2019-20 nonconference schedules

[triaddukefan]

I just saw Clemson's schedule on Twitter....... tougher than Miss State's

 

[UConnCat]

It was simply an observation regarding the OOC and conference schedules of SC and UConn.

It was more than that. The topic was MSSU's non-conference schedule and your response was to compare SC and UConn. The "whataboutism" aside, I was simply pointing out that what you see as an advantage for UConn has been seen as a disadvantage by others during the past 3 years. Again, it's hard to keep up.

 

[nwhoopfan]

The final non-conference schedule isn’t complete but looking at who we have so far we will play Baylor, UConn, and Maryland (three top 5 teams). Also will have Duke, Clemson, Purdue, Indiana, Wash St., South Dakota, Dayton, App St., and Alabama St.

Wow, Washington St. has Baylor and South Carolina on their OOC schedule. They are going to be taking some lumps early in the year. New coach there is scheduling aggressively.

 

[militarydog]

It was more than that. The topic was MSSU's non-conference schedule and your response was to compare SC and UConn. The "whataboutism" aside, I was simply pointing out that what you see as an advantage for UConn has been seen as a disadvantage by others during the past 3 years. Again, it's hard to keep up.

I was responding to SCspurs’ post that was specifically referencing SC and UConn’s schedules. I added the portion regarding MSU’s schedule to voice my disappointment in their OOC schedule. Again, there was no whataboutism, slight or anything else inferred.

 

[militarydog]

Dawn is NEVER afraid tough competition. That is why I love her. She models her team after the type of player she was in College. The final non-conference schedule isn’t complete but looking at who we have so far we will play Baylor, UConn, and Maryland (three top 5 teams). Also will have Duke, Clemson, Purdue, Indiana, Wash St., South Dakota, Dayton, App St., and Alabama St. add in two more unknown teams and that’s pretty tough for a young team. But I expect that it will pay huge dividends in the SEC as well as the tournament playing tough teams early.

I didn’t realize until I looked again at the “way too early” preseason Top 25 that at first glance the SEC and ACC were tied with the most top 25 teams.

 

[billybud]

FSU played last year with only 9...the top three scorers return for senior year....plus a core of returning players and a couple of freshman McDonald's AA's to add in for playing time.

They have a chance to get to the Sixteen..

 

[SimpleDawg]

Yikes.... omgosh. That's bad.

Anyways...... not sure if this has been said, but it's been confirmed that we tried extremely hard to schedule UConn or Louisville, but there's nobody that wanted to play except Oregon and Texas. Nobody wants to play dog litter, but it's not easy to play any top 10 teams when none wants to play.

Anyways... I'm hoping we pick up 2 RPI top 15 wins in the Vancouver showdown. And I'm hoping A&M and SC both stay top 10 teams. And Tennessee makes an improvement. Otherwise we'll get absolutely tarred on this board for our schedule. But if all things go right and in line, we might play up to 5 or 6 overall top 15 teams. And btw, I'm not saying the Marquette game this year is a tough game at all, since they just lost their entire starting lineup. Obviously I'm pointing to Vancouver and A&M and SC and one more of those in the SEC championship game. And maybe Tennessee.

And like I said.... it is what it is, but I'll take a #2 or #3 seed this year if our schedule is weak. Because.... like....after that episode in Portland last year, I really don't care anymore about what seed we get. I think homecourt matters more than seeding and this year the Greenville spot is the closest location, and that's hoping South Carolina finishes worse than us, so we can win that location.

...

 

[SimpleDawg]

Love Vic and what he has done with MSU. They have been one of the top programs the last few years (2 final fours and elite 8). They should not be playing OOC schedules like this. This is something I would expect Vandy, Florida or Ole Miss to play....

I should just put this out there, but we tried REALLY hard to schedule top names, but it's much easier for teams who already had a contract worked out years before the schedule's release. I'll think we'll need to work out some future contracts by the end of this year against top teams... one that both sides can agree on.

But like I said, maybe the SEC won't suck this year and we can get a lot of good wins in conference. And that we play Stanford and another top 10 team in Vancouver this year. I'm sure Notre Dame or Louisville or some other top ACC team will go to Vancouver. Last year SC, Notre Dame, and Oregon State were there. They'll probably be 3 top 10 teams there this year.


