PDA

View Full Version : Clearing up One Thing on SMC's Scheduling



thegloriousgoateeofKP
12-04-2016, 11:32 AM
This quote popped up in another thread, and it brought up a topic I'd like to shed some light on:

"SMC scheduled their way to an undefeated (likely) non conference. Aren't they at home until conference play begins now? If I was an SMC fan I would be pretty tired of the rinky dink scheduling philosophy."

The reality is, until the Committee shows that it can properly evaluate how difficult it is to win on the road (they mess this up year after year after year), SMC's tourney chances are better off playing nobodies at home instead of good/mediocre/poor teams on the road. Maybe their national reputation won't grow as quickly, but unquestionably, their tourney chances are better.

A game on the road against, say, a team in the RPI 100s is a tough, tough game to win because home court advantage in basketball is so important (it's worth ~3.5 points, I think.) And yet, you lose that game and your resume takes a major hit because "you lost to a nobody!"

Consider how much better SMC is than Pacific this year. Even so, if that game were played today at Pacific, SMC would be only an 11-point favorite (via KenPom) with an 84% chance of winning. They lose that game, and their at-large chances take a major, major hit. Why saddle yourself with more of those games than you absolutely have to? If you play enough of them, you're going to lose one eventually, and playing in the WCC, you already have no choice but to play some. Luckily for the power conferences, they NEVER have to play on the road against truly terribly teams, if they don't want to.

Here's some further reading. Tough road losses likely kept Monmouth out of the NCAA Tourney last year: https://thecauldron.si.com/nevermonmouth-6d2e8a71ea27#.as4ljclku

This is also the strongest argument against continuing the series with Wazzu. If they insist on having us come to Pullman, it's simply not worth the risk of losing and damaging our at-large chances.

bartruff1
12-04-2016, 11:48 AM
How is it working out for Long Beach State ?

Zagceo
12-04-2016, 11:55 AM
Only way to keep Monson at LBS if you asked their AD

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-ncaa-coach-contract-20150124-story.html

Outraged
12-04-2016, 12:04 PM
How is it working out for Long Beach State ?

Monson gets the proceeds from road games in his contract. That is why they play on the road.

btzag
12-04-2016, 12:09 PM
That philosophy does not help your team develop any sort of toughness or reselience and also overlooks the fan base that enjoys seeing natural rivals competing every year. Show me all the programs with this philosophy and I guarantee they are on my personal 'weak' list.

Also why does SMC never seem to play in these holiday tourneys like the rest of the country? You get plenty of good games on a neutral court and you don't have to negotiate the home and home stuff.

bartruff1
12-04-2016, 12:13 PM
Monson getting paid big money to lose games...now that sounds like a great job for a coach...

ZagsObserver
12-04-2016, 12:16 PM
This quote popped up in another thread, and it brought up a topic I'd like to shed some light on:

"SMC scheduled their way to an undefeated (likely) non conference. Aren't they at home until conference play begins now? If I was an SMC fan I would be pretty tired of the rinky dink scheduling philosophy."

The reality is, until the Committee shows that it can properly evaluate how difficult it is to win on the road (they mess this up year after year after year), SMC's tourney chances are better off playing nobodies at home instead of good/mediocre/poor teams on the road. Maybe their national reputation won't grow as quickly, but unquestionably, their tourney chances are better.

A game on the road against, say, a team in the RPI 100s is a tough, tough game to win because home court advantage in basketball is so important (it's worth ~3.5 points, I think.) And yet, you lose that game and your resume takes a major hit because "you lost to a nobody!"

Consider how much better SMC is than Pacific this year. Even so, if that game were played today at Pacific, SMC would be only an 11-point favorite (via KenPom) with an 84% chance of winning. They lose that game, and their at-large chances take a major, major hit. Why saddle yourself with more of those games than you absolutely have to? If you play enough of them, you're going to lose one eventually, and playing in the WCC, you already have no choice but to play some. Luckily for the power conferences, they NEVER have to play on the road against truly terribly teams, if they don't want to.

Here's some further reading. Tough road losses likely kept Monmouth out of the NCAA Tourney last year: https://thecauldron.si.com/nevermonmouth-6d2e8a71ea27#.as4ljclku

This is also the strongest argument against continuing the series with Wazzu. If they insist on having us come to Pullman, it's simply not worth the risk of losing and damaging our at-large chances.

I don't disagree that a difficult road game can be a hard game to win. Maybe the risk is greater than the reward for Randy and company. But then you can't complain if you get a poor seed or are left out of the field od of 64. No guts, no glory

Zagdawg
12-04-2016, 12:20 PM
They were banned from playing in the preseason tournaments for a few years due to the sanctions against them --they should be playing in one of the tournaments next year-- should be quiet a few available due to so many good teams playing in the Nike tournament in Portland.

As good as St Marys is --it would be great to see them play some good teams --to help the WCCs overall resume ---at least they got the game against Stanford.

Being battle tested helped us be able to step up in the WCC tournament last year and win the one that really counted --and the Gaels were on the outside looking in again --wishing they were dancing once more.

sittingon50
12-04-2016, 12:22 PM
Maybe Don or MJ can help out here: SMC got their pre-season Tourney privileges taken away for a few years. Those potentially quality games (away from Moraga) had to be replaced. Taking out all the P5 opponents that wouldn't play in their gym & the limited # of quality mid-majors, what's left? Renting a facility in Oakland for a neutral court game? I doubt that's a $ decision that Coach Bennett makes.

