Concerned about 20 game league schedule

obobo55

Active member
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
126
Reaction score
51
Points
28
As a fan, I am certain I will like more B1G games. However, I have several concerns about how it will play out both in league power ratings and with the committee each year.

With fewer NC opportunities for all 14 teams, the total number of interconference games will be reduced and those that remain will have a higher impact on the league's yearly reputation. Figure most teams will be playing in the exempt tourneys along with a Challenge game and possibly one other top tier game. A loss in the 1st round exempt game can doom your SOS (see Nebraska).

The other big concern is what league record is considered "lock" worthy? Back in the 16 game schedule, 10-6 was nearly a sure thing. That only required winning 2 more road games than you lost at home. It is a .625 win %. I'm not sure if 12-8 (.600) will be enough. 13-7 is .650 and in some years, that might not be enough. 14-6 will surely be in, but how hard is that to accomplish?

Just thought I'd post and see what some of you thought.
 

I think it's really only an issue in the rare year where the league as a whole does terribly in the non-conference portion of the season. Last year is the perfect example where the league got destroyed in the B1G/ACC challenge and there were few quality wins in non-conference play across the board. This left few quality wins to be had during conference play. Nebraska is a bad example in my opinion because they lost to St. John's...and UCF....and Kansas...and Creighton during non-conference play. Any time a team loses it's 4 best non-conference games they are going to face an extreme struggle to make the tournament. They had a soft B1G schedule (somehow played Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, and Purdue just once each) and could only hang their hat on a win at home against Michigan.

The expanded B1G schedule will certainly put more importance on the conference as a whole at least holding it's own in the non-conference portion of the season and the sample size of those games will be smaller than it has been to date which obviously will increase variance.
 

That is my concern though. We are talking about probably 5 games that make up the portion of the schedule that determines the rep for the league. ACC Challenge...3 in exempt...Gavitt or other power league.

Let's say you are a team expected to be 5th or 6th in the B1G. You get a road game against the 8th best ACC team (lose). You enter an 8-team bracketed exempt tourney (which usually have 1 team from each of the top 6 conf.) and are placed into the 4/5 game with a team of equal ability. IF you lose that game, instead of playing the "best" team in the field, you instead get the bottom team where even a win doesn't help and the 3rd game is likely against #6 in the field. So now instead of facing what you thought were going to be 5 quality games (tier 1 or 2 in committee terms) you might be down to 1 or 2.

You as a coach or AD no longer have much control in determining the schedule strength. You commit to the Challenge but the opponent is partially out of your control. Same for Gavitt. Most teams will try to get the best exempt event they can which may have other heavyweights. Beyond those 5, for financials, it is going to be mostly "buy" games because schools need a certain number of home dates.

The max is 31. 10 are away league games. At least 2 are neutral exempt. Throw in 1 road game and the most you can get at home now is 18. That is probably the least any B1G school can afford to go down to.

That is for a middle tier B1G team. If you are Rutgers and the ACC & Gavitt games give you complete garbage matchups and you are entering an exempt as a underdog in every game, it may be nearly impossible to notch a tier 2 NC win.

Just trying to point out some of the dangers I see possible. If the committee is placing so much emphasis on scheduling and it is out of your hands, what do you do?
 


SelectionSunday, do you have any thoughts on this conundrum?

I really wonder if the league has it tough for a couple of seasons with getting a decent number of teams into the field whether this will be rolled back.

The idea is sound. It is tough trying to get good H&H games with other power conf. schools. Good mids are not willing to play without receiving a return game. Fans are no longer willing to buy a slate of weak "buy" games. Plus, adding league matchups to to BTN fills their programming.

I just think they did not examine all of the ramifications.
 


If you can not get non con games against Nova or Kansas or even Marquette types this 20 game conference slate is great. Go 12-8 with 3 top 25 wins, just 3 and your in. Nebraska had one top 25 win and did not deserve to get in. Heck, they may have had only one top 50 win and were not even close to being considered. The conference is weaker right now so .500 will not cut it. The less garbage games i have tickets for the better. There have been many games the last several years where we gave them to the boys club and they were not even used ! No one likes a 30 point win over a school that you can not even name a single player in their history. Follow the money. It is the only reason they added conference tourneys, expanded the NCAA. The tourney with 48 teams was the best because you had byes for teams that had great regular seasons and the regular season meant more. They will be at 72 soon.
 

I'm OK with it, mainly because it guarantees 1 more quality home game (2 overall). The coaches will adapt accordingly in the non-conference and schedule mostly garbage outside of their exempt tournament and the required conference challenges (most of 'em already do, anyways). I've given up on the U of M scheduling good home & homes (Pitino has scheduled 1 H&H in 5 years), so I'll take the extra (quality) Big 10 home game.

I don't think it'll negatively impact the number of bids the Big 10 gets. I think last season (less than 5 bids) will remain a rare occurrence for the conference; it was historically bad. ... it happens. Being in the running for an at-large bid still will come down to what it always does. ... who you played, where you played them, who you beat, and who beat you. In theory, the 20-game conference schedule gives the Gophers 2 more chances for quality wins, certainly of better quality than the ones they'd schedule (in their place) at The Barn in November and December. I'm cool with that.
 




Top Bottom