Conference USA develops new & unique conference scheduling concept

[tornado]

They have a completely new idea for conference scheduling that will try to trick the system to get more of their teams into the NCAA Tournament and to get higher RPI's and better seeds.

C-USA currently has 14 teams in their conference.
Each team will play an 18-game conference schedule BUT-
only the first 14 games will name a scheduled opponent - then --
the final four games will be determined by the standings after 14 games, and the TOP 5 teams
will play each other only in a round-robin format. The remaining 9 teams not in the TOP 5 play only teams that are also not in the TOP 5.

This way, down the stretch, with only 4 games remaining, the best teams will only play good teams and improve their RPI's and not hurt themselves with a loss or even a game against a low-RPI team.

http://www.herald-dispatch.com/sports/marshall_sports/chuck-landon-c-usa-making-big-moves-in-hoops/article_dad0483a-c987-5b60-9041-bfc87418accd.html

[BUfan39]

They have a completely new idea for conference scheduling that will try to trick the system to get more of their teams into the NCAA Tournament and to get higher RPI's and better seeds.

C-USA currently has 14 teams in their conference.
Each team will play an 18-game conference schedule BUT-
only the first 14 games will name a scheduled opponent - then --
the final four games will be determined by the standings after 14 games, and the TOP 5 teams
will play each other only in a round-robin format. The remaining 9 teams not in the TOP 5 play only teams that are also not in the TOP 5.

This way, down the stretch, with only 4 games remaining, the best teams will only play good teams and improve their RPI's and not hurt themselves with a loss or even a game against a low-RPI team.
http://www.herald-dispatch.com/sport...87418accd.html

That is a FANTASTIC idea that I can see a lot of other mid major conferences adopting if indeed it goes well this year for CUSA.

[PurpleAceFan]

That is a FANTASTIC idea that I can see a lot of other mid major conferences adopting if indeed it goes well this year for CUSA.

I'm skeptical. RPI really doesn't have as much of a meaning as it used to. I am hoping for them that this doesn't just end up with the top teams poaching each other at the end of the season. Could I suppose give teams a potential for Q1 or Q2 wins, but could also get good teams a loss or two. For example, is 2-0 better than 4-2 in the eyes of the committee if 2 of the 4 teams are not "name schools"?

Kudos for them for at least trying though.

[Da Coach]

A lot of conferences are trying different approaches to conference scheduling, but this CUSA idea sounds like one of the better ones I have heard yet.

The Big Ten just recently decided to increase to a 20-game conference schedule that it will implement in the 2018-19 season. That means they will have to play fewer non-conference games, and they hope it will benefit their teams' RPI's and other analytic measurements, and avoid bad losses to lower seeded non-conference teams.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/big-ten-adds-two-games-for-a-20-game-conference-schedule-starting-in-2018-19/

The ACC just decided to go to a 20-game conference schedule that will start in the 2019-20 season, just in time for the launch of their ACC TV Network so that they will have more conference games to televise, and make more money-

http://www.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/index.ssf/2016/07/acc_will_move_to_20-game_conference_schedule_in_2019-20_when_acc_network_launche.html

The Pac-12 just met last week and decided to explore a new conference scheduling format that will "match up the best teams in the Pac-12 on a year-by-year basis rather than sticking to the pre-existing league schedules that was put in place on a 10-year plan prior to the 2011-12 season".
The way it will work is that the Pac-12 will ask each coach to pick the next season's order of finish 1 to 12 shortly after the previous season ends. Then the conference will begin working on creating the schedule to make sure the top predicted teams match up against each other as many times as possible in order to try to maximize the number of teams that the Pac-12 gets into the NCAA Tournament.
Recall that last year, the Pac-12 only got 3 teams in the NCAA, and they all did poorly. Arizona was a #4 seed and lost to #13 seed Buffalo. Arizona State and UCLA were #11 seeds and both lost in the First Four play-in round. All 3 were eliminated in their first game, and the conference went 0-3 and took home far less revenue than the MVC did.

https://frshoopz.com/cbb/rothstein-pac-12-exploring-new-methods-for-conference-scheduling/

And there are other conferences that are considering changes in scheduling formats or realignment changes to try to improve their teams' chances of getting into the NCAA Tournament.

[tornado]

the A-10 already completed a season where they are doing that - but it kinda backfired....

