BE Going to 20 Games?

[admin]

“What does it mean for schools outside the Power 5 model, with the exception of the Big East, moving forward? A lot fewer chances to earn NCAA Tournament bids on an annual basis.

Moving to 20 league games is going to change the entire model,” one Big Ten athletic director told FanRag Sports last week. “They want to wipe out the non-Power 5 schools from getting at-large bids completely. Moving to 20 games makes that more of a realistic possibility.”

https://www.fanragsports.com/trickle-do ... schedules/

[GoldenWarrior11]

“What does it mean for schools outside the Power 5 model, with the exception of the Big East, moving forward? A lot fewer chances to earn NCAA Tournament bids on an annual basis.

Moving to 20 league games is going to change the entire model,” one Big Ten athletic director told FanRag Sports last week. “They want to wipe out the non-Power 5 schools from getting at-large bids completely. Moving to 20 games makes that more of a realistic possibility.”

https://www.fanragsports.com/trickle-do ... schedules/

Oh no! Does that mean that the Big East is now..... P6?!!!

I knew it. The AAC created a mockable campaign to secretly attack it's main competitor into the P5...

[stever20]

the thing that's so weird to me with this is unless the committee is going to start really taking 17-15 teams again, I don't see how this is going to do what they want it to do. I mean, looking at the MAAC their 6th and 7th place teams finished with 10-10 records. So adding in even 7-4 OOC records, they would be 17-14 regular season. That's awfully precarious in making the NCAA tourney. At some level, the records matter.

[Savannah Jay]

the thing that's so weird to me with this is unless the committee is going to start really taking 17-15 teams again, I don't see how this is going to do what they want it to do. I mean, looking at the MAAC their 6th and 7th place teams finished with 10-10 records. So adding in even 7-4 OOC records, they would be 17-14 regular season. That's awfully precarious in making the NCAA tourney. At some level, the records matter.

Someone call a doctor...I think I agree with Stever.

A few articles I've read stated that the mid-majors are going to lose games to the football 5 schools because F5 schools go to 20 conference games...but doesn't that mean some F5 teams on the NCAA "margin" are going to (potentially) be trading buy games (or games they expect to win) for a game against conference foes, potentially very good ones?

I VERY randomly picked Illinois' schedule this year. They have non-con games against DePaul, Wake Forest, and Missouri from major conferences. Then UNLV, New Mexico State, Marshall, and Austin Peay from "mid majors." And the some buy games. If they add two conference games and you are their athletic director trying to get to 20 wins or some other threshold, which games would you drop? If you drop Wake and Missouri, maybe your win total is unaffected but the mid-majors haven't been hurt at all (contrary to much public opinion). However, if they drop almost any other games, the mid-majors are affected but they are risking having a worse record because the two new Big 10 opponents will likely be stronger than the 2 games they are dropping, which seems like it would hurt their record and chances for an at large...which, to Stever's point ( you are 1 for 8,194, baby!) records have to mean something. It sure can help their RPI but if they trade 2 wins for 2 losses, will it matter much in the end?

[stever20]

the thing that's so weird to me with this is unless the committee is going to start really taking 17-15 teams again, I don't see how this is going to do what they want it to do. I mean, looking at the MAAC their 6th and 7th place teams finished with 10-10 records. So adding in even 7-4 OOC records, they would be 17-14 regular season. That's awfully precarious in making the NCAA tourney. At some level, the records matter.

Someone call a doctor...I think I agree with Stever.

A few articles I've read stated that the mid-majors are going to lose games to the football 5 schools because F5 schools go to 20 conference games...but doesn't that mean some F5 teams on the NCAA "margin" are going to (potentially) be trading buy games (or games they expect to win) for a game against conference foes, potentially very good ones?