...

 

[SCspur]

Yikes.... omgosh. That's bad.

Anyways. not sure if this has been said, but it's been confirmed that we tried extremely hard to schedule UConn or Louisville, but there's nobody that wanted to play except Oregon and Texas. Nobody wants to play dog litter, but it's not easy to play any top 10 teams when none wants to play.

Anyways... I'm hoping we pick up 2 RPI top 15 wins in the Vancouver showdown. And I'm hoping A&M and SC both stay top 10 teams. And Tennessee makes an improvement. Otherwise we'll get absolutely tarred on this board for our schedule. But if all things go right and in line, we might play up to 5 or 6 overall top 15 teams. And btw, I'm not saying the Marquette game this year is a tough game at all, since they just lost their entire starting lineup. Obviously I'm pointing to Vancouver and A&M and SC and one more of those in the SEC championship game. And maybe Tennessee.

And like I said.... it is what it is, but I'll take a #2 or #3 seed this year if our schedule is weak. Because.... like....after that episode in Portland last year, I really don't care anymore about what seed we get. I think homecourt matters more than seeding and this year the Greenville spot is the closest location, and that's hoping South Carolina finishes worse than us, so we can win that location.

...

I highly doubt Miss St finish as a top 3 seed with that schedule. Even if they win 25+ games i think it’ll be hard for the committee to place them over another team with a slightly worst record but better SOS. They’ll desperately need to win the Vancouver Showcase to pick up those top 10 wins and probably can’t afford to lose many SEC games IMO. It is definitely tough to schedule top teams because some are already tied into contracts but that doesn’t mean you have to go and load up on a bunch of cupcakes. Their are teams like UCLA, Oregon St, NC St, Florida St for example that are usually highly ranked and always have pretty good RPI’s so I can’t really buy the excuse that “no one wants to play us”. I kind of expected better from Vic especially since he wants his program to be seen as “elite”.

 

[bballnut90]

I highly doubt Miss St finish as a top 3 seed with that schedule. Even if they win 25+ games i think it’ll be hard for the committee to place them over another team with a slightly worst record but better SOS. They’ll desperately need to win the Vancouver Showcase to pick up those top 10 wins and probably can’t afford to lose many SEC games IMO. It is definitely tough to schedule top teams because some are already tied into contracts but that doesn’t mean you have to go and load up on a bunch of cupcakes. Their are teams like UCLA, Oregon St, NC St, Florida St for example that are usually highly ranked and always have pretty good RPI’s so I can’t really buy the excuse that “no one wants to play us”. I kind of expected better from Vic especially since he wants his program to be seen as “elite”.

I think that's a little dramatic. Mississippi State will be fine. Their OOC is laughable but SEC projects to be strong this year with Tennessee, South Carolina, A&M and Kentucky all being potential top 20 teams.
Maryland earned a 3 seed last year despite having only one good win the entire season (against a South Carolina team that was dreadful in the first part of the year) and a 66 overall SOS with 4 losses. Mississippi State can easily do better than that and should have a better SOS than Maryland did last year.

 

[SimpleDawg]

I highly doubt Miss St finish as a top 3 seed with that schedule. Even if they win 25+ games i think it’ll be hard for the committee to place them over another team with a slightly worst record but better SOS. They’ll desperately need to win the Vancouver Showcase to pick up those top 10 wins and probably can’t afford to lose many SEC games IMO. It is definitely tough to schedule top teams because some are already tied into contracts but that doesn’t mean you have to go and load up on a bunch of cupcakes. Their are teams like UCLA, Oregon St, NC St, Florida St for example that are usually highly ranked and always have pretty good RPI’s so I can’t really buy the excuse that “no one wants to play us”. I kind of expected better from Vic especially since he wants his program to be seen as “elite”.

It was confirmed by our insiders that we tried really hard to schedule some top teams. There's like 15 or so of those teams.... if none of them end up working out for one reason or another except Oregon, I'm not sure if you can see or not that there aren't many other teams left to try to call.

