(03-05-2015 01:24 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  One suggestion, getting rid of Non Div 1a games. The problem is getting good teams to play at a certain places. The lower half probably can get all the tough away games but very few Major Conferences will be willing to play at some sites. That may change, but Cinci, UCONN, Temple, SMU, Memphis and maybe Houston can possibly get teams to do H/H. USF, UCF, ECU, Tulane and Tulsa will have hard times to get "Power Conferences" to play at their places.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but non D1 games aren't factored into RPI are they? So the reason for ECU's 300+ rpi isn't as much the non D1 games but the D1 games against terrible competition, and the fact that we lost to some of them. I know that if we replaced those Non D1 games with Duke or Kansas or someone it would help our RPI but if we replace them with Presbyterian or the Citadel or something, our RPI would actually get worse right? For the record I am not defending our Non D1 games or our weak SOS overall. I would like to see both changed.

The problem for ECU is that we can't get good teams to come to Minges OOC. In 2007-08 we got NC State at home. That wasn't even a team that helped our RPI, but was a team that in most years would be seen as a very good opponent. We won and (then) coach Sydney Lowe said in the post game that he would never come back to Minges.

Maybe the move to the AAC will help our perception some and who we can get to come here. Certainly not the nearby ACC schools, but maybe some decent RPI teams. I definitely want the non D1 games gone and if those become road games then so be it. No matter what we do we are going to have horrible RPI teams at home. I guess it's a matter of how few home games we will tolerate until hopefully we can get some respect. Even most of our Home and Home deals are with teams who usually have RPIs between ~150 and 300 so whatever teams we pay to come here are going to be terrible.

I don't think it's a simple fix to get our OOC RPI to where most would want it. I've seen something like this suggested...

NC Wesleyen (non D1) -> Get as good of a team as we can to pay us to come play
Lynchburg (non D1) -> Same
Central Connecticut (342) -> Same
Florida A&M (351) -> Same

Depending on who we could get to invite us to their place that would help some. How much, I'm not sure, but it would be a good start IMO.

Here's the problem...that would have left us with 3 OOC home games this year. UNC Asheville, UNC Greensboro, and James Madison. I'm not even sure if we could get any of those to come here every year. We played at UNCG last year. Road games from this year at FAU and UNCW are alternating types of games. So we could be looking at anywhere from 2 to 4 home games in a given year. That is kind of hard to sell. If we get a better early season tournament than we did this year maybe we could schedule a couple more home games.

I don't know if anyone has a guess as to what that would move our OOC RPI to? From 300 to what?

(03-05-2015 03:04 PM)k-vegasbuc Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 02:54 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  The simple fact for ECU is that until we improve drastically we're going to have to road whore a couple more ACC games per year.

I would actually like to see us do that. I think we would bring good crowds if we played games at State, UNC, Duke or Wake since we have alumni that live in all those areas.

Living in Winston-Salem, I am 100% for us playing @ Wake Forest!

We should also schedule Charlotte & Davidson, IMO.

(03-05-2015 01:32 PM)Weatherdemon Wrote:  Losing to good teams in OOC is better than winning against crappy teams.
It improves your SOS and a loss to a top 50 team is often better for the RPI than a win against a 200+ team.

No reason anyone in this league should have OOC SOS's that poor.

So the next question becomes 'why do certain programs do it?' Some seem to do it every year.

(03-05-2015 03:07 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 03:04 PM)k-vegasbuc Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 02:54 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  The simple fact for ECU is that until we improve drastically we're going to have to road whore a couple more ACC games per year.

I would actually like to see us do that. I think we would bring good crowds if we played games at State, UNC, Duke or Wake since we have alumni that live in all those areas.

Living in Winston-Salem, I am 100% for us playing @ Wake Forest!

We should also schedule Charlotte & Davidson, IMO.

I would like that as well since my family lives in Kernersville (near Winston). I now live in SC but I would go up to visit for that.

(03-05-2015 03:03 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 02:54 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  The simple fact for ECU is that until we improve drastically we're going to have to road whore a couple more ACC games per year.