I VERY randomly picked Illinois' schedule this year. They have non-con games against DePaul, Wake Forest, and Missouri from major conferences. Then UNLV, New Mexico State, Marshall, and Austin Peay from "mid majors." And the some buy games. If they add two conference games and you are their athletic director trying to get to 20 wins or some other threshold, which games would you drop? If you drop Wake and Missouri, maybe your win total is unaffected but the mid-majors haven't been hurt at all (contrary to much public opinion). However, if they drop almost any other games, the mid-majors are affected but they are risking having a worse record because the two new Big 10 opponents will likely be stronger than the 2 games they are dropping, which seems like it would hurt their record and chances for an at large...which, to Stever's point ( you are 1 for 8,194, baby!) records have to mean something. It sure can help their RPI but if they trade 2 wins for 2 losses, will it matter much in the end?

Come on over to the dark side!!!! lol.... The only thing that could change things is if the committee starts looking at records like 17-15 and allows them in the tourney. Teams like last year Illinois and Iowa finished at 18-14. If the committee starts letting them in the tourney regularly that's going to change things big time.

[CrawfishBucket]

“What does it mean for schools outside the Power 5 model, with the exception of the Big East, moving forward? A lot fewer chances to earn NCAA Tournament bids on an annual basis.

Moving to 20 league games is going to change the entire model,” one Big Ten athletic director told FanRag Sports last week. “They want to wipe out the non-Power 5 schools from getting at-large bids completely. Moving to 20 games makes that more of a realistic possibility.”

https://www.fanragsports.com/trickle-do ... schedules/

I think 11 is inevitable.

Honestly, Rhode Island may be the sneaky good move that's not really being talked about.

They've quietly become the bellcow of the A10, as coaches at both VCU and Dayton get poached.

The Rhode Island brand name fits in beautifully with Providence being a leader in the conference.

This move would improve the strength of the conference from Day 1.

[Hall2012]

“What does it mean for schools outside the Power 5 model, with the exception of the Big East, moving forward? A lot fewer chances to earn NCAA Tournament bids on an annual basis.

Moving to 20 league games is going to change the entire model,” one Big Ten athletic director told FanRag Sports last week. “They want to wipe out the non-Power 5 schools from getting at-large bids completely. Moving to 20 games makes that more of a realistic possibility.”

https://www.fanragsports.com/trickle-do ... schedules/

I think 11 is inevitable.

Honestly, Rhode Island may be the sneaky good move that's not really being talked about.

They've quietly become the bellcow of the A10, as coaches at both VCU and Dayton get poached.

The Rhode Island brand name fits in beautifully with Providence being a leader in the conference.

This move would improve the strength of the conference from Day 1.

A - Public school, so nah.

B - Why would PC let this happen? It's the same reason X doesn't want Dayton in, Villanova doesn't want St. Joe's in, etc. Being in a decidedly better conference gives our schools a clear advantage over these other schools in their back yard. Why would they willingly give up that advantage and invite these rivals up onto equal footing?

[DeltaV]

Rhode Island?

Between Public, Providence, not expanding the conference footprint, and a massive 'Who?' factor, I think there's a greater chance Duke joins than we invite RI.

The nice thing about 20 conference games is it allows us to poach whatever 1 mid major team has had the best ~8 year period by 2020 (if there's one worth it), and keep the round robin. No need to bring in a pair for numbers sake.

[pki1998]

I'd be interested to hear what Nova fans have to say about the potential for 20 games. 20 conference games plus 4 Big Five games, and an exempt tournament doesn't leave a lot of scheduling options.

I love the Big Five. I know a lot of college basketball traditions have died, but i want this one to survive! I also want the "Mythical Miami Valley Conference" (Xavier, Cincinnati, Dayton, and Miami (OH)) back!

[Novachap]

PK---yes, I too like the Big 5 a lot. Last 4 years is not indicative of how tough those games historically have been.

24 games between the BE and Big 5 does not leave a lot of room, you are right. I can see us doing H&H with some name schools---this year is UCONN (yeah, I know), previously Syracuse, Virginia, etc. Those make for really nice mid season contests... It will just cut down on the early games.

Honestly, I am on the fence about adding another team. I see the $$$ benefit and looking to open another market for TV, however, it is a pretty great mix now as it is as well.