|
|
Post by 23won on Apr 2, 2013 18:09:19 GMT -5
We are down from 16 to 13 teams (including Mason) next year. If we hold at 13, how do they run the schedule?
If we play 18 games like last year, we play everyone once and 6 teams twice. Since this whole conference thing is fluid, it doesn't make sense to set things in stone for a "scheduling policy" IMO. Instead, they should schedule home and home matches among the top teams (to prop up RPIs) and then among the lower teams.
It'd make sense for us to have 2 games with VCU, St Lou, U Mass, SJU, Dayton and Richmond.
Likewise, it'd make sense for Fordham to double up with the lower seeded teams. Wouldn't that help the higher rated teams elevate SOS and RPI to prop up odds for a tourney bid. Isn't that in the best interests of the schools and conference, not regional issues?
|
|
|
|
Post by SICguy84 on Apr 2, 2013 18:13:06 GMT -5
Wrong thread but, please no more CCSU next season. Right?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2013 20:31:54 GMT -5
If we play 18 games like last year The A10 played a 16 game schedule in 2012-13. La Salle went 11-5. More than likely, the 2013-14 schedule will have each team play 8 teams once and 4 teams twice. I doubt they will go to an 18 game schedule. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2013 20:33:56 GMT -5
Wrong thread but, please no more CCSU next season. Right? CCSU is not on the schedule. |
|
|
|
Post by 23won on Apr 3, 2013 10:14:11 GMT -5
Oops KJ, good fix. Still, the same point remains. I'd like top see the top teams (i.e., us) double up against the top teams, the middle against the middle and the bottom against the bottom.
That should get good teams tourney ready and presumably build RPI at the top. Not sure how it would affect conference RPI/BPI, but does anyone really acre about that over team RPI/BPI?
On the other hand, if they continued last year's approach and flipped venues from last year's single game schedules, we'd have (1)VCU and St Louis at home, (2)St Joe neutral and (3)UR, Dayton and UMass on the road. We'd double up again with GW again. In that scenario, we'd need 3 more to double up on. The question is - how do they pick them?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 10:38:48 GMT -5
Oops KJ, good fix. Still, the same point remains. I'd like top see the top teams (i.e., us) double up against the top teams, the middle against the middle and the bottom against the bottom. That should get good teams tourney ready and presumably build RPI at the top. Not sure how it would affect conference RPI/BPI, but does anyone really acre about that over team RPI/BPI? On the other hand, if they continued last year's approach and flipped venues from last year's single game schedules, we'd have (1)VCU and St Louis at home, (2)St Joe neutral and (3)UR, Dayton and UMass on the road. We'd double up again with GW again. In that scenario, we'd need 3 more to double up on. The question is - how do they pick them? They probably haven't even figured out what they're going to do yet. I agree 100% with what you're saying about matching up the top teams, but that could also cause be a problem as the top teams could beat up on each other and a middle-bottom team could have an inflated finish because they played multiple games against the lower teams. I think a couple years ago when teams had three A10 partners who they played twice, the league tried to have everyone matched up twice against what they considered to be one top, one middle, and one lower tier team. There's just no easy way to do it and I don't envy them trying to put together a schedule this year. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Apr 4, 2013 15:24:16 GMT -5
And sometimes the "top" tier teams don't finish near the top. Like the Hawks this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by vasalos on Apr 4, 2013 15:27:42 GMT -5
With the top half of the 2012-2013 A10 gone our OCC scheduling will be very important. We need to schedule bubble teams to keep our Rpi high. Road games preferred. Remember the Committee favors teams that play bubble teams regardless of result and quality road wins.
|
|
|
|
Post by 23won on Apr 4, 2013 16:00:10 GMT -5
I think we should schedule as many low to midtier BCS teams as possible and 2 tourney worth teams above the bubble. Their RPIs inevitably shoot up in conference and they wind up with good home wins that put them on the bubble.
Pick 2-3 mids from the list from whoever will schedule us:
UVA, V Tech, Wake,
Iowa (why not?), MD, Purdue
Arkansas, Tennessee, Alabama
St Mary, Akron, Ohio, St John
Schedule 1-2 tourney teams from
Wichita State, Pitt, ND, G'town, K State, New Mexico, @ Fla Gulf (for Sam),
Do we have Nova, Temple and Miami on for next year
|
|