I don't think you necessarily HAVE to do that. The difference between basketball and football is that there are nearly 3 times as many schools and instead of there being 5-6 quality conferences, there are at least 10 to choose from. Do you guys have any history with Davidson? They would be a solid option to get a series going with. Then you've got your Charlottes, George Washingtons, and LaSalles of the world. Not the sexiest options, but I think you guys can find some better games.

I agree but I'd rather road whore just for the publicity it gets us in state. We got a lot of local pub just by playing Duke and UNC tough, probably a LOT more than we'd get playing any of those. IMHO, we need to have at least one of the 4 NC ACC teams on the schedule each year.

FWIW, Charlotte is beyond awful right now. There's no benefit to playing them. The other ones that I'm positive that we can get to come to Greenville aren't much to write about but I get your point.

This doesn't even count non-Div 1 games, does it? I remember reading an article saying some RPI ratings are skewed by having extra non-D1 teams on the schedule. Something about it being better to play a game that doesn't exist as far as RPI is concerned than it is to play against a 300+ RPI team.

(03-05-2015 03:18 PM)Tigers2B1 Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:32 PM)Weatherdemon Wrote:  Losing to good teams in OOC is better than winning against crappy teams.
It improves your SOS and a loss to a top 50 team is often better for the RPI than a win against a 200+ team.

No reason anyone in this league should have OOC SOS's that poor.

So the next question becomes 'why do certain programs do it?' Some seem to do it every year.

Probably because team's want their record to be 15-15 instead of 5-25. You could plug in USF, UCF or Houston here, but do you know the one team that ECU's RPI doesn't negatively affect? That's right, ECU. It's not as if we would be a bubble team right now with a better RPI. Hell we wouldn't even be in the NIT discussion. We wouldn't even be in the same universe that the NIT discussion was taking place.

Of course there are somewhat abstract (for lack of a better word) ways that it would help ECU. A stronger OOC schedule would better prepare ECU for conference play. There is also the CHANCE that maybe one more AAC team gets in that otherwise wouldn't based on our RPI and ECU gets some bit of money from that.

I, and most, ECU fans are in agreement that ECU needs to fix scheduling in basketball but there are reasons to schedule soft. We can't just lose 20+ games a year and expect basketball to go anywhere. At the same time we can't beat a bunch of nobodies and expect it to go anywhere. Hopefully now we are starting to get some players in here of a higher caliber. We can start getting rid of some of those "automatic wins" (which haven't always even been the result) and scheduling some better teams, not with the thought that it is just a loss for money, but maybe we can actually steal a few here or there.

It has been a long hard road for ECU basketball, but I think we are getting to the point where schedules that are this bad are finally hurting us. And while I want what's good for the conference, these things do actually have to hurt us before we change them. That, or the conference has to make some rules. I just don't think you are going to get ECU to trade home games and wins for road games and losses so Memphis and Co. have a better chance to make the tournament. If trading these terrible opponents for better ones, even if it means less home games, helps ECU then I think it will happen, and I think we are at or nearing that point.

(03-05-2015 02:54 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  The simple fact for ECU is that until we improve drastically we're going to have to road whore a couple more ACC games per year.

I don't think you necessarily HAVE to do that. The difference between basketball and football is that there are nearly 3 times as many schools and instead of there being 5-6 quality conferences, there are at least 10 to choose from. Do you guys have any history with Davidson? They would be a solid option to get a series going with. Then you've got your Charlottes, George Washingtons, and LaSalles of the world. Not the sexiest options, but I think you guys can find some better games.

(03-05-2015 10:31 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Not only hurts the RPIs of other teams in the conference but the perception of the conference as a whole. Other conferences have scheduling requirements for it's members. Is there anything in the works for this conference and scheduling?

OOC SOS:

ECU 300
UCF 319
Tulane 326
Houston 330

Well if this group of 4 didn't suck, it would move the strength of themselves into the ooc opponents SOS. I bet that would be a huge factor.

(03-05-2015 03:04 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  50% of your RPI is your opponents' record. 25% is your record. 25% is your opponents' opponents' record.

So to a school like Memphis, etc., Houston's OOC schedule is half as important as Houston's OOC record.

