Another Expansion/Realignment Thread

[TylerDurden]

I wonder if we could schedule with another conference with an odd number of teams for the odd team out every game night. That is the annoyance of going forward with 11

Because being at 11 it doesn't really mess too much with men's basketball because they don't play travel partner schedules and creating scheduling agreements is a complicated task - especially during a conference season window, I think not.

I does create competitive balance issue with women's basketball and volleyball if you use a traditional travel partner set up. It doesn't matter for men's soccer (they'll be at 8) or women's soccer (they'll be at 10) or baseball/softball.

[BCPanther]

I'm guessing there will be a push to split the Iowa swing in women's sports. That's not a fun weekend for anybody, especially in volleyball. I could see them making Drake the single because it's easy to get into DSM and you're not guaranteeing yourselves an 0-2 weekend almost every time.

Drake
UNI/Bradley--3.5 Hours
UIC/Valpo--1 Hour
Indiana State/Illinois State--2.5 Hours
SIU/Murray--2 Hours
Evansville/Belmont--2.5 Hours

[TylerDurden]

I'm guessing there will be a push to split the Iowa swing in women's sports. That's not a fun weekend for anybody, especially in volleyball. I could see them making Drake the single because it's easy to get into DSM and you're not guaranteeing yourselves an 0-2 weekend almost every time.

Drake
UNI/Bradley--3.5 Hours
UIC/Valpo--1 Hour
Indiana State/Illinois State--2.5 Hours
SIU/Murray--2 Hours
Evansville/Belmont--2.5 Hours

This helps illustrate the imbalance I referenced if you stick to travel partners with 11 teams. In every league weekend, two teams get to prepare for only one opponent and the second game will always be a disadvantage for the single team.

In this hypothetical, Drake plays Weekend Game 1 vs. UNI and teams are on equal rest. Bradley doesn't play anyone. Weekend Game 2 Drake plays a rested Bradley on reduced travel.

Coaches complain about a lot of things, but this sort of imbalance would send the single team coach and administration through the roof. They'd have more travel on the road than everyone else, more weekend prep to do (2v1), combined with less time between matches/game and less recovery time.

The good news about the MVC is the proximity of the teams where you could go away from travel partners in a traditional sense to create a more balanced schedule without making WBB and VB into full MBB-type schedules (which I'm guessing no one wants to do because of costs). It would require more mid-week games, but that, to me, is a much better option than playing an 11-team, travel partner schedule.

Of course, another option is simply to not play a double round robin - that's the least disruptive option and, frankly, the one they'll probably go with. All you have to do is adjust your tiebreakers to reflect that you aren't playing everyone twice.

[BCPanther]

I'm guessing there will be a push to split the Iowa swing in women's sports. That's not a fun weekend for anybody, especially in volleyball. I could see them making Drake the single because it's easy to get into DSM and you're not guaranteeing yourselves an 0-2 weekend almost every time.

Drake
UNI/Bradley--3.5 Hours
UIC/Valpo--1 Hour
Indiana State/Illinois State--2.5 Hours
SIU/Murray--2 Hours
Evansville/Belmont--2.5 Hours

This helps illustrate the imbalance I referenced if you stick to travel partners with 11 teams. In every league weekend, two teams get to prepare for only one opponent and the second game will always be a disadvantage for the single team.

In this hypothetical, Drake plays Weekend Game 1 vs. UNI and teams are on equal rest. Bradley doesn't play anyone. Weekend Game 2 Drake plays a rested Bradley on reduced travel.

Coaches complain about a lot of things, but this sort of imbalance would send the single team coach and administration through the roof. They'd have more travel on the road than everyone else, more weekend prep to do (2v1), combined with less time between matches/game and less recovery time.

The good news about the MVC is the proximity of the teams where you could go away from travel partners in a traditional sense to create a more balanced schedule without making WBB and VB into full MBB-type schedules (which I'm guessing no one wants to do because of costs). It would require more mid-week games, but that, to me, is a much better option than playing an 11-team, travel partner schedule.

Of course, another option is simply to not play a double round robin - that's the least disruptive option and, frankly, the one they'll probably go with. All you have to do is adjust your tiebreakers to reflect that you aren't playing everyone twice.

I see what you're saying now. Misinterpreted.

In that case just schedule WBB like MBB and figure out Volleyball. Not sure what the answer is there because UNI and Drake are so head and shoulders above everybody else that I'm not sure it matters how you set it up.

[TylerDurden]

I see what you're saying now. Misinterpreted.

In that case just schedule WBB like MBB and figure out Volleyball. Not sure what the answer is there because UNI and Drake are so head and shoulders above everybody else that I'm not sure it matters how you set it up.

They won't schedule WBB like MBB because it's too expensive to travel for one-off games when you zig-zag the league.

RE Volleyball: I get what you're saying, but team strength won't be a factor (and shouldn't be) for any sport schedule. You want everyone to be playing with as close to the same parameters as possible.

It really comes down to how tied the league/schools are to playing everyone twice in both WBB and VB.

[ColonialBulldog]

I'm a little torn on this. What if you add another and we have another defection? If we're staying at a 11, there has to be some sort of mandate that you are playing a non-con team on the "off-day". That's just way too big of a competitive advantage when you're slogging through a 20 game conference slate. I don't care if its Chicago State. Just mandate that some D1 team is scheduled.

But if the only true concern with UST is that they are another mouth to feed, then bring them aboard. Way too many positives to outweigh that negative. Everything Loyola had going for it, UST seems to bring on a much faster paced schedule.

[Bulldog4life24]

I'm a little torn on this. What if you add another and we have another defection? If we're staying at a 11, there has to be some sort of mandate that you are playing a non-con team on the "off-day". That's just way too big of a competitive advantage when you're slogging through a 20 game conference slate. I don't care if its Chicago State. Just mandate that some D1 team is scheduled.

But if the only true concern with UST is that they are another mouth to feed, then bring them aboard. Way too many positives to outweigh that negative. Everything Loyola had going for it, UST seems to bring on a much faster paced schedule.

mandating a non-con game on those "off" days would result in more games against horrid sub-300 net teams. That's not what the Valley needs to add to their MBB and WBB schedules.

[BCPanther]

How is it an advantage when everybody gets a 'bye' at some point?

Other leagues have been doing it for years plus, like stated, we don't need to be playing teams that are available in January and February. Not a whole lot of quality opponents just sitting there waiting for the phone to ring for those dates.

Also, I wouldn't be shocked if we go back to 18. That's 10 fewer losses the league has to take and it helps keep the calendar in order.

[MissouriValleyUnite]

St. Thomas is already a Q2 game and they’re not even eligible for the NCAA Tournament yet and still playing in their D3 arena. If there’s an addition, it’s going to be the Tommies. Otherwise, they’ll stick at 11.

[ColonialBulldog]

How is it an advantage when everybody gets a 'bye' at some point?

Well that's an easy one. Timing and opponent. A bye early in the season is less advantageous than a bye in the middle of the conference slate. Having Bradley as your only opponent in one week is more advantageous for a league contender than only having to play a bottom of the league team.

But I thought about it and the premise is off. If we keep the same schedule format of Tuesday/Wednesday and Saturday/Sunday, every team would necessarily have two byes. (Although there could be some manipulation with those late November/early December games. I wouldn't be surprised if the Valley went with a "5 games over two weeks" model. For example, you'd play Sun/Wed/Sat/Tues/Thurs. And at a minimum every team would have 4 games every two weeks. That doesn't actually seem so bad.