Edit: looks like ZD was posting similar thoughts the same time as I.

gonzagafan62
12-04-2016, 12:24 PM
I agree with you KP,

But on the other hand if you lose any games and don't beat Gonzaga if you're SMC you basically drop from what now is a 4 seed to now on the bubbble and the we know how that works lol

maynard g krebs
12-04-2016, 12:38 PM
Dayton and Stanford show they're trying imo.
According to realtimerpi.com, SMC's SOS is currently 16 and their RPI is 5. I know that means little at this point, but it doesn't mean nothing.
GU is 39 in SOS, 12 in RPI

TheZagPhish
12-04-2016, 01:02 PM
Bennett is clever and wise to play the angles he has, I think. He's finding a way to elevate his program in this heavily stratified climate with the players he can assemble, and you have to hand it to him -- it's working.

I don't always understand SMC's road but it is improving them for the betterment of our league and team. I wonder what they'll be like ten years from now, with some expectation that they'll be a more respected, challenged and challenging team on the national level.

thegloriousgoateeofKP
12-04-2016, 01:25 PM
Bennett is clever and wise to play the angles he has, I think. He's finding a way to elevate his program in this heavily stratified climate with the players he can assemble, and you have to hand it to him -- it's working.

Yup. Unless you can get home or neutral games against legitimate teams, or until the Committee properly understands home/road weights, it's simply not worth playing road games that you don't have to.

The Zags don't do it; the Dukes and Michigan States of the world don't do it. SMC shouldn't either

dan71w
12-04-2016, 01:58 PM
Dayton and Stanford show they're trying imo.
According to realtimerpi.com, SMC's SOS is currently 16 and their RPI is 5. I know that means little at this point, but it doesn't mean nothing.
GU is 39 in SOS, 12 in RPI

This I do not understand at all. I am not dissing on SMC, but the idea they they are sitting with such a high SOS, and RPI smacks of gaming the system at this point in the season. they have not played any top 25 teams as of yet.

Nevada Don
12-04-2016, 02:04 PM
Maybe Don or MJ can help out here: SMC got their pre-season Tourney privileges taken away for a few years. Those potentially quality games (away from Moraga) had to be replaced. Taking out all the P5 opponents that wouldn't play in their gym & the limited # of quality mid-majors, what's left? Renting a facility in Oakland for a neutral court game? I doubt that's a $ decision that Coach Bennett makes.

.

To confirm, SMC was sanctioned by the NCAA for 2 or 3 years but that ends for next year, thus we'll be in the Wooden Legacy, which I already commented on that the competition doesn't really impress me.

Renting the Oakland Coliseum is kind of a non starter IMO. It would take a double-header with SMC and Cal against two Big5 (top draw) schools to fill 18,000 seats. I believe Cal wanted us to rent the Coliseum (at our expense) for the SMC home portion of a 2 (at Berkeley) and 1. SMC at Stanford only drew 4,079 and it holds I think 7,500. Not very good. I'll give you an idea, why not the WCC against a Top 3 conference, a challenge. WCC would be SMC and GU at the Oakland Coliseum. Do it for next year or the year after when the talent is still there, (for us anyway).

Maybe renting the Oakland Coliseum will be more economically feasible down the road as the Warriors will move across the Bay to a new facility in 3 years. Why doesn't Cal hold a WCC-PAC-12 Challenge at their place ?

With the abundance of activities in the Bay Area, SMC would be thrilled to consistently sell 4,000 seats (new capacity next year) for every game. At this point, no one really thinks they could sell out 5,000 plus seats. If that was to change, SMC does have a conception (land area) to build a new basketball facility. SMC is pretty isolated. There are basically two roads into the College, each about a 5 mile drive from the freeway. Both roads are two-lanes !!

Saint Mary's does have obstacles to overcome with scheduling and attendance in the Bay Area.

Nevada Don
12-04-2016, 02:08 PM
This I do not understand at all. I am not dissing on SMC, but the idea they they are sitting with such a high SOS, and RPI smacks of gaming the system at this point in the season. they have not played any top 25 teams as of yet.

We aren't smart enough to game the system.

Martin Centre Mad Man
12-04-2016, 03:56 PM
We aren't smart enough to game the system.

Nice. ;)

Goshzagit
12-04-2016, 04:02 PM
Gonzaga's RPI is 8 via all current rankings.

Not 12?

Zag_Dad
12-04-2016, 04:11 PM
To confirm, SMC was sanctioned by the NCAA for 2 or 3 years but that ends for next year, thus we'll be in the Wooden Legacy, which I already commented on that the competition doesn't really impress me.

Renting the Oakland Coliseum is kind of a non starter IMO. It would take a double-header with SMC and Cal against two Big5 (top draw) schools to fill 18,000 seats. I believe Cal wanted us to rent the Coliseum (at our expense) for the SMC home portion of a 2 (at Berkeley) and 1. SMC at Stanford only drew 4,079 and it holds I think 7,500. Not very good. I'll give you an idea, why not the WCC against a Top 3 conference, a challenge. WCC would be SMC and GU at the Oakland Coliseum. Do it for next year or the year after when the talent is still there, (for us anyway).

Maybe renting the Oakland Coliseum will be more economically feasible down the road as the Warriors will move across the Bay to a new facility in 3 years. Why doesn't Cal hold a WCC-PAC-12 Challenge at their place ?

With the abundance of activities in the Bay Area, SMC would be thrilled to consistently sell 4,000 seats (new capacity next year) for every game. At this point, no one really thinks they could sell out 5,000 plus seats. If that was to change, SMC does have a conception (land area) to build a new basketball facility. SMC is pretty isolated. There are basically two roads into the College, each about a 5 mile drive from the freeway. Both roads are two-lanes !!

Saint Mary's does have obstacles to overcome with scheduling and attendance in the Bay Area.

Just curious, how many of SMC home games are sold out other than the game against GU?

maynard g krebs
12-04-2016, 04:23 PM
Gonzaga's RPI is 8 via all current rankings.

Not 12?

