2014-15 Schedule

[MadaboutWu]

I have a pair of question for you JH4P: What OOC SOS would you be happy with? What OOC SOS would you be disappointed with?

We were 29 last year and I was happy with that but expectations change based on success (though only to a point as scheduling doesn't happen by magic and there is a lot of luck involved and often teams don't end up where they are projected), so this year I'd be happy with top 20 and disappointed with worse than 40.

Last year we got knocked a lot for our schedule which we all would love to change. The two biggest reasons why it won't change easily have nothing to do with the OOC. They are the MVC and the double standards applied to non-BCS school in the media and elsewhere.

[FlyingWheat]

We are the name on the jersey. We lived on SC and in the public interest with last year's schedule. I'm all for an amazing schedule, but I think it looks like this year's schedule will be at least another small step forward (we aren't done scheduling yet).

Agreed. We are a name on the jersey, but it takes two to make an exciting game. Last year was an exception because we were chasing perfection. I understand that scheduling is difficult, and a lot of it depends on how Utah and Memphis turn out, but I'd love to see one more marquee matchup.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I have a pair of question for you JH4P: What OOC SOS would you be happy with? What OOC SOS would you be disappointed with?

A top 25 OOC SOS would be a nice goal in my mind. I'd be happy if it is better, disappointed if it is significantly worse, say, outside top 50. I'm answering your questions since you asked, but I don't think this is very relevant to my previous comments.

1 - There are multiple ways to achieve a good SOS. Playing all OOC games against teams ranked 100-150 might lead to the same OOC SOS as playing 5 top 10 teams and then a bunch of cupcakes. We can discuss the merits of either strategy in terms of what the committee might think, but that is another conversation for another day. I'm simply focusing on the top end of the schedule and evaluating what is there.

2 - It is true that OOC is all WSU can control, but that's just a scheduling nuance. As a fan, I get to watch 30-35 games a year. Mid-game, I'm not thinking "this sure is a nice opponent given WSU's tough scheduling predicament". I don't say this to criticize WSU. They are doing their best given the circumstances. I'm just saying that as a fan who follows all the games from November to March (not just Nov-Dec) I'm looking at the schedule as a whole and just trying to identify how many games I'll get to see the Shockers match up against top notch competition.

I think the majority of WSU's OOC SOS improvement in recent years has been by removing the cupcakes and playing more NIT/CBE level opponents. This is a great strategy for NCAA seeding when you take into account the reality of the difficulties WSU faces in scheduling. Kudos to WSU for figuring this out.

However, as a fan, I just have a simple desire to see quality WSU teams play quality opponents. This entire thread I've just been making the observation that the past several years have not been good in this regard, and next year doesn't appear to be all that much better. I don't blame anyone at WSU for this. I just acknowledge that it is reality and am expressing my disappointment that it is what it is.

[SB Shock]

I'm not talking names at all right now, and even if I was, would it be a fault to desire, as a fan, to get to play some big names?

Take a look at the following numbers from last year based on 2013-2014 Schedules up to Selection Sunday and looking at teams in the top 100 of the RPI:

# of Games Played Against Top 50 RPI Opponents:
19 – 1 Team
17 – 1 Team
16 – 1 Team
15 – 3 Teams
14 – 7 Teams
13 – 5 Teams
12 – 9 Teams
11 – 11 Teams
10 – 10 Teams
9 – 12 Teams (median)
8 – 2 Teams
7 – 3 Teams
6 – 5 Teams
5 – 3 Teams
4 – 6 Teams
3 – 6 Teams (WSU is here)
2 – 10 Teams
1 – 4 Teams
0 – 1 Team

79 of the teams in the RPI top 100 last year played more top 50 opponents than did WSU.
70 of the teams in the RPI top 100 last year played twice as many top 50 opponents as did WSU.
53 of the teams in the RPI top 100 last year played triple as many top 50 opponents as did WSU.

Next year might be better. I'm just saying that looking at the schedule, there is a decent chance that WSU gets stuck with a really low number (2, 3, 4) once again. I'm just expressing a wish that WSU could get a schedule similar to what the average top 100 RPI team gets. It would be fun. Why is this even controversial?