I don't think Vic cares if his team is seen as elite, but I do know that he doesn't wanna play a lot of bad teams. I don't either; nobody does.

And like I said.........there could potentially be a lot of great teams we play on our schedule when it's all said and done. And....we've already been through this who's gonna be better this year SC or MSU argument many times before, and I still don't understand your overconfidence in South Carolina. You're not even guaranteed Greensville. You have to beat us out for that spot first of all. So doubting we'll be a top 3 seed sounds a bit mildly amusing to me.

...

 

[SCspur]

I think that's a little dramatic. Mississippi State will be fine. Their OOC is laughable but SEC projects to be strong this year with Tennessee, South Carolina, A&M and Kentucky all being potential top 20 teams.
Maryland earned a 3 seed last year despite having only one good win the entire season (against a South Carolina team that was dreadful in the first part of the year) and a 66 overall SOS with 4 losses. Mississippi State can easily do better than that and should have a better SOS than Maryland did last year.

Yes but Maryland’s Conference RPI was higher than the SEC’s last year. Miss St will now have to depend on the SEC being stronger this year to get a higher seeding. Not sure if you were aware but none of those teams on their schedule this year(outside of West Virginia & Marquette who will be considerably weaker) were top 150 in SOS last year and I don’t think they will be this year either. Just thinking back to Maryland in 2017 they had a very good team but SOS doomed them to a lower seeding and bad regional. The same might be said for Miss St this year.

 

[Plebe]

I highly doubt Miss St finish as a top 3 seed with that schedule. Even if they win 25+ games i think it’ll be hard for the committee to place them over another team with a slightly worst record but better SOS. They’ll desperately need to win the Vancouver Showcase to pick up those top 10 wins and probably can’t afford to lose many SEC games IMO.

I don't agree. Last year they got a 1 seed despite beating no one better than South Carolina and Marquette, and despite losing to Missouri at home.

 

[SCspur]

It was confirmed by our insiders that we tried really hard to schedule some top teams. There's like 15 or so of those teams.... if none of them end up working out for one reason or another except Oregon, I'm not sure if you can see or not that there aren't many other teams left to try to call.

I don't think Vic cares if his team is seen as elite, but I do know that he doesn't wanna play a lot of bad teams. I don't either; nobody does.

And like I said....there could potentially be a lot of great teams we play on our schedule when it's all said and done. And....we've already been through this who's gonna be better this year SC or MSU argument many times before, and I still don't understand your overconfidence in South Carolina. You're not even guaranteed Greensville. You have to beat us out for that spot first of all. So doubting we'll be a top 3 seed sounds a bit mildly amusing to me.

...

Well for starters I never said or implied SC would be better than Miss St in my previous post so I’m not sure where that came from. I was just letting you know that theirs no excuse to loading up on cupcakes when their are tons of other teams to play. Year after year Miss St schedule is less than average and all we see is excuses...

Lastly why wouldn’t I be confident in the team I root for? I have every right to feel like SC will be better than Miss St next year in the same way you think Miss St will be a 2020-21 Super team.... also Miss St is not standing in the way of SC being seeded in Greenville. Just because you won the tourney last year doesn’t mean you own that court remember SC leads the nation in attendance for a reason. Home court advantage is ours.

 

[SCspur]

I don't agree. Last year they got a 1 seed despite beating no one better than South Carolina and Marquette, and despite losing to Missouri at home.

That speaks to the inconsistency of the committees selection process. Maryland also had a similar record and year in 2017 but got placed a 3 seed in the tournament due to a weak schedule. I also don’t this Miss St will be as good as they were last year so it’s possible that they could run the table OOC and lose a couple SEC games but shouldn’t be awarded a higher seed because of it IMO.

 

[bballnut90]

Yes but Maryland’s Conference RPI was higher than the SEC’s last year. Miss St will now have to depend on the SEC being stronger this year to get a higher seeding. Not sure if you were aware but none of those teams on their schedule this year(outside of West Virginia & Marquette who will be considerably weaker) were top 150 in SOS last year and I don’t think they will be this year either. Just thinking back to Maryland in 2017 they had a very good team but SOS doomed them to a lower seeding and bad regional. The same might be said for Miss St this year.

