Lazy Sunday, thinking on non conference scheduling...

[A Clockwork Orange]

The common gripe is that SU doesn't leave the state of New York until January, or that we schedule no games at other team's courts. Disregarding the quality of competition we play, I decided to take a look at UNC, Duke, Kentucky and Syracuse over the past three seasons and those teams scheduling tendencies.

What I found out is Syracuse isn't far off from their scheduling in terms of how many we play away from the dome. You can argue that we schedule weaker competition, but looking at neutral court games, etc... we're roughly the same.

We also schedule about three less OOC games a year simply because of the Big East schedule. That's three less OOC games we could schedule as away games. If you go to SU's scheduling tendencies before the Big East went to the 18 game schedule and I think you'd find we were schedulign more away games each year.

Duke and UNC also schedule some cheapy "away" games most years as well, which adds to their "away" game total even though the games are complete lay ups played in locales like Greensboro and Asheville.

I think amount of OOC games is a determining factor in our scheduling. We need the revenue from those OOC games, so we need to schedule more home games as compared to teams that are playing 15 or 14 games OOC a year, instead of 12.

I also think the other point is, do you consider NYC SU's home away from home? I would argue that if you consider it for SU you'd have to make a similar distinction for these other three team's as they draw just as well as SU in neutral games at MSG. So if you say SU is playing a de facto home game at MSG, I feel like the same thing needs to be said about UK, UNC, and Duke as they draw just as well there.

Here are their schedules over the last three years for comparisons. Make of it what you will.

View attachment 320View attachment 321View attachment 322View attachment 323

 

[Cusefan95]

Interesting stuff. I think the ACC going to an 18 game schedule, and us getting to play an easier schedule in the ACC as compared to the Big East, is going to increase the similarities between the scheduling for Duke/UNC/Syracuse.

Personally I think that the national perception that MSG is a home game for us is to our advantage - I'd rather not see that diluted by having it considered a home court for Duke, Kentucky, and North Carolina as well in public opinion.

 

[Knicks411]

That's some really good stuff. Trying to pull it all together, this is what I have:

Duke: 25 home games, 6 road games (one in Greensboro), and 13 neutral site games.
Kentucky: 27 home games, 6 road games, 13 neutral site games
UNC: 27 home games, 6 road games (one in Asheville), 11 neutral.
SU: 28 home games, 1 road game, 8 neutral site games.

I still don't really see how it's that close. Yes, we have fewer OOC games because of the longer BE schedule, but even if you adjust for that, all 3 of the other teams have played 6 road games over the last 3 years, we're at 1. Duke has played 11% of their OOC games on the road (not counting the Asheville game), we've played 2.7% of our OOC games on the road.

I think amount of OOC games is a determining factor in our scheduling. We need the revenue from those OOC games, so we need to schedule more home games as compared to teams that are playing 15 or 14 games OOC a year, instead of 12.

This could be true, I decided to look at how we scheduled before the BE season went to 16 games.

In 2007, I count 12 home games, 1 road game (at Canisus) and a neutral site game.
In 2006, I count 11 home games, 3 neutral site games.
In 2005, I count 10 home games, 1 road game (at Siena), and 3 neutral site games.

In the 3 years prior to the 16 game season, I don't see much of a difference, though in 03 and 04 we played at Mich St and Mizzou.

 

[All4SU]

SU gets criticized for not leaving NYS in November/December. Yet Duke and UNC barely get criticized for playing so many of their NCAA tournament games in friendly North Carolina venues.

 

[Knicks411]

SU gets criticized for not leaving NYS in November/December. Yet Duke and UNC barely get criticized for playing so many of their NCAA tournament games in friendly North Carolina venues.

Probably because they don't schedule those games?

 

[All4SU]

Probably because they don't schedule those games?

You know what I mean. They get the advantage of those games. Yet almost never discussed except by SU fans.

 

[Cusefan95]

This could be true, I decided to look at how we scheduled before the BE season went to 16 games.

In 2007, I count 12 home games, 1 road game (at Canisus) and a neutral site game.
In 2006, I count 11 home games, 3 neutral site games.
In 2005, I count 10 home games, 1 road game (at Siena), and 3 neutral site games.

In the 3 years prior to the 16 game season, I don't see much of a difference, though in 03 and 04 we played at Mich St and Mizzou.

Pretty sure our scheduling changed after the ACC raid and football dropped off the map - which is why I keep beating the drum that it was a financial decision made above JBs level. Once we get to the ACC, we'll have the guaranteed revenues to be able to start scheduling more true road games. We pick up one/yr, Duke/UNc drop one when the ACC goes to an 18 game schedule...and we'll all be basically scheduling the same way.