Why don't you break this down by Non-Conference schedule (WSU has no control over the conference).

[ShockerFever]

A top 25 OOC SOS would be a nice goal in my mind. I'd be happy if it is better, disappointed if it is significantly worse, say, outside top 50. I'm answering your questions since you asked, but I don't think this is very relevant to my previous comments.

1 - There are multiple ways to achieve a good SOS. Playing all OOC games against teams ranked 100-150 might lead to the same OOC SOS as playing 5 top 10 teams and then a bunch of cupcakes. We can discuss the merits of either strategy in terms of what the committee might think, but that is another conversation for another day. I'm simply focusing on the top end of the schedule and evaluating what is there.

2 - It is true that OOC is all WSU can control, but that's just a scheduling nuance. As a fan, I get to watch 30-35 games a year. Mid-game, I'm not thinking "this sure is a nice opponent given WSU's tough scheduling predicament". I don't say this to criticize WSU. They are doing their best given the circumstances. I'm just saying that as a fan who follows all the games from November to March (not just Nov-Dec) I'm looking at the schedule as a whole and just trying to identify how many games I'll get to see the Shockers match up against top notch competition.

I think the majority of WSU's OOC SOS improvement in recent years has been by removing the cupcakes and playing more NIT/CBE level opponents. This is a great strategy for NCAA seeding when you take into account the reality of the difficulties WSU faces in scheduling. Kudos to WSU for figuring this out.

However, as a fan, I just have a simple desire to see quality WSU teams play quality opponents. This entire thread I've just been making the observation that the past several years have not been good in this regard, and next year doesn't appear to be all that much better. I don't blame anyone at WSU for this. I just acknowledge that it is reality and am expressing my disappointment that it is what it is.

Sounds like KU is a perfect school for you to hop on the bandwagon.

There's a couple options for you:
1. Become a full-fledged KU fan, instead of the halfie that you are.
2. Contact Gregg Marshall and apply for scheduling coordinator.
3. STFU and accept WSU's position for what it is unless something unforeseen happens. It hasn't hurt them in the last 4 years.

[shockmonster]

On SD this morning, Bruce said that our home schedule would be much better. Said that we'd have a Big East team on it but not Creighton. Anyone know who? I didn't have time to listen much.

[FlyingWheat]

On SD this morning, Bruce said that our home schedule would be much better. Said that we'd have a Big East team on it but not Creighton. Anyone know who? I didn't have time to listen much.

But we already have DePaul in Hawaii! Honestly though, I don't know.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Why don't you break this down by Non-Conference schedule (WSU has no control over the conference).

Because breaking it down to non-conf is counterproductive to the discussion I'm trying to have. I'm discussing the schedule as a whole. The MVC games are a big piece of the whole. Thus, the MVC games should be part of the discussion.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

A question for my critics...

Do you generally enjoy watching the Shox play Chicago State as much as playing Tennessee? How about compared to UNLV? I'm not asking if you have fun at the Chicago State game. I'm asking, do you have AS MUCH FUN, on average, at that game as you do at a game vs Tennessee/UNLV/etc.?

[FlyingWheat]

A question for my critics...

Do you generally enjoy watching the Shox play Chicago State as much as playing Tennessee? How about compared to UNLV? I'm not asking if you have fun at the Chicago State game. I'm asking, do you have AS MUCH FUN, on average, at that game as you do at a game vs Tennessee/UNLV/etc.?

Remember how excited everyone was when they thought we were playing UCONN? I hope (and I'm pretty sure we do) have people fighting to bring us exciting match ups like that.

[WuDrWu]

A question for my critics...

Do you generally enjoy watching the Shox play Chicago State as much as playing Tennessee? How about compared to UNLV? I'm not asking if you have fun at the Chicago State game. I'm asking, do you have AS MUCH FUN, on average, at that game as you do at a game vs Tennessee/UNLV/etc.?

Yes, I have more fun watching WSU play Tennessee than play Chicago State. What is your point?

[The Mad Hatter]

Because breaking it down to non-conf is counterproductive to the discussion I'm trying to have. I'm discussing the schedule as a whole. The MVC games are a big piece of the whole. Thus, the MVC games should be part of the discussion.

