NET

[RacerJoeD]

I think the key takeaway is to schedule the games anyway, because it is better to lose to Q1s than (in many cases) to beat Q4s. The biggest part of this is financial. It is impossible to regularly schedule Q1s at home, and you need home games both for ticket sales and happier fans, but also because it's easier to win at home than on the road.

The part that should be emphasized is the scheduling of H/H with perennial Q2s and Q3s as opposed to buy game Q4s. scheduling a team at say, NET of 70, is a Q1 game on the road and a Q2 game at home. But if you were to schedule top 50 teams anywhere, say as part of a 2-1 or 1-1-1, all three go those games are Q1s.


Some teams that are in the top 50 range?

North Texas
ORU
New Mexico
Pitt
Charleston
Kent State
Northwestern
Auburn

These are teams that already appear in some Valley teams schedules. These are the sweet spot. First, because they will schedule Valley teams. Second, they are more apt to be willing to play a Valley team on the road. Lastly, for the better teams in the valley, they are winnable games.

[Adunk33]

In terms of scheduling, it continues to get harder to get games against the P5 as many of them have shifted to a 20-22 game conference season. So, then you have to convince a P5 to use one of their (8ish) games left to buy an MVC school. It's tougher than ever to be a MM coach between scheduling and being feeders to the P5. See Georgia's leading scorer and Kentucky's No.2, for example.

It's been talked about at length before but the NET is just total BS. RPI was a good metric...until the MMs figured out how it could work for them. That led the NCAA to change the way they evaluate tournament participants. RPI certainly had its flaws, I believe the Birds were like 38 RPI in 2008 and didn't make the dance, but as another poster indicated...it didn't have the built in bias of the NET.

[TylerDurden]

I think the key takeaway is to schedule the games anyway, because it is better to lose to Q1s than (in many cases) to beat Q4s. The biggest part of this is financial. It is impossible to regularly schedule Q1s at home, and you need home games both for ticket sales and happier fans, but also because it's easier to win at home than on the road.

The part that should be emphasized is the scheduling of H/H with perennial Q2s and Q3s as opposed to buy game Q4s. scheduling a team at say, NET of 70, is a Q1 game on the road and a Q2 game at home. But if you were to schedule top 50 teams anywhere, say as part of a 2-1 or 1-1-1, all three go those games are Q1s.


Some teams that are in the top 50 range?

North Texas
ORU
New Mexico
Pitt
Charleston
Kent State
Northwestern
Auburn

These are teams that already appear in some Valley teams schedules. These are the sweet spot. First, because they will schedule Valley teams. Second, they are more apt to be willing to play a Valley team on the road. Lastly, for the better teams in the valley, they are winnable games.

I agree, generally.

But let's not forget that there are two evaluation systems: one for Power schools and one for everyone else. Going 4-11 in Q1 for Oklahoma shows they can beat anyone. Going 1-3 for a mid-major shows they have a weak schedule. It's science, or something - a feature, not a flaw.

Interestingly enough, the MVC used to put together lists of potential nonconference opponents for schools via their RPI consultants - based off potential team strength. Austin Peay used to be the example nonconference opponent team in the 2000s - someone you could beat at home or on the road who would win 20+ games regardless. It didn't count as a quality win in the eyes of the committee, but they were a great nonconference RPI opponent.

Frankly, I'd love to see a mandate return even though I realize things are different than they were even a decade ago as it relates to nonconference opportunities. It's the only way some schools will ever put together a decent schedule.

[keane1]

In terms of scheduling, it continues to get harder to get games against the P5 as many of them have shifted to a 20-22 game conference season. So, then you have to convince a P5 to use one of their (8ish) games left to buy an MVC school. It's tougher than ever to be a MM coach between scheduling and being feeders to the P5. See Georgia's leading scorer and Kentucky's No.2, for example.

It's been talked about at length before but the NET is just total BS. RPI was a good metric...until the MMs figured out how it could work for them. That led the NCAA to change the way they evaluate tournament participants. RPI certainly had its flaws, I believe the Birds were like 38 RPI in 2008 and didn't make the dance, but as another poster indicated...it didn't have the built in bias of the NET.

MO State still holds the record of lowest RPI to not make the dance, 21 RPI in 2006. Prior to that, no team below 30 had ever been passed over.

[Drakey]

Bottom line is we need to schedule better. Wardle did a good job this year but didn’t cash in on the opps unfortunately.

You don't get it. They won't play a decent mid major team.

[Bulldog4life24]

Bottom line is we need to schedule better. Wardle did a good job this year but didn’t cash in on the opps unfortunately.

You don't get it. They won't play a decent mid major team.

We say this, yet UNI got decent non con games. How?

[BCPanther]

Bottom line is we need to schedule better. Wardle did a good job this year but didn’t cash in on the opps unfortunately.

You don't get it. They won't play a decent mid major team.

We say this, yet UNI got decent non con games. How?

UNI is willing to play on the road and does a great job of picking teams that are most likely going to be decent. Those games are completely available if you are willing to play people at their place.

Next year we've got Battle 4 Atlantis, at Toledo, at USF and Richmond at home already lined up.

[tribecalledquest]

Bottom line is we need to schedule better. Wardle did a good job this year but didn’t cash in on the opps unfortunately.

You don't get it. They won't play a decent mid major team.

Yes they will. Please stop with this.

[Drakey]

Bottom line is we need to schedule better. Wardle did a good job this year but didn’t cash in on the opps unfortunately.

You don't get it. They won't play a decent mid major team.

Yes they will. Please stop with this.

Delude yourself then. Bradley lucked in to two games counting as Quad 1, which are just mid majors who happened to be better than usual (Liberty and Utah State) Got Auburn in a tournament, which most Valley teams would not be able to get into, and took a buy game at Arkansas. You got ONE power 5 regularly scheduled game at their place with no chance that nay of them would ever play in Peoria.

[Bulldog4life24]

Drakey - if you're argument was P5s won't play us straight up, I'd agree with you. They won't play a straight up home and home, neutral, or agree to even a couple years of games at their place.

You can play them though. You just have to be willing to take early season buy games or catch em in a tough tournament. UNI did it this year. Bradley got a couple.

If you don't then you have to take your chances with programs like SLU and Wyoming having continued success (that didn't work out), or a usually solid upper mid conference in the A-10 not crapping the bed (that didn't work either).