OOC Scheduling

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I keeping seeing ours getting lambasted. Is that just bad luck due to Oregon State, WVU, and Missouri all sucking?

Because we already play 20 (up from 18) conference games, in addition to the aforementioned teams from high major conferences, plus Florida. That's six high major opponents that, in the Dixon Era, would have been two or three at the most. Look at Dixon's last season here: Purdue. That was the list of high major OOC opponents, in a season when we only played 18 conference games. I get that the Gonzaga game was canceled and I get that the ACC was better. Just curious what we're doing wrong in the OOC (other than getting some bad luck with three teams sucking way worse than anyone likely would have anticipated).

 

[pittchagg]

I keeping seeing ours getting lambasted. Is that just bad luck due to Oregon State, WVU, and Missouri all sucking?

Because we already play 20 (up from 18) conference games, in addition to the aforementioned teams from high major conferences, plus Florida. That's six high major opponents that, in the Dixon Era, would have been two or three at the most. Look at Dixon's last season here: Purdue. That was the list of high major OOC opponents, in a season when we only played 18 conference games. I get that the Gonzaga game was canceled and I get that the ACC was better. Just curious what we're doing wrong in the OOC (other than getting some bad luck with three teams sucking way worse than anyone likely would have anticipated).

It’s mostly bad luck. West Virginia fell apart after they were already on the schedule, we didn’t have any choice in the Missouri game, and they were projected to be much, much better than they ended up being. I think both WVU and Missouri were projected to be somewhere in the 60-70 range in kenpom’s preseason projections, but they both obviously weren’t at that level.

The killer was that the tournament had two really strong SOS teams in Florida and Baylor, a solid SOS team in Pitt, and one of the worst high major teams in the country in Oregon State. Because we lost to Florida (a fine loss and the best non-conference opponent we played all year), instead of playing a top 25 Baylor team, we got a #175 Oregon State team. Just swapping those two opponents would have pushed our SOS up a ton. Missouri being at the level that they were supposed to be would have it up a ton. West Virginia not falling apart would have pushed it up a ton.

On paper it was a schedule that wasn’t all that different than last year’s strong non-conference schedule - fewer 300+ opponents than last year for a slightly better bottom end of the schedule, but they swapped the Vanderbilt game for one of FGCU or Purdue Fort Wayne for a slightly softer middle, with similar projected top end opponents. It’s just that what was supposed to be the top end tanked.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

It’s mostly bad luck. West Virginia fell apart after they were already on the schedule, we didn’t have any choice in the Missouri game, and they were projected to be much, much better than they ended up being. I think both WVU and Missouri were projected to be somewhere in the 60-70 range in kenpom’s preseason projections, but they both obviously weren’t at that level.

The killer was that the tournament had two really strong SOS teams in Florida and Baylor, a solid SOS team in Pitt, and one of the worst high major teams in the country in Oregon State. Because we lost to Florida (a fine loss and the best non-conference opponent we played all year), instead of playing a top 25 Baylor team, we got a #175 Oregon State team. Just swapping those two opponents would have pushed our SOS up a ton. Missouri being at the level that they were supposed to be would have it up a ton. West Virginia not falling apart would have pushed it up a ton.

On paper it was a schedule that wasn’t all that different than last year’s strong non-conference schedule - fewer 300+ opponents than last year for a slightly better bottom end of the schedule, but they swapped the Vanderbilt game for one of FGCU or Purdue Fort Wayne for a slightly softer middle, with similar projected top end opponents. It’s just that what was supposed to be the top end tanked.

This is right. We need to swap some of those home games for road games though. Winning at Duq and YSU and our NET is 10-15 spots higher. Playing a road game at Duquesne but in PPG Paints Arena is such a hack because the crowd would be 80/20 Pitt.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Playing a road game at Duquesne but in PPG Paints Arena is such a hack because the crowd would be 80/20 Pitt.

