Why is Dayton seen as a high major and UR not?
One argument is bc they play a national high powered tough schedule.
One argument is bc they play a national high powered tough schedule.
2024–25 schedule
- Thread starter SFspidur
- Start date
Back to this year’s schedule rather than debating overall philosophy for a moment, where is the UR schedule? seems right on track to be released 5:05 next Friday afternoon as a Labor Day dump.
"high major" may be overstating it but they just had a 23 Net, their average attendance is 13k, and they host the First Four every year.
AND the A10 needs to schedule a conference challenge with another mid-major conference. AAC or MVC?
yes, if what u said about the strategy of teams at our level not wanting to take those road buy games is true. u can't really say they r not able get the games if they have no interest in even trying to get the games, right? I think it's three fold. 1. some teams still don't want or try for them (I hope that's not UR). 2. There are just a lot more 150+ teams as I mentioned b4 so they're filling a lot more those games. math. your group was 76-150 NET. Well for 151+ there are 3 times as many teams. 364 d1 teams. 3. & some majors want just the crappy teams.
I just looked quickly at 3 blue bloods - unc duke kansas. They have buy games against the Goo Moos, lasalle, wofford, furman, oakland, uncw. Now granted I think we're above all those programs. Mason the closest. But those teams can fall in the 76-150 net range. at least in ballpark. Obv a 76-150 net range will have some variety year to year. Those r not perfect examples but I don't have the research at my fingertips like vt4700.
VCU is playing BC neutral. We've played Florida, Clemson, NC State last 3 neutral. Tho all in their geographic backyard which kind of sucks but still "neutral". If u can get that kind of neutral game I'm sure those teams would be happy to play them at home too. imo a little more out there than u think.
but we'll have to continue to see how things develop w scheduling. I wish they'd move to something closer to an equitable pro scheduling model given these guys are getting paid like they pros.
couple things ... regarding "what u said about the strategy of teams at our level not wanting to take those road buy games", I said that was how we (and I believe others) used to schedule. we'd want a return game or we wouldn't play, excluding a game like Kansas which is too cool a game not to play. I doubt we or anyone else is holding that line anymore though. we know the high majors aren't going on the road to non-high majors any more with the rare exception. we see what they're all doing with their schedules.
also I probably wasn't clear about what I said about how high majors were scheduling. I think they'll play other high majors or others that they think will be top 75 teams (give or take) and BOTTOM 150 teams (which is an estimate). with 362 teams last year and a few more this year, the bottom 150 is like NET 220+.
I do believe that line still lingers for some. how many idk. VCU never plays a pure road buy game.
Sorry if I misread or conflated 151+ vs. bottom 150 of Net. But more than the bottom 150 r getting those games. I think most, probably all, of the ones I mentioned above playing those games are not the bottom 150. Not last year. Likely not most years but maybe occasionally. & that is 6 teams vs. 3 teams, the only 3 teams I looked at.
Colgate schedule just came out today. 3 road buy games at Syracuse, Kentucky, NC State. I bet they haven't been bottom 150 since NET was introduced. Not even close. and their rolling NET average since introduced is likely better than UR's. How did they get 3 of those games?
Colgate doesn't have bball resources of a higher mid, but good program. It's Patriot League but they dominate it now. I like what else they did with schedule too. they have a big challenge to get teams except very regional to come play there due to geography. Not 1 cupcake. I don't know if there is a 250+ team on the schedule. They have 1 non d1 - won't count in NET. their OOC will have a great SOS. Check it out...
Wait so Colgate can do it?? I was under the belief that only Dayton could get those games and it was due to fan base and travel. Next u will tell me SDSU can get into that big NIL tourney.
Last edited:
It has everything to do with home games. UR and its season ticket holders like to fill up the Robins Center and dropping down to 4 OOC home games is not going to be welcomed. Plus the extra travel puts an academic burden on the student athlete. I like the idea of the expanded conference schedule and if it could be totally balanced that would be the best in my opinion.