If the bottom of the conference schedules easy and it results in a bunch of wins, on balance this is a good thing.

Houston scheduled easy because the coach knew it was going to be tough sledding.

thats not really the case, thats a good argument for the middling OOC sos teams that are like 150--280 type rpi rank

the teams in the bottom 4 have a lot of no win games, bottom 300 rpi games ....

look at temple last year they were 9-22 but still ranked top 180 overall rpi because they had great OOC..beating temple was better than beating a couple 19 win teams...

there are buy games but you can keep it respectable and fairly easy without going overboard with the no win games

(03-05-2015 04:38 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 10:31 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Not only hurts the RPIs of other teams in the conference but the perception of the conference as a whole. Other conferences have scheduling requirements for it's members. Is there anything in the works for this conference and scheduling?

OOC SOS:

ECU 300
UCF 319
Tulane 326
Houston 330

Well if this group of 4 didn't suck, it would move the strength of themselves into the ooc opponents SOS. I bet that would be a huge factor.

Exactly. It's a two part problem. You can't take a crappy team and game the system into them having a good RPI. It's a combination of scheduling better and also being good enough to win some of those games.

Good teams don't want to play RPI killers (crappy teams). So how are crappy teams supposed to magically schedule all these good teams?

And even so George Mason has the 62nd best SOS right now and an RPI of 214 because they are 8-19. You can't just win games or just schedule better and magically have a good RPI, it has to be a combination of the two.

Hopefully ECU, UCF, USF, and Houston are in the process of upping their talent so they can schedule better and win some games and have a better RPI. I don't get why people think RPI is some system you can just game. Wouldn't everyone do that if it was the case? You could just win 15 games and make the tournament because your RPI was so good?

Obviously you can move it a few spots based on scheduling but it won't fix much if you aren't winning.

According to RealtimeRPI.com
Missouri has the 15th best SOS and an RPI of 202 at 8-21
USC has the 85th best SOS and an RPI of 204 at 11-18
George Mason has the 62nd best SOS and an RPI of 214 at 8-19
Gonzaga has the 77th best SOS and an RPI of 8 at 28-2

See the correlation?

So I'm guessing that Aresco and the conference have no plans in place to correct this problem? I mean this is an issue that affects and reflects on the entire conference. So it is a conference issue. Nothing?

(03-05-2015 01:45 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 10:31 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Not only hurts the RPIs of other teams in the conference but the perception of the conference as a whole. Other conferences have scheduling requirements for it's members. Is there anything in the works for this conference and scheduling?

OOC SOS:

ECU 300
UCF 319
Tulane 326
Houston 330

the main "problem" is ECU is a better team now in conference play than they were before. I LL take the wins in conference vs losing any day for the "good of the conference" I'm selfish, school before conference

That is the Army independence shining through.

(03-05-2015 10:31 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Not only hurts the RPIs of other teams in the conference but the perception of the conference as a whole. Other conferences have scheduling requirements for it's members. Is there anything in the works for this conference and scheduling?

OOC SOS:

ECU 300
UCF 319
Tulane 326
Houston 330

The obvious solution is that Memphis joins the Big 12.....

we are not worthy of you.

(03-05-2015 05:47 PM)No Bull Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 10:31 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Not only hurts the RPIs of other teams in the conference but the perception of the conference as a whole. Other conferences have scheduling requirements for it's members. Is there anything in the works for this conference and scheduling?

OOC SOS:

ECU 300
UCF 319
Tulane 326
Houston 330

The obvious solution is that Memphis joins the Big 12.....

we are not worthy of you.

Damn straight Memphis is going to the Big 12

(03-05-2015 04:28 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 03:18 PM)Tigers2B1 Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:32 PM)Weatherdemon Wrote:  Losing to good teams in OOC is better than winning against crappy teams.
It improves your SOS and a loss to a top 50 team is often better for the RPI than a win against a 200+ team.

No reason anyone in this league should have OOC SOS's that poor.

So the next question becomes 'why do certain programs do it?' Some seem to do it every year.