The NCAA never considered a Pitt - Duquense game at the Civic Arena/PPG Paints an away game for Pitt from the day that Duquesne moved into the Palumbo Center, why would they consider it an away game now?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

last year’s strong non-conference schedule

Well that's the issue. Last season's non-conference schedule wasn't actually very strong (249th on Pomeroy, for example). If we hadn't gotten a little bad luck would this season's non-con have been similarly mediocre? Yeah, maybe. But scheduling in such a way that you think it's going to be mediocre always leaves the possibility that a couple of the teams that you think are going to be decent turn out to be less so, which ends up making your schedule look bad.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

The NCAA never considered a Pitt - Duquense game at the Civic Arena/PPG Paints an away game for Pitt from the day that Duquesne moved into the Palumbo Center, why would they consider it an away game now?

Because it was always officially a neutral site game. That's how the contract read. Duquesne is allowed to play home games there. As long as Duquesne is considered the home team in the contract, it will be considered a road game for us.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Because it was always officially a neutral site game. That's how the contract read. Duquesne is allowed to play home games there. As long as Duquesne is considered the home team in the contract, it will be considered a road game for us.

No, it won't.

Just because Pitt wants to pretend it's a road game when they play another team on a court other than their home court the NCAA is under no obligation to agree.

And in fact, the contract when the teams played there before always said which team was considered the home team in which year. And yet in the years that Pitt was the home team the game never counted as a Pitt home game, just as when Pitt was the away team the game never counted as a Pitt away game.

 

[pittchagg]

Well that's the issue. Last season's non-conference schedule wasn't actually very strong (249th on Pomeroy, for example). If we hadn't gotten a little bad luck would this season's non-con have been similarly mediocre? Yeah, maybe. But scheduling in such a way that you think it's going to be mediocre always leaves the possibility that a couple of the teams that you think are going to be decent turn out to be less so, which ends up making your schedule look bad.

Last year’s NET NCSOS was #144, which is what was listed on the committee’s team sheets. It’s probably the single biggest reason why we made the field last year given our pretty mediocre predictive metrics.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Last year’s NET NCSOS was #144, which is what was listed on the committee’s team sheets. It’s probably the single biggest reason why we made the field last year given our pretty mediocre predictive metrics.

You get that 144 isn't actually very good, right?

The biggest reason we made the tournament is even though some people think that the NET is the be all and end all of the committee, in reality there are other things that are much, much more important. Even SMF knows that, even if he doesn't realize that he knows it.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

No, it won't.

Just because Pitt wants to pretend it's a road game when they play another team on a court other than their home court the NCAA is under no obligation to agree.

And in fact, the contract when the teams played there before always said which team was considered the home team in which year. And yet in the years that Pitt was the home team the game never counted as a Pitt home game, just as when Pitt was the away team the game never counted as a Pitt away game.

You dont understand. The contract probably stated which team was considered home on the scoreboard and brought their admin to work it but it was a neutral site game or joint home game for revenue distribution. I dont know the specifics of whether or not it was 50/50 or like 70/30 Pitt but the gate was split and each school's season ticket holders were provided tickets as part of their season ticket package. That's the definition of a neutral site game.

What if Duquesne played Dayton there? Or played RMU or WVU? Or played Pitt there when Palumbo was closed for renovation? Are those neutral site games? The arena is literally 2 blocks from Duquesne's campus if distance matters at all. What if Pitt played Duke there and the crowd was 50/50? Is that a neutral site game?

The only way I can see you'd be right here is if the NCAA had some type of distance rule but even then you could hack it because it would probably state that the home team would have to use it as a home gym for X amount of games. My guess would be 3 or more. So you tell Duquesne we'd play them in a 2 for 1 if they play 2 more home games at PPG. They could play VCU, Dayton, or maybe even get WVU in on this action as WVU used to play them home and home there up until a few years ago.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

You dont understand.

It is hilarious that you can say that and then post something that shows that you have no idea what you are talking about.

The NCAA NEVER considered a Pitt - Duquesne game at the Civic Arena / PPG Paints to be a Pitt away game once Duquesne moved their home games back on campus. If they didn't do it then, why would they do it now? Especially since it would obviously be an attempt to manipulate the rankings. Similarly, if Pitt decided to play Duke at PPG and call it a neutral site game, that would clearly be an attempt to manipulate the rankings, and there is no way the NCAA would allow that.