The thing that always bothers me is that you get the ESPN talking heads ripping on the schedule without bothering to look at what they pay ACC schools vs Big East schools and taking that into account. I realize they got into journalism in part because they aren't smart enough to do basic math, but it's seriously biased to not bring it up as a mitigating factor - especially since their employer is the factor.

 

[Knicks411]

Pretty sure our scheduling changed after the ACC raid and football dropped off the map - which is why I keep beating the drum that it was a financial decision made above JBs level. Once we get to the ACC, we'll have the guaranteed revenues to be able to start scheduling more true road games. We pick up one/yr, Duke/UNc drop one when the ACC goes to an 18 game schedule...and we'll all be basically scheduling the same way.

The thing that always bothers me is that you get the ESPN talking heads ripping on the schedule without bothering to look at what they pay ACC schools vs Big East schools and taking that into account. I realize they got into journalism in part because they aren't smart enough to do basic math, but it's seriously biased to not bring it up as a mitigating factor - especially since their employer is the factor.

I guess, but should it really be taken into account? I am not sure the reason why really matters; if we don't play a lot of road games, then we don't play a lot of road games. I wouldn't expect the the selection committee, for instance, to take that into account when they seed the field. They shouldn't.

 

[Cusefan95]

I guess, but should it really be taken into account? I am not sure the reason why really matters; if we don't play a lot of road games, then we don't play a lot of road games. I wouldn't expect the the selection committee, for instance, to take that into account when they seed the field. They shouldn't.

If they state it as fact, they don't need to. But when they start implying (or openly stating as Dicke V has done on MANY occasions) that JB is choosing to scheduling this way to avoid tough games and pad his schedule with easy wins - which many of the ESPN talking heads do - then yes, I think they've taken a stance that requires them to explain in further detail.

But expecting even handedness from reporters is obviously foolish on my part.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Pretty sure our scheduling changed after the ACC raid and football dropped off the map - which is why I keep beating the drum that it was a financial decision made above JBs level. Once we get to the ACC, we'll have the guaranteed revenues to be able to start scheduling more true road games. We pick up one/yr, Duke/UNc drop one when the ACC goes to an 18 game schedule...and we'll all be basically scheduling the same way.

The thing that always bothers me is that you get the ESPN talking heads ripping on the schedule without bothering to look at what they pay ACC schools vs Big East schools and taking that into account. I realize they got into journalism in part because they aren't smart enough to do basic math, but it's seriously biased to not bring it up as a mitigating factor - especially since their employer is the factor.

This has been a criticism of Boeheim well before the ACC raid and well before the football team went in the toilet. Kind of refutes the "financial" defense.

I don't see why people feel the need to bend over backwards to defend this. The nonconference schedule most years isn't very good. And it sucks, especially for us out of towners. Cuse vs. Colgate isn't getting picked up by ESPN.

 

[KingOtis]

According to Vitale and ESPN, any game at MSG is a home game for SU, yet when we play Florida in Tampa or Kansas in Kansas City, it's not a true road game.

Over the past several years, we've had multiple games against UNC, Florida, Kansas, Michigan State and Memphis...all coming off recent Final Four appearances and/or National Championships. How many other programs can say that?

 

[themole]

in the future, on a related note, will we have more big-time ooc games? I mean, will we still play UConn and Gtown annually? Losing those two rivalries is the only thing I don't like about the ACC move. If we do, and also have the Big10-ACC challenge, that's three big OOC games a year not even counting November tourneys.

 

[KingOtis]

in the future, on a related note, will we have more big-time ooc games? I mean, will we still play UConn and Gtown annually? Losing those two rivalries is the only thing I don't like about the ACC move. If we do, and also have the Big10-ACC challenge, that's three big OOC games a year not even counting November tourneys.

I think we'll play Georgetown every year for sure. UConn might join the ACC eventually.

 

[Cusefan95]

This has been a criticism of Boeheim well before the ACC raid and well before the football team went in the toilet. Kind of refutes the "financial" defense.

I don't see why people feel the need to bend over backwards to defend this. The nonconference schedule most years isn't very good. And it sucks, especially for us out of towners. Cuse vs. Colgate isn't getting picked up by ESPN.

I don't recall this criticism from 2003, when we played Memphis at the Garden, GT at home, and Michigan State as a true road game. maybe it existed...but if we schedule like that the criticism goes away.

We haven't scheduled that way since then...I'd be interested in your theory as to why we don't schedule like that since 2003.

 

[KingOtis]

I don't recall this criticism from 2003, when we played Memphis at the Garden, GT at home, and Michigan State as a true road game. maybe it existed...but if we schedule like that the criticism goes away.