Probably because team's want their record to be 15-15 instead of 5-25. You could plug in USF, UCF or Houston here, but do you know the one team that ECU's RPI doesn't negatively affect? That's right, ECU.

Bull crap... Unless you think practically throwing seasons away before they start is smart.

As to the rest of your PhD dissertation of excuse making is the same crap uneducated ECU fans spew. Trading home games...... Lol. We'd probably make just as much ( or more) money and get more publicity going on the road vs the ACC as we would with the trash ooc Lebo and Co keep giving us.

If we can't get good teams at home it's much better to go on the road. Its much better for RPI snd it worked for football. It's clearly working at SMU too. I hate to sound like SJ but it's exactly that kind of mentality that's holding this program back.

(03-05-2015 05:24 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 04:38 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 10:31 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Not only hurts the RPIs of other teams in the conference but the perception of the conference as a whole. Other conferences have scheduling requirements for it's members. Is there anything in the works for this conference and scheduling?

OOC SOS:

ECU 300
UCF 319
Tulane 326
Houston 330

Well if this group of 4 didn't suck, it would move the strength of themselves into the ooc opponents SOS. I bet that would be a huge factor.

Exactly. It's a two part problem. You can't take a crappy team and game the system into them having a good RPI. It's a combination of scheduling better and also being good enough to win some of those games.

Good teams don't want to play RPI killers (crappy teams). So how are crappy teams supposed to magically schedule all these good teams?

And even so George Mason has the 62nd best SOS right now and an RPI of 214 because they are 8-19. You can't just win games or just schedule better and magically have a good RPI, it has to be a combination of the two.

Hopefully ECU, UCF, USF, and Houston are in the process of upping their talent so they can schedule better and win some games and have a better RPI. I don't get why people think RPI is some system you can just game. Wouldn't everyone do that if it was the case? You could just win 15 games and make the tournament because your RPI was so good?

Obviously you can move it a few spots based on scheduling but it won't fix much if you aren't winning.

According to RealtimeRPI.com
Missouri has the 15th best SOS and an RPI of 202 at 8-21
USC has the 85th best SOS and an RPI of 204 at 11-18
George Mason has the 62nd best SOS and an RPI of 214 at 8-19
Gonzaga has the 77th best SOS and an RPI of 8 at 28-2

See the correlation?

i think you're misssing the correaltion an rpi of 202 is AMAZING for a team with only 8 wins.. keep in mind rpi ranks till 351...that means beating the worst team in the SEC is better than beating an 18 win vermont who is tieed for 2nd in its league

temple was 9-22 and ranked top 180 rpi beccause it scheduled well last year....you are trying to downplay rpi/sos but you are actually proving the point

look at the sec since you pointed out mizzou, remove kentucky, whats left is basically equals to the AAC...but yet almost half our conference is ranked 200 rpi or worse in a 11 member league (5) and they only have 2 members lower than a 200 rpi in a 14 member league (with 4 of our member way lower than any of theirs)

and you want to know what plays into that
http://www.foxsports.com/south/story/sec...ing-102314

or

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaab--sec-...00614.html

if you didnt feel like reading SEC has decided they are going to push to be one of the best basketball leagues and what they believed is most important was scheduling and proposed and actually put out some drastic measures to potentially to do so

"To help avoid successive bad years, Slive has hired former NCAA tournament guru Greg Shaheen as a scheduling consultant for his conference. And every school has agreed to send its non-conference schedule to the league office for feedback/tweaking/outright rejection."

they have a committe that oversees their leagues scheduling

(03-05-2015 05:24 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 04:38 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 10:31 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Not only hurts the RPIs of other teams in the conference but the perception of the conference as a whole. Other conferences have scheduling requirements for it's members. Is there anything in the works for this conference and scheduling?

OOC SOS:

ECU 300
UCF 319
Tulane 326
Houston 330

Well if this group of 4 didn't suck, it would move the strength of themselves into the ooc opponents SOS. I bet that would be a huge factor.

Exactly. It's a two part problem. You can't take a crappy team and game the system into them having a good RPI. It's a combination of scheduling better and also being good enough to win some of those games.