It's like you think that you've come up with all these clever schemes to manipulate the system that no one else has or ever will consider. And that everyone will just look at it and say "huh, wonder why they did that? Oh well, no sense to consider it any more." And that just isn't the way that things work. I mean maybe in your head they work that way, but not in the real world.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

It is hilarious that you can say that and then post something that shows that you have no idea what you are talking about.

The NCAA NEVER considered a Pitt - Duquesne game at the Civic Arena / PPG Paints to be a Pitt away game once Duquesne moved their home games back on campus. If they didn't do it then, why would they do it now? Especially since it would obviously be an attempt to manipulate the rankings. Similarly, if Pitt decided to play Duke at PPG and call it a neutral site game, that would clearly be an attempt to manipulate the rankings, and there is no way the NCAA would allow that.

It's like you think that you've come up with all these clever schemes to manipulate the system that no one else has or ever will consider. And that everyone will just look at it and say "huh, wonder why they did that? Oh well, no sense to consider it any more." And that just isn't the way that things work. I mean maybe in your head they work that way, but not in the real world.

Pitt/Duq was always a contracted neutral site game. What are you talking about? They've never attempted to play a true road game at Duquesne at PPG.

A few questions:

1. WVU @ Duquesne at PPG - is that a home or neutral game for Duquesne

2. Same question for Dayton @ Duquesne

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Pitt/Duq was always a contracted neutral site game. What are you talking about? They've never attempted to play a true road game at Duquesne at PPG.

A few questions:

1. WVU @ Duquesne at PPG - is that a home or neutral game for Duquesne

2. Same question for Dayton @ Duquesne

Those are both home games for Duquesne. Because you may not have noticed this, but West Virginia and Dayton are not actually in Pittsburgh.

They've never attempted to play a true road game against Duquesne at PPG because there is no such thing as a true road game if Pitt plays Duquesne at PPG.

Why did none of the games that Pitt and Duquesne played at PPG between 2010 and 2018 count as Duquesne home games? Don't you think that Pitt would have benefited in many of those years from pretending that it was a road game? And yet they never counted that way. Why, do you suppose, that is?

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Why did none of the games that Pitt and Duquesne played at PPG between 2010 and 2018 count as Duquesne home games? Don't you think that Pitt would have benefited in many of those years from pretending that it was a road game? And yet they never counted that way. Why, do you suppose, that is?

Easy.

Because RPI was all winning percentage based. It didnt account for where games were played. So there was no real advantage by making those Duquesne home games. NET seems to overweight road games. Also, by making it a joint home game every year, it gave Pitt season ticket holders seats and another small reason to buy season tickets. So it was contracted as a neutral site game.

You arent going to be able to cite an NCAA rule on this and neither am I. I am relying on basic common sense. If Pitt wants to play "at Duquesne" and Duquesne feels they can get a bigger crowd at PPG the NCAA isnt going to tell Pitt that it has to count that as a neutral site game. Its 2 blocks from Duquesne's campus and having Duquesne host a big opponent in a big arena makes all the sense in the world. If this were RMU hosting Pitt at PPG Paints, maybe you'd have a point.

Let me ask you this one. If Oakland secedes from the city of Pittsburgh so Pitt is officially in Oakland, PA, would playing Duquesne at PPG then count as a road game. What's the rule? You cant be in the same city? Would Michigan State playing Detroit at the Pistons arena count as a Detroit home game for NET if its contracted as such?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Because RPI was all winning percentage based. It didnt account for where games were played.

So not only do you not understand the NET, you didn't understand the RPI either. Got it.

I mean good god, do you really think that the RPI didn't account for where games were played? In point of fact, a road win counted as 1.4 wins on your record and a home win only counted for 0.6 wins on your record. If you won five home games your record for your RPI was 3-0. If you won five road games your record for your RPI was 7-0.

