Making Our Schedule

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

There is a strong correlation between games played against RPI sub 200 teams and under seeding. If we can be expected to defeat a team with an RPI of 200, we should be able to beat a team with an RPI of 150. Only one of those two games actively hurts our postseason chances.

The only thing you get by scheduling that soft is cover so at the end of the year you can say "but we got 20 wins!" A garbage win is only marginally better than a loss.

Maybe nobody schedules like this, but they should. Apply game theory to the scheduling. It is a system that can and should be exploited. If there is no value in scheduling an RPI sub 200 team, then you shouldn't schedule them. Period.

Do you have any idea what goes into scheduling non conference games? The schedules that have to line up? The fact that everyone is competing to get the rpi friendly mid majors? The fact that the better mid majors know they are better and therefore cost more? The fact that several conferences like the Missouri valley and horizon require that their members get return games thus increasing their cost?

No one is questioning our ability to beat top 150 teams (though statistically we would lose some). What I'm questioning is your understanding of how the process works and how impossible your standard is. Non conference scheduling isn't a buffet where you can pick the best of everything

[jficke13]

There is value. You are more likely to win those games. Those games are more likely to be played at home. You can't just create the toughest schedule in the world and hope it works out.

http://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2016/rpi

#150 RPI team at the end of the year was Fairfield. Are you suggesting that isn't an expected win? Do you think they couldn't be a buy game?

You're telling me you couldn't look at that ranking, and sub a few juggernauts like Fairfield in for freaking Grambling (a blistering Rpi #350!) and not still expect wins?

[jficke13]

Do you have any idea what goes into scheduling non conference games? The schedules that have to line up? The fact that everyone is competing to get the rpi friendly mid majors? The fact that the better mid majors know they are better and therefore cost more? The fact that several conferences like the Missouri valley and horizon require that their members get return games thus increasing their cost?

No one is questioning our ability to beat top 150 teams (though statistically we would lose some). What I'm questioning is your understanding of how the process works and how impossible your standard is. Non conference scheduling isn't a buffet where you can pick the best of everything

Should we just say *f* it and schedule a bunch of games that we KNOW are going to be a net negative when selection sunday comes around?

No, we should aim for a schedule that actually benefits us instead of actively hinders us.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

http://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2016/rpi

#150 RPI team at the end of the year was Fairfield. Are you suggesting that isn't an expected win? Do you think they couldn't be a buy game?

You're telling me you couldn't look at that ranking, and sub a few juggernauts like Fairfield in for freaking Grambling (a blistering Rpi #350!) and not still expect wins?

Plus they are a Jesuit University.

[GoldenWarrior11]

Must Play:
Notre Dame

Would Love to Play:
Louisville
Cincinnati
Syracuse
UConn
Pittsburgh
Boston College
Dayton
Gonzaga

Would Settle For:
Saint Louis
Wichita State
Davidson
St. Mary's
VCU
Northern Iowa

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Should we just say *f* it and schedule a bunch of games that we KNOW are going to be a net negative when selection sunday comes around?

No, we should aim for a schedule that actually benefits us instead of actively hinders us.

EVERY team has games that are "net negatives" when selection Sunday comes around. As long as you win them (and don't schedule more than 3 300+ rpi teams) they won't have any negative impact on selection Sunday.

Your standard of scheduling ONLY games against RPI top 150 teams is an impossible standard. Not only that, it would likely bankrupt the program at some point.

If you said RPI top 250, great! Probably unrealistic as almost every high major schedules 1 or 2 high fat cupcakes, but its at least theoretically plausible. Top 150, no way in hell.

[jficke13]

EVERY team has games that are "net negatives" when selection Sunday comes around. As long as you win them (and don't schedule more than 3 300+ rpi teams) they won't have any negative impact on selection Sunday.

Your standard of scheduling ONLY games against RPI top 150 teams is an impossible standard. Not only that, it would likely bankrupt the program at some point.

If you said RPI top 250, great! Probably unrealistic as almost every high major schedules 1 or 2 high fat cupcakes, but its at least theoretically plausible. Top 150, no way in hell.

