Bradley schedule for 2013-2014

[Bradleyfan1]

So, are these four games with Illinois and 3 bad teams an exempt tourney or just a scheduling arrangement? It should be at least 3 wins for BU and probably 4 for Illinois, but by making the other teams play eachother you actually positively manipulate your RPI. The three bad teams cannot lose both of the remaining games they play. There will be 3 games played between the 3 bad teams and we end up 3 wins and 3 losses. If these bad teams instead went and took buy games somewhere, then we could easily see 0 wins and 6 losses. So, although this arrangement won't do much for the OOC RPI, it could be worse if we did not participate in it.

"Like"

[Da Coach]

The RPI doesn't work the way you suggest- those "bad" teams would actually do more to improve their RPI by playing "buy" games against good teams, even if they lost them. Beating bad teams does not do much for your RPI. That's why Bradley's non-conference RPI last year was so bad.

[RedSoxDSM]

50% of the RPI formula is opponents' winning %. I am saying that it helps BU and Illinois's RPIs if the bad teams play eachother and actually record some wins as opposed to playing buy games against different opponents and posting losses.

[Da Coach]

Here is a listing of all the early season tournaments- it does list a number of the new "round robin" format events, including the one Bradley is in, but it does not list any other tournaments or events that include Bradley.
If anyone knows anything more about the previously reported Las Vegas event Bradley was going to play in, let us know.

http://www.bloggingthebracket.com/20...nts-events-MTE

[amckillip]

The RPI doesn't work the way you suggest- those "bad" teams would actually do more to improve their RPI by playing "buy" games against good teams, even if they lost them. Beating bad teams does not do much for your RPI. That's why Bradley's non-conference RPI last year was so bad.

50% of the RPI formula is opponents' winning %. I am saying that it helps BU and Illinois's RPIs if the bad teams play eachother and actually record some wins as opposed to playing buy games against different opponents and posting losses.

Redsox is correct. The teams our opponent's play is important, but our opponent's W-L is much more important.

[bradleyfan20]

Here is a listing of all the early season tournaments- it does list a number of the new "round robin" format events, including the one Bradley is in, but it does not list any other tournaments or events that include Bradley.
If anyone knows anything more about the previously reported Las Vegas event Bradley was going to play in, let us know.
http://www.bloggingthebracket.com/20...nts-events-MTE

Bradley is playing two games in Las Vegas in December before Christmas. These games are two neutral site games, not a tournament. The exempt tournament involves getting 3 home games and a road contest with Illinois.

[TheAsianSensation]

50% of the RPI formula is opponents' winning %. I am saying that it helps BU and Illinois's RPIs if the bad teams play eachother and actually record some wins as opposed to playing buy games against different opponents and posting losses.

While it's true, the effect is close to a wash IMO. Recording .500 records in those couple of games is a small boost in our SoS, but they all trade off absorbing their bad schedules in conference play, in a way multiplying that effect. Still, maybe that's 3 extra wins on our SoS traded off with some big hits in the opponent's SoS factor. In the big scheme, the effect is close to trivial.

The RPI doesn't work the way you suggest- those "bad" teams would actually do more to improve their RPI by playing "buy" games against good teams, even if they lost them. Beating bad teams does not do much for your RPI. That's why Bradley's non-conference RPI last year was so bad.

The RPI is very counterintuitive in this factor: you don't root for your opponents to get a high an RPI as possible for your benefit. You root for them to have as good a record as possible and to play as tough a schedule as possible. Now granted, a lot of that ends up reflecting in their RPI, but it's not 100%.

Those weak teams, when they play buy games, they get the boost in the 50% of the formula where it counts. However, that boost translates for us to the 25% part of the formula for us. Plus, the difference between the best opponent's SoS and worst opponent SoS for that 25% part of the formula is smaller compared to the difference between the best and worst teams in the other two categories.



Bottom line: Alabama St and Chicago St aren't good, and I'm worried about our SoS numbers next year. But the schedule isn't done yet either. And by the way, everyone should be fine with Jax State. Not an awful program, and the OVC is slowly starting to learn how to game the RPI a bit.

[Da Coach]

...And by the way, everyone should be fine with Jax State. Not an awful program, and the OVC is slowly starting to learn how to game the RPI a bit.

Is this how far we have fallen? Jacksonville State, which finished last season with their all-time best RPI of 142, is now being referred to as a highlight of our schedule next year? Can't we do better?

[TheAsianSensation]

Is this how far we have fallen? Jacksonville State, which finished last season with their all-time best RPI of 142, is now being referred to as a highlight of our schedule next year? Can't we do better?

Who said they were a highlight? I said, "not awful". They're exactly the type of team you want to play in a multi-team tournament format like this. Of course, the event failed on the other two slots.

[Da Coach]

Who said they were a highlight? I said, "not awful". They're exactly the type of team you want to play in a multi-team tournament format like this. Of course, the event failed on the other two slots.

Who is the highlight of our non-conference schedule if not Jax State?

[TheAsianSensation]

Who is the highlight of our non-conference schedule if not Jax State?

South Florida will be better IMO. And hey, the split happened, it was a good home-and-home to schedule at the time.

We do need to work on lining up the home-and-homes in future years. Hopefully we got a good road game coming up that we can translate into a 2014-15 home game at Carver.

Ever since that wacky 07-08 year where we got 2 BCSs in Carver, a 3rd on a neutral, and 4 road Horizon games, we've never been able to line up a steady stream of good opponents at home. We got out of sequence.

[Da Coach]

Ever since that wacky 07-08 year where we got 2 BCSs in Carver, a 3rd on a neutral, and 4 road Horizon games, we've never been able to line up a steady stream of good opponents at home. We got out of sequence.

I love how you suggest the decline began with people who have been gone for years. The decline in the home schedule did not begin in 2007-2008. It began in 2010 with the departure of the last AD. It bottomed out last year, worse than at any time in many, many years, and could be significantly worse again this year.
Here are the overall Strength of Schedule numbers. If you know where we can get older ones, or those for just the non-conference games, let me know. -
Year......SOS
2004-05 69
2005-06 50
2006-07 21
2007-08 84
2008-09 99
2009-10 64
2010-11 145
2011-12 90
2012-13 177
2013-14 ?

By far the worse SOS was last year, and it wasn't even close. It appears we have to go way back into the 1990's or farther to find an SOS anywhere close to that bad. And 3 of the 4 worst SOS numbers have been the last 3 seasons.

[amckillip]

I love how you suggest the decline began with people who have been gone for years. The decline in the home schedule did not begin in 2007-2008. It began in 2010 with the departure of the last AD. It bottomed out last year, worse than at any time in many, many years, and could be significantly worse again this year.
Here are the overall Strength of Schedule numbers. If you know where we can get older ones, or those for just the non-conference games, let me know. -
Year......SOS
2004-05 69
2005-06 50
2006-07 21
2007-08 84
2008-09 99
2009-10 64
2010-11 145
2011-12 90
2012-13 177
2013-14 ?

By far the worse SOS was last year, and it wasn't even close. It appears we have to go way back into the 1990's or farther to find an SOS anywhere close to that bad. And 3 of the 4 worst SOS numbers have been the last 3 seasons.

I think you're reading into an agenda in a post that had none. To TAS' point, we've only had one year better than 07-08.

I don't think anyone but the most extreme would deny that Geno/Cross are scheduling weaker than JL/KK did, which I absolutely hate, but I think TAS was more speaking to the point that it's hard to schedule, than try to assign blame to anyone in particular.

[TheAsianSensation]

You have to go beyond the numbers on this though. One year ('07-'08 ) we had 2 BCS teams in Carver. Next year we traveled to both. But since we loaded it up in that one year, we boxed ourselves in, unable to start new series with new power conference teams, which means we didn't get the big names in Carver in '08, '09, and '10. Chain reaction.

And that '07-'08 year, we played 4 Horizon teams on the road. Now, we just can't continue all those series the next year and play 4 of them at home. In fact, in the '08-'09 season we only had 5 non-con games at Carver, so we had to consolidate. We did have Butler though. But we didn't start many new series because we were congested with finishing up some of the other series.

And then in '09-'10, we see the consequences of that. Since we didn't get any new quality series started, our home slate had Wofford, WCU, Presby, IdSU, and Loyola.

So that's the effect I'm talking about. I'm looking into the trends. Schedules take multiple years to craft. You have to build them up.

In fact, you can even go back to 2006 on this. Fresh off the big run, we scheduled up, and rightfully so, but we overloaded so badly that we lost sight of the long-term scheduling philosophy in order to try and cash in quickly. In '06-'07, we brought 3 Horizon teams into Carver, without realizing we'd have to return them next year and get out of sequence. We brought them in because we signed up for two great 2-for-1s in Michigan St and Iowa St. So in the short term it was a terrific schedule but in the long term it boxed us in for years.

Now, if you want to argue that the new regime isn't building them up well, fine. But at the least, they're doing a very good job of avoiding scheduling traps that really caused us problems in the last few years.

And by the way, all this criticism...it's not like the job is easy though. I realize how difficult it is to schedule. I am a very strict grader in this respect. The ideal schedule I'm comparing all this to is very lofty.

By the way, I've searched high and low for non-con SoS numbers, by the way. Those things are the holy grail. I can't find anything before '10-'11.

[Da Coach]

I appreciate your insight, and we know scheduling isn't easy. But we have heard all these excuses before, and yet the non-conference schedule keeps getting worse. Last year it wasn't just the worst in the MVC, it was worst by a big margin. If it is so hard, why is every other MVC school able to schedule better than Bradley over the last couple years? Next year's non-conference schedule is shaping up to be possibly even worse than last year's. We are touting Jacksonville State as possible the best team on our home non-conference schedule next season! And we'll have possibly more 300+ RPI opponents than we have ever seen before! Is that what they think fans want? The fans I have talked to are getting tired of the excuses.