Do you really not think that's a difference, or after all those years did you just not understand the RPI, even a little bit? Certainly would explain a lot.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

So not only do you not understand the NET, you didn't understand the RPI either. Got it.

I mean good god, do you really think that the RPI didn't account for where games were played? In point of fact, a road win counted as 1.4 wins on your record and a home win only counted for 0.6 wins on your record. If you won five home games your record for your RPI was 3-0. If you won five road games your record for your RPI was 7-0.

Do you really not think that's a difference, or after all those years did you just not understand the RPI, even a little bit? Certainly would explain a lot.

OK but now answer my questions in the last paragraph.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

OK but now answer my questions in the last paragraph.

In the completely moronic scenario where Oakland secedes from the city of Pittsburgh a Pitt - Duquesne game at PPG is still not a road game. For the same reason the first nine Pitt - Duquesne games at PPG were not road games.

Do you have any other really stupid hypotheticals that have nothing at all to do with reality that you want me to answer, or would you rather put some effort into understanding the way that things work in the real world?

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

In the completely moronic scenario where Oakland secedes from the city of Pittsburgh a Pitt - Duquesne game at PPG is still not a road game. For the same reason the first nine Pitt - Duquesne games at PPG were not road games.

Do you have any other really stupid hypotheticals that have nothing at all to do with reality that you want me to answer, or would you rather put some effort into understanding the way that things work in the real world?

Yes. The other one you didnt answer. Is Michigan State @ Detroit at Little Caesar's Arena a road or neutral site game for MSU if the contract shows its a 100% Detroit home game. Their season ticket holder(s), their admin working it, 100% of concessions

 

[PantherRama724]

I serenade my friends every year about our OOC scheduling. We’re stuck in a 2000’s Big East mentality where, because that league was so loaded, it didn’t make sense to go out and schedule an ambitious non-conference because the league gave you everything you needed. Going into league play at 11-1, 12-0, whatever was perfect scheduling for that period. With where we’re at now, the strategy has to shift. There’s absolutely zero risk to playing big time opponents in non-conference as, if you lose, it doesn’t kill the metrics and if you win you’ve got a top of the resume bullet point for March.

I’d love to see us pursue some former Big East foes for a Home/Home arrangement. UConn with Hurley would be an event at the Pete, St John’s with Pitino, Villanova if they can get it together. Even some of the newer schools in that league like Xavier (Miller) or Marquette would generate some excitement and likely be a much easier ticket sell than the Missouri’s or Vanderbilt’s of the world.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I serenade my friends every year about our OOC scheduling. We’re stuck in a 2000’s Big East mentality where, because that league was so loaded, it didn’t make sense to go out and schedule an ambitious non-conference because the league gave you everything you needed. Going into league play at 11-1, 12-0, whatever was perfect scheduling for that period. With where we’re at now, the strategy has to shift. There’s absolutely zero risk to playing big time opponents in non-conference as, if you lose, it doesn’t kill the metrics and if you win you’ve got a top of the resume bullet point for March.

I’d love to see us pursue some former Big East foes for a Home/Home arrangement. UConn with Hurley would be an event at the Pete, St John’s with Pitino, Villanova if they can get it together. Even some of the newer schools in that league like Xavier (Miller) or Marquette would generate some excitement and likely be a much easier ticket sell than the Missouri’s or Vanderbilt’s of the world.

We are actually scheduling much tougher now. People forget the Big East was only 18 games so we had 13 00Cs. Jamie only played in those 2 game Gazelle Group tournaments which were never that high of a level. Then he'd play 10 mid or low majors and then usually 1 P6 opponent (Ten, Wis, Aub, PSU, Wash, OK St). And that opponent was usually much worse than us for the program we established. I agree Jamie didnt need to schedule tough for RPI purposes as he was pretty good at gaming and beating the best teams from the mid-major leagues but what happened is that Pitt basketball got really boring and stale. People stopped paying attention until January. I felt the fans needed and deserved a big-time December home game.

