This matrix explains Sendek/Fowler scheduling completely. If not for last year, the results vs 11-25 would be equally horrendous as against 1-10. His job is predicated on playing a weak OOC schedule. Last year was the first year that 1/2 of Sendek’s wins did not come against teams ranked 101+ in the RPI. Pathetic.
The BCA tourney exemplifies this chart. We schedule a lot (and spank) the 100+ teams. We win less than .500 against “good” teams 25-100 (many of which make the NCAA’s). We get hammered against “great” teams (1-25).
The numbers really don’t vary much. In our “greatest” years, we haven’t really beaten substantially more quality teams, we’ve just played and beaten more mediocre and poor teams.
Jeff, down at the bottom-shouldn’t the first line be “vs top 10″?
This matrix explains Sendek/Fowler scheduling completely. If not for last year, the results vs 11-25 would be equally horrendous as against 1-10. His job is predicated on playing a weak OOC schedule. Last year was the first year that 1/2 of Sendek’s wins did not come against teams ranked 101+ in the RPI. Pathetic.
The BCA tourney exemplifies this chart. We schedule a lot (and spank) the 100+ teams. We win less than .500 against “good” teams 25-100 (many of which make the NCAA’s). We get hammered against “great” teams (1-25).
The numbers really don’t vary much. In our “greatest” years, we haven’t really beaten substantially more quality teams, we’ve just played and beaten more mediocre and poor teams.
great
Diese seite ist genauso interessant wie informativ. Viele Grüße!
Hallo thank you for a lovely web site I enjoyed
I like your website I will share this with friends
You have a great website. Keep up the good work.