ADVERTISEMENT

2025-2026 Non Conference Schedule

??? Other than an MTE game against BC, Clemson was the only major Boise St played. And Boise played an NAIA team.

Other than MTE, the only majors St Mary's played were Nebraska and Utah, and they played a D2 team.

SDSU only played Cal as a major outside of their MTE while also playing a D3 team.

So, outside of MTEs, these 3 teams played combined 4 majors and 3 non D1 teams OOC. Seems like this hurts, not helps, your argument.
?????. I'm not sure what you are looking at but:

SDSU played Oregon, Gonzaga, Houston, Creighton and Cal OOC last year

St. Mary's played Nebraska, Utah, Utah State, Boise State, USC, and Arizona State last year

Boise played St. Mary's, San Francisco, Clemson, Boston College, Washington State,

We played Auburn and then a bunch of crap. These teams made it happen, we didn't.
 
Last edited:
?????. I'm not sure what you are looking at but:

SDSU played Oregon, Gonzaga, Houston, Creighton and Cal OOC last year

St. Mary's played Nebraska, Utah, Utah State, Boise State, USC, and Arizona State last year

Boise played St. Mary's, San Francisco, Clemson, Boston College, Washington State,

We played Auburn and then a bunch of crap. These times made it happen, we didn't.
Yes, all played mulitple good OOC games. UNBELIEVABLE the lengths mooneyites go to. Well, if it is not an MTE on a tuesday in the south region, then how are we supposed to get a game. Just wow.

But 97 - the games you listed are the one's im thinking of - and I just knew those teams off top of my head. Sure there are another 5-10 mid majors that had good OOC opponents. We can't get those games or MTE's or whatever b/c moon has no gravitas, or pull, or teams have no reason to play him.
 
?????. I'm not sure what you are looking at but:

SDSU played Oregon, Gonzaga, Houston, Creighton and Cal OOC last year

St. Mary's played Nebraska, Utah, Utah State, Boise State, USC, and Arizona State last year

Boise played St. Mary's, San Francisco, Clemson, Boston College, Washington State,

We played Auburn and then a bunch of crap. These times made it happen, we didn't.

Lmao

MTEs r a big part of scheduling. why is VT4700 dismissing that. why would anyone.

Those teams had very good schedules and it hurt spider23's argument? what. this mush isn't following that at all.

Plus...plus...those teams had some good buy games at home. UC San Diego, Towson, Akron, Chattanooga. And they get higher profile games within their own confereces.
 
?????. I'm not sure what you are looking at but:

SDSU played Oregon, Gonzaga, Houston, Creighton and Cal OOC last year

St. Mary's played Nebraska, Utah, Utah State, Boise State, USC, and Arizona State last year

Boise played St. Mary's, San Francisco, Clemson, Boston College, Washington State,

We played Auburn and then a bunch of crap. These teams made it happen, we didn't.
We need to get into a good MTE. No question about that.
 
Yes, all played mulitple good OOC games. UNBELIEVABLE the lengths mooneyites go to. Well, if it is not an MTE on a tuesday in the south region, then how are we supposed to get a game. Just wow.

But 97 - the games you listed are the one's im thinking of - and I just knew those teams off top of my head. Sure there are another 5-10 mid majors that had good OOC opponents. We can't get those games or MTE's or whatever b/c moon has no gravitas, or pull, or teams have no reason to play him.
Don't appreciate the mooneyite comment. Really wish u would stop with that. I hated our schedule last year. Hated it. But, we usually have a good one. You mentioned Boise's coach as an example of a coach picking up the phone and scheduling great. Boise had a home game against Clemson ( solid for a mid major), and had one other game against a major against BC, which was part of their MTE that included games against Hampton and South Dakota St. Had we played their schedule, you would have destroyed Mooney.

The other schedules were good mainly because of MTEs, which is the case for most mid majors now. Get into a good MTE and a very average schedule looks way better. We need to get in better MTEs. No question about that. It is also much harder to schedule like we used to, even as recent as a few years ago. No question about that either. And our schedule last year was beyond awful, and we should do much better than that regardless of how much harder it is now. No question about that either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
and when we don't should anyone be held accountable?
Never. That is the answer. All the credit for the few and far between good years, and deflect blame on all the bad years. And all the posters beating their chests leading up to the first scrimmage, slinked back off the board once the season got gnarly.
 
