PDA

View Full Version : A Question on conference schedules



feldspar
01-21-2012, 01:39 PM
I was just looking at Carolina's schedule to see who their next opponent is and discovered that they have this weekend off. How does that work? How do they get an entire week of rest during the middle of ACC play? I scanned our Jan/Feb schedule as well as those of a couple of other ACC teams and no one has a week-long break like UNC does this week.

Not that big of a deal, but just kind of a head scratcher.

hurleyfor3
01-21-2012, 01:41 PM
Unc usually does that in lieu of scheduling a non-conference opponent. Although historically they do it later in the season, around mid-February.

1 24 90
01-21-2012, 01:46 PM
I find that most teams take the week off rather than scheduling non conference games. For instance, Ohio State has been off for a week. Although Michigan is at Arkansas today and Uconn is at Tennessee. So I guess I disproved my point. I guess it's just the choice of the coach to take a week off or keep the 2 games a week routine.

hurleyfor3
01-21-2012, 01:59 PM
I find that most teams take the week off rather than scheduling non conference games. For instance, Ohio State has been off for a week. Although Michigan is at Arkansas today and Uconn is at Tennessee.

Not to mention Temple picking up its second win in ACC play.

Did someone at cbs think they were scheduling the uconn and tennessee women's teams?

Kdogg
01-21-2012, 03:28 PM
I was just looking at Carolina's schedule to see who their next opponent is and discovered that they have this weekend off. How does that work? How do they get an entire week of rest during the middle of ACC play? I scanned our Jan/Feb schedule as well as those of a couple of other ACC teams and no one has a week-long break like UNC does this week.

Not that big of a deal, but just kind of a head scratcher.

All ACC teams get a bye week during conference play. Some, like Duke, play a non-conference game during that week.

77devil
01-21-2012, 04:08 PM
Here is a different scheduling issue. Duke had a one day turnaround for FSU today. FSU had 3 having last played on Tuesday. It happens again against VT in late Feb. There is no need for this disparity. It's not about recovering physically as much as time for the coaches and players to adequately prepare.

gumbomoop
01-22-2012, 12:10 AM
Here is a different scheduling issue. Duke had a one day turnaround for FSU today. FSU had 3 having last played on Tuesday. It happens again against VT in late Feb.

This stuff bugs me a bit, too. I guess it's TV needs, ESPN and ACC Network.

Next time it's actually a bit worse for Duke, as they visit Tallahassee on a Thurs eve, then return home for a noon game v. VaTech. Hope ... well, I hope Duke wins both.

uh_no
01-22-2012, 12:35 PM
This stuff bugs me a bit, too. I guess it's TV needs, ESPN and ACC Network.

Next time it's actually a bit worse for Duke, as they visit Tallahassee on a Thurs eve, then return home for a noon game v. VaTech. Hope ... well, I hope Duke wins both.

No, the reality is that unless every acc team plays on the same days every week, there will be disparity. Perhaps they could all play every wednesday and every saturday, but yes, you're right, then all the games would be at the same time. Sometimes it works in your favor, sometimes it doesn't.

Do you hear K complaining about it? No. It's something you can't control. There are many many things we CAN control that cost us this game (66.7% fga in the second half) so why even bother fretting about the other stuff? The tournament has 2 day turnarounds anyway, so duke should get plenty used to them.

I have no problem with duke having as many disadvantages as possible in the regular season. It can only make us a better team.

gumbomoop
01-23-2012, 10:44 AM
No, the reality is that unless every acc team plays on the same days every week, [1] there will be disparity. Perhaps they could all play every wednesday and every saturday, but yes, you're right, then all the games would be at the same time. [2] Sometimes it works in your favor, sometimes it doesn't.

[3] Do you hear K complaining about it? No. It's something you can't control. There are many many things we CAN control that cost us this game (66.7% fga in the second half) so why even bother fretting about the other stuff? [4] The tournament has 2 day turnarounds anyway, so duke should get plenty used to them.

[5] I have no problem with duke having as many disadvantages as possible in the regular season. It can only make us a better team.

We do have some disagreements. I concede up front that I may be making a bit too much of this. I think over the last couple of seasons when this issue has come up, not many posters see it as a big deal, so yours is definitely the majority viewpoint.

It's not so much the [1] disparity per se that bugs me, but the striking discrepancy re [2] advantage and disadvantage. Consider......

Duke plays 16 conference games this season. Of that total:
a. Games in which Duke & opponent have equal number of prep days = 6
b. Games in which opponent has more prep days than Duke = 9
c. Games in which Duke has more prep days than opponent = 1 [last game, UNC] [Btw, UNC is among the 9 in line b, above]

So, disparity will happen, but if prep days are useful to, well, prepare for one's opponent, Duke gets short end of that discrepancy stick, and noticeably so.

[3] You're right, K doesn't complain about it. I have to assume he and the staff occasionally notice.

