Author Topic: CUSA MBB Scheduling article - good read  (Read 871 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



stonecoldken

  • Chancellor
  • ******
  • Posts: 12934
Reply #1 on: October 24, 2017, 03:36:45 pm
Give one position on the selection committee per conference.  If you have 34 conferences, that's 34 people, with 7 of them from P5 & Big East & A-10.  Those 27 committee members could demand fairness by voting for mid majors into the Tourney.


Another way, comparing how you do vs RPI.  If you have a 45 RPI vs a 3 schedule, that's -42.  If you have a 250 RPI vs a 300 schedule, that's +50.  You can't help your level of competition, only how you perform against it.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2017, 03:41:33 pm by stonecoldken »
CHP sold out.  I declare Nick McEntyre our Chancellor-In-Exile!

JFelt quote about CHP.  "Stake your claim.  As long as UNC-CH doesn't want it first."

Taylor Swift, Jewel, Katy Perry, SE Cupp, Jennifer Garner, Gwen Stefani, Jessica Alba, & Eva Mendes are my Baby Mama's.


ghostofclt

  • Sophomore
  • *
  • Posts: 780
Reply #2 on: October 24, 2017, 05:19:12 pm
clt says lets set up fake classes to allow non eligible athletes to play b-ball and fb all.


No that is too absurd. Would never happen.


NinerAdvocate

  • MemberPF
  • Walk On
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Reply #3 on: October 25, 2017, 10:18:11 am
The problem with the RPI formula was it was 25% your record and 75% the record of your opponents (and their opponents). They created a huge bias towards SOS which in turn creates a huge bias towards home teams (eg Syracuse never leaving their home court til conference play) and therefore the so called power leagues.

I'm all for building a better metric / mousetrap that shifts more emphasis towards winning games, which will allow a 26 win CUSA team to make the field over a 14-14 power league team (just typing that sentence is ridiculous - why is this even a debate? Its about winning games, not just who you play - and Jay Bilas is an idiot schill for suggesting who you play is more important than winning games).

HOWEVER, huge caveat here - the last time some fairness was introduced to the metric (RPI) - a tweak to just 25% of the formula rewarding road wins more than home wins, really just window dressing, in 2005, the NCAA immediately de-emphasized the RPI because it had 6 MVC teams in the mix for at large bids, and they cant have that s***. The NCAA tournament is just a glorified revenue share for the big boys and allowing more seats at the table for the mid majors is a no-no, NO MATTER HOW MANY GAMES THEY WIN AND HOW MUCH THEY HAVE TO TRAVEL TO DO SO (another absurd concept).

So why the rant? Simple. It is pointless to design a better / actually more fair metric, if the committee is just going to ignore it or use it selectively when it helps their cause to give money and exposure to the power league dregs. I suggest what you have to do is to get the power leagues to buy in to a blind, impartial metric that just may end up putting a program like La Tech (and say 25 wins) in over a 6th place SEC team. The metric has to be fair and not selectively applied or its pointless. Doing this would fix a good deal of what is wrong with college basketball.

Of course, I have had ideas that will never ever be implemented for what would fix CFB too. And I thought that UNC Cheats actions were so egregious that they couldn't be overlooked. So what the f*** do I know. Greed and corruption will almost assuredly continue to rule until these assholes kill college sports altogether. Same as it ever was.   
« Last Edit: October 25, 2017, 10:21:02 am by NinerAdvocate »


JaMiNNiNeR

  • Senior
  • **
  • Posts: 1705
Reply #4 on: October 25, 2017, 12:08:25 pm
The A10 did improve its conference RPI by changing its scheduling policy. Id like to see CUSA do something similar although it will be harder because many CUSA schools are located in less populated areas so scheduling is tougher.


Nugget

  • Assistant Coach
  • ***
  • Posts: 4580
Reply #5 on: October 25, 2017, 12:42:30 pm
I am encouraged that C-USA has hired Mark Adams as a consultant.  The first step to fixing the problem is admitting you have one.
#unc-CHeatingPays


Run49er

  • Moderator
  • Chancellor
  • *****
  • Posts: 12453
Reply #6 on: October 27, 2017, 10:53:46 pm
David Teel of the Daily Press in Newport News with his take on the subject. Also a good read.

Dailypress.com: C-USA basketball mulling radical schedule overhaul


itsbraille49

  • MemberPF
  • Assistant Coach
  • ***
  • Posts: 3693
  • I used to be arrogant, but now I'm perfect.
    • Green Tinted Glasses
Reply #7 on: October 28, 2017, 12:34:26 pm
The A10 did improve its conference RPI by changing its scheduling policy. Id like to see CUSA do something similar although it will be harder because many CUSA schools are located in less populated areas so scheduling is tougher.

The A10 actually only did the tiered based scheduling for one season, which happened to be a season several teams rebounded from lulls. Id say the cannibalization could have actually cost us bids that season.

C-Pip's right.  About EVERYTHING.

Quote
(11:24:23) stonecoldken: CPip is the Cornbread of Engineers.



 

* Charlotte 49ers News

* State of Charlotte

* Videos