8legs1dream
Graduate Assistant
how did they get those 3 P5's on road if the majors only play the roughly bottom 150 NET
I would be fine if UR said they will play road games and don't need to be paid. Tell Kansas this time - you don't need to buy us - we will play for free, just let us play you. Tell that to any major team - we will play for free, you don't need to buy a UR game.
From a slightly different stratosphere of scheduling mentality:
Kentucky released their schedule, five P5 games (Duke in Atlanta, Gonzaga in Seattle, Ohio St, @Clemson, Louisville) one buy game vs solid Colgate, 4 buy games against low D1s and the their MTE. They are hosting their own 3 game MTE this year with no other teams of note, WKU being most notable. 9 home games, 3 neutral, 1 road.
Kentucky released their schedule, five P5 games (Duke in Atlanta, Gonzaga in Seattle, Ohio St, @Clemson, Louisville) one buy game vs solid Colgate, 4 buy games against low D1s and the their MTE. They are hosting their own 3 game MTE this year with no other teams of note, WKU being most notable. 9 home games, 3 neutral, 1 road.
One factor we see is that the high major in a state or region (like Syracuse or Kentucky) will play regional teams. I don’t feel like that is ever true in Virginia with the ACC teams. Not sure if this is so more often than not or if seeing these schedules is giving me a recency bias on them. We only seem to get the downward facing games (VMI, W&M, Hampton a few years ago.) It’s one of the reasons I liked the Wake series so much.
idk. but maybe they like playing Colgate like I do. an mediocre team who will have a great record because of the weak PL.
I dont' disagree, but I think it sets a horrible precedent. the $90k buy is nothing to a home high major team which keeps all ticket and concessions revenue that the buy game gives them with no return trip expenses. the road team is flying in, has hotels to pay for, ground transportation, food, etc...
Last year - Syracuse, Arizona, Illinois
Colgate Raiders Nitty Gritty at Bracketologists
bracketologists.com
Lost at home to THAT Lafayette team?
But we market ourselves as this wealthy school in the south with one of the highest tuitions in the country, a very healthy endowment, and a strong alumni base that is also wealthy and donates - so really, should we care about that 90K? I get why lower level schools do it. But if we can entice ONE good game a year because we play it for free - then we should do it. We don't need the money.
yep. Colgate went 24-10 with 21 Q4 wins.Last year - Syracuse, Arizona, Illinois
Colgate Raiders Nitty Gritty at Bracketologists
Lost at home to THAT Lafayette team?
yeah, that's why I think they're perfect to play. I'm sure they're not awful so we could lose, but as a fan you'd have to expect a win and it's a solid NET win.
A NET win of 127 isn't moving the needle on anyone's resume. Their NET is going to just go down and down as the year progresses when they play a bunch of Q4 Patriot League teams. And as you said, they have been pretty good, so decent chance we lose that game. They are better than the dregs we have on our schedule at present though.
their NET was 161 on January 11.
they didn't play a team with a NET better than 267 the rest of the year and they played a bunch of teams in the 300's.
they finished at 125.
seems playing bad teams doesn't hurt your NET as long as you win.
I’d definitely play Colgate at home as a buy game. But seems very unlikely they’d be that. I’d play them as mm H&M too but as replacement for others bc I think we need to minimize qty of those. I guess I don’t really get the concept that Colgate is perfect for us when we have to return the game but it’s a game a p5 supposedly shouldn’t & doesn’t want to play at all when they get them only at home without a return & r expected to win at even a higher rate than us.
because I think we need H&H mid major games.
I don't think we can play the high major scheduling game of just playing other high majors and buy games.
they're not an easy game. we could lose. but they're one of those teams who's probably not as good as their NET implies. and I want to play teams with inflated NETs.
We can disagree on how many h&h mid major games we should get into. That’s fine. I agree we can’t play the same scheduling game. It’s why I’m advocating for us taking more road p5 buy games bc we have trouble getting those games unlike p5s. But u have said they’re not there and Colgate is playing 3 of them.
I guess it's possible we aren't as open to road hm games as Colgate. but didn't we do that Florida last year ... unless you consider that neutral court? was BC a buy game? we did play them at home in 2019 after playing on the road in 2017. if not a buy, then they owe us a game.