Capel only has 11 OOC games. 2 are tourney games. 2 are vs P6s. So only 7 cupcakes vs Jamie's 10. I dont have a huge problem with how Capel schedules. The Q4s actually helped us this year because we blew them out but that's a risk to take. I'd schedule more D2s, fewer Q4s, and more winnable road games like Duq, YSU, RMU, Penn, Drexel, etc.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I serenade my friends every year about our OOC scheduling. We’re stuck in a 2000’s Big East mentality where, because that league was so loaded, it didn’t make sense to go out and schedule an ambitious non-conference because the league gave you everything you needed. Going into league play at 11-1, 12-0, whatever was perfect scheduling for that period. With where we’re at now, the strategy has to shift. There’s absolutely zero risk to playing big time opponents in non-conference as, if you lose, it doesn’t kill the metrics and if you win you’ve got a top of the resume bullet point for March.

I’d love to see us pursue some former Big East foes for a Home/Home arrangement. UConn with Hurley would be an event at the Pete, St John’s with Pitino, Villanova if they can get it together. Even some of the newer schools in that league like Xavier (Miller) or Marquette would generate some excitement and likely be a much easier ticket sell than the Missouri’s or Vanderbilt’s of the world.

Like it's been mentioned above, I do think bad luck is part of this. Dixon never had WVU, Oregon State, Missouri, and Florida on the slate - and that's with playing 20 conference games instead of 18. Of course, I'm talking about name only, because three of those teams suck this season. And last year was WVU, Michigan, VCU, Northwestern, and Vanderbilt. I just can't fault the OOC scheduling. But I do agree that you might as well play some national powerhouses early, because it seems like the rewards far outweigh the risks these days.

I think the bigger problem is the ACC's performance in Nov/early Dec, and I think that gets weighted too heavily. Teams are probably more different from Nov to March now than ever before because of how many pieces are coming and going each offseason.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Like it's been mentioned above, I do think bad luck is part of this. Dixon never had WVU, Oregon State, Missouri, and Florida on the slate - and that's with playing 20 conference games instead of 18. Of course, I'm talking about name only, because three of those teams suck this season. And last year was WVU, Michigan, VCU, Northwestern, and Vanderbilt. I just can't fault the OOC scheduling. But I do agree that you might as well play some national powerhouses early, because it seems like the rewards far outweigh the risks these days.

I think the bigger problem is the ACC's performance in Nov/early Dec, and I think that gets weighted too heavily. Teams are probably more different from Nov to March now than ever before because of how many pieces are coming and going each offseason.

Weren't we 9-3 vs the B12 and tied the SEC in the challenge? I'd like to see side by side results for all the P6 + MWC. Clemson and VT even have wins over MWC tourney teams. The ACC does seem better this year. Like Miami and BC are ok teams and they are at the bottom. There's really just 3 bad teams out of 12. The ACC needs to hire a math guy to figure out NET and what's going wrong. Part of it is Syracuse has 5 Q4 wins by a combined 60 points. Not sure if there's other example of that.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Weren't we 9-3 vs the B12 and tied the SEC in the challenge? I'd like to see side by side results for all the P6 + MWC. Clemson and VT even have wins over MWC tourney teams. The ACC does seem better this year. Like Miami and BC are ok teams and they are at the bottom. There's really just 3 bad teams out of 12. The ACC needs to hire a math guy to figure out NET and what's going wrong. Part of it is Syracuse has 5 Q4 wins by a combined 60 points. Not sure if there's other example of that.

Well what about bad losses? ND lost to Western Carolina, Georgetown, and the Citadel. FSU lost to Lipscomb, etc. Louisville lost to Chattanooga, DePaul, Arkansas State, etc. Is the problem that the stank from those losses follows those teams and then when they go on an inevitably win a few conference games everyone gets tainted?

I'm sure every conference has lost a few of these, but maybe the ACC is losing more than most. I don't know.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Well what about bad losses? ND lost to Western Carolina, Georgetown, and the Citadel. FSU lost to Lipscomb, etc. Louisville lost to Chattanooga, DePaul, Arkansas State, etc. Is the problem that the stank from those losses follows those teams and then when they go on an inevitably win a few conference games everyone gets tainted?