[4] The NCAAT point isn't quite analogous, as the 2-day turnaround is equal for both teams. But if your point is that playing some 2-day turnarounds is useful prep for NCAAT, yes, that makes some sense. Maybe the ACC should do this a lot more, for all teams.

[5] If the prep-days-disadvantages are actually advantageous in making Duke tougher, good. But in general, given the unbalanced mess disparities, the very concept of disadvantages would seem to suggest it makes things marginally more difficult to end up with a better record, and therefore a better seed, etc.

MarkD83
01-23-2012, 11:55 AM
There is a diffferent point of view that too many prep days makes a team complacent. So what is the ideal number of days between games. Thursday to Saturday is too short. Only 1 day to review old game film and put in a game plan. Sunday to Wednesday and Wednesday to Saturday are good (2 days). The first day is to look at old game film and the next day is to put in the new game plan. Travel days need to be included so a 3 day turn around is ideal if travel is involved. I don't think this actually makes much difference to the players (except for the travel time). Its the coaches that have to be well organized and do their howework in a short period of time if there is a short turn-around.

UrinalCake
01-23-2012, 02:05 PM
I think the short turnarounds have to do with the fact that we play on thursdays a lot. My guess is that it's a better TV night. We used to play on sundays a lot when Fox had their sunday night ACC game of the week, but now that that's gone we seem to play on saturdays more. So we get these thursday-saturday sequences. Hard to complain about the fact that the TV networks want us to play during the best viewing times though.

Here's what I don't get: most ACC teams have played five games, but some have only played four, including UNC. So if they've already had their bye week, then how do they have another bye week coming up? This means that after the mid-week games Duke will have played two more games than UNC. I'm sure there's a logical explanation but I just haven't thought it through.

Lar77
01-23-2012, 02:29 PM
No, the reality is that unless every acc team plays on the same days every week, there will be disparity. Perhaps they could all play every wednesday and every saturday, but yes, you're right, then all the games would be at the same time. Sometimes it works in your favor, sometimes it doesn't.

Do you hear K complaining about it? No. It's something you can't control. There are many many things we CAN control that cost us this game (66.7% fga in the second half) so why even bother fretting about the other stuff? The tournament has 2 day turnarounds anyway, so duke should get plenty used to them.

I have no problem with duke having as many disadvantages as possible in the regular season. It can only make us a better team.

No problem with it; in fact, K said something similar to that after the Wake game. Absent an unlikely complete collapse, we will be in the NCAAT with a good seed. Beyond that, who outside of Chapel Hill cares? I do resent the fiction of an ACC Regular Season champ because of unbalanced schedules, but that ship has sailed as well.

sagegrouse
01-23-2012, 02:45 PM
We do have some disagreements. I concede up front that I may be making a bit too much of this. I think over the last couple of seasons when this issue has come up, not many posters see it as a big deal, so yours is definitely the majority viewpoint.

It's not so much the [1] disparity per se that bugs me, but the striking discrepancy re [2] advantage and disadvantage. Consider......

Duke plays 16 conference games this season. Of that total:
a. Games in which Duke & opponent have equal number of prep days = 6
b. Games in which opponent has more prep days than Duke = 9
c. Games in which Duke has more prep days than opponent = 1 [last game, UNC] [Btw, UNC is among the 9 in line b, above]

So, disparity will happen, but if prep days are useful to, well, prepare for one's opponent, Duke gets short end of that discrepancy stick, and noticeably so.

[3] You're right, K doesn't complain about it. I have to assume he and the staff occasionally notice.

[4] The NCAAT point isn't quite analogous, as the 2-day turnaround is equal for both teams. But if your point is that playing some 2-day turnarounds is useful prep for NCAAT, yes, that makes some sense. Maybe the ACC should do this a lot more, for all teams.

[5] If the prep-days-disadvantages are actually advantageous in making Duke tougher, good. But in general, given the unbalanced mess disparities, the very concept of disadvantages would seem to suggest it makes things marginally more difficult to end up with a better record, and therefore a better seed, etc.

It really is a level playing field. Beginning in the new year, every team plays two games per week and this last for nine weeks. Using higher math, that works out to be 18 games. Some teams play only 16 or 17 because they want the time off. Duke would rather play and, therefore, schedules Temple and ST. John's in addition to the 16 conference games. Bt basically, you have the same number of potential games played over the same period of time; the scheduling is a bit irregular, given the intent to use five days of the week for ACC games. I don't think it makes a difference, and would have to have 100 years of data to dig out some relationships.

Moreover, in the ACC Tournament, the teams play every day (as long as they last). And, as others have noted, the NCAA-T has only one day off between games. (And in the old, old days, when men were men and women had to be back in the dorms by 11PM, the NCAA tournament games -- including the Final Four --were Friday and Saturday.)

sagegrouse