When I posted earlier, realtime said 12. Apparently hadn't yet updated from yesterday.

maynard g krebs
12-04-2016, 04:25 PM
This I do not understand at all. I am not dissing on SMC, but the idea they they are sitting with such a high SOS, and RPI smacks of gaming the system at this point in the season. they have not played any top 25 teams as of yet.

To game the system, you'd have to accurately project the w/l records of the teams you play, and schedule teams with high winning %'s that you know you can beat. Easier said than done.

MBAGael
12-04-2016, 04:32 PM
Zag Dad, the only game which was a sellout was the first game vs Nevada. Most likely, we won't sellout our 3,500 seat gymnasium until we play either you or BYU.

ZAG 4 LIFE
12-04-2016, 05:15 PM
As a former college player, and coach... I can only speak for myself...
I'd want to play some really good teams. From a players perspective it's
A no brainer... competitive people/players LOVE challenges.
From a coaching perspective, while tougher games by definition are
More difficult to win... by scheduling and playing them, over time, recruiting
Will enjoy an uptick.

john montana
12-04-2016, 05:19 PM
That was my quote, mostly tongue in cheek. You won't convince me they can't get good games though. I am not talking about playing 100 rpi level teams on the road, go play some PAC 12 schools etc. SMC has a name now and I bet they can get those games. With this team...they would win em too. Bennett clearly won't take a road without a return, but I bet he could get one off road games against Oregon etc.

Zag_Dad
12-04-2016, 05:23 PM
Zag Dad, the only game which was a sellout was the first game vs Nevada. Most likely, we won't sellout our 3,500 seat gymnasium until we play either you or BYU.

Thanks MBAGael. I was just curious why there is such a push for an improvement on the gym at SMC if they don't fill the one they currently have. Based on posts over at GIAG it seems many of the fans feel like a new gym will result in tougher oppponents being willing to play you on your court. GU built a 6,000 seat gym because they didn't know at the time whether the program would continue to thrive the way it was at that time. The fear was that if we overbuilt the gym it could look empty when the bandwagon got empty.

That didn't happen. ��

GO ZAGS

MBAGael
12-04-2016, 06:49 PM
ZD, Knocking out the back wall is only part of the $13m project. Behind the new seats will be a brand new workout/training facility for all the student athletes. This helps our programs and will add 500 new seats to our gym, bringing it to 4K. We also just remodeled our old gym to make it a state of the art practice facility for basketball.

I am not sure adding 500 high quality seats will change who will play us at home. It seems like the general trend is teams not traveling much and wanting home win guarantees. P5 teams have this luxury because they get high quality games in conference. By the way, we do have a home and home with a top 10 team this year!

JM, we played cal last year with no return game. We just completed a home and home with Stanford. We were willing to play at Oregon this year but they backed out at the last second. We ended up starting a home and home with Dayton this year which is a nice get. Of our first six games, only 3 have been at home. Definitely an improvement over prior years.

willandi
12-04-2016, 07:10 PM
To game the system, you'd have to accurately project the w/l records of the teams you play, and schedule teams with high winning %'s that you know you can beat. Easier said than done.

I remember reading, last year or before, that the way to game the system is to play lower level teams of high level conferences since the opponents of those lower level teams, in conference, are usually higher level.

Talk was that, as I remember it, New Mexico and the Mountain West were pretty active in doing this, at that time.

It may have changed.

willandi
12-04-2016, 07:14 PM
Today, Dec 4, 2016
How is SMC above Gonzaga in RPI, SOSand all the other categories?
2016-17 RPI
RK TEAM RPI D1 W-L SOS NCRP NCSS CFRP CFSS 1-25 26-50 51-100 L12 LRPI OFFQ DEFQ ASM
1 Baylor .7326 8-0 7 314 7 314 314 2-0 1-0 3-0 8-0 2 5.1 19.6 24.7
2 Creighton .7289 8-0 8 278 8 278 278 0-0 3-0 2-0 8-0 10 20.9 2.2 23.1
3 TCU .7017 7-0 26 166 26 134 79 1-0 1-0 0-0 7-0 23 13.8 13.4 27.2
4 Florida .6964 7-1 14 233 14 233 233 0-1 0-0 2-0 7-1 49 8.1 13.5 21.5
5 Villanova .6956 8-0 43 304 42 304 304 1-0 2-0 2-0 8-0 28 11.9 15.8 27.7
6 Saint Mary's .6942 6-0 32 43 32 24 43 0-0 2-0 1-0 6-0 20 6.7 11.3 18.1
7 South Carolina .6914 7-0 51 37 51 18 37 0-0 0-0 2-0 7-0 3 4.8 18.8 23.6
8 Minnesota .6798 7-1 24 265 24 265 265 1-0 0-1 3-0 7-1 30 6.4 9.8 16.3
9 Gonzaga .6778 8-0 70 108 71 86 146 1-0 1-0 3-0 8-0 18 10.2 10.4 20.6
10 Middle Tennessee .6764 7-1 10 17 10 30 17 0-0 2-0 1-1 7-1 38 0.3 6.6 6.8

gonzagafan62
12-04-2016, 07:31 PM
Willandi,

We are now below SMC because we just got done playing 330+ Mississippi Valley State

gonzagafan62
12-04-2016, 07:36 PM
I remember reading, last year or before, that the way to game the system is to play lower level teams of high level conferences since the opponents of those lower level teams, in conference, are usually higher level.

Talk was that, as I remember it, New Mexico and the Mountain West were pretty active in doing this, at that time.

It may have changed.

