Basketball metrics reward quality wins against quality schedules. The A10 understands this and recently partnered with the Mountain West Conference to start an annual challenge event to boost the non-conference résumés of both leagues. The agreement will offer some shade, but conference members are still largely on their own when it comes to scheduling. Former VCU Head Coach Will Wade was one of the few A10 skippers openly critical of the process and painted an equally-grim picture — though he now sings a different tune at LSU and even admonished the Rams’ schedule by comparison. Still, his frustration in appeasing Siegel Center fans with quality opponents stemmed from the same pushback received from Flyer fans at UD Arena. Schools must become more creative and perhaps partner with like-minded basketball programs in other leagues that share the same frustration.
“We’re focused on positioning men’s basketball for yearly NCAA at-large consideration and any scheduling approach that fundamentally addresses that goal is always open for study,” Sullivan said. “Tackling the issue will not be resolved in a single brush stroke. It will take a series of measures that address multiple concerns and might involve like-minded institutions with similar scheduling burdens. We also need the selection committee to acknowledge the issue exists. I feel like they did see it last year with how they evaluated teams like Belmont and NC State. I see some progress.”
The UDPride discussion forums run thick with free scheduling advice and recommendations. The fans have a laundry list of teams that seem like perfect fits. Some fans want to play anyone, anywhere, at any time and barnstorm the country like Mike Jarvis’
George Washington Colonials or John Chaney’s
Temple Owls. Others want the traditional rivals back on the schedule like
Xavier, Notre Dame, DePaul Marquette, Cincinnati, and Louisville. Yet another group wants to expand upon Sullivan’s “Coalition of the Willing” and develop a long-term alliance with strong NCAA at-large basketball schools outside the power conferences. The goal is to leverage Quad 1 and Quad 2 opportunities for additional scheduling security. On paper it’s a great idea, but it needs more time in the oven.
“We’ve approached schools equally frustrated with non-con scheduling about creating a multi-year, multi-team, round-robin, home-and-home series, but it gets bogged down in things like logistics, dates, or conference television,” Sullivan explained.
BEING UNCONVENTIONAL
In the meantime, the Flyers must continue to reach out — and look out — for their own best interest. When UD goes hunting for non-conference opponents, they often approach with their best sales pitch out of the gate. There’s no telling how many other schools are making the same inquiry and the smallest nuance or edge might be the difference in landing a contract or coming in second. The Flyers and the A10 have performed well in non-conference scheduling over the last fews seasons, but it’s in spite of the changing climate rather than because of it.
“We’ve looked at home-and-home series with UD starting on the road and proposed three-game home-neutral-away matchups with the neutral game geographically favorable to the opponent,” he said.
It wasn’t that long ago when newly-hired Ohio State men’s basketball coach Chris Holtmann suggested the top Ohio basketball schools should play one another. After all, Holtmann had vast experience with yearly in-state rivalries as the former coach at Butler University. The Bulldogs participated in the Crossroads Classic at Bankers Life Fieldhouse, a four-team event including Indiana, Purdue, and Notre Dame. Even when the Buckeye brand effectively owns the state of Ohio, Holtmann saw the value of playing other Ohio schools. Flyer fans caught wind of his remarks and salivated at the thought of rekindling in-state rivalries and giving the non-conference schedule a shot in the arm. Rumors included Cleveland as a possible destination spot for the event.
It appears the jets have cooled however, falling victim to the same pinch. Sullivan wasn’t giving up on the idea, but there are roadblocks.
“The Dayton, Ohio State, Cincinnati, and Xavier concept has some traction,” he shared. “Once the Big-10 announced their decision to expand to 20 conference games and play in December however, more challenges developed and it’s been stuck in the concept phase.”
The Big East recently announced the addition of Connecticut as a league member. Expect Xavier’s non-con schedule to get smaller too.
TIME COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS
While marquee non-conference games move the needle, Dayton must also shop around for quality ‘buy games’ to fill in the gaps. Die-hard fans that nerd-out on the metrics take notice of these opponents as well, passing judgement on whether they meet (or fail to meet) their expectations.
