Scheduling Philosphy:
Nov 19, 2018 14:59:15 GMT -5
Post by mrose on Nov 19, 2018 14:59:15 GMT -5
In light of the underling discussion of a conference's relative strength the question of scheduling almost always comes into play. There are differing philosophies and differing motives for a program's schedule. Some conferences establish standards they expect their members to live by and others sort of treat scheduling with a hands-off approach. In this discussion let's ignore the Power-5 along with the MEAC and SWAC as those conferences mostly certainly treat scheduling different than "mid-majors."
I always stated the RPI could be gamed and evidently it was gamed enough the NCAA decided this past summer to scrap that ranking system for a new system. But prior to scrapping the RPI the NCAA put in place another tool called "quadrants." When selecting and seeding the field of 68 the NCAA plans to continue to use the quadrant system. It's a pretty simple breakdown to separate teams into 4 groups and it essentially states who a team played and where they played.
Going forward, IMHO, with T-Rankings and advanced metrics the quadrant system can be used similarly as the old RPI in a way to schedule up and improve one's relative strength-of-schedule...if the desire is there.
Here's how the quadrants are divided:
Group 1: Home (1-30) Neutral (1-50) Away (1-75)
Group 2: Home (31-75) Neutral (51-100) Away (76-135)
Group 3: Home (76-160) Neutral (101-200) Away (136-240)
Group 4: Home (161-353) Neutral (201-353) Away (241-353)
Wins against Group 1 & 2 are good wins. Losses vs teams in Groups 3 and 4 are bad. Racking up wins vs teams in Groups 3 and 4 are basically meaningless and the Selection Committee interprets that info as a team didn't go out and challenge themselves to receive an At-Large or a better seeding. Oh, in addition to the quadrants the Committee sees listed on each team sheet how many non D I programs that team played. That info is listed in the quadrant field and is easily read when determining who a team played and whether they challenged themselves.
So, let's look at how the Horizon League, in aggregate, scheduled this year based off of the 2017-18 quadrants. But first, the HL doesn't have any home games scheduled vs the Power-5, Big East, or American Athletic. However, the HL does play 25 road games this year against those members.
The HL has 60 true home non-con games this season. 59 road games and 7 neutral site games. Of the 60 home games 16 (26.67%) are against non D I opponents. None of the scheduled home games are from Groups 1 or 2. 33 away games and 3 neutral site games are scheduled vs the top 2 Groups. Back to home games, the HL has 10 games scheduled vs Group 3, 34 vs Group 4, and as mentioned earlier 16 vs non D I.
To make it more clear about the home games scheduled:
10 vs Group 3
34 vs Group 4
16 vs non D I
That's all of the HL's non-con home slate.
Of the total 126 games (60 home, 59 away, 7 neutral) the HL plays 58 (46%) games vs Group 4 or non D I opponents.
Let that sink in for a moment. Nearly half of all the HL's out-of-conference games are against the worst of the worse D I programs or non D I programs.
IMHO, it's hard to improve your lot in life if you choose not to challenge yourself, but that's just my 2 cents on the scheduling philosophy.
I always stated the RPI could be gamed and evidently it was gamed enough the NCAA decided this past summer to scrap that ranking system for a new system. But prior to scrapping the RPI the NCAA put in place another tool called "quadrants." When selecting and seeding the field of 68 the NCAA plans to continue to use the quadrant system. It's a pretty simple breakdown to separate teams into 4 groups and it essentially states who a team played and where they played.
Going forward, IMHO, with T-Rankings and advanced metrics the quadrant system can be used similarly as the old RPI in a way to schedule up and improve one's relative strength-of-schedule...if the desire is there.
Here's how the quadrants are divided:
Group 1: Home (1-30) Neutral (1-50) Away (1-75)
Group 2: Home (31-75) Neutral (51-100) Away (76-135)
Group 3: Home (76-160) Neutral (101-200) Away (136-240)
Group 4: Home (161-353) Neutral (201-353) Away (241-353)
Wins against Group 1 & 2 are good wins. Losses vs teams in Groups 3 and 4 are bad. Racking up wins vs teams in Groups 3 and 4 are basically meaningless and the Selection Committee interprets that info as a team didn't go out and challenge themselves to receive an At-Large or a better seeding. Oh, in addition to the quadrants the Committee sees listed on each team sheet how many non D I programs that team played. That info is listed in the quadrant field and is easily read when determining who a team played and whether they challenged themselves.
So, let's look at how the Horizon League, in aggregate, scheduled this year based off of the 2017-18 quadrants. But first, the HL doesn't have any home games scheduled vs the Power-5, Big East, or American Athletic. However, the HL does play 25 road games this year against those members.
The HL has 60 true home non-con games this season. 59 road games and 7 neutral site games. Of the 60 home games 16 (26.67%) are against non D I opponents. None of the scheduled home games are from Groups 1 or 2. 33 away games and 3 neutral site games are scheduled vs the top 2 Groups. Back to home games, the HL has 10 games scheduled vs Group 3, 34 vs Group 4, and as mentioned earlier 16 vs non D I.
To make it more clear about the home games scheduled:
10 vs Group 3
34 vs Group 4
16 vs non D I
That's all of the HL's non-con home slate.
Of the total 126 games (60 home, 59 away, 7 neutral) the HL plays 58 (46%) games vs Group 4 or non D I opponents.
Let that sink in for a moment. Nearly half of all the HL's out-of-conference games are against the worst of the worse D I programs or non D I programs.
IMHO, it's hard to improve your lot in life if you choose not to challenge yourself, but that's just my 2 cents on the scheduling philosophy.
