So we apparently learned nothing from last year's pathetic non-con and apparently CC wanted an even worse one for 24-24. Brilliant.

Besides the terrible matchups, can we discuss the lack of weekend games?  Not exactly making it easy to bring kids, though it seems questionable at best that they care about anyone coming given the competition to begin with

Since both the men and women open at the Smith Center on Election Day Eve, I am going to assume that is a doubleheader event (tipoffs not announced for either game), hopefully with enough promos and sideshows/entertainment to engage the students who might otherwise be preocupied with what will happen the following day.

What was wrong with last year GW0509?
Going 11-2 against an embarrassing schedule is nothing to be proud of. What matters is how we end the season. 
We have to stop using injuries as an excuse for our program every year - every team faces the same issues.
If we don't want to schedule or perform at a level expected of an A-10 team, lets save some money and go play in the Patriot or AE Leagues.

So sure, times change and I suppose with the reliance on metrics such as KenPom and the Net, the rules can be subsequently altered.  Nevertheless, I am left to conclude that no matter what GW does with its schedule, if you are hell-bent on defending GW and its scheduling philosophy, you can find a way to do so.

In earlier times, when GW was competing for postseason berths annually, the mantra seemed to be that nobody worth their salt wanted to play GW.  They certainly were never going to play at Smith Center and even scheduling games on the road was problematic.  If a top 25 or 50 major program scheduled GW on their home court, the scenario was that if they won, then they did what was expected of them...beat a midmajor at home.  And if GW pulled off the upset, then the loser would contemplate how stupid they were for scheduling that game in the first place.  For that major, there was nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Today, GW does not represent nearly as formidable competition.  The likelihood of winning on a major's home court is substantially less today than it was 20 years ago.  Therefore, one would think that we should be able to schedule 2-3 road contests (let's call it 2 since we are also playing in the MTE) against higher quality opponents.  Are the bluebloods really concerned with losing to GW, given all of the examples I cited from last season featuring other A10 schools scheduling such games.  La Salle's experience playing at Duke last year wasn't so miserable as to prevent them from playing at UNC this season.  

And yet we're supposed to believe that we can't attract such opponents because the win over GW does nothing for them?  No, I do not believe that's what happening here.  I think CC's general scheduling philosophy can be summed up as follows:

1. Play far more home games than away/neutral, regardless of how bad these opponents are.
2. No one-offs or games without some kind of return game.
3. Thus far, no home and homes against higher quality midmajors.  (Hofstra was on the books under JC.  AU and ODU, and I suspect we'll be playing ODU at home next season, don't fit this definition.  Don't get me wrong about AU, I think it's great from a local rivalry perspective to play them.  I am taking about games against midmajors who are perennially top 150 programs.  These games seem to be missing with the exception being at a MTE.) 

The fact is that many GW fans, myself included, were all over Hobbs for playing a soft OOC schedule and yet his schedules were quite a bit more competitive than CC.  Maybe it's just that there are far fewer of us here but it occurs to me that CC is getting a major pass in comparison.

I will again bring this back to the group of people who this ought to matter the most...our players.  Ask them if they prefer a home game against Mercyhurst or a road game at UNC.  What's more satisfying, a 3 point win against NJIT or a 3 point loss at Seton Hall?  Which of those outcomes instill greater confidence moving forward?  Our players deserve the opportunity to play on a big stage more frequently than our latest OOC schedules are providing.  These guys are competitors; they want to be challenged and they want the opportunity to generate headlines even for one night.  

I agree that what's done is done and the hope is that an improved team will lead to an improved schedule (although I suspect we'll be going back to the "who wants to play us, we're a legitimate threat to win" arguments that we heard two decades ago).  Of course, we'll all happily cross that bridge once we get there.

I would be interested in blindly asking students in Kogan Plaza if they would rather play the following schools vs. who have on the schedule:

Youngstown State
Purdue Fort Wayne
St. Thomas
Austin Peay

Because all those schools are at least 100+ KenPom spots better than North Carolina A&T.  We'd be "better prepared" playing against KenPom teams ranked 130-200. Yet I don't think they would attract any more students to show up than would show up to see NC A&T, Lafayette, NJIT etc.  The casual student fan is first and foremost looking to be entertained with dunks and 3 pointers on a random November/December weeknight. It's why big schools play Mississippi Valley State over and over to start the season.

