getting a better RPI and seed while having similar odds of getting a win (though probably in a closer game).
In a dream scenario, you could line up 4 of those teams for 3-for-1 deals. Play 3 at home each year and one on the road. It'd be great for RPI and would lessen costs significantly for buy games since the contract would balance it out. But the downside is that it would take a lot of planning and effort to find 4 teams all getting involved. It might work best if you tried to line those same teams up with each other for home-and-home games, sort of like a mini Bracket Buster, but in terms of effort, it'd be a lot more work than simply scheduling a HM home-and-home and offsetting it with a couple low-level buy games.
-
Hope Mike was good at calculus. Thanks for all the hard work Brew.
-
Brew:
Assuming we beef up the non-conference schedule, these games are played from Late Nov to early January. Does that diminish these games? I would think it would be better to play these games in January or February (or even early March). Do you see a chance that a Wisconsin and/or ND (or the like) would be open to a February game, as opposed to a December game? Would it matter?
-
Assuming we end up with a 16 game conference schedule. We then would be able to schedule two more home and home series. Make that Notre Dame and Louisville and there would be no reason to improve the rest of the non-conference schedule.
-
@AnotherMU84
Honestly, I don't think it would matter too much. As beneficial as it may be to have a nice February win, it would also be a detriment to have a disappointing February loss. It won't have any impact on the RPI and the committee will see the same commitment to playing a tough schedule whether the game is on December 5th or February 5th.
While there won't be as many marquee games, we'll still be playing teams like Georgetown, Butler, and Xavier in February. We'll still have to beat good teams in the conference tournament. Maybe we won't be in the top half of SportsCenter twice a week in February, but we'll be there enough that people won't forget our name.
Now if we were merging with the A-10, that might be a different story. But as long as this league gives us 7-8 games against the top-50 every year, we'll be fine.
-
Assuming we end up with a 16 game conference schedule. We then would be able to schedule two more home and home series. Make that Notre Dame and Louisville and there would be no reason to improve the rest of the non-conference schedule.
I'll bet you a beer it's 18.
-
If the C-7 TV deal ends of as lucrative as has been rumored we should have the extra money to reduce one home? As you properly point out there are going to be less opportunities for signature wins in the C-7+. We need to be willing to give up a home game that would otherwise end up as a buy game to get another home and away against a quality. (maybe the Zags if they don't join the C-7).
-
Giving up a home game is more than just lost revenue. Fans that were used to 17-18 games per year are now getting used to 16. I think most will be fine with that if there's a strong league schedule and 2-3 high-quality home non-con games, but if we drop to 15 or less, I think some of the donors will start getting irritable.
-
Was talking about this yesterday during the game with the people I sit around and I had an idea. What if the MU/ND instead of being a home & home was neutral site at the United Center every year much like the U of I vs. Mizzou game is neutral in StL? The UC is bigger than both schools arenas and I think it could be something pretty cool. Also, it's about 90 minutes from either campus and possibly could play it after finals when students are gone anyway.
Just a thought.
-
Was talking about this yesterday during the game with the people I sit around and I had an idea. What if the MU/ND instead of being a home & home was neutral site at the United Center every year much like the U of I vs. Mizzou game is neutral in StL? The UC is bigger than both schools arenas and I think it could be something pretty cool. Also, it's about 90 minutes from either campus and possibly could play it after finals when students are gone anyway.
Just a thought.
Great idea!
-
Was talking about this yesterday during the game with the people I sit around and I had an idea. What if the MU/ND instead of being a home & home was neutral site at the United Center every year much like the U of I vs. Mizzou game is neutral in StL? The UC is bigger than both schools arenas and I think it could be something pretty cool. Also, it's about 90 minutes from either campus and possibly could play it after finals when students are gone anyway.
Just a thought.
Like this but doubt the Domers will.
-
This is why I think we should just stick with 9 teams for now and play a 16 game schedule, it would give everyone more flexibility to schedule better out of conference games. Plus, that 10th team will be a step down from the 9th. Nobody can seem to agree who the 10th should be, and there isnt a clear choice, so just stick with 9 for now. Maybe bring in 10-12 if a few years after we've become more established.
-
Why won't we have six RPI top 25 games in conference play? With an 18 game mirror schedule, it only takes three top 25 schools. Georgetown, Gonzaga, Xavier, Butler, Villanova, St. John's... Three of the six should be top 25 on average.
-
Why won't we have six RPI top 25 games in conference play? With an 18 game mirror schedule, it only takes three top 25 schools. Georgetown, Gonzaga, Xavier, Butler, Villanova, St. John's... Three of the six should be top 25 on average.
Would, could, should, but in the past 5 seasons, they haven't been. On average we would have played 4.4 top-25 teams, as only once were more than three of the proposed teams in the top-25 (not including Marquette). On average we'll play 2 fewer top-25 teams in league play.
I don't like using RPI stats this early because they're unreliable, but if you look at this year, Butler is the ONLY team in the top-25. Creighton and Gonzaga are there, but neither seems to be a lock for this conference, and if they are, it likely means we've gone to 12 and aren't playing a full mirror schedule.
The simple truth is if we want to keep our strength of schedule and RPI where it's been, we will need to play a tougher non-conference schedule.
-
Have to hope ND will choose to play us. They will be in high demand from Georgetown, DePaul, Villanova, etc.
-
Actually I think Gtown wants Cuse more. Brey and Buzz have a good relationship and see us playing Home and Home ala Wisconsin. We have a good rivalry with Louisville as well which is a possibilty.
-
Another possibilty would be to schedule Duke allowing JP to play in front of his home crowd.
-
Another possibilty would be to schedule Duke allowing JP to play in front of his home crowd.
I think we'd have a better shot at UNC to let JPT play in front of a home crowd. Not sure Duke does that as frequently as Roy does.
For long-term scheduling, I think our best bets for annual series are Notre Dame, Cincinnati, and Louisville. I'd be happy with any of those three, though ND and Louisville would be my top two picks. Past that, just about any ACC, SEC, or Big 12 teams would make me happy for the occasional home-and-home. I really think we only need one other year-in and year-out opponent. Between history, location, and similarity of programs, I think ND is probably the best and most likely bet.
-
Like this but doubt the Domers will.
Why not? Chicago is basically a home game for them.
-
Here is an article from September 2012 with Brey saying he wants to continue the long standing rivalries with MU and DU along with annual rotating games with some of the old BE Catholic schools:
http://www.rumbleinthegarden.com/2012/9/18/3353196/brey-wants-to-play-the-big-easts-catholic-based-institutions-in (http://www.rumbleinthegarden.com/2012/9/18/3353196/brey-wants-to-play-the-big-easts-catholic-based-institutions-in)
-
Why not? Chicago is basically a home game for them.
Yeah, I think ND would love playing us in the United Center. They would think it's more of an advantage for them, and they'd make a lot more money compared to their on-campus gym.
However, I seem to remember there being some type of conference rule that let DePaul block us from scheduling neutral site games in Chicago.
-
However, I seem to remember there being some type of conference rule that let DePaul block us from scheduling neutral site games in Chicago.
Maybe we could work something out with DePaul. The two of us could host Illinois and Notre Dame on a rotating basis at the UC. Obviously we couldn't play the Demons, but each of us could play one of the others. Have a double-header.
-
Maybe we could work something out with DePaul. The two of us could host Illinois and Notre Dame on a rotating basis at the UC. Obviously we couldn't play the Demons, but each of us could play one of the others. Have a double-header.
That would be really cool. You could buy tickets to each game, or both at a package rate...
-
Maybe we could work something out with DePaul. The two of us could host Illinois and Notre Dame on a rotating basis at the UC. Obviously we couldn't play the Demons, but each of us could play one of the others. Have a double-header.
Or we simply leave that old rule out of the new conference bylaws and screw DePaul.... but I like this idea much, much better. Call it the Hiawatha Classic.
-
i've come to dislike the neutral court games over the past few years. there are too many of them and it rarely ends up being a good atmosphere. i think big games should be held on campus. MU-Wash in the garden last year had about 40 people in the stands. Same for ND-Temple at the Barclays this year. Both were great games played in semi-empty stadiums. i've been to the Mu-Wisc game now 3 years in a row, always a sell out, always a big draw, always on nat'l tv with a chance to show off your home floor/students etc...
however, in the case of Mizzou-Ill, IU-Butler, ND-MU, Dep-ND, etc., when such a large portion of both of your alumni bases live there, it can make for a cool made-for-tv setting.
i think there are benefits to both, but i like the idea of home/home better than a neutral site game, even though any game the UC would be sweet.
-
Get Illinois, DePaul, ND and Marquette to play two games (one home or away, one neutral) on a four-year rolling format where you invite a couple of guests every year for the neutral court games. Rent the UC for a day, and bang out a triple-header of marquee match-ups.
Call it The Hiawatha/South Shore Classic, presented by Steve Novak's Used Car Outlets (f/k/a Bob Rohrman Used Car Superstores)
SAMPLE ROTATION (guests in brackets, schools used for example only, i.e. close proximity, heavy Chicago fan bases, and/or national followings)
Year 1:
Illinois at Marquette
DePaul at Notre Dame
Illinois vs. DePaul at United Center
Notre Dame vs. [Michigan State] at United Center
Marquette vs. [Mizzou] at United Center
Year 2:
DePaul at Illinois
Notre Dame at Marquette
Notre Dame vs. DePaul at United Center
Marquette vs. [Kentucky] at United Center
Illinois vs. [Georgetown] at United Center
Year 3:
Marquette at Illinois
Notre Dame at DePaul
Notre Dame vs. Marquette at United Center
Illinois vs. [Butler] at United Center
DePaul vs. [Kansas] at United Center
Year 4:
Illinois at DePaul
Marquette at Notre Dame
Marquette vs. Illinois at United Center
DePaul vs. [Vanderbilt] at United Center
Notre Dame vs. [North Carolina] at United Center
-
Throw in Northwestern and Loyola and make it a tournament