I'll budge and leave it to 0 sub 300, 0 sub 250, and only as many 200-250 as is absolutely necessary given the tyranny of the schedulemakers. As an objective our schedulemakers should be actively hunting Fairfields. RPI 100-150s that are buyable, expected wins.

Throwing our hands up and saying bring on the fat cupcakes is going to lead to perennial threads complaining about our RPI, SOS, seeding, and quality of the season tickets we are buying, as it should.

[79Warrior]

Must Play:
Notre Dame

Would Love to Play:
Louisville
Cincinnati
Syracuse
UConn
Pittsburgh
Boston College
Dayton
Gonzaga

Would Settle For:
Saint Louis
Wichita State
Davidson
St. Mary's
VCU
Northern Iowa

MU is working on Notre Dame. The AD and Provost are both alums. It is in the works. Maybe we get a preview in Maui in 2017.

[GGGG]

I'll budge and leave it to 0 sub 300, 0 sub 250, and only as many 200-250 as is absolutely necessary given the tyranny of the schedulemakers. As an objective our schedulemakers should be actively hunting Fairfields. RPI 100-150s that are buyable, expected wins.

Throwing our hands up and saying bring on the fat cupcakes is going to lead to perennial threads complaining about our RPI, SOS, seeding, and quality of the season tickets we are buying, as it should.

I can basically agree with this.

[jficke13]

I knew I was remembering posts by guys that are much smarter than me on this subject:

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2009/12/rpi-is-killing-mu-schedule-tougher.html

"How risky would playing Top 200 creampuffs be? Since 2005, MU has gone 27-2 when playing a home game against a team ranked between 101st and 200th in the land in Pomeroy, with the only two losses being to St. Louis after Travis Diener broke his hand and we had no point guard, and to a North Dakota State team that went on to go 20-8 and was ranked 127th.

Going 6-0 against Top 200 creampuffs instead of teams ranked from 250th to 347th will typically move us up 30 spots in the RPI each Selection Sunday, and even if we get tripped up and go 5-1 against Top 200 Creampuffs, we will be much higher than being dragged down by six wins against bottom 100 teams."

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2013/03/does-scheduling-improve-seeding.html

I also feel like I recall either Paint Touches or CS doing an actual analysis of the teams that got left out or got moved down a couple lines in the NCAA and the commonality was # of sub 200 RPI opponents, but I'm coming up snake eyes on finding that one.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I'll budge and leave it to 0 sub 300, 0 sub 250, and only as many 200-250 as is absolutely necessary given the tyranny of the schedulemakers. As an objective our schedulemakers should be actively hunting Fairfields. RPI 100-150s that are buyable, expected wins.

Throwing our hands up and saying bring on the fat cupcakes is going to lead to perennial threads complaining about our RPI, SOS, seeding, and quality of the season tickets we are buying, as it should.

This is more reasonable. But I will repeat again, EVERY team schedules RPI 250+ teams and most schedule 300+ teams. If you can find me a team that consistently doesn't, I will amend my statement. Last season was an anomaly with how many bad games were scheduled. If we continue at that level, then definitely complain away. But I'm not going to get the pitchforks out if 1 or 2 of our cupcakes are 300+ and another 1 or 2 are 250+.

[Jay Bee]

I'll budge and leave it to 0 sub 300, 0 sub 250, and only as many 200-250 as is absolutely necessary given the tyranny of the schedulemakers. As an objective our schedulemakers should be actively hunting Fairfields. RPI 100-150s that are buyable, expected wins.

Throwing our hands up and saying bring on the fat cupcakes is going to lead to perennial threads complaining about our RPI, SOS, seeding, and quality of the season tickets we are buying, as it should.

BTW, the RPI of your opponents does not impact your RPI.

[Herman Cain]

Bring back the games with UWM and UW-Green Bay.  It's stupid to bring in mid-majors from far away that fans have no interest in when we have these little upstarts sitting in our shadow.  And it would improve the RPI.

I agree with this analysis.

[thanooj]

That's certainly what they think!

Haha. This deserved more attention.  Well done. 

[jsglow]

There is not a single team that schedules like this. Not one. This isn't close to a reasonable expectation

What TAMU said.  It simply isn't happening.  I'm not even sure MU could make it happen if it wanted to.  The key is to schedule 200-250, not 300-350 and even 1-2 of them is fine.

