• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Wake Forest Basketball - '24-25 Schedule Thread

wakefan1995 said:
lol hell no. You're basically throwing money away. The only sport right now worth having the same seat for is baseball. We get the cheapest seats upstairs and just move down every game thin. The only games we sit in our actual seats are NCSU, DUKE, UNC
Click to expand...
I did the same thing last year. I think Duke and State were the only games I had to sit upstairs.
 
Coppin State went 2-27 last year to check in at #361 out of 362 teams in the KP and Torvik ratings

Forbes don't need Kenny Pom and Bart telling him how to schedule

Coppin State's coach is some guy named Larry Stewart, who replaced Juan Dixon before last season. Dixon coached at Coppin State for 6 years and managed to crack the top 320 (#265, in 2020-21) in the Torvik rankings one time.
 
thatguy2016 said:
Coppin State went 2-27 last year to check in at #361 out of 362 teams in the KP and Torvik ratings

Forbes don't need Kenny Pom and Bart telling him how to schedule

Coppin State's coach is some guy named Larry Stewart, who replaced Juan Dixon before last season. Dixon coached at Coppin State for 6 years and managed to crack the top 320 (#265, in 2020-21) in the Torvik rankings one time.
Click to expand...
Blitzing quad 4 teams is the way to go in terms of gaming the NET. The B12 demonstrated that last year.
 
As long as we are prepared to win by 50 instead of 25, that type of game is fine.
 
Rafi said:
Blitzing quad 4 teams is the way to go in terms of gaming the NET. The B12 demonstrated that last year.
Click to expand...

that's one approach. The MWC has received lots of undeserved bids by taking the opposite approach and not scheduling any Q4 teams.

last year, Coppin lost by 45 at VPI, by 39 at JMU, and by 20 at Maryland
 
thatguy2016 said:
that's one approach. The MWC has received lots of undeserved bids by taking the opposite approach and not scheduling any Q4 teams.

last year, Coppin lost by 45 at VPI, by 39 at JMU, and by 20 at Maryland
Click to expand...
That's incorrect. MWC teams in the tournament had the following records in quad 4 games: Colo State 6-0, SDSU 6-0, Boise 8-0, Nevada 9-0, New Mexico 10-1, Utah State 10-0.
 
Rafi said:
That's incorrect. MWC teams in the tournament had the following records in quad 4 games: Colo State 6-0, SDSU 6-0, Boise 8-0, Nevada 9-0, New Mexico 10-1, Utah State 10-0.
Click to expand...

You’re right. I was conflating my previous analysis of teams ranked worse than 300 with Quad 4. It’s worth noting, however, that MWC teams played the following amounts of non-conference Q4 games last year:

Boise State 3
Utah State 4
Colorado State 2 (I stopped there)

Wake Forest played 5 - more than any of those teams

And that was, in part, because WF chooses to schedule teams that were worse than 300 in the previous year. Scheduling teams is a bit of a crapshoot - unless the team is terrible, in which case we can be pretty sure they will be terrible again. I forget the exact specifics of the analysis from last year, but I’m pretty sure the top 4 MWC teams (from preseason) scheduled zero games against sub-300 teams. They all scheduled non-D1 teams, which don’t hurt your non-con schedule.

As you know, the committee chooses to double-count certain resume aspects, including Q1 wins and strength of schedule. So by scheduling really, really shitty teams, we’re planning to have a hit against the resume.

But it is what it is. And it’s not worth worrying about because (1) I’m not changing the schedule strategy and (2) nothing matters if we fall apart down the stretch anyway.

TL; DR the MWC 100% has a different scheduling philosophy than the Big XII (and Forbes) - and it has worked.
 
Forbes admitted that he needs to schedule quad 4 games and blow them out. He is scared of HPU.
 
The key is to blow them out though. How many times were we in a single digit game mid 2nd half last season against the teams we were supposed to blow out? Heck, we were down 20 to Elon at one point, right? The problem is you're not always going to hit your stride early in the season when you're breaking in a bunch of new players and haven't figured out everyone's roles yet.
 
thatguy2016 said:
You’re right. I was conflating my previous analysis of teams ranked worse than 300 with Quad 4. It’s worth noting, however, that MWC teams played the following amounts of non-conference Q4 games last year:

Boise State 3
Utah State 4
Colorado State 2 (I stopped there)

Wake Forest played 5 - more than any of those teams

And that was, in part, because WF chooses to schedule teams that were worse than 300 in the previous year. Scheduling teams is a bit of a crapshoot - unless the team is terrible, in which case we can be pretty sure they will be terrible again. I forget the exact specifics of the analysis from last year, but I’m pretty sure the top 4 MWC teams (from preseason) scheduled zero games against sub-300 teams. They all scheduled non-D1 teams, which don’t hurt your non-con schedule.

As you know, the committee chooses to double-count certain resume aspects, including Q1 wins and strength of schedule. So by scheduling really, really shitty teams, we’re planning to have a hit against the resume.

But it is what it is. And it’s not worth worrying about because (1) I’m not changing the schedule strategy and (2) nothing matters if we fall apart down the stretch anyway.

TL; DR the MWC 100% has a different scheduling philosophy than the Big XII (and Forbes) - and it has worked.
Click to expand...
New Mexico played 6 and Nevada played 5 quad 4 out of conference games.
 
Bubble Boy said:
The key is to blow them out though. How many times were we in a single digit game mid 2nd half last season against the teams we were supposed to blow out? Heck, we were down 20 to Elon at one point, right? The problem is you're not always going to hit your stride early in the season when you're breaking in a bunch of new players and haven't figured out everyone's roles yet.
Click to expand...
Correct. You game the system by scheduling quad 4 games and blowing those teams out. You can't blow out a quad 4 team unless you first schedule a quad 4 team.
 
Rafi said:
Correct. You game the system by scheduling quad 4 games and blowing those teams out. You can't blow out a quad 4 team unless you first schedule a quad 4 team.
Click to expand...
Except that strength of schedule is double counted
 
thatguy2016 said:
lol keep looking for minutiae in the middle of the larger point
Click to expand...
You claimed the MWC teams didn't play quad 4 games, when, in fact, the top 6 MWC teams played 50(!) quad 4 games. Then you moved the goal posts and said they didn't schedule quad 4 non-conference games, and when citing examples you conveniently left out the two MWC tournament teams that played the most quad 4 non-conference games. It's not minutiae, it's the whole point of the discussion.
 
Rafi said:
You claimed the MWC teams didn't play quad 4 games, when, in fact, the top 6 MWC teams played 50(!) quad 4 games. Then you moved the goal posts and said they didn't schedule quad 4 non-conference games, and when citing examples you conveniently left out the two MWC tournament teams that played the most quad 4 non-conference games. It's not minutiae, it's the whole point of the discussion.
Click to expand...
Isn't the point that they played higher NET Q4 teams so it hurts them much less than playing teams in the 300s?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top