Florida last year was technically neutral. Orange Bowl Classic in Sunrise, FL closer to Miami/Ft Lauderdale. We also did same game in 2009. I was at it with a couple UR guys. We were about 3 of 10 UR fans there total...that's how neutral. Tho I think some fans of the previous game (doubleheader) were rooting against Florida so that helped. And we won. Big win. Helped us get at large with our highest seed ever. We need those games and wins. The next year we won vs Purdue in Chicago (MTE). Had we not won A10 auto we were bubble & needed it. 19-20 we beat Wisco (MTE). We all know about the Kansas buy game & what that did. Ole Jer also took a buy game at Pitt the next season even tho back then we used to get a couple major H&Hs. All those games were key to our NCAAs. It's the only way (at large) in for us imo. The more shots at them the better.
The Clemson and NC State games were like that too...neutral by NET but call them "semi neutral" bc they're in the opponents geographic base. True neutral much better but u take what u can get.
BC was a 2 for 1. 2 away 1 home that also had some tie into a UR football game there. The series is done.
We have played at Bama and at Florida (in Gainesville) recently. Those were true road buy games in past. Only ones I can think of under Mooney. Kentucky in a sense but that was part of a campus hosted MTE. Auburn would be another if we have it.
We're open to "neutral" games like that, and we have proven to play true road buy games too but just on an infrequent basis. I'd like us to be a lot more open. Even when we're in a good MTE, which we know is not this year unless something reported is way off.
The latter is what I've heard but idk how it works exactly. Often with our single game so-called neutrals they are a doubleheader, so there are 4 teams there total. 2 games back to back. We'd be sharing revenue among 4 teams. But there is the cost of renting this neutral arena which is not cheap. So also shared expenses on top of your own team travel expenses. But there are sponsors for some of these games too, I know at Orange Bowl ones there were, and I think they subsidize or take care of some costs like maybe arena. It's definitely not a money making thing for UR tho.
I certainly don't think its for a lack of trying that we are struggling this year it seems to put together a good schedule. There's a lot of parts for UR to consider. I mentioned it before but a school like Monmouth and UR are very different when it comes to its ability to schedule game. Monmouth and Colgate probably care more about the money from buy-games and exposure playing P5 teams than they care about their record because they both know they realistically have no chance for an at-large and it will come down to winning the conference tournament anyway. UR also won't schedule fewer than 6 OOC due to fans and revenue from the games.
I have no problem doing return home-home games with other schools from the other top 5 best conferences outside of P5 (A10, AAC, MWC, WCC, MVC). I am sure an Indiana State, Bradley, Nevada, Tulsa, Loyola Marymount level of school will certainly pick up the phone if we called them. Also, I think we can also try for home-home games against schools that have been solid in leagues outside of the ones above like a Charleston, Yale, Princeton, Grand Canyon, Vermont. I am even okay doing home-home games against teams like W&M and JMU for historical reasons. However, there is no reason now for us to be doing this with schools like Bucknell. There is absolutely no upside to a game like this.
Also, I am definitely for road games against P5 teams, but it depends on the team. I want us to have a chance of winning the game. Sure, playing at Houston, Duke, UConn would be great and a win would be incredible, but it is more likely we go 0-3 than winning one of those games. If we finished with a record of 9-4 with 9 wins being against Q3/Q4 teams and 4 loses are all on the road to top power teams, we will be going into conference play out of the at-large picture. The bulk of our schedule should be made up of teams like Boston College, Wichita St, and UNI like last year. Even though we lost all those games and WSU & UNI weren't up to the level they typically are, most years those 3 teams would comfortably be Q2 for us. In my opinion, we should roughly aim for a schedule like this:
2 games against certain Q1 P5 opponents away/neutral
4-5 games against Q4 opponents at home
6-7 games against expected Q2 or high Q3 opponents, home/away/neutral
Our goal going into A10 play should be about top 80 NET and a record no worse than 10-3 with losses only coming in the Q1/Q2 category.