Look, we've been more than nice to Grambling.  A couple years ago they couldn't even fill out their non-con dance card but we still played them in the BC.  I'd argue that Grambling owes us for any short notice crazy open date we ever need filled.

[brewcity77]

As Jay Bee notes, it's not the RPI of your opponent that impacts your own RPI. However, as a general guideline, I think sticking in the top-250 for most opponents is ideal. If you have 7 dates to fill, I believe that ideally two top-200, two 200-250, and three sub-250 would be best. Ideally, 0-1 sub-300 in any given year. But I'm working on a better evaluation method for this.

[Dr. Blackheart]

I came across this gem...

--Look for schools on probation, especially if part of the penalty is a loss of scholarships.

--If you want to play a school with junior college transfers, play them early, before the players are used to the system.

--Book road games when the student body is on Christmas vacation or has exams.

--Schedule a school with a national reputation in football, but none in basketball.

--Book road games in the city arena, not the campus snakepit. In other words, play St. John's at Madison Square Garden, not Alumni Hall.

McGuire said it was all right to play teams from major conferences but added: "Go for the bottom-half teams. Especially go for a team which is normally a basket case, with players who two-hand dribble and have underwear hanging out of their pants."

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-06-16/sports/sp-2822_1_mcguire-schedule-al

[Holly Ellenson is my Mom]

Would love to see us play Boheim a little more.  Maybe eve squash Buzz's dreams at VT every 3 or 4 years.

[warriorchick]

Would love to see us play Boheim a little more.  Maybe eve squash Buzz's dreams at VT every 3 or 4 years.

BTW your screen name:

[Newsdreams]

I knew I was remembering posts by guys that are much smarter than me on this subject:

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2009/12/rpi-is-killing-mu-schedule-tougher.html

"How risky would playing Top 200 creampuffs be? Since 2005, MU has gone 27-2 when playing a home game against a team ranked between 101st and 200th in the land in Pomeroy, with the only two losses being to St. Louis after Travis Diener broke his hand and we had no point guard, and to a North Dakota State team that went on to go 20-8 and was ranked 127th.

Going 6-0 against Top 200 creampuffs instead of teams ranked from 250th to 347th will typically move us up 30 spots in the RPI each Selection Sunday, and even if we get tripped up and go 5-1 against Top 200 Creampuffs, we will be much higher than being dragged down by six wins against bottom 100 teams."

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2013/03/does-scheduling-improve-seeding.html

I also feel like I recall either Paint Touches or CS doing an actual analysis of the teams that got left out or got moved down a couple lines in the NCAA and the commonality was # of sub 200 RPI opponents, but I'm coming up snake eyes on finding that one.

It is not about the risk but how hard it is to schedule. Finding the open dates at the arena vs dates opponents are available. Plus it was explained why last year's schedule was so soft. Not that we have to agree but there was a purpose.

[martyconlonontherun]

As buy games, or 3 or 4 for one home and homes?

I'm fine with both as buy games, but if we're going to give a home game to a mid-major, I'd much rather give it to a stronger team like UNI.

Am I optimistic that the new AD is 1.) Cheap and 2.) in desperate need to get fans excited about the team. I could see them "bolstering" their schedule with playing Marquette at the BC. Get paid to drive across town is a win-win.

[Herman Cain]

I came across this gem...

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-06-16/sports/sp-2822_1_mcguire-schedule-al

So there you have it , Al agrees with me that we should have a home and home with Alabama.

[WarriorFan]

I came across this gem...

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-06-16/sports/sp-2822_1_mcguire-schedule-al

This should be posted permanently on the AD's wall.  It's perfect, and it would work.  Screw RPI... we could schedule only "big name" schools and under these rules walk away undefeated after the non-conferences season.

[🏀]

This should be posted permanently on the AD's wall.  It's perfect, and it would work.  Screw RPI... we could schedule only "big name" schools and under these rules walk away undefeated after the non-conferences season.

Except it wouldn't work at all.

[GGGG]

I love Al, but treating him as a the oracle for how to run a basketball program nearly 40 years after he retired is silly.