Should College Basketball Change It's Calendar?

[xubrew]

I'd make a poll, but I'm more interested in what people would say, so....

Okay before anyone asks, yes, this is the kind of thing I spend time thinking about...

I really think college basketball should change its calendar. The non-exempt season used to start the Friday before Thanksgiving when it was set at 27 games, and a lot of teams didn't even play that weekend. When they expanded it out to 29 games (or 30 for those who don't play in a conference tournament) the start date became the second Friday in November.

What happened is that the vast majority of teams used those two extra games to add two crappy games onto their schedule. So, what we have for most of November are huge mismatches in front of half empty arenas, and a bunch of other people who don't even realize the season has started yet. College basketball begins its season as unceremoniously as any major sport possibly could.

I think the first Friday in December would be a much better start date. If they did it right, they could make it into a huge weekend on the college sports calendar. You have college basketball opening on Friday. That leads into the conference championship football games on Saturday. And, the key here would be to have games on the schedule that people actually want to watch. College basketball teams love easing in to their seasons. That's another reason why there is so little anticipation for it. The general sports fan has nothing to participate. I mean, even diehard fanbases like Louisville aren't going to get all jacked up for their big opening night game against.....Samford! We need showcase games on that opening night.

The exempt tournaments could take place over Christmas Break instead of over Thanksgiving. On the college sports calendar, I think they would compliment the bowls very well. In a way, an exempt tournament is like a bowl game. It's typically in a warm weather climate or a resort, and teams are invited to play there. They could kind of cross promote the two, since ESPN runs so many of the bowls and tournaments anyway.

Essentially, everything would be pushed back three weeks, which would also push the tournament back three weeks, but I've given that some though too. And, my feelings about that are as follows....

SO FREAKIN' WHAT???

The calendar isn't the only problem, but I do think it is one of the bigger problems. College basketball is a major sport, but you'd never know it in the month of November. You have major programs that are actually in the rankings playing in front of no fans. Part of that is that the games aren't interesting. Another part of it may be that November is just too damned early for the non die hard fans, which is what ninety percent of the people are. You do get some packed arenas in November and December, but that seems to be the exception, not the rule. I think we need fewer buy games, but I also think we need a later start date. Have the first games on the last week of classes. Then, we move on to the exempt tournaments and "Classics." Then, after that, there are more games played on campus when the students are actually back from break.

[LadyMuskie]

I think it would make absolutely no difference whatsoever over the long haul. And might even hurt college basketball more because the tournament will be fighting with the start of baseball in spring.

[XUFan09]

I think the buy games might actually be the bigger issue. Just speculation on that, though. I don't have data to go with it.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[RoseyMuskie]

I think it would make absolutely no difference whatsoever over the long haul. And might even hurt college basketball more because the tournament will be fighting with the start of baseball in spring.

I think it's an intriguing idea, Brew. I was in Vegas for first weekend of the season, and outside of the diehards, you would have never known college basketball was beginning. My non Xavier friends, who are fairly intelligent sports fans, also had no idea.

And to Lady's point - Would you rather fight football or baseball? Early basketball competing against football in prime season is less appealing than the kick of basketball against the beginning of baseball.

If you could guarantee the sport hit it off with a larger bang if the start was pushed back, I'd recommend the switch in a heart beat. I don't know if that's feasible though.

[muskiefan82]

Essentially, everything would be pushed back three weeks, which would also push the tournament back three weeks

April Awesomeness doesn't have the same ring.

[nuts4xu]

I didn't realize the college basketball schedule has a problem. Is this really an issue? With all due respect to Brew, I am asking sincerely.

Early season cupcakes are a good way for a college basketball team to get used to playing with each other. I like the idea of better matchups earlier in the season, but I don't think it would necessarily mean you would have great games.

Brew always does a great job of laying out his opinion, and it has been well thought out. Just haven't heard anyone in the game state the early basketball season is an issue that needs to be dealt with before.

[sgarcia]

The Final Four leads into Masters week (also on CBS) so the tourney isn't getting pushed back.