Never. That is the answer. All the credit for the few and far between good years, and deflect blame on all the bad years. And all the posters beating their chests leading up to the first scrimmage, slinked back off the board once the season got gnarly.
Who deflected blame? I don't remember anyone doing that last season. Who were all the posters beating their chests after a scrimmage? I don't remember that either. What's going on, man? U seem way angry. Hope all is okay.
 
by headline, I assume there will be 4 weaker teams added. not exactly the Maui Classic, but that's a field we could live with.
just do better than the Gulf Coast Classic.
I think it's a misleading usage of the word...I think it's just those four teams.

The Charleston Classic was supposed to reduce from an 8-team event to a 4-team event next season, but it looks like they're doing two separate 4-team events.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiderman
heard from a guy who's in the know (not at Richmond), that scheduling at schools like ours may get worse.
said the P5's are all using a new scheduling software designed to maximize their tournament chances.
no idea how the math works, but can't imagine we'll be looked at favorably.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
heard from a guy who's in the know (not at Richmond), that scheduling at schools like ours may get worse.
said the P5's are all using a new scheduling software designed to maximize their tournament chances.
no idea how the math works, but can't imagine we'll be looked at favorably.
I get this completely. Again, this is where you need to have a coach with connections, gravitas, energy, magnetism, whatever to get things done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spiders4ever
I get this completely. Again, this is where you need to have a coach with connections, gravitas, energy, magnetism, whatever to get things done.
This will be our excuse after we release a sh*t schedule this year. Meanwhile, other programs similar in stature to ours will still be playing good OOC schedules. So, effing weak.
 
I get this completely. Again, this is where you need to have a coach with connections, gravitas, energy, magnetism, whatever to get things done.
I don't understand what the software would say is a good team to play. Other P5's of course, or at least good P5's. Would it want you to schedule a bad P5? Probably not. I assume no P5's will play anyone with a 200+ NET. But do you even want to play a solid mid major and risk a loss? Maybe just mid majors who you believe will win their conferences?

And won't the software tell every P5 to schedule the same teams? So like 50 high major schools are going to call Drake, McNeese and UC Irvine for a game next year?
 
I don't understand what the software would say is a good team to play. Other P5's of course, or at least good P5's. Would it want you to schedule a bad P5? Probably not. I assume no P5's will play anyone with a 200+ NET. But do you even want to play a solid mid major and risk a loss? Maybe just mid majors who you believe will win their conferences?

And won't the software tell every P5 to schedule the same teams? So like 50 high major schools are going to call Drake, McNeese and UC Irvine for a game next year?

It's a good thing to be in demand, the NCAA will allow these P5 metric pumping mid-majors to play a 60 game season for the benefit of the power conferences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spiders4ever
I don't understand what the software would say is a good team to play. Other P5's of course, or at least good P5's. Would it want you to schedule a bad P5? Probably not. I assume no P5's will play anyone with a 200+ NET. But do you even want to play a solid mid major and risk a loss? Maybe just mid majors who you believe will win their conferences?

And won't the software tell every P5 to schedule the same teams? So like 50 high major schools are going to call Drake, McNeese and UC Irvine for a game next year?
Software will show 99+% win chances. Play 7 of those at home. Then, play 6 majors. Just win 2 of the 6, and you are sitting pretty at 9-4 with a couple good wins. Sucks, but this is what most majors will do.
 
I don't understand what the software would say is a good team to play. Other P5's of course, or at least good P5's. Would it want you to schedule a bad P5? Probably not. I assume no P5's will play anyone with a 200+ NET. But do you even want to play a solid mid major and risk a loss? Maybe just mid majors who you believe will win their conferences?