We haven't scheduled that way since then...I'd be interested in your theory as to why we don't schedule like that since 2003.

Big East expansion.

 

[Knicks411]

We haven't scheduled that way since then...I'd be interested in your theory as to why we don't schedule like that since 2003.

For whatever reason, we did in 2009. Only year though.

Over the past several years, we've had multiple games against UNC, Florida, Kansas, Michigan State and Memphis...all coming off recent Final Four appearances and/or National Championships. How many other programs can say that?

Pretty much all the elite programs?

 

[KingOtis]

Pretty much all the elite programs?

After you throw in the Big East teams that fit the same category, I'd say few programs have played the same volume of recent Final Four/National Championship squads over the last several years.

 

[A Clockwork Orange]

That's some really good stuff. Trying to pull it all together, this is what I have:

Duke: 25 home games, 6 road games (one in Greensboro), and 13 neutral site games.
Kentucky: 27 home games, 6 road games, 13 neutral site games
UNC: 27 home games, 6 road games (one in Asheville), 11 neutral.
SU: 28 home games, 1 road game, 8 neutral site games.

I still don't really see how it's that close. Yes, we have fewer OOC games because of the longer BE schedule, but even if you adjust for that, all 3 of the other teams have played 6 road games over the last 3 years, we're at 1. Duke has played 11% of their OOC games on the road (not counting the Asheville game), we've played 2.7% of our OOC games on the road.

This could be true, I decided to look at how we scheduled before the BE season went to 16 games.

In 2007, I count 12 home games, 1 road game (at Canisus) and a neutral site game.
In 2006, I count 11 home games, 3 neutral site games.
In 2005, I count 10 home games, 1 road game (at Siena), and 3 neutral site games.

In the 3 years prior to the 16 game season, I don't see much of a difference, though in 03 and 04 we played at Mich St and Mizzou.

I think if SU scheduled one true road game a year early in the season a lot of the criticism would quickly go away. It seems that's the one thing these other three teams do. Given that we have three less slots on our schedule for OOC games, that to me would be enough. Keep the neutral site games throw in one early season (think first six games of the year) at a team's home court, and you get rid of a lot of the criticism. Kentucky has an OOC rivalry game with Indiana each year, which we will have with G'Town when we move to the ACC. UNC and Duke are pretty slick with their scheduling, as each of them has scheduled away games against teams they know they'll beat (UNC with Evansville and Portland, and Duke with Temple). Duke and UNC also have the Big Ten/ACC Challenge, which we only had this year, and it just happened to be a home game. I think the move to the ACC is actually going to quell a lot of our scheduling critics, because we'll be playing one game OOC against G'Town, and one OOC against a solid Big Ten opponent each year. We may even schedule something with UConn/St. John's as well in NYC, which pretty much gives us Duke's schedule each year. I'll be interested to see if this scheduling philosophy comes to fruition.

I'd love to go back to the days where SU schedule at least one true road game against the likes of Tennessee, Arizona, Mizzou, etc... Good teams, mid to high level BCS schools. Give me one of those games a year along with a neutral and I'd be happy. I think the critics would be as well.

The MSG home court argument has always bothered me because it's not SU's fault that so many preseason tournaments are held in the largest city in the country that also happens to be in the same state as SU's campus. It's like saying California playing in LA is a home game. It especially rings true, as both LA and NYC have well known college teams that reside in those cities. If Cal ever played a neutral site game in LA, there wouldn't be one person saying it was a home game for them, which is why I've never understood that argument for SU.

 

[HOFCeluck]

According to Vitale and ESPN, any game at MSG is a home game for SU, yet when we play Florida in Tampa or Kansas in Kansas City, it's not a true road game.

Over the past several years, we've had multiple games against UNC, Florida, Kansas, Michigan State and Memphis...all coming off recent Final Four appearances and/or National Championships. How many other programs can say that?

UNC: 2009-10
UF: 05-06, 08-9, 09-10, 11-12
KU: 08-09
MSU: 01-02, 02-03, 03-04, 10-11
Memphis: 02-03, 04-05, 08-09, 09-10

That's 14 games over 11 season. Not overly impressive, and not really unique among basketball powerhouse.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

Here's the Syracuse road debate paradox:

a) Syracuse isn't very good (or proven) because they never go on the road...which is also known as "The Uninformed Argument"

b) Syracuse is one of the absolute best road teams in the nation the last few years (we have a 30-7 record in road/neutral games since the beginning of 2009-10 season)...which is also known as "Reality"

FWIW, Kentucky is 32-13, OSU is 27-11, and UNC is 22-22 in road/neutral games over the same period.