[GoMuskies]

I think it would be fine to push college basketball's start back three weeks (or maybe until Thanksgiving). I don't think you need to push the Tournament back three weeks, though. Just compress the schedule a bit.

[sgarcia]

If the schedule was 27 games like it was years ago you could condense it but I think it would be too difficult with every team playing 30 regular season games now.

[GoMuskies]

I don't think it would be that difficult. Teams would occasionally play three games a week. It was not that unusual until recently for teams to do that.

[Xville]

i don't think changing the calendar would make a difference. In my opinion, the timing of the season beginning is not the issue. I believe that there are two main issues when it comes to the college basketball season...the first one, is that the regular season doesn't matter to the casual fan. All that really matters is March. Sure, people will tune in to watch their favorite team, and go to games throughout the season, but the casual fan isn't going to tune in to college basketball until deep into the heart of conference season.

The second issue is fixable in that the college basketball season doesn't start off with a bang, and it needs to. While the "classics" and the "tournaments" are nice for non-conference schedules, I see them as mostly gimmicky and something that doesn't improve college basketball as a whole. Having games aboard an aircraft carrier, in the bahamas, at Walt Disney World...I'm sorry but it does nothing for the sport as a whole...Half to a quarter full of arenas, during holidays so no one really is paying attention anyways, and at neutral sites.

What would really help, is if there were high-profile non-conference games at home arenas to start off the season...I believe that would generate far more interest and fan support. Move these SEC/BIG 10, Big East/Big Ten, ACC/Big Ten to the first week of the calendar and keep them at the home arenas. Outside of that, have non-conference games that actually pique the interest of the casual fan. I think this would help a little, not a lot but a little. In the grand scheme of things, the regular season for college basketball is what it is....the sport is geared toward the February-April timeline, and there isn't much that can be done about that, unless you wipe out March Madness and go to a four team playoff ala college football and I believe there is no one in America that wants that.

[xeus]

A longer offseason makes my job as a moderator more difficult, as the offseason is already a long and tortured period for this messageboard.

But aside from that, basketball needs those games that brew calls "crappy". There are 351 teams in D1 hoops, and most of them are "crappy". We used to be crappy, as those of you who remember the Tay Baker days in Schmidt fieldhouse can attest. My point is that those "crappy" games are an important part of the larger landscape of college hoops, both for the small programs who are beneficiaries of buy games, and for the big programs who play them and get to warm up before conference play.

As for a lack of fans in November, who cares? Not sure why that is a problem. And frankly, if it were, the big conferences and major programs would be raising it as an issue. November is such an important time for teams to develop, for coaches to learn, players to gel, etc.

Interesting points brew, but with college hoops as one of most valuable sports going (and only growing like crazy over the last 20 years) I say leave well-enough alone.

[xubrew]

The Final Four leads into Masters week (also on CBS) so the tourney isn't getting pushed back.

The Master's is during the day. No tournament games after the first weekend are, or they don't need to be. CBS could have the Master's followed by the NCAA Tournament.

[Xville]

A longer offseason makes my job as a moderator more difficult, as the offseason is already a long and tortured period for this messageboard.

But aside from that, basketball needs those games that brew calls "crappy". There are 351 teams in D1 hoops, and most of them are "crappy". We used to be crappy, as those of you who remember the Tay Baker days in Schmidt fieldhouse can attest. My point is that those "crappy" games are an important part of the larger landscape of college hoops, both for the small programs who are beneficiaries of buy games, and for the big programs who play them and get to warm up before conference play.

As for a lack of fans in November, who cares? Not sure why that is a problem. And frankly, if it were, the big conferences and major programs would be raising it as an issue. November is such an important time for teams to develop, for coaches to learn, players to gel, etc.

Interesting points brew, but with college hoops as one of most valuable sports going (and only growing like crazy over the last 20 years) I say leave well-enough alone.

