Pure Committee Politics

[CoxMustangFan]

he claims we have tried to schedule them - but they would not do it. Moody is great - but it might also be a hard place to convince people they need to come play.

Do you fully understand the challenge (which I say in a very nice way)? There are three common scheduling formats: 0-1 (you play at their place with no return trip), 1-1 (two year agreement, where you each get a home game), and a 1-1-1 (home, home, and neutral). When you're growing and perceived to be a risky team, you're only going to get good teams to agree to a 0-1. It will take a few years of being ranked before you can get a 1-1 (see SDSU getting one from KU).

[Pony147]

I think it should be easier going forward to schedule better teams because we are now an RPI asset, not an RPI liability

[malachi896]

Though I agree with what everyone is saying about the importance of booking a few top tier teams, the thing I think we are overlooking here is improving the softer teams. Those teams this year were really bad and pulled us down a lot. The key is to schedule a bunch of teams in the middle (see umass this year) so that you average up to a high rpi. If our bottom wasn't so bad our rpi would have been in the 40s at the worst.

[Stallion]

again nobody was going to play in Garland for a minimum payout

[Grant Carter]

Though I agree with what everyone is saying about the importance of booking a few top tier teams, the thing I think we are overlooking here is improving the softer teams. Those teams this year were really bad and pulled us down a lot. The key is to schedule a bunch of teams in the middle (see umass this year) so that you average up to a high rpi. If our bottom wasn't so bad our rpi would have been in the 40s at the worst.

Absolutely, it is the top teams everyone pays attention to but if instead of playing 6 teams with RPI over 300 we play 6 teams with RPI around 150 we are in a much better situation.