I have no problem doing return home-home games with other schools from the other top 5 best conferences outside of P5 (A10, AAC, MWC, WCC, MVC). I am sure an Indiana State, Bradley, Nevada, Tulsa, Loyola Marymount level of school will certainly pick up the phone if we called them. Also, I think we can also try for home-home games against schools that have been solid in leagues outside of the ones above like a Charleston, Yale, Princeton, Grand Canyon, Vermont. I am even okay doing home-home games against teams like W&M and JMU for historical reasons. However, there is no reason now for us to be doing this with schools like Bucknell. There is absolutely no upside to a game like this.
Also, I am definitely for road games against P5 teams, but it depends on the team. I want us to have a chance of winning the game. Sure, playing at Houston, Duke, UConn would be great and a win would be incredible, but it is more likely we go 0-3 than winning one of those games. If we finished with a record of 9-4 with 9 wins being against Q3/Q4 teams and 4 loses are all on the road to top power teams, we will be going into conference play out of the at-large picture. The bulk of our schedule should be made up of teams like Boston College, Wichita St, and UNI like last year. Even though we lost all those games and WSU & UNI weren't up to the level they typically are, most years those 3 teams would comfortably be Q2 for us. In my opinion, we should roughly aim for a schedule like this:
2 games against certain Q1 P5 opponents away/neutral
4-5 games against Q4 opponents at home
6-7 games against expected Q2 or high Q3 opponents, home/away/neutral
Our goal going into A10 play should be about top 80 NET and a record no worse than 10-3 with losses only coming in the Q1/Q2 category.
Well, well, well…the NCAA is crying foul about the Players Era MTE. Both about them trying to claim it’s two separate MTEs and thus able to have more than one team from a conference, and also the NIL arrangements for the event.
www.sportico.com
NCAA Memo Fuels Questions About Big-Bucks NIL Hoops Event
The Players Era Festival, set to take place in two months, has agreed to pay $1 million to the NIL collective of each of its eight participants.
www.sportico.com
Chattanooga is playing @ USC and @ St Mary's to start their season. They will be very good this year and will likely be favored to win the Southern Conference, so no reason why we shouldn't be able to get a couple games like this. I am still hoping we land 2 or 3 majors, or at least a couple majors and a St Mary's type. Why hasn't 23 used his SDSU connections to get us a game with them?
stand firm, NCAA, on your ruling against multiple teams from the same conference appearing in the same MTE!Well, well, well…the NCAA is crying foul about the Players Era MTE. Both about them trying to claim it’s two separate MTEs and thus able to have more than one team from a conference, and also the NIL arrangements for the event.
NCAA Memo Fuels Questions About Big-Bucks NIL Hoops Event
The Players Era Festival, set to take place in two months, has agreed to pay $1 million to the NIL collective of each of its eight participants.
maybe they'll dump someone and be looking for an A10 team that hasn't filled it's schedule yet!
Good post, but last year we went 15-3 A-10 and only improved from 85 when the NET first came out to 73. So, we might need to be in the 50s or maybe low 60s or better when A-10 play starts.
Valid point VT. Looking at our OOC games last year, this was the breakdown:
Q1 - 2 games both losses
Q2 - 3 games. 1 win & 2 losses
Q3 - 2 wins & 0 losses
Q4 - 6 wins & 0 losses
While I still maintain we would've been more thoroughly in the bubble discussion had we beaten BC, WSU, and UNI. Still, you're right that I am not sure winning those games would've moved us up considerably enough in the NET. However, A10 regular season champs, 26-7, could make an argument for an at-large in my opinion.
Reflecting on our schedule last year, while it was still solid and at-large worthy (the games were there, just didn't win enough), there were still too many Q4 games and not enough Q2-3 games, in my opinion. If we could replace Siena, Queens, and Lafayette for teams who had a NET of <175 and won those games, our NET ranking would put us in a better position. We played 5 teams with a NET 310+. Those games have little upside, unless we win by 40+ like the P5 teams, but even then we should limit the amount of low Q4 games we have.