You're right on how it works. Head coach Larry Eustachy gamed system the best. Did it with Southern Mississippi AND Colorado State. Colorado state missed the tourney the one year he gamed it there while Southern Mississsippi lost as #9 seed to Kansas State

sittingon50
12-04-2016, 07:40 PM
Did I read something about a parking garage of some sort associated with that project, MBA? Have never been to your campus but understand that's a problem.

thegloriousgoateeofKP
12-04-2016, 07:54 PM
You're right on how it works. Head coach Larry Eustachy gamed system the best. Did it with Southern Mississippi AND Colorado State. Colorado state missed the tourney the one year he gamed it there while Southern Mississsippi lost as #9 seed to Kansas State

Here's a good write-up on how Texas Tech gamed the system. Hats off to them, and hats off to Eustachy and anyone else who exposes the deeply flawed RPI:

http://basketballpredictions.blogspot.com/2015/12/how-to-inflate-your-resume-how-texas.html

MBAGael
12-04-2016, 08:06 PM
50, parking is a problem at our campus but mainly during class times. There are going to be two rather small second levels added to two current parking lots. They have nothing to do with the Student Athlete Performance Center project (what the gym expansion falls under).

gonzagafan62
12-04-2016, 08:12 PM
Here's a good write-up on how Texas Tech gamed the system. Hats off to them, and hats off to Eustachy and anyone else who exposes the deeply flawed RPI:

http://basketballpredictions.blogspot.com/2015/12/how-to-inflate-your-resume-how-texas.html

Great read. Reminds me of exactly how eustachy did it. Didn't know Texas tech and tubby did the same thing. I really dislike the RPI and I think the committee is starting to do the same because they've been leaving out better RPI teams for the teams that pass the "eye test"

MBAGael
12-04-2016, 08:21 PM
I wonder how much weight rpi even has now? With advanced models like kenpom and bpi, I would think the selection committee would weigh the rpi less. Or it would be one tool of many. If you watched the college football selection show, you would be surprised at how many different numbers everyone uses to create opinions.

gonzagafan62
12-04-2016, 08:28 PM
I wonder how much weight rpi even has now? With advanced models like kenpom and bpi, I would think the selection committee would weigh the rpi less. Or it would be one tool of many. If you watched the college football selection show, you would be surprised at how many different numbers everyone uses to create opinions.

That's what I'm getting at with my last post. They've started weeding out teams that have better RPIs but better wins. It's made for a lot better tournament games and better teams getting in. Wish they would've put Monmouth and SMC in last year though. Those two teams looked like real teams... Tulsa was a joke and so was Michigan imo

Nevada Don
12-04-2016, 08:32 PM
Today, Dec 4, 2016
How is SMC above Gonzaga in RPI, SOSand all the other categories?


If we had all the answers, there would be no "mysteries of life?"

Zagdawg
12-04-2016, 08:38 PM
Early in the season --based upon who we both played--the RPIs will clean up as we get further into the season--especially as our opponents get into their conference schedules.

willandi
12-04-2016, 08:38 PM
If we had all the answers, there would be no "mysteries of life?"

We would still be married!

MBAGael
12-04-2016, 08:49 PM
Will, As a professor of economics, this means i teach stats and econometrics, I'll tell you this: it's a timing issue right now and that rpi's standard deviation is still fairly large so I would not use it now. Kenpom is more accurate.

Second, we have played 3 top 80ish teams so far along with another one at 106. Two on the road and one neutral site. We have only played one sub 200 team out of 6 games. Although we are off to a very good start, we now have 5 home games lined up before league starts.

JPtheBeasta
12-04-2016, 09:16 PM
If we had all the answers, there would be no "mysteries of life?"


The answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything is 42.

ZagsObserver
12-04-2016, 09:45 PM
Will, As a professor of economics, this means i teach stats and econometrics, I'll tell you this: it's a timing issue right now and that rpi's standard deviation is still fairly large so I would not use it now. Kenpom is more accurate.

Second, we have played 3 top 80ish teams so far along with another one at 106. Two on the road and one neutral site. We have only played one sub 200 team out of 6 games. Although we are off to a very good start, we now have 5 home games lined up before league starts.

The problem for the gaels is that if they don't beat the zags they will have exactly no top 50 wins. The committee will see that they didn't even attempt to play top 50 teams.

MBAGael
12-04-2016, 09:49 PM
What about our win at Dayton?

GoZags
12-04-2016, 09:55 PM
What about our win at Dayton?

There's a chance .... Dayton has finished Top 50 3 times in the last decade including 2 of the past 3 (at least KenPom Top 50).
^

sittingon50
12-04-2016, 11:32 PM
If we had all the answers, there would be no "mysteries of life?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeOKWMpsPvU

Nevada Don
12-04-2016, 11:50 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeOKWMpsPvU

Dang and I gave up smoking!!

titopoet
12-05-2016, 05:35 AM
To game the system, you'd have to accurately project the w/l records of the teams you play, and schedule teams with high winning %'s that you know you can beat. Easier said than done.

Exactly... everyone raise their hands who think Iowa State will have a lower rpi than Stanford at the end? Why? Because Stanford is sitting at 20 spots better right now and is rated a better win than Iowa State...for now. RPI in this part of the season is fluid and won't mean any for another third of a season. Both Arizona and SDSU will be higher than they are now while many of the best victories for SMC will start to fade. Hopefully not to much and keep SMC in the 20 or 30s for two teams doing well in the season can only help WCC.

ZagsObserver
12-05-2016, 06:43 AM
Is there a reason gonzaga would play a 300 rip team instead of a 200 rpi team? Seams like it would achieve the same end.

LongIslandZagFan
12-05-2016, 07:15 AM
The one thing the scheduling done by Randy does is limit access to quality wins. When it comes to the eye test later on down the road when they are being compared against power 5 middling teams... they aren't going to have any. Lately Randy has put all of his quality win chips on beating Gonzaga... if they don't do that... they lose out on the tourney.

bartruff1
12-05-2016, 07:24 AM
If Gonzaga had lost to the Gaels or anyone else in the WCC Tourney last year they would have been in the same boat..

