Conference Realignment: What Next?

[stever20]

If realignment is driven by TV execs, I doubt they limit inventory by creating divisions. Imagine top 2 teams only playing against each other once because of divisions.

It could easily happen anyway without the double RR. Look at this year - Providence and Creighton were picked 7th and 8th. If the goal was to schedule the top of the league to play each other twice and the bottom once, Villanova very realistically could have ended up playing Creighton and PC only once each.

normally though top of the league would try to avoid teams picked even lower than 7th/8th. More like the 9th/10th/11th type of teams.

[Hall2012]

If realignment is driven by TV execs, I doubt they limit inventory by creating divisions. Imagine top 2 teams only playing against each other once because of divisions.

It could easily happen anyway without the double RR. Look at this year - Providence and Creighton were picked 7th and 8th. If the goal was to schedule the top of the league to play each other twice and the bottom once, Villanova very realistically could have ended up playing Creighton and PC only once each.

normally though top of the league would try to avoid teams picked even lower than 7th/8th. More like the 9th/10th/11th type of teams.

Sure, but everyone needs games. Someone's gotta play the bottom three twice. My point though, is more that the final standings in this league have rarely closely resembled pre-season projections. There's always surprised and disappointments, so unless we're gonna go with a bracket-busters style "everyone's last 3 opponents to be determined at a later date," there's always the risk of an imbalanced schedule not working out in the league's best interest.

[kayako]

If realignment is driven by TV execs, I doubt they limit inventory by creating divisions. Imagine top 2 teams only playing against each other once because of divisions.

You can play everyone in our "division" twice, everyone in the other division once which makes it 16 games and then have 2 "extra" games against your other division for TV/matchups for total of 18.

I think it's still better to have flexibility vs. set-in-stone years in advance schedule.

[kayako]

Sure, but everyone needs games. Someone's gotta play the bottom three twice. My point though, is more that the final standings in this league have rarely closely resembled pre-season projections. There's always surprised and disappointments, so unless we're gonna go with a bracket-busters style "everyone's last 3 opponents to be determined at a later date," there's always the risk of an imbalanced schedule not working out in the league's best interest.

What's the main selling point of creating divisions to avoid imbalanced conference schedule? BET seeding? I don't get it....

[billyjack]

What would a 22-game schedule look like? Fewer non-conference games for all of us?

Why can't the NCAA increase its arbitrary number of allowable games? Why can't the season start the last week of October?

Why can't Midnite Madness start a week earlier, Oct 8th or whenever?

College hockey starts earlier than hoops and ends on the same week.

[Hall2012]

Sure, but everyone needs games. Someone's gotta play the bottom three twice. My point though, is more that the final standings in this league have rarely closely resembled pre-season projections. There's always surprised and disappointments, so unless we're gonna go with a bracket-busters style "everyone's last 3 opponents to be determined at a later date," there's always the risk of an imbalanced schedule not working out in the league's best interest.

What's the main selling point of creating divisions to avoid imbalanced conference schedule? BET seeding? I don't get it....

To make the regular season worth...anything? I mean, woohoo we won the regular season by beating up on the bottom 3 twice each while the team who finished 1 game back only got to play them once each and instead lost a road game to really tough team that we didn't have to play.

[billyjack]

Sure, but everyone needs games. Someone's gotta play the bottom three twice. My point though, is more that the final standings in this league have rarely closely resembled pre-season projections. There's always surprised and disappointments, so unless we're gonna go with a bracket-busters style "everyone's last 3 opponents to be determined at a later date," there's always the risk of an imbalanced schedule not working out in the league's best interest.

What's the main selling point of creating divisions to avoid imbalanced conference schedule? BET seeding? I don't get it....

To make the regular season worth...anything? I mean, woohoo we won the regular season by beating up on the bottom 3 twice each while the team who finished 1 game back only got to play them once each and instead lost a road game to really tough team that we didn't have to play.

Look, if we in Friartown want to avoid playing games *at* Gonzaga, that's within our rights.

[Hall2012]

What's the main selling point of creating divisions to avoid imbalanced conference schedule? BET seeding? I don't get it....

To make the regular season worth...anything? I mean, woohoo we won the regular season by beating up on the bottom 3 twice each while the team who finished 1 game back only got to play them once each and instead lost a road game to really tough team that we didn't have to play.

Look, if we in Friartown want to avoid playing games *at* Gonzaga, that's within our rights.

I do! Maybe it's just some old Big East nostalgia, but regardless of how good anyone is, I love the local games. Being within driving distance makes the SJU and PC games for example, a lot of fun and great potential road trips. I don't want to lose those to instead have to watch a 10:30pm start in Spokane. If we're giving up 2nd games with some teams, I'd rather Seton Hall give up the 2nd games in Omaha and Milwaukee than the ones in Philly and NYC.

[kayako]

What's the main selling point of creating divisions to avoid imbalanced conference schedule? BET seeding? I don't get it....

To make the regular season worth...anything? I mean, woohoo we won the regular season by beating up on the bottom 3 twice each while the team who finished 1 game back only got to play them once each and instead lost a road game to really tough team that we didn't have to play.

It wouldn't be that imbalanced with 20 game schedule (12 teams).

billyjack, 22 game conference slate is undoable for Villanova.

22 conference games
3 MTE + 1 campus game
Gavitt
B12
4 Big 5

That's already 1 game over the max, and we'd literally have no ability to schedule anyone. Unless the Big 5 slate is reduced, I'd argue even 20 games is unsustainable.

[Hall2012]

What's the main selling point of creating divisions to avoid imbalanced conference schedule? BET seeding? I don't get it....

To make the regular season worth...anything? I mean, woohoo we won the regular season by beating up on the bottom 3 twice each while the team who finished 1 game back only got to play them once each and instead lost a road game to really tough team that we didn't have to play.

It wouldn't be that imbalanced with 20 game schedule (12 teams).

billyjack, 22 game conference slate is undoable for Villanova.

22 conference games
3 MTE + 1 campus game
Gavitt
B12
4 Big 5

That's already 1 game over the max, and we'd literally have no ability to schedule anyone. Unless the Big 5 slate is reduced, I'd argue even 20 games is unsustainable.

It's an extreme example of course, but with an imbalanced schedule the questions of legitimacy surrounding the last 2 regular season champions will become the norm.