Buy games are not going to go away, it is what it is especially when there are over 300 programs (which I think is absolutely ridiculous but that discussion is for a different time). However, I would like to see College basketball do a better job at introducing its product than it is currently doing. I believe that if they did do that, more interest would be generated....more interest=more money which I think is good for the growth of the sport.

[xubrew]

I didn't realize the college basketball schedule has a problem. Is this really an issue? With all due respect to Brew, I am asking sincerely.

Early season cupcakes are a good way for a college basketball team to get used to playing with each other. I like the idea of better matchups earlier in the season, but I don't think it would necessarily mean you would have great games.

Brew always does a great job of laying out his opinion, and it has been well thought out. Just haven't heard anyone in the game state the early basketball season is an issue that needs to be dealt with before.

I don't know if everyone would consider it an "issue," but when you assess it we seem to have a lot of meaningless games and a lot of people not caring. I understand that many casual fans don't care until the Tournament until March, or at the very least don't care until bracketolgy starts appearing (which I think has done a lot to help the game, BTW). Well, how do people think teams get to the tournament?? I mean, we have 350+ teams fighting for essentially the top forty in order to assure they get in if they need an at-large bid. That makes for a highly important regular season.

Is it an issue that the ratings suck?? Is it an issue that attendance is lousy?? Maybe not. But, if things could be done to make them better then why not do it?? I can't help but think that for eight weeks, between the end of the Super Bowl and the end of the NCAA Tournament, college basketball is THE sport. Why not make it 11??

I don't think the calendar is the only issue. I think that 70 percent of the games are, for the most part, uninteresting, is another issue. For your OOC rivalry games and your national showcase games, the arenas are packed and the atmosphere is incredible. Maybe just having more of those would fix a lot. But, when you have ranked teams playing solid competition, and the arena is half empty, it's kind of discouraging. At least to me.

[sgarcia]

The Master's is during the day. No tournament games after the first weekend are, or they don't need to be. CBS could have the Master's followed by the NCAA Tournament.

So you would like the Conference Championships to be the same weekend as the Masters and start the tourney the week after? That would be tough for ESPN since they have the first 2 rounds of the Masters and lots of conference tourney games during the day. The B1G title game is also always at 3:00 on CBS on Sunday. The selection show is always at 6:00 on CBS also on Sunday. I'm not opposed to moving the tournament I'm just pointing out the items that need addressed if the tourney does move.

[xubrew]

So you would like the Conference Championships to be the same weekend as the Masters and start the tourney the week after? That would be tough for ESPN since they have the first 2 rounds of the Masters and lots of conference tourney games during the day. The B1G title game is also always at 3:00 on CBS on Sunday. The selection show is always at 6:00 on CBS also on Sunday. I'm not opposed to moving the tournament I'm just pointing out the items that need addressed if the tourney does move.

I know two things about the Master's. It involves golf, and the ratings are high.

So, I agree that it's not in the best interest of anyone to have two showcase events in competition with one another. To be honest, I kind of forgot about the Master's. I could see it working if the Sweet Sixteen/Elite Eight were the week of the Master's, and the FF was the following week, but no. You wouldn't want the two going on at the same time. No one would. Even in Olympic years, hoops ratings take a bit of a hit.

[sirthought]

Interesting discussion but:

- Funny that you consider it a problem that they need to be higher profile. College basketball competes with a whole world of entertainment options, which are universally competing today against YouTube and Netflix. Colleges literally pump a disgusting amount money into advertising trying to get people to buy tickets and adore their teams. But it is what it is: just another entertainment option. And the option of the couch with quick "Top 10 Fail" videos often win. Trust me, as a former marketing director at major arts institution with world-class culture and entertainment value…college basketball has it great compared to most other outlets these days.

- Colleges begged to have more games in a season so they could bolster their take for season tickets and concessions, but the coaching staff doesn't want to hurt their player's development or their chance at a better record. So they schedule buy games, which has led to a proliferation of programs that probably shouldn't even be in the business of Div 1 go for it. (Like NKU and NJIT.) This thins out the overall product. For the average person there are too many teams/players to have to learn who to root for, who is good/bad, etc. etc. And surprisingly, the parity has had a good/bad effect depending on what angle you're looking at this.