Rangerzag
12-05-2016, 07:30 AM
The one thing the scheduling done by Randy does is limit access to quality wins. When it comes to the eye test later on down the road when they are being compared against power 5 middling teams... they aren't going to have any. Lately Randy has put all of his quality win chips on beating Gonzaga... if they don't do that... they lose out on the tourney.

Or, say SMC beats Gonzaga twice in regular season. Unfortunately maybe that particular season Gonzaga's rpi is not high enough to represent the good wins SMC counts on to get them off the bubble and into the NCAA tournament. Then Gonzaga wins the WCC tournament to push itself off the bubble and into the NCAA tournament.

No feeling sorry then, for SMC being on the outside looking in.

TheGonzagaFactor
12-05-2016, 07:33 AM
I think Bennett knows what he has and schedules accordingly. More tough games means more chances to be exposed and for teams to figure you out on film.

SMC has a key advantage that Gonzaga didn't: an established program in the conference. SMC can play nobody, and if they limit the bad losses, a win over GU legitimizes them. GU didn't have this luxury. There were no WCC games that weren't "bad losses" to the committee when GU was coming up. GU had to play a tough OOC to get ANY recognition, which is why they were taking away games without return trips for years.

SMC takes advantage of it to such a ridiculous extent that people were trying to argue a team that lost to Pepperdine TWICE and didn't win an outright conference title in a weak league last year deserved to be in the tournament. It's laughable. However, we GU fans want another good team in the conference so badly that we generally play along.

TheGonzagaFactor
12-05-2016, 07:34 AM
If Gonzaga had lost to the Gaels or anyone else in the WCC Tourney last year they would have been in the same boat..

They didn't, so they weren't..............

bartruff1
12-05-2016, 07:37 AM
They didn't, so they weren't..............

Point being their schedules didn't mean much of anything....it came down to one game for the automatic..

LongIslandZagFan
12-05-2016, 07:44 AM
Or, say SMC beats Gonzaga twice in regular season. Unfortunately maybe that particular season Gonzaga's rpi is not high enough to represent the good wins SMC counts on to get them off the bubble and into the NCAA tournament. Then Gonzaga wins the WCC tournament to push itself off the bubble and into the NCAA tournament.

No feeling sorry then, for SMC being on the outside looking in.


Bingo... That is the very real risk Randy runs when he does that kind of schedule. JMHO... they need to get into a early tourney... those usually offer up a chance at a good win, even if you lose an early game.

LongIslandZagFan
12-05-2016, 07:45 AM
I think Bennett knows what he has and schedules accordingly. More tough games means more chances to be exposed and for teams to figure you out on film.

SMC has a key advantage that Gonzaga didn't: an established program in the conference. SMC can play nobody, and if they limit the bad losses, a win over GU legitimizes them. GU didn't have this luxury. There were no WCC games that weren't "bad losses" to the committee when GU was coming up. GU had to play a tough OOC to get ANY recognition, which is why they were taking away games without return trips for years.

SMC takes advantage of it to such a ridiculous extent that people were trying to argue a team that lost to Pepperdine TWICE and didn't win an outright conference title in a weak league last year deserved to be in the tournament. It's laughable. However, we GU fans want another good team in the conference so badly that we generally play along.

I'd buy that to a point... but Randy knew he had a very solid team returning this year... look at their schedule.

TexasZagFan
12-05-2016, 07:47 AM
Point being their schedules didn't mean much of anything....it came down to one game for the automatic..

For both teams, it came down to that one game. I submit that the Zags OOC, and their experience overall, put them in a better position to handle the pressure.

bartruff1
12-05-2016, 07:55 AM
For both teams, it came down to that one game. I submit that the Zags OOC, and their experience overall, put them in a better position to handle the pressure.

Grasping at straws....begging the question.....conjecture.. ;)

ZagsObserver
12-05-2016, 08:09 AM
Grasping at straws....begging the question.....conjecture.. ;)

The difference is gonzaga played good teams, they just lost. The gaels didn't attempt a good ooc game. Home patsies only.

TexasZagFan
12-05-2016, 08:10 AM
Grasping at straws....begging the question.....conjecture.. ;)

Oh hell, bart, "conjecture" is what a chat board is all about... :lmao:

TexasZagFan
12-05-2016, 08:11 AM
The difference is gonzaga played good teams, they just lost. The gaels didn't attempt a good ooc game. Home patsies only.

Isn't the WCC tournament in Vegas pretty much a home away from home for the Zags? I don't recall how many SMC fans were there.

bartruff1
12-05-2016, 08:26 AM
Oh hell, bart, "conjecture" is what a chat board is all about... :lmao:

Ain't that the truth....I would like to stay and play but I have to manage my Goldman options.... the masters of the universe are back from the cold....

CDC84
12-05-2016, 08:52 AM
It would be nice if a whole new arena could be built from the ground up, but I believe there are economic and campus space issues that are hurting SMC's ability to build a new arena, but don't hold me to it.

The size of the gym isn't the important issue. It's the amenities, the locker rooms (visiting locker rooms do matter), comfortable seats, a great HVAC system so that your eyeglasses don't fog up when you enter the building, etc.

Regarding the original subject, I think the issue that many analysts have with SMC is Randy's refusal to take on "buy games." He has adopted the Stew Morrill philosophy. It's home and home or no. What about playing at BCS programs that generally produce top 50 RPI teams every year? The Dan Monson thing is a very different deal where you go play at Louisville, UNC and Duke and become everyone's sacrificial lamb. There are other power 5 programs out there who generally have a top 50 RPI every year who SMC could beat on the road. They just aren't going to do a home and home with SMC. I'm thinking of someone like Purdue. I totally agree with bypassing road games at Penn State or Mississippi or Texas Tech. It's not worth it.