There are 14 A-10 teams and each team plays the other 13 once plus they get FIVE more games scheduled with an effort by the league to try to PLAN their uneven 18 games conference schedule - to try to make sure the extra five games favor all the top teams playing each other.

Problem is- they missed their guesses...

Dayton & VCU were predicted to be two of the TOP TEAMS but ended up at or well below .500 so down the stretch- they played against other top teams - possibly hurting their chances!

In the end, they got 3 teams in but only as 7, 11 and 12 seeds....so their plan really did not help

[Da Coach]

I'm seeing more talk that the MVC should institute some new creative form of scheduling like Conference USA is doing (see theare trying to get better top post in this thread). (Here is one such discussion)
The ultimate goal is to try to benefit certain teams and get more than 1 MVC team into the NCAA Tournament.

However, I have my reservations about applying it to the MVC.
First, I agree that improving the non-conference schedules is the best way to improve the MVC's chances for multiple NCAA bids.
But if the conference starts arbitrarily manipulating the schedule or the seeding method for the benefit of a couple perceived "favored teams" at the expense of all the other teams, it then becomes a case of a handful of powerful MVC people playing favorites. It would work against the teams that are improving and trying to get better and climb into the top 3, and it arbitrarily benefits the teams that in people's minds, are the "favorites" and "deserve" a little help to get into the NCAA Tournament.

[tornado]

the MVC rarely ever has 275 or 300+ RPI teams, so it just isn't as necessary

[Da Coach]

The Sun Belt Conference just completed their yearly conference meetings, and they have also passed "a series of sweeping changes to both non-conference and conference scheduling, the postseason conference tournament format, and the location of the conference tournament".

http://sunbeltsports.org/news/2018/6/4/mbball-sun-belt-conference-announces-strategic-mens-basketball-plan.aspx

The Sun Belt plan centers around improving the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Championship seed of the conference’s automatic qualifier, improving the resume of the best conference teams in order to receive additional bids to the NCAA Tournament and additional postseason opportunities should one of those teams not receive that conference’s automatic qualifier, and also improving the conference tournament format and atmosphere.


Brief summary-
1) They will be looking to create 2 non-conference games each year for each member (one home and one away game) against "peer conference opponents" that the Sun Belt will work to arrange.
That could be an opening for the MVC to work out such a MVC-Sun Belt alliance.
2) They will split into 2 divisions and set up a “20-game smart schedule” starting in 2019-20. The first 16 games will be scheduled before the season, but then the final 4 games will be scheduled in the final 2 weeks within "pods" that are determined by the standings after the first 16 games.
Pod A (#1, #2, #3), Pod B (#4, #5, #6), Pod C (#7, #8, #9) and Pod D (#10, #11, #12). Each team will play the other two pod members once home and once away for the final four games of the 20-game schedule.
3) Conference Tournament seeding will change to avoid teams being penalized by the "smart schedule" that might have forced them to play tougher opponents in their final 4 games, plus a team's seed could be boosted if their wins came against the better teams-
At the completion of the regular season, teams will be seeded for the conference tournament based on the results within their pod range. As an example, a team in Pod A (#1, #2, #3) cannot be seeded any lower than No. 3 seed. It is possible, however, that the regular season champion – the team that earned the No. 1 position in Pod A – would not be the No. 1 seed in the tournament should that team not have the best pod record amongst the three teams in that pod.
4) And the format for the Conference Tournament will change with the top seeds getting byes. Plus the tournament games will be played at conference sites, except for the semifinal and championship game to be played at the Smoothie King Center in New Orleans.

[tornado]

after a year the Sun Belt has scrapped their oddball scheduling concept

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/26889595/sun-belt-scraps-pod-plan-revamp-scheduling

Oddly, after one year of their "pod scheduling" concept - which were intended to improve their post-season chances...
.. they were very displeased with their results...

"In the NET rankings last season, Georgia State and Georgia Southern, the Sun Belt's best teams,
were ranked 126th and 128th in the NET. Per teamrankings.com, Georgia State and Georgia Southern
would have had rankings of 50th and 78th under the old RPI system.
Displeased with the discrepancy between the league's standing in the RPI versus the NET, the league
may consider a minimum NET "threshold" for its members' nonconference schedules to counter the change.

"At the end of the day, we want to be a multi-bid league..."