Good teams don't want to play RPI killers (crappy teams). So how are crappy teams supposed to magically schedule all these good teams?

And even so George Mason has the 62nd best SOS right now and an RPI of 214 because they are 8-19. You can't just win games or just schedule better and magically have a good RPI, it has to be a combination of the two.

Hopefully ECU, UCF, Tulane, and Houston are in the process of upping their talent so they can schedule better and win some games and have a better RPI. I don't get why people think RPI is some system you can just game. Wouldn't everyone do that if it was the case? You could just win 15 games and make the tournament because your RPI was so good?

Obviously you can move it a few spots based on scheduling but it won't fix much if you aren't winning.

According to RealtimeRPI.com
Missouri has the 15th best SOS and an RPI of 202 at 8-21
USC has the 85th best SOS and an RPI of 204 at 11-18
George Mason has the 62nd best SOS and an RPI of 214 at 8-19
Gonzaga has the 77th best SOS and an RPI of 8 at 28-2

See the correlation?

Don't think you can lump USF in this group our OOC schedule strength hasn't been in the200s in years

(03-05-2015 06:06 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Don't think you can lump USF in this group our OOC schedule strength hasn't been in the200s in years

My apologies. I meant Tulane. I don't know why I typed USF.

(03-05-2015 05:57 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 05:24 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 04:38 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 10:31 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Not only hurts the RPIs of other teams in the conference but the perception of the conference as a whole. Other conferences have scheduling requirements for it's members. Is there anything in the works for this conference and scheduling?

OOC SOS:

ECU 300
UCF 319
Tulane 326
Houston 330

Well if this group of 4 didn't suck, it would move the strength of themselves into the ooc opponents SOS. I bet that would be a huge factor.

Exactly. It's a two part problem. You can't take a crappy team and game the system into them having a good RPI. It's a combination of scheduling better and also being good enough to win some of those games.

Good teams don't want to play RPI killers (crappy teams). So how are crappy teams supposed to magically schedule all these good teams?

And even so George Mason has the 62nd best SOS right now and an RPI of 214 because they are 8-19. You can't just win games or just schedule better and magically have a good RPI, it has to be a combination of the two.

Hopefully ECU, UCF, USF, and Houston are in the process of upping their talent so they can schedule better and win some games and have a better RPI. I don't get why people think RPI is some system you can just game. Wouldn't everyone do that if it was the case? You could just win 15 games and make the tournament because your RPI was so good?

Obviously you can move it a few spots based on scheduling but it won't fix much if you aren't winning.

According to RealtimeRPI.com
Missouri has the 15th best SOS and an RPI of 202 at 8-21
USC has the 85th best SOS and an RPI of 204 at 11-18
George Mason has the 62nd best SOS and an RPI of 214 at 8-19
Gonzaga has the 77th best SOS and an RPI of 8 at 28-2

See the correlation?

i think you're misssing the correaltion an rpi of 202 is AMAZING for a team with only 8 wins.. keep in mind rpi ranks till 351...that means beating the worst team in the SEC is better than beating an 18 win vermont who is tieed for 2nd in its league

temple was 9-22 and ranked top 180 rpi beccause it scheduled well last year....you are trying to downplay rpi/sos but you are actually proving the point

look at the sec since you pointed out mizzou, remove kentucky, whats left is basically equals to the AAC...but yet almost half our conference is ranked 200 rpi or worse in a 11 member league (5) and they only have 2 members lower than a 200 rpi in a 14 member league (with 4 of our member way lower than any of theirs)

and you want to know what plays into that
http://www.foxsports.com/south/story/sec...ing-102314

or

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaab--sec-...00614.html

if you didnt feel like reading SEC has decided they are going to push to be one of the best basketball leagues and what they believed is most important was scheduling and proposed and actually put out some drastic measures to potentially to do so

"To help avoid successive bad years, Slive has hired former NCAA tournament guru Greg Shaheen as a scheduling consultant for his conference. And every school has agreed to send its non-conference schedule to the league office for feedback/tweaking/outright rejection."

they have a committe that oversees their leagues scheduling

Im all for that.