Fans often debate why the Flyers scheduled a buy game against a certain opponent when other opponents with better metrics were available and willing to play. It comes down to opportunity cost.
Once the schedule is released, public dissection occurs from the tail of the snake instead of the head. Fans reverse-engineer schedules but athletic directors and coaches start with a blank page. They hold out for signed contracts from the best opponents on the radar. Leaving as many scheduling dates open for as long as possible affords Sullivan the flexibility to bring the Auburns and Mississippi States to UD Arena. If he gives up too soon and starts adding strong buy games from one-bid leagues, he has less flexibility to accommodate the available dates of Top-75 power-conference schools that fans want to see — and it might cost Dayton a brand-name opponent.
If he waits too long, there’s a chance of striking out altogether — on Top-75 power-conference schools and quality buy games. It’s not unlike a game of ‘chicken’ but at a certain point dates must be filled with opponents and fewer quality teams are available later in the scheduling cycle. The Flyers offer the most flexibility to marquee power-conference opponents fans prefer and less flexibility to others. This offseason was especially difficult because the Auburn and Mississippi State contracts expired.
“We are sensitive to the scheduling appetite of the Flyer fan base,” Sullivan adamantly stated. “We want what they want. I do not hide from that. The coaches and players want NCAA at-large power-conference schools at UD Arena too. The
Flyer Faithful are knowledgeable and recognize the branding, tradition, and atmosphere those schools bring.”
DIVIDE BY ZERO
Perhaps the most-repeated criticism lobbed at UD men’s basketball schedules is the perception of inflexibility. Fans sense an unwillingness to try new things and throw caution to the wind for high-risk/high-reward returns. They say try something different — anything. Many ticketholders on UDPride expressed approval at reducing the home schedule for the chance to play a one-way game at Kansas or Virginia — both games would be even better. Sullivan understands those concerns, but that approach ignores the realities of the NCAA Tournament, the Selection Committee, the A10, and historical mathematical precedent.
All things being equal, if the Flyers could schedule Virginia ten times in one season — even disproportionally away at Charlottesville — UD wouldn’t hesitate. It’s implausible of course, but it illustrates UD’s commitment to pursuing strong non-conference opponents and a willingness to travel away from home to fulfill that promise. But it’s not reality because all things
aren’t equal.
Even if Dayton went 2-8 or 3-7 in those 10 games against a perennial 30-win opponent, there’s no compelling data that suggests a team from the A10 with 13 or 14 losses in a season has any chance at an NCAA at-large bid. A 19-14 Dayton team isn’t going to make the NCAA tournament and there are no contemporary metrics to support non-power-conference schools receiving the same latitude for surviving the scheduling meat grinder as schools from power conferences that finish under .500 in their league and barely over .500 overall. Even when the A10 received six bids in 2014, no one said ‘the A10 beat each other up’.
Richmond failed to make the 2014 NCAA Tournament because they finished 19-14 (8-8) and never got their name called.
The Flyer men’s basketball program can’t afford to lose 12 of 13 games in January and February and still be on the bubble because the A10 bubble is 23-10 under the best-case scenario. Whether that’s intentional or unintentional bias remains uncertain, but there is no precedent that indicates otherwise; the NCAA Selection Committee’s yearly tournament brackets are crystal clear on this. Since 2003-04, only one A10 school has received an at-large bid with fewer than 23 wins. Those are the goalposts UD must schedule and perform to. If the goalposts shift, UD can and will shift with them.
“Men’s basketball is the financial instrument for the entire athletic department,” Sullivan said. “A minimum number of home games must be played to realize those financial commitments, but latitude exists for exceptions and we’re willing to trade off a home game for an away game should the metrics dictate. It has to make scheduling sense and metrics sense.”
GO BACK TO PART 2:
Feeling the Squeeze
READ ON TO PART 4: Inside and Outside
FLIGHT SCHEDULE w/AD Neil Sullivan: Part 3: Theory as Product
Linear Mode