TexasZagFan
12-05-2016, 09:11 AM
It would be nice if a whole new arena could be built from the ground up, but I believe there are economic and campus space issues that are hurting SMC's ability to build a new arena, but don't hold me to it.

The size of the gym isn't the important issue. It's the amenities, the locker rooms (visiting locker rooms do matter), comfortable seats, a great HVAC system so that your eyeglasses don't fog up when you enter the building, etc.

Regarding the original subject, I think the issue that many analysts have with SMC is Randy's refusal to take on "buy games." He has adopted the Stew Morrill philosophy. It's home and home or no. What about playing at BCS programs that generally produce top 50 RPI teams every year? The Dan Monson thing is a very different deal where you go play at Louisville, UNC and Duke and become everyone's sacrificial lamb. There are other power 5 programs out there who generally have a top 50 RPI every year who SMC could beat on the road. They just aren't going to do a home and home with SMC. I'm thinking of someone like Purdue. I totally agree with bypassing road games at Penn State or Mississippi or Texas Tech. It's not worth it.

Not even Don Haskins demanded a home and home. To play Georgetown, he agreed to two games at Georgetown, and one in El Paso. UTEP won one of those games in DC, and that ended any future deals with them.

sideshow06
12-05-2016, 10:27 AM
I think RB has made some effort in the last couple of years to start breaking this pattern. I agree with those who have stated that he tries to schedule to the abilities of each team - thus last year's disappointing schedule when expectations were low and everyone, including RB, was caught off guard with the speed at which the talent came online. For reasons you guys made clear, he plays a risky game of hit and miss with other mid-majors. He tries to predict the ones that will be better than expected. And yes, he's hard headed about the return games, but he took a chance with Cal last year - finally taking an away game in the hopes of stoking a local rivalry. After paying it lip service Cuonzo Martin basically backed out of any return trip (since the Gaels almost won) or new series without the odds stacked heavily in his favor (2-1 with the SMC "home" game at Oakland Coliseum with SMC paying the whole bill). Stanford took the home and home (muchos gracias) but after two losses, its doubtful new coach Jerod Haase (who didn't schedule those) wants anything to do with SMC in the near future. Oregon almost happened, but they wanted a 3-1 and then backed out anyway. I think the Dayton home and home is a positive step. Finding a way to make UAB work as a neutral when they wouldn't come to SMC is a positive step. This year's schedule is a move in the right direction. With the increased visibility of this season, perhaps we'll have some additional juice to make those kinds of deals more favorable.

As for the current RPI standings. It will normalize. Yes, you just played a 300+ team, and we haven't had any of those. We have a couple of cupcakes coming up at home, and you have a few decent games left in the OOC. I'm pretty sure that even if we win out in OOC, you're going to leapfrog us. But this year's SMC schedule is hardly an embarrassment considering the recent history. This idea that RB purposefully schedules the easiest he can and then leaches off GU is kind of stupid and tired. You're better than that.

From http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Gonzaga.html. Looks about right. Hardly different enough for GU to be griping.

SMC/GON
Expected RPI: 15.5/10.7
Expected SOS: 91/81
Expected Record:26-3/28-2
Expected Conf Record: 15-3/16-2

RPIForecast uses Sagarin PREDICTOR to establish W/L probabilities.

TexasZagFan
12-05-2016, 10:34 AM
As for the current RPI standings. It will normalize. Yes, you just played a 300+ team, and we haven't had any of those. We have a couple of cupcakes coming up at home, and you have a few decent games left in the OOC. I'm pretty sure that even if we win out in OOC, you're going to leapfrog us. But this year's SMC schedule is hardly an embarrassment considering the recent history. This idea that RB purposefully schedules the easiest he can and then leaches off GU is kind of stupid and tired. You're better than that.

"Stupid" and "tired"? lol, you're damning this year's schedule with faint praise.

Goshzagit
12-05-2016, 10:40 AM
Rest of OOC opponents for GU (RPI):

87 Akron
180 UW
179 Tennessee
182 South Dakota

All-Sub 200 the rest of the way, with potential to go much higher given UW & UT's SOS in Conference.

Rest OOC opponents for SMC (RPI):

41 UT-Arlington
195 UC-Irvine
309 W. Kentucky
154 Texas A&M CC
217 S. Carolina St

2 of 5 below 200 RPI, likely a 3rd in Irvine. 1 Below 300 RPI team. If anything, these team's RPI will suffer as they enter Conference play.

Our current SOS is 24
SMC current SOS is 21

However, SMC's 5 remaining opponents avg RPI is 200, ours is around 150; yet will have to assume Tennessee and UW will continue to rise, along with Iowa St, Florida, Arizona, and maybe not SDSU this season.

By the time February rolls around, our collective SOS will rise above SMC, by a large margin, mostly given the remaining opponents in both our OOC schedule.

We don't have premier teams remaining, but SMC has dreadful.

The Gaels have improved their SOS, so this only helps us and them and WCC.

sideshow06
12-05-2016, 10:43 AM
I'm being diplomatic, this being your board and all. I think this year's SMC schedule is just fine. I don't really have time for people who say we play "nobody" and don't understand how RPI works this early in the season. But I'm happy to have a good conversation about the pluses and minuses of RB's scheduling, recognizing that there ARE both pluses and minuses - and that SMC and GU have different challenges to scheduling that are not just about willingness to play tougher games (so what worked for GU won't necessarily work for SMC).

TexasZagFan
12-05-2016, 10:54 AM
I'm being diplomatic, this being your board and all. I think this year's SMC schedule is just fine. I don't really have time for people who say we play "nobody" and don't understand how RPI works this early in the season. But I'm happy to have a good conversation about the pluses and minuses of RB's scheduling, recognizing that there ARE both pluses and minuses.

Stick around sideshow, there's been considerable grousing here by Zag fans over the relative weakness of our OOC this year vs prior year gauntlets. Personally, I thought this year's schedule was fine, with 3 top 25 opponents in the mix, and a host of new players on the court this year.

What both SMC & GU must avoid are surprises against lesser WCC opponents. SMC hurt itself last year getting swept by Pepperdine. Our losses came to you (twice) & BYU. I think 16-2 will be enough to win the #1 seed for the WCC tournament.

LongIslandZagFan
12-05-2016, 11:53 AM
I think RB has made some effort in the last couple of years to start breaking this pattern. I agree with those who have stated that he tries to schedule to the abilities of each team - thus last year's disappointing schedule when expectations were low and everyone, including RB, was caught off guard with the speed at which the talent came online. For reasons you guys made clear, he plays a risky game of hit and miss with other mid-majors. He tries to predict the ones that will be better than expected. And yes, he's hard headed about the return games, but he took a chance with Cal last year - finally taking an away game in the hopes of stoking a local rivalry. After paying it lip service Cuonzo Martin basically backed out of any return trip (since the Gaels almost won) or new series without the odds stacked heavily in his favor (2-1 with the SMC "home" game at Oakland Coliseum with SMC paying the whole bill). Stanford took the home and home (muchos gracias) but after two losses, its doubtful new coach Jerod Haase (who didn't schedule those) wants anything to do with SMC in the near future. Oregon almost happened, but they wanted a 3-1 and then backed out anyway. I think the Dayton home and home is a positive step. Finding a way to make UAB work as a neutral when they wouldn't come to SMC is a positive step. This year's schedule is a move in the right direction. With the increased visibility of this season, perhaps we'll have some additional juice to make those kinds of deals more favorable.

As for the current RPI standings. It will normalize. Yes, you just played a 300+ team, and we haven't had any of those. We have a couple of cupcakes coming up at home, and you have a few decent games left in the OOC. I'm pretty sure that even if we win out in OOC, you're going to leapfrog us. But this year's SMC schedule is hardly an embarrassment considering the recent history. This idea that RB purposefully schedules the easiest he can and then leaches off GU is kind of stupid and tired. You're better than that.

From http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Gonzaga.html. Looks about right. Hardly different enough for GU to be griping.

SMC/GON
Expected RPI: 15.5/10.7
Expected SOS: 91/81
Expected Record:26-3/28-2
Expected Conf Record: 15-3/16-2

RPIForecast uses Sagarin PREDICTOR to establish W/L probabilities.

I don't disagree with it being an improvement over last year. But if this is considered a good year scheduling-wise with a middling Pac 12 Stanford as the marquee... it isn't really reaching for the stars. Yes, Dayton is a good start... but part of GU's ascendancy included being willing to play the real big boys (on neutrals like OOC tourneys) even if it means a loss. I just feel with the team he had this year... he should have reached higher. But if this is the start of him changing toward a better national schedule... then it is a positive step forward. In the end, if SMC can go out and play the bigs and win some of them... it only helps the WCC on the whole. I think many here are more disappointed because we see the talent level and just wished they got challenged more.

CDC84
12-05-2016, 12:41 PM
When it comes to Gonzaga.....when GU scheduled the Arizona game in L.A., Arizona was looking like a national title contender. If Ferguson hadn't bailed, and if the team had been perfectly healthy, a win over the Cats would've been a monster win along the lines of beating Duke or UNC. Having to play Quinnipiac in the first round in Orlando was really nothing GU could do about. Bad luck. Kind of like being stuck with Chaminade in the first round in Maui, but at least there it's a D-2 opponent that doesn't hurt your RPI. The opponent on GU's schedule that kind of hurts them is Tennessee. They are only 3-3 right now, and are picked to finish next to last in the SEC. If you're going to travel that far to play a game, ideally it would be against an opponent like Villanova, but this is price that GU had to pay in order to get a BIS opponent last season, and why they ditched the BIS game this year. I really liked the decision to bring in Akron. Kind of reminds me of when they brought in that really good Oral Roberts team a few years ago. Those games are great because: 1) you should win the game, but you must play well to do so 2) you don't have to return the game 3) you play a team that has a real shot of getting into the NCAA tournament, and whose RPI will be respectable.

gaels87
12-05-2016, 12:55 PM
Just curious, how many of SMC home games are sold out other than the game against GU?

As stated earlier, the U. Nevada (season opener) game sold out and I was at our game vs. San Jose State during the T-giving break (no students) and it was 90% full. I assume if the students were there, it would have sold out. I would venture to say that we will start selling out regularly again, as we did in 08-12 era (the 2010 season/sweet 16 season, we sold out 9 times per the media guide). If you go online right now, most games have only GA available.

The questions about playing neutral games in Oakland... there is a reason that we played a neutral vs. UAB in LAS VEGAS a few weeks ago .... because it was probably cheaper for us to do that, as opposed to renting out Oracle. Cal, Stanford draw horribly, even at home, so any type of combined classic would be a money loser, unless you can bring in a UK - and even that might not sell out. Bay Area basketball is probably #7 or 8 on the sports popularity scale. People here really don't care about it because there has been very little sustained success.

sideshow06
12-05-2016, 01:52 PM
Now in hindsight, I think the biggest hit we took from the NCAA sanctions was the loss of the OOC tourneys. We weathered the scholarship thing pretty well, and we're now pretty deep in spite of it all. But not being able to go to OOC tourneys, which offset some of Bennett's more stubborn policies about home-and-homes, was a big blow. So was losing the BracketBusters games where there was an automatic return game. I think RB is just starting to adjust to life without those, and just in time we can attend one next year. Granted, the Wooden doesn't have the best competition next year, but I don't think THAT was in RB's hands. I feel good that things are going to get better now that RB has one of his favorite scheduling tools back.

maynard g krebs
12-05-2016, 01:59 PM
Thanks to the Gaels' posters for the level headed, informative responses.

Everyone's entitled to their opinions re Bennett's philosophy, but agree or disagree, the bottom line is that he's made them relevant and in the discussion nationally, with arguably less to work with than some other WCC schools in terms of location, tradition, facilities etc. Whether they'd advance or recede with a different scheduling philosohpy is an open question.

And when Bennett leaves/retires, there's a good chance they sink back into obscurity. I'm just grateful that they provide one worthy opponent in league, for now. That may not always be the case.

Nevada Don
12-05-2016, 02:28 PM
Thanks to the Gaels' posters for the level headed, informative responses.

Comments like yours is a BIG reason we come here. Thanks to all of you.

bballbeachbum
12-05-2016, 06:09 PM
If Gonzaga had lost to the Gaels or anyone else in the WCC Tourney last year they would have been in the same boat..

I think one of the points though is that Gonzaga, because of what they accomplish in the OOC and have accomplished for the last whatever amount of years it's been, find themselves much less often in that situation. And because of their OOC, the Zags are better prepared over the years as a program with a team that's cured in their brand of OOC year in and year out, and thus they play better more often when in conference and when in big conference games.

bballbeachbum
12-05-2016, 06:18 PM
I think Bennett knows what he has and schedules accordingly. More tough games means more chances to be exposed and for teams to figure you out on film.

SMC has a key advantage that Gonzaga didn't: an established program in the conference. SMC can play nobody, and if they limit the bad losses, a win over GU legitimizes them. GU didn't have this luxury. There were no WCC games that weren't "bad losses" to the committee when GU was coming up. GU had to play a tough OOC to get ANY recognition, which is why they were taking away games without return trips for years.

SMC takes advantage of it to such a ridiculous extent that people were trying to argue a team that lost to Pepperdine TWICE and didn't win an outright conference title in a weak league last year deserved to be in the tournament. It's laughable. However, we GU fans want another good team in the conference so badly that we generally play along.

well said, and I agree with LIZF's comment to this too and CDC's ideas on SMC's scheduling possibilities.

whatever, it is what it is and folks will think whatever they think about it. I still like going out to Moraga to see games, from back when I was in high school to now bringing the kids

bballbeachbum
12-05-2016, 06:25 PM
Randy's big coup is Australia seems to me, recruiting kids who've played together before and in a system, some real talent too...wasn't going to get those kids to SMC from here at home so he pipelined the talent down under and has done it well. And he's a tough competitor and game coach obviously, his players get after it for him and achieve great things in the association.

DixieZag
12-05-2016, 06:40 PM
Bennett is clever and wise to play the angles he has, I think. He's finding a way to elevate his program in this heavily stratified climate with the players he can assemble, and you have to hand it to him -- it's working.

Wait.

You know I respect you and you are a good friend, so this is nothing but conversation.

But, "working"?

It didn't work real well last march when they absolutely had a team that A) was way good enough to be in the top field and B) likely would've won a game or two - but they didn't get in.

I believe they'd have been better off playing a couple, maybe 3, one-time, away games at like a Texas, or Iowa, or even San Diego State, whoever, and even lose 2 out of 3 of those (which I think would be more likely to win 2 out of 3), when it comes to the committee looking at schedule. When they've played good teams close on the road, it says they're not afraid, and it makes their 2 victories over us more meaningful, even in our very down year (conference-wise).

I don't pretend to know what goes on in the committee's heads, and I definitely know that they vastly prefer to put in a 16-12 UCLA team over a 27-3 SMC team (I know it was different years, just an example).

But, an even bigger issue to me is the unfairness to all those great players that have come through that we can't help but respect. THEY deserved a shot at those big teams and never got it - sad. It sounds like Bennett cares more about Bennett than giving his kids what they've earned.

gonzagafan62
12-05-2016, 06:51 PM
Point being their schedules didn't mean much of anything....it came down to one game for the automatic..

That point really isn't valid though (nothing against you Bart just conversation) ... Gonzaga didn't win any of those games and the schedule last season wasn't great either. Have to win games that you schedule too

DixieZag
12-05-2016, 07:00 PM
What about our win at Dayton?

A good start. No snark.

Yes, more like that. Shoot higher. Go to the east coast (that seems to matter), play Seton Hall, play Georgetown or Maryland or VA Tech. Victories in the east seems to count more than the west...for whatever reason, fair or not.

And - not addressing this to you, shocked at how few people bring up rewarding good kids/players, working their asses off in a small gym with limited TV exposure. As said (and maybe I'll keep saying it and drive everyone crazy, again), ultimately, they deserve the shot. This isn't LMU. They've earned it over years of consistency, they have two games under the bright lights - GU, maybe BYU some years. They deserve the bright lights of the right schools back east.

gonzagafan62
12-05-2016, 07:03 PM
A good start. No snark.

Yes, more like that. Shoot higher. Go to the east coast (that seems to matter), play Seton Hall, play Georgetown or Maryland or VA Tech. Victories in the east seems to count more than the west...for whatever reason, fair or not.

And - not addressing this to you, shocked at how few people bring up rewarding good kids/players, working their asses off in a small gym with limited TV exposure. As said (and maybe I'll keep saying it and drive everyone crazy, again), ultimately, they deserve the shot. This isn't LMU. They've earned it over years of consistency, they have two games under the bright lights - GU, maybe BYU some years. They deserve the bright lights of the right schools back east.

I sincerely agree with this. SMC deserves to play good teams out east. If they did and made two legit programs in the WCC we'd be talking about a serious rivalry between GU and SMC - and that's saying something because it's already a damn good one... SMC is on the brink of something special.