I'm sure every conference has lost a few of these, but maybe the ACC is losing more than most. I don't know.

We have 3 bad teams out of 15. Is that enough to limit NCAAT bids by 3-4? It doesnt add up. Like, I promise you that Syr, NC St, Pitt, Wake are no worse than those MWC teams or the middle of the pack BE teams who are getting in. Its amazing to me that the ACC can't hire a NET consultant to reverse engineer it.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

We have 3 bad teams out of 15. Is that enough to limit NCAAT bids by 3-4? It doesnt add up. Like, I promise you that Syr, NC St, Pitt, Wake are no worse than those MWC teams or the middle of the pack BE teams who are getting in. Its amazing to me that the ACC can't hire a NET consultant to reverse engineer it.

Right, and I'm sure the same was true when other conferences were getting left in the dust and we were in the conferences the computers loved.

At the end of the day, you're going to have 10ish teams with a legitimate gripe most years, because it's an impossible science. But the tournament produces a ton of drama every year, so no one will question it (unless it's to add more teams and allow for more drama).

I don't disagree that we should look at ways to improve the conference NET (in addition to the obvious way), but I can acknowledge it's pretty silly to try and differentiate between so many teams that are basically pick 'ems on a neutral court and have played completely different schedules.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Right, and I'm sure the same was true when other conferences were getting left in the dust and we were in the conferences the computers loved.

At the end of the day, you're going to have 10ish teams with a legitimate gripe most years, because it's an impossible science. But the tournament produces a ton of drama every year, so no one will question it (unless it's to add more teams and allow for more drama).

I don't disagree that we should look at ways to improve the conference NET (in addition to the obvious way), but I can acknowledge it's pretty silly to try and differentiate between so many teams that are basically pick 'ems on a neutral court and have played completely different schedules.

Which is why the tournament needs expanded. This isnt about just getting teams in to win a Natty. Its an accomplishment and it makes late season games more exciting. I'm against 96. But it should be 72. Have the worst 8 teams play the 4 16 seeds and then the last 8 teams in play for the 11 or 12 seeds.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Which is why the tournament needs expanded. This isnt about just getting teams in to win a Natty. Its an accomplishment and it makes late season games more exciting. I'm against 96. But it should be 72. Have the worst 8 teams play the 4 16 seeds and then the last 8 teams in play for the 11 or 12 seeds.

68 to 72 doesn't do much for me; we'd be back to the same complaints. I wouldn't be opposed to 96. But we're always going to find something to complain about while this remains a beauty pageant. I wouldn't be opposed to objective criteria. But people will say we already have that because, theoretically, every team makes the postseason.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Yes. The other one you didnt answer. Is Michigan State @ Detroit at Little Caesar's Arena a road or neutral site game for MSU if the contract shows its a 100% Detroit home game. Their season ticket holder(s), their admin working it, 100% of concessions

It is 88 miles from the Breslin Center to Little Caesar's Arena.

The fact that you think that that is a similar situation to Pitt playing a game 1.9 miles from the Petersen Center says a lot.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

It is 88 miles from the Breslin Center to Little Caesar's Arena.

The fact that you think that that is a similar situation to Pitt playing a game 1.9 miles from the Petersen Center says a lot.

What about Villanova @ LaSalle, Drexel, or St. Joseph's at The Palestra or at the Sixers arena (lets say that Nova didnt play home games there that season).

What about Arizona State @ Grand Canyon at the Suns arena?

What about BC @ Northeastern or BU at the Celtics arena?

What are the rules on this?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

What about Villanova @ LaSalle, Drexel, or St. Joseph's at The Palestra or at the Sixers arena (lets say that Nova didnt play home games there that season).

What about Arizona State @ Grand Canyon at the Suns arena?

What about BC @ Northeastern or BU at the Celtics arena?

What are the rules on this?

The rules are whatever SMF thinks it should be the NCAA does the opposite, and everyone assumes that they got it right.

And 99.7% of the time, they did.