I have no idea what your point is.

Can we all agree that it would be nice to be in a better conference? Yes. Can we all agree that it would be nice to have non-con opponents willing to play us (particularly on equal terms)? Yes.

Given that I can't imagine any dissent on those points and that we clearly aren't discussing whether WSU schedules well in what they control (given that your post specifically rejects that in favor of looking at the whole schedule, most of which WSU doesn't control), what is it that we are supposed to be discussing?

[moshock]

A question for my critics...

Do you generally enjoy watching the Shox play Chicago State as much as playing Tennessee? How about compared to UNLV? I'm not asking if you have fun at the Chicago State game. I'm asking, do you have AS MUCH FUN, on average, at that game as you do at a game vs Tennessee/UNLV/etc.?

Since you like statistics sooooo much - My fun-o-meter is pegged at 110% anytime I watch the Shox (no matter who they play) and I pretty much resemble "Bob" the guy on the Cialis commercial for a few days (up to 36 hours) after watching them.

[shockmonster]

Because breaking it down to non-conf is counterproductive to the discussion I'm trying to have. I'm discussing the schedule as a whole. The MVC games are a big piece of the whole. Thus, the MVC games should be part of the discussion.

Ok JH4P, then I'll start the discussion. I say that we drop Loyola, SIU, and ISUB from next years schedule. We can replace them with OU, OSU, and KSU. This should help our RPI. Additionally, I vote to not play a home game against Chicago State or Tennessee State and instead play road games at KU, and Syracuse on the road. This should help our schedule and our RPI even though we will be playing 65-70% of our games on the road. Ok JH4P, what is your solution? :)

[ShockTalk]

I can certainly see both sides to this. The last 3/5s of the season is an RPI killer and can be a death trap if we foul up a game or two. On the other hand, while it may be cool to see WSU play a Duke, Arizona, or Michigan St, how much does it prove if you win the only really big game on schedule, but lose a couple of lesser ones, or worse, lose the big game. The game may be an SOS booster, but proved little.

For a long time (and still do to a point), I thought the way the Zags did it was the way to go. Now, I'm not so sure. Yes, they've been to 17 NCAAs and 16 in a row, but how much was a product of actually taking a pay check to play big names and how much was a product of dominating their conference. Gonzaga's best years were the early years of 1999-2001, the first 3 years of their 16 year run. 2 S16s and an E8 (7-3 record). Their seeding-----10, 10, and 12. Were they just taking teams by surprise? Over the last 13 years, they've made the S16 twice with an overall record of 12-13. When seeded 8 or better (10 times), their record is 10-10.

How did the Zags do against the "Big Boys"? In the non-con part of the schedule only from 1998/99 - 2010-11, they played 45 games against top 25 ranked teams (ranking at the time they played) going 15-30. Against top 10 teams, 5-17. I'm sure their players profited from the experience and it may have helped them come Dance time. Other than that and their fans getting to watch their team (mostly on TV) (and mostly getting beat), that's about it.

Why did I not include the last 3 seasons in the above example? Well, while averaging about 3.5 top 25 teams a year in the non-con for 13 years, they now have only played 4 including NO top 10 teams. It would appear something has changed and probably with them.

The other big problem trying to make up for a weak conference RPI all in the non-con, is that your non-con should also be a team's formative time. Where players learn to play together, new players learn the ropes, and the team builds some confidence. It's a balancing act. Will a team learn more going on the road early and playing a top 10 team or scheduling an over-all better schedule to get the same SOS/RPI bump.

I think the best answer is trying to get into the best pre-season tournaments you can, maybe two some years, and get your top 10 experience there. Last year, the schedule in general was a drag as some, if not most, of the better opponents under played where we hoped they'd be. Also, the Valley was terrible. No CU and it had 4 200+ teams (one approaching 300) and another team around 175. If we didn't have to play those 4 games to the 2 bottom teams our SOS would have improved from 98 to 72. Without the 3 worst teams and those 6 games, our SOS would have been 55.

Play well, get in the Dance, and you will have your opportunity to play the "big boys". I believe we have done this already.