[XUOHTX]

I think the real "problem" is March Madness. To the average fan, it's like an entirely new and more exciting season. It lasts a month and gets all the media attention. It's like any sport that isn't football. The regular season has lots of games on lots of nights and if a team loses a game here and there, no big deal. Unlike college football or NFL where each week has major playoff implications.

No matter where you put it on the calendar, the nature of the sport will be the same.

[sirthought]

I think the real "problem" is March Madness. To the average fan, it's like an entirely new and more exciting season. It lasts a month and gets all the media attention. It's like any sport that isn't football. The regular season has lots of games on lots of nights and if a team loses a game here and there, no big deal. Unlike college football or NFL where each week has major playoff implications.

No matter where you put it on the calendar, the nature of the sport will be the same.

It shouldn't matter if a team loses a game here or there. It's still fun to watch the games. (And sadly, the playoff implications only matter to a handful of schools in college football, so why bother with the "lesser" schools' games.)

Is the problem the March tournaments themselves? Or people's patience to watch the whole darn season?

Major newspapers, ESPN, Sports Illustrated…all sports media outlets…have coverage of college basketball the whole time. From season previews to game by game prognostication. It's not like there isn't something to check out if you want it.

There are more games available to watch electronically than ever…in the history of most any sport. (I doubt volleyball or wrestling would ever get investment from ESPN 3 or FoxSportsGo.)

The truth may be that this oversaturation of games, teams, and what style team t-shirt you should buy has lead to some people wanting to focus on something else.

[Xville]

It shouldn't matter if a team loses a game here or there. It's still fun to watch the games. (And sadly, the playoff implications only matter to a handful of schools in college football, so why bother with the "lesser" schools' games.)

Is the problem the March tournaments themselves? Or people's patience to watch the whole darn season?

Major newspapers, ESPN, Sports Illustrated…all sports media outlets…have coverage of college basketball the whole time. From season previews to game by game prognostication. It's not like there isn't something to check out if you want it.

There are more games available to watch electronically than ever…in the history of most any sport. (I doubt volleyball or wrestling would ever get investment from ESPN 3 or FoxSportsGo.)

The truth may be that this oversaturation of games, teams, and what style team t-shirt you should buy has lead to some people wanting to focus on something else.

Is it? I'm a pretty big Xavier fan..I'm out of town but still try to go to 5-6 games a year and try to watch every game that i'm not attending on tv. However, I missed the game against WKU because of other obligations and I don't really care that I missed it. Why? Because watching what is essentially a buy game (yes i know WKU has been good in the recent past yada yada ) is boring after about the first 5-10 minutes of a game..even if one of the teams is your favorite team. That's why arenas are three-quarters to half full and ratings for college basketball are for the most part pretty weak until conference play starts.

I do agree though to an extent about the oversaturation of games.....there is a big number of "who cares" games especially this early in the season.

[xubrew]

I think the real "problem" is March Madness. To the average fan, it's like an entirely new and more exciting season. It lasts a month and gets all the media attention. It's like any sport that isn't football. The regular season has lots of games on lots of nights and if a team loses a game here and there, no big deal. Unlike college football or NFL where each week has major playoff implications.

No matter where you put it on the calendar, the nature of the sport will be the same.

I agree that this may be the common perception. I disagree strongly that it is the reality. I'm not picking on you. I'm picking on the people who say the regular season doesn't matter because of March Madness.

The regular season matters a lot. I think it is, top to bottom, more meaningful than any other major sport's regular season. Before you point to college football, I said "Top to Bottom." The bottom of college football doesn't mean much if you can win all your games and still be left out because of a general supposition.