And won't the software tell every P5 to schedule the same teams? So like 50 high major schools are going to call Drake, McNeese and UC Irvine for a game next year?

why would the software say to play those teams...last year u were telling me they only played other P5s and the bottom 150 NET teams. which isn't true but that was the convo here iirc

I need Joey Bag o Donuts to scribble this on a whiteboard. Like old school Tropicana sportsbook.
 
why would the software say to play those teams...last year u were telling me they only played other P5s and the bottom 150 NET teams. which isn't true but that was the convo here iirc

I need Joey Bag o Donuts to scribble this on a whiteboard. Like old school Tropicana sportsbook.
I'm just guessing. No idea what the software says.
But a mid major with a net a heck of a lot better than us was told by a high major that their annual game was off because the software said the game doesn't maximize their tournament chance. I'll have to wait for the high major's schedule to see what kind of games the program recommends.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1 and plydogg
Software and algorithms can be developed to do anything the user determines is needed. Can be simple or complicated. Can make a few assumptions or a myriad of assumptions. I wouldn’t assume anything without looking at the supposed requirements and code. But it does seem we are on the outside looking in. Not a new area for us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zeeter
I'm just guessing. No idea what the software says.
But a mid major with a net a heck of a lot better than us was told by a high major that their annual game was off because the software said the game doesn't maximize their tournament chance. I'll have to wait for the high major's schedule to see what kind of games the program recommends.

what teams
 
call all the high majors and try, but then reach out to Liberty, High Point, JMU, UNCW, Charleston, Furman, Wofford, Winthrop, Princeton, Yale ...
 
Go call some schools in the American, Mountain West and get some home and homes, heck just go to their place and play them. VCU did this last year, they are in our league, last time I checked. Is it harder in this day and age? Sure, but are we running a "national" program as Mooney says we are or some mid major budget operation that takes whatever table scraps are offered. Seems like the latter to me. Mandate has to come from the top that this is our intention but we won't ever hear that. We will hear the excuses after though.
Too long a bus ride. Our poor little school can't afford it
 
JOC to Mooney" " Why did you wait so long to schedule a MTE?"

Mooney: " I meant to, but forgot about it until it was too late so all I could get was a D2 MTE"

All is not lost. Maybe we'll get lucky and some P5 schools are looking for a midmajor cupcake and will call..
 
I guess the “software” has entered the picture because of the huge increase in variability in team makeup. I don’t think the software is going to be much better than the normal scheduling assumptions, but it gives a convenient scapegoat if a team’s quality wins aren’t good enough. That being said the NCAA selections are already biased towards the P5 and with the P5 being able to pull most of the talent out of the mid-major ranks, I don’t see a need for schedule enhancement for any P5 team. Just like at UR, it comes down to coaching. Is your coach building a NCAA worthy roster and developing a winning culture or not?

As far as UR goes, I am expecting a very similar OOC schedule to last year. One would think the MTE would have to be better since the bar is subterranean, but signs sure aren’t looking promising. The difference between the Men’s and Women’s program trajectories is dumbfounding.
 
I'm sure an A-10 team with a sub 200 NET largely returning the same roster is not going to be ping in this software algorythm. 100% guarantee this gets mentioned in Mooney's one and only late spring/summer presser that he will do as part of the reason it is so hard to schedule these days. But he will be really excited about the opportunities we have before us. Heck, it probably won't be a presser but some quotes JOC gets from him via e-mail.

I really do like how our entire MBB goes radio silent during the offseason, it really helps generate interest in the program and shows the level of excitement we have for our program. Meanwhile, Roussell is out doing interviews, on social media generating PR for our women's program. As was said, these programs are on two completely different trajectories.
 
I'm sure an A-10 team with a sub 200 NET largely returning the same roster is not going to be ping in this software algorythm. 100% guarantee this gets mentioned in Mooney's one and only late spring/summer presser that he will do as part of the reason it is so hard to schedule these days. But he will be really excited about the opportunities we have before us. Heck, it probably won't be a presser but some quotes JOC gets from him via e-mail.

I really do like how our entire MBB goes radio silent during the offseason, it really helps generate interest in the program and shows the level of excitement we have for our program. Meanwhile, Roussell is out doing interviews, on social media generating PR for our women's program. As was said, these programs are on two completely different trajectories.

It's called managing expectations, except in our case there just are no expectations from or for the regime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 97spiderfan
I really do like how our entire MBB goes radio silent during the offseason, it really helps generate interest in the program and shows the level of excitement we have for our program. Meanwhile, Roussell is out doing interviews, on social media generating PR for our women's program. As was said, these programs are on two completely different trajectories.
It's all part of the overall malaise and comfort culture long game in the mens program. If we don't hype or provide updates, there is no criticism to be had. Hardt with his commnents (sensible,etc) or lack theroff is complicit in endorsing this culture.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT