20-Game Conference Schedule Starting 2019?

[What Would Jesus Do?]

TOS is saying this has been announced but I didn't see it on the ACC site.

I'm a big fan of playing more in-conference games so that we can have more home-and-away pairings every year.

Anyone have any info on this?

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I have always assumed that the 18-game conference schedule was imposed by the NCAA. But I don't know if that's true.

The reason I assume that is if you look around at other conferences, no matter how many teams in the conference, they never seem to play more than 18 regular-season in-conference games.

If that's right, does that mean the NCAA has changed the rules? And if they have changed that, have they also increased the number of total games a team can play in a year?

As a committed bball fan, I'm strongly in favor of more games. More is better.

If it were my call, I'd bump to 44 or 45 for the total season (including tournaments) and 21 for the conference regular season, starting immediately.

At some point you need to be concerned about overworking the kids. But I don't think a few more games should be a big problem.

 

[dukedevilz]

Looks legit. Which means every ACC school will play 6 schools twice and everyone else once. http://www.cbssports.com/college-ba...-to-basketball-schedule-for-incoming-network/

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Looks legit. Which means every ACC school will play 6 schools twice and everyone else once. http://www.cbssports.com/college-ba...-to-basketball-schedule-for-incoming-network/

This is why I think a 21-game schedule would be best (given that we can't play everyone home-and-away). 21 games means we play half the ACC teams twice. Fourteen teams once, then 7 of them again.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

No mention of an increase in the total number of games played. So this means 2 fewer out-of-conference games.

Fewer creampuffs, I hope. I'm good with a few easy games. But we can ditch a couple of them and still have enough.

 

[dukedevilz]

Seems like a decent idea. Maybe the powers that be that make these decisions can't stomach a conference schedule featuring an odd number of games. But yes, I'm all for taking off the Kennesaw States and Radfords from the schedule in place for two conference foes.

 

[Ozheelfan]

Seems like a decent idea. Maybe the powers that be that make these decisions can't stomach a conference schedule featuring an odd number of games. But yes, I'm all for taking off the Kennesaw States and Radfords from the schedule in place for two conference foes.

You might be in favour of it, but not sure if the LOM is..... two less creampuffs? Maybe one less "away" game in Dook Square Garden? I'd like to see that happen.

 

[dukedevilz]

You might be in favour of it, but not sure if the LOM is..... two less creampuffs? Maybe one less "away" game in Dook Square Garden? I'd like to see that happen.

What better way to prepare for the NCAA Tournament then by rescinding contracts against competitive teams on a neutral floor. And while I would agree that Duke plays a very light schedule at home OOC, the neutral court games more than make up for it. Duke's SOS has actually been more challenging than UNC's in recent years.

Non-Conference Strength of Schedule
Duke:
2016- 10
2015- 40
2014- 20
2013- 1
2012- 2
Average: 14.6

UNC:
2016- 78
2015- 5
2014- 35
2013- 77
2012- 20
Average: 43"

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

What better way to prepare for the NCAA Tournament then by rescinding contracts against competitive teams on a neutral floor. And while I would agree that Duke plays a very light schedule at home OOC, the neutral court games more than make up for it. Duke's SOS has actually been more challenging than UNC's in recent years.

Non-Conference Strength of Schedule
Duke:
2016- 10
2015- 40
2014- 20
2013- 1
2012- 2
Average: 14.6

UNC:
2016- 78
2015- 5
2014- 35
2013- 77
2012- 20
Average: 43"

You didn't say where you got your numbers, but a quick glance at Pomeroy shows a similar pattern.

Probably depends on what you count as a creampuff.

I looked at this a year or 2 ago in a more subjective way. Basically I looked a the number of OOC teams with a rating of 125 or worse by Pomeroy. There was less difference between Duke and UNC than I had expected.

For example, last season both schools played 5 "creampuffs" (using the 125 or worse definition).

Part of the problem, of course, is you can schedule a team that's usually well-ranked, but catch it on a bad year. Or it can go the other way - as some teams that scheduled Monmouth found out last year.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

What better way to prepare for the NCAA Tournament then by rescinding contracts against competitive teams on a neutral floor. And while I would agree that Duke plays a very light schedule at home OOC, the neutral court games more than make up for it. Duke's SOS has actually been more challenging than UNC's in recent years.

Non-Conference Strength of Schedule
Duke:
2016- 10
2015- 40
2014- 20
2013- 1
2012- 2
Average: 14.6

UNC:
2016- 78
2015- 5
2014- 35
2013- 77
2012- 20
Average: 43"

Does that strength of schedule metric take into account location of the game? My guess is no - but that is a great strategy for K. Don't play any true road games OOC, and still have your SOS metric look good because you play decent to good teams neutral site and at home. If most other teams tried that, the committee may not reward them for it, but K has gotten to the point that all he really has to do is "hold serve" and be looked at favorably by the committee - again, that's a smart strategy - doesn't prepare you well for road games in conference, but who really cares, you're playing for the tournament anyways.

 

[dukedevilz]

You didn't say where you got your numbers, but a quick glance at Pomeroy shows a similar pattern.

Probably depends on what you count as a creampuff.

I looked at this a year or 2 ago in a more subjective way. Basically I looked a the number of OOC teams with a rating of 125 or worse by Pomeroy. There was less difference between Duke and UNC than I had expected.

For example, last season both schools played 5 "creampuffs" (using the 125 or worse definition).

Part of the problem, of course, is you can schedule a team that's usually well-ranked, but catch it on a bad year. Or it can go the other way - as some teams that scheduled Monmouth found out last year.

Got if from ESPN. Look under the NCSS column and change the year accordingly.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rpi/_/year/2016/sort/RPI

 

[dukedevilz]

Does that strength of schedule metric take into account location of the game? My guess is no - but that is a great strategy for K. Don't play any true road games OOC, and still have your SOS metric look good because you play decent to good teams neutral site and at home. If most other teams tried that, the committee may not reward them for it, but K has gotten to the point that all he really has to do is "hold serve" and be looked at favorably by the committee - again, that's a smart strategy - doesn't prepare you well for road games in conference, but who really cares, you're playing for the tournament anyways.

The RPI calculates 1.4 wins for a road win and 0.6 wins for a home win; conversely, -1.4 points for a home loss and -0.6 points for a road loss. It's actually low risk, high reward for scheduling road games. So going on the road can actually be very beneficial to a team's RPI. Just ask Long Beach State. They consistently have a top 100 RPI ranking with 14+ losses in a relatively weak conference.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

The RPI calculates 1.4 wins for a road win and 0.6 wins for a home win; conversely, -1.4 points for a home loss and -0.6 points for a road loss. It's actually low risk, high reward for scheduling road games. So going on the road can actually be very beneficial to a team's RPI. Just ask Long Beach State. They consistently have a top 100 RPI ranking with 14+ losses in a relatively weak conference.

Yes, that's the RPI though. Which is a different metric than the NCSS metric you originally referred to - unless I'm missing something here?

 

[dukedevilz]

You are correct in that the SOS doesn't factor in the location of the game. So yes, on that basis, we could say maybe Duke's SOS isn't as impressive as it appears on paper. But I feel like the RPI helps balance things out better with 1.4 per road win and a 0.6 for a home win. Either way, 3 top 10 schedules in the last 5 years is pretty impressive in my opinion.