Less than twenty percent of the teams make the NCAA Tournament. It's roughly 40-45 out of 351 that are in a position to get in to the tournament without needing the automatic bid. That makes the 29-31 game regular season EXTREMELY important. The games in November are very important. That's what drives me nuts. These are big games, and virtually no one cares outside of the diehard fans. And, we have a lot of teams that piss away opportunities to play meaningful games. You only get 30, and a buy game basically does nothing for you, so scheduling one basically means you just took a pass on 1/30th of your season to try and make the top forty. Scheduling five or six means taking a pass on 1/5th of your season. So, that bothers me too. I get playing a few of them, but I just think that when 70 percent of the games are buy games, that's way too many. It doesn't engage the fans, and it doesn't really help the teams. At least not on paper.

[Xville]

I agree that this may be the common perception. I disagree strongly that it is the reality. I'm not picking on you. I'm picking on the people who say the regular season doesn't matter because of March Madness.

The regular season matters a lot. I think it is, top to bottom, more meaningful than any other major sport's regular season. Before you point to college football, I said "Top to Bottom." The bottom of college football doesn't mean much if you can win all your games and still be left out because of a general supposition.

Less than twenty percent of the teams make the NCAA Tournament. It's roughly 40-45 out of 351 that are in a position to get in to the tournament without needing the automatic bid. That makes the 29-31 game regular season EXTREMELY important. The games in November are very important. That's what drives me nuts. These are big games, and virtually no one cares outside of the diehard fans. And, we have a lot of teams that piss away opportunities to play meaningful games. You only get 30, and a buy game basically does nothing for you, so scheduling one basically means you just took a pass on 1/30th of your season to try and make the top forty. Scheduling five or six means taking a pass on 1/5th of your season. So, that bothers me too. I get playing a few of them, but I just think that when 70 percent of the games are buy games, that's way too many. It doesn't engage the fans, and it doesn't really help the teams. At least not on paper.

Completely agree and I think that is one of the main problems with college basketball...not the timing of it, but the fact that there are so many buy games and unfortunately they aren't going away.

For example, take a look at Louisville's home basketball schedule...it is freaking atrocious before their conference play starts...and honestly i think it is a huge slap in the face to season ticket holders to pay for that crap (i know no one is holding their feet to the fire but still). I have a buddy who has season tickets and he has been to one game this year....its just not worth it to sit thru about 2 hours of that crap...you can instead watch the first 10 minutes at home and then go do other things when Louisville is up on Grand Canyon by 30 at the 10 minute mark of the first half.

[drudy23]

Who in their right mind would turn off NCAA tournament coverage to watch the Masters? Not many.

Seems like it would be more of an issue for the Masters than the NCAA.

[waggy]

How does 20% magically turn into 70%?

[muskiefan82]

How does 20% magically turn into 70%?

By adding 50%. That seems simple.

[Xville]

How does 20% magically turn into 70%?

If we are just talking non-conference, I don't know if that number is very far off....Louisville for instance...10 of their 13 non-conf games are what i would consider buy games. I looked at Duke...8 of 13.

I would say Xavier does a better job than most in regards to "buy games" but honestly my perception is that is not the norm...I think the norm is more of how Duke and Louisville schedule. That's atrocious.

[waggy]

If we are just talking non-conference, I don't know if that number is very far off....Louisville for instance...10 of their 13 non-conf games are what i would consider buy games. I looked at Duke...8 of 13.

I would say Xavier does a better job than most in regards to "buy games" but honestly my perception is that is not the norm...I think the norm is more of how Duke and Louisville schedule. That's atrocious.


Seriously, Xavier fans care about Louisville and Dukes "atrocious" home schedule?

[Xville]

Seriously, Xavier fans care about Louisville and Dukes "atrocious" home schedule?

We are talking about college basketball in general on this topic right? So yeah as far as college basketball goes, and its perception, I do care about their schedules.

I know that "buy" games are a part of college basketball but they suck and aren't fun to watch in my opinion. Those atrocious home schedules of those kinds of programs are also why the casual fan doesn't start paying attention to college basketball until January which I think is a problem. If you want the sport to continue to grow in popularity as well as financially, buy games are not the way to do that.

