Originally Posted by Chris R
I wouldnt even need a 2 for 1. Id take a 1 for 1. Belmont has won 20+ games like 13 of the last 14 seasons. Trouble is, lots of teams want to play Belmont too that are in the same shoes as Dayton.
Belmont is as good as some of the SEC teams we've scheduled. Im sure we've tried getting Belmont. Takes two to tango. Also depends on what the rest of your schedule looks like when factoring in exempt tournies, predicted travel issues between already scheduled exempted tournies, neutrals like Colorado in Chicago, winter exams, etc. You may want to play the game, they want want to play it, and both have an available date, but the available date is just not practical. December 21st for example would an impractical date for a Belmont road game if we were hosting Auburn at home on Dec. 23rd. Its suicide. These are still 19yr old kids. They need rest and recovery. They cant burn all the gas and then turn around in 36 hours and do it again in a key home game where they are running on fumes when the other team has had 5 days off. You need more scouting time than on the plane ride home from Nashville to give yourself a chance.
So many factors in scheduling. Mere mortals cannot do it. It takes a special kind of crazy to juggle all the variables and make the calls, call the scheduling bluffs, hold out for marquee teams saying yes, hold out on those same marquee teams saying no and then being short on opponents, etc etc. Its poker with millions at stake.
|
I'd be happy be with a H/H as well. Looking at their home schedule over the past couples, Dayton should be a game they'd schedule
I would think if they want to get it done it'd happen.
With the NET factoring in efficiency/margin of victory, it sounds like UD can be less selective about buy game opponents