The biggest problem with last year's schedule is the fact that our freshmen played like freshman against teams we should regularly beat by 15-20.  DMVPiranha posted about his concerns with CC's decision to go young last offseason vs. bringing in more vets.  I think some of that has to do with CC not anticipating the unlimited transfer rule, but it's a valid criticism (compare how Tony Skinn has gone about the transfer portal in his first two years at Mason vs. us).  

I also think people are not appreciating how a huge chunk of that losing streak is a result of losing 2 of our best 3 players to prolonged injury, something that is entirely divorced from our OOC schedule.  Hypothetically, say we played a tougher OOC schedule last year and go 9-4 instead of 11-2.  We then have the same exact injuries occur during conference play, so our final record is 13-19 as opposed to 15-17.  Is the trajectory of the program any different?  Is finishing like 190 in Kenpom all that much better than 203?  Is CC getting better transfers this offseason because we played UNC Asheville and Brown instead of Navy and UMES?

Most have other OOC games that will balance out the SOS factor. Not GW. No others are predicted to be last in conference by Blue Ribbon. Keep on working towards those coveted at-large bids GW!

The schedule is what it is because CC wants it this way. I don’t know how many times I can say it - this is by his design. I have heard him say - and this is a quote - “I will take as many cupcake buy games as the university will pay for.”  He believes ( borne of his own  experience at Miami) that playing a cupcake OOC schedule and putting up as many “W’s” as possible heading into Conference is the best way to burnish post-season credentials. So make no mistake - this isn’t about inability to attract better schools, it’s this way because he wants it this way.

We saw the risks attendant with that philosophy in full view last year. Not only did we underperform against horrible teams, the A-10 isn’t the ACC and the updraft is really limited. That said, this is the way he’s chosen to go. I disagree with it, but he’s got the right to prove it out amd (hopefully);prove me wrong.

Having spoken to CC about this very topic extensively over the past two seasons, the truth is much more complicated. My understanding of all of the relevant factors that impact scheduling are as follows:

First of all the A-10 has set forth some scheduling parameters that  members must adhere to. This has to do with "buy" games. There are limitations on the types of teams A-10 members can schedule for "buy" games both in terms of who you can bring in and who you can go on the road to play.

Second, there is the difference that the A-10 has nearly become a one-bid league. Meaning the other games aren't nearly as important as the Conference Schedule and therefore, less value is placed on them.

Third, there is the idea that our roster has been in flux the past few years and CC has had teams that are relatively inexperienced playing together the past 2 seasons. I believe that CC feels it is important to jell early without too much scheduling pressure.

Fourth, what happened  last year had as much to do with being a young team with a number of key injuries as it did with the OOC schedule.

Fifth, there is the fact that CC does want to schedule wins so that we can establish some program momentum by having a winning season which (checking my notes) hasn't happened in awhile.

Sixth, there is the issue of if GW determined to play a game or two that was more difficult, who would be willing to play GW - given our recent record, many teams see no value to playing  us on a risk/reward basis and therefore, the options are not plentiful and that's before you get to finding agreeable dates. To fly out to the West Coast to play single game right before exam period may not be a good thing for our student-athletes. It all depends on what your options are. 

Seventh, I think GW (and maybe not CC as much) places a priority on getting as many home games as possible. Easier to schedule LM teams in that endeavor.

So yes part of all of this is a choice but that choice is made within an environment that poses a number of constraints.

I also know that should we improve and maintain some roster continuity that CC is also willing to play tougher OOC games. So hopefully, we will have opportunities in the future to improve the strength of OOC schedule. 

Last edited by GWRising (9/13/2024 2:27 pm)

For those of you who were at the open practice today, CC and ML (new AD) reiterated most of the points I laid out above regarding scheduling when asked about it.