[waggy]

Well if you want to increase the commercial viability of a sport then you make it more professional. More focused. So in this case you would drop all the shitty teams and conferences from the equation.

Personally, I like it the way it is, with all the shitty and teams and shitty conferences included. Not to mention excluding the shitty teams and conferences would ruin March.

College bball is unique. Not saying it's better, just different. Part of that uniqueness is all the suckiness at the bottom.

[xubrew]

How does 20% magically turn into 70%?


Seriously, Xavier fans care about Louisville and Dukes "atrocious" home schedule?

I meant 70% of the OOC games, and this is the "Around the NCAA" Forum. I personally do care about the lack of interest early in the year and I think the crappy schedules are one of the things that contribute to it.

[waggy]

I meant 70% of the OOC games, and this is the "Around the NCAA" Forum. I personally do care about the lack of interest early in the year and I think the crappy schedules are one of the things that contribute to it.


Yeah, Louisville and Duke have no idea what they doing. They are the problems in college basketball. Ruining the sport. Hahaha.

[Xville]

Well if you want to increase the commercial viability of a sport then you make it more professional. More focused. So in this case you would drop all the shitty teams and conferences from the equation.

Personally, I like it the way it is, with all the shitty and teams and shitty conferences included. Not to mention excluding the shitty teams and conferences would ruin March.

College bball is unique. Not saying it's better, just different. Part of that uniqueness is all the suckiness at the bottom.

No one is saying to exclude the small conferences or teams....maybe you should read a few pages of a thread before just jumping right in the middle of a topic not knowing what we are even discussing.

[waggy]

Maybe people should stop starting piss up a rope threads.

[xubrew]

Yeah, Louisville and Duke have no idea what they doing. They are the problems in college basketball. Ruining the sport. Hahaha.

Okay, those might be the two worst examples you could have possibly given for the point you're trying to prove.

Rick Pitino would like to play a tougher schedule but the lease on their new arena requires them to play a certain number of home games, which limits the number of road games they can play and increases the number of buy games they need to play. So, I think he would agree with me.

Duke may be undermatched a lot, but they're really only playing three games against teams that are a complete joke, and that's if you include Bryant who actually is one of the more competitive teams in the NEC and has been since they moved up. Duke isn't who I'm talking about. I think their schedule is really good, and they're not among the major programs who play a bunch of cupcakes in front of a half empty building.

[waggy]

I'm not trying to prove a point.

I do not GAF about Dukes or Louisvilles schedules. Not even a little bit.

If anyone should have a concern for their schedules it should be their own fans.

Why don't you go to their fan messageboards and tell them they need to get their shit together?

[xubrew]

I'm not trying to prove a point.

I do not GAF about Dukes or Louisvilles schedules. Not even a little bit.

If anyone should have a concern for their schedules it should be their own fans.

Why don't you go to their fan messageboards and tell them they need to get their shit together?

Do you frequently join in on conversations you don't GAF about?? Why don't you close this thread, and open one that you do care about??

[Xville]

Maybe people should stop starting piss up a rope threads.

that's fine that you don't care about this topic..other people do.

I believe that if you get rid of a lot of the buy games for some teams like Duke, Louisville, Syracuse etc etc...and replace them with more high profile games, that early interest in the sport would grow. If you grow interest, you grow money..considering it is a sport that I really like, I want the sport to continue to grow.

I think buy games are stupid at least the amount of them for a number of teams.

[GoMuskies]

Rick Pitino would like to play a tougher schedule

No he wouldn't. I'm sure he's probably lied and said that, but it's not true. He did the same thing in scheduling when they played at Freedom Hall.

[waggy]

If this thread was focused on how the BE could increase its visability and/or popularity it might have some merit. Otherwise it's a pissing up a rope conversation. IMHO.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Do you frequently join in on conversations you don't GAF about?? Why don't you close this thread, and open one that you do care about??

Yes he does. Pretty annoying but it seems to be his thing.

Nothing like people giving a shit about what other people give or dont give shits about.

[waggy]

You should be thanking me for my focused and helpful contribution.