I do like discussing the topic of scheduling, and I like u guys too, but predictably I have to hammer some of these comments 17
not sure we need that revenue from that 1 extra crappy home OOC game. In fact taking $100k buy road game is likely much better. I'd like to see numbers. Lots of $5 deals for those early games. The season tix r cheap too and I truly think our fanbase would pay the exact same season tix cost for 1 less game. For away game biggest cost is charter flight (might be privately funded) and hotel. At home lot of expenses - the refs, RMC events, heck we pay the damn vcu kids to play in the band. Tiny profit. And if that home game is a "buy" game where we're paying the opponent, its a big loss.
Bucknell was a 2 for 1 not a H&H. u can be against that 2 for 1 too but imo there's definitely a distinction.
u r against playing elite p5s bc we can't win? Little ol' Richmond. That's what some said about Kansas game too. It was the #1 reason why we got bid. And who cares if we go 0-3 in those games 1 year? Micro view. I don't get what some of u r protecting against. Mooney has 1 at large bid EVER. we r only in the at large convo 1 every 5 years. I know I'm redundant but we're just trying to improve on that. You're really worried about about being out of at large picture before conf play? We do that nearly every year already! Like Brooklyn I personally think we can come out of OOC with similar records but against better comp & have a really good resume win in there. But first u need to actually try it for 5 years and then we'll know.
I went back and looked at 2009-10. Wow. We played 5 P5 games. Besides Florida, we beat Miss St and Missouri. Lost to South Carolina and Wake. None were at home. S. Carolina was actually another road buy game I forgot about. All away or neutral. And we played in a stronger A10. Now some want to go weaker ooc with a weaker A10. Unsurprisingly that was the 1 year Mooney got At Large. 7 seed. Emulate that schedule as much as possible. I know ppl will say u cant do it...key is good MTE u knock out a couple games there, u have to be willing to take a couple neutral or road buy games (I've never said wildly available but they r obviously there), and maybe we can find lower tier p5 H&H once in a while.
& look at other seasons I mentioned where we've been in mix. One remarkably was just 14 months b4 Mooney took & later turned us into "one of the best basketball programs in the nation" . They all have the P5 wins in common. But we're not going undefeated in them. u need the shots.
not sure we need that revenue from that 1 extra crappy home OOC game. In fact taking $100k buy road game is likely much better. I'd like to see numbers. Lots of $5 deals for those early games. The season tix r cheap too and I truly think our fanbase would pay the exact same season tix cost for 1 less game. For away game biggest cost is charter flight (might be privately funded) and hotel. At home lot of expenses - the refs, RMC events, heck we pay the damn vcu kids to play in the band. Tiny profit. And if that home game is a "buy" game where we're paying the opponent, its a big loss.
Bucknell was a 2 for 1 not a H&H. u can be against that 2 for 1 too but imo there's definitely a distinction.
u r against playing elite p5s bc we can't win? Little ol' Richmond. That's what some said about Kansas game too. It was the #1 reason why we got bid. And who cares if we go 0-3 in those games 1 year? Micro view. I don't get what some of u r protecting against. Mooney has 1 at large bid EVER. we r only in the at large convo 1 every 5 years. I know I'm redundant but we're just trying to improve on that. You're really worried about about being out of at large picture before conf play? We do that nearly every year already! Like Brooklyn I personally think we can come out of OOC with similar records but against better comp & have a really good resume win in there. But first u need to actually try it for 5 years and then we'll know.
I went back and looked at 2009-10. Wow. We played 5 P5 games. Besides Florida, we beat Miss St and Missouri. Lost to South Carolina and Wake. None were at home. S. Carolina was actually another road buy game I forgot about. All away or neutral. And we played in a stronger A10. Now some want to go weaker ooc with a weaker A10. Unsurprisingly that was the 1 year Mooney got At Large. 7 seed. Emulate that schedule as much as possible. I know ppl will say u cant do it...key is good MTE u knock out a couple games there, u have to be willing to take a couple neutral or road buy games (I've never said wildly available but they r obviously there), and maybe we can find lower tier p5 H&H once in a while.
& look at other seasons I mentioned where we've been in mix. One remarkably was just 14 months b4 Mooney took & later turned us into "one of the best basketball programs in the nation" . They all have the P5 wins in common. But we're not going undefeated in them. u need the shots.
Similar threads