[Xville]

Okay, those might be the two worst examples you could have possibly given for the point you're trying to prove.

Rick Pitino would like to play a tougher schedule but the lease on their new arena requires them to play a certain number of home games, which limits the number of road games they can play and increases the number of buy games they need to play. So, I think he would agree with me.

Duke may be undermatched a lot, but they're really only playing three games against teams that are a complete joke, and that's if you include Bryant who actually is one of the more competitive teams in the NEC and has been since they moved up. Duke isn't who I'm talking about. I think their schedule is really good, and they're not among the major programs who play a bunch of cupcakes in front of a half empty building.

I disagree...it doesn't matter if Bryant is good in their conference or not...no one cares about Bryant. They also play Elon, Ga Southern, Yale, Utah State, Siena and Buffalo. Those teams may also be good this year, I dunno....heck Siena even made the tournament a few times here and there. That is still 7-8 home games that most people don't give a crap about. Maybe you are a die hard fan and you will watch Duke play Bryant or whatever, but for most people that game doesn't even register a look.

To grow the sport, you don't have to convince die hard basketball fans...you have to convince the casual fan...the casual fan isn't going to sit down and watch Duke play Bryant.

[xubrew]

I disagree...it doesn't matter if Bryant is good in their conference or not...no one cares about Bryant. They also play Elon, Ga Southern, Yale, Utah State, Siena and Buffalo. Those teams may also be good this year, I dunno....heck Siena even made the tournament a few times here and there. That is still 7-8 home games that most people don't give a crap about. Maybe you are a die hard fan and you will watch Duke play Bryant or whatever, but for most people that game doesn't even register a look.

To grow the sport, you don't have to convince die hard basketball fans...you have to convince the casual fan...the casual fan isn't going to sit down and watch Duke play Bryant.

Elon and Georgia Southern are terrible, even by small conference standards. GA Southern was pretty good a year ago, but is awful this year. As for everyone else...

Yale is one of the favorites to win the Ivy, Utah State was expected to be really good before their best player quit the team the day before the season started, Siena will likely contend for the MAAC, Buffalo isn't great this year but they are a program that takes basketball seriously and is trying to build on it. So, I would consider those to be at least semi-intriguing, and at least Duke fills the place.

But, let's look at a team like Iowa, and I just picked them at random....they're playing Gardner Webb, Coppin State, UMKC, Western Illinois (who I know is 6-1 with a win at Wisconsin, but that is kind of a surprise considering most didn't expect them to finish in the top half of the Summit), Drake, and Tennessee Tech. That's seven games out of nine non exempt OOC games where the only opponent that appears to be any good at all even by small conference standards is good on accident. And, Iowa's arena has been half empty.

That's why I don't put Duke into that category, at least not this year. I get what you're saying and I think we agree in general. I just generally wouldn't point at Duke as being the worst offenders of awful and uninteresting OOC schedules.

[sirthought]

Good lord, this thread is pointless.

[xubrew]

Good lord, this thread is pointless.

Most are. In fact, all of them are. What I do is I look at a thread's title, and if it doesn't interest me, which most of them don't, I don't even open it, much less read through it and respond to it.

[MADXSTER]

Good lord, this thread is pointless.

If XUBREW responds then I know the thread is dead.

[xubrew]

If XUBREW responds then I know the thread is dead.

See, there ya go! That's all you need to look for.

[XUFan09]

Good lord, this thread is pointless.
I find it rather rich when people make this assertion of a thread, when most people, including a lot of basketball fans, would consider this whole site pointless.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[MauriceX]

Personally, I really enjoy threads like this. I don't get the chance to talk sports with people who care as much as the people on this board unless I come here. So stop raining on other people's parades. If you don't like, don't come back. Thanks.

Back to the original point - I definitely agree that there could be a way to spice up OOC. Instead of shifting months, I think that having the conference challenges be the very first thing would be a good alternative. You get some marquee match-ups with teams that will at least be competitive for making the tournament. People care about big ticket games. I think that would help.