Fair but highly doubting them as a 3 is a stretch. All of SC, Kentucky, A&M and Tennessee should be better this year which will boost their RPI. If Mississippi State enters the tournament with 3-4 losses (which isn't out of the realm of possibilities given their schedule) they'll be top 3 seed. I don't think many people expect that Mississippi State will be out of the top 10-12 teams next year.

 

[bballnut90]

That speaks to the inconsistency of the committees selection process. Maryland also had a similar record and year in 2017 but got placed a 3 seed in the tournament due to a weak schedule. I also don’t this Miss St will be as good as they were last year so it’s possible that they could run the table OOC and lose a couple SEC games but shouldn’t be awarded a higher seed because of it IMO.

Maryland was 16 RPI that year with a 74 RPI, Mississippi State was 8 RPI a year ago with 43 SOS. Maryland also went on to lose by 14 to a 10 seed in the Sweet 16. Not a good comparison.

 

[SimpleDawg]

Well for starters I never said or implied SC would be better than Miss St in my previous post so I’m not sure where that came from. I was just letting you know that theirs no excuse to loading up on cupcakes when their are tons of other teams to play. Year after year Miss St schedule is less than average and all we see is excuses...

Lastly why wouldn’t I be confident in the team I root for? I have every right to feel like SC will be better than Miss St next year in the same way you think Miss St will be a 2020-21 Super team.... also Miss St is not standing in the way of SC being seeded in Greenville. Just because you won the tourney last year doesn’t mean you own that court remember SC leads the nation in attendance for a reason. Home court advantage is ours.

And I say it is what it is at this point.

I definitely don't think you're guaranteed Greenville. Don't know if you would have played in Greenville last year, and Mississippi State would've probably been the #1 seed there last year if the locations last year was this year's.

Attendance is one thing but it's not everything. I think you have to at least be a #1 or #2 seed to be playing in Greenville and I would definitely believe we are your biggest threat for that spot. Vic could easily finish higher in the standings than SC this year and be a higher overall ranked team which would give us the argument over you in Greenville.

Not saying you can't be overconfident in your team, but I'm just wondering if you realize that MSU and SC are seen as practically equal going into the year with about the same level of talent. I'm just surprised you don't see us as, once again, your main threat.

..

 

[MSUFan2003]

I think the only reason State got that 1 seed was winning the SEC. That was the only argument I could see for it.

 

[SimpleDawg]

I think the only reason State got that 1 seed was winning the SEC. That was the only argument I could see for it.

Or... there was no one else with a more impressive resume.

 

[bballnut90]

It was confirmed by our insiders that we tried really hard to schedule some top teams. There's like 15 or so of those teams.... if none of them end up working out for one reason or another except Oregon, I'm not sure if you can see or not that there aren't many other teams left to try to call.

I don't think Vic cares if his team is seen as elite, but I do know that he doesn't wanna play a lot of bad teams. I don't either; nobody does.

And like I said....there could potentially be a lot of great teams we play on our schedule when it's all said and done. And....we've already been through this who's gonna be better this year SC or MSU argument many times before, and I still don't understand your overconfidence in South Carolina. You're not even guaranteed Greensville. You have to beat us out for that spot first of all. So doubting we'll be a top 3 seed sounds a bit mildly amusing to me.

...

The problem is that even if they couldn't get top 15 teams, why didn't they go after teams in the 20-100 RPI range? Beating up on a bunch of bottom feeders doesn't help the team improve or boost up their resume.

And fair or not, South Carolina will get Greenville over Mississippi State regardless of how teams finish. It's a 1.5 hour drive from Columbia and SC has a massive fan base that will fill up the arena. Mississippi State is a 6.5 hour drive from there. It's like how Oregon was given the Portland regional a year ago as a 2 seed even though Stanford deserved the 2 seed there over the Ducks.

 

[SimpleDawg]

The problem is that even if they couldn't get top 15 teams, why didn't they go after teams in the 20-100 RPI range? Beating up on a bunch of bottom feeders doesn't help the team improve or boost up their resume.

And fair or not, South Carolina will get Greenville over Mississippi State regardless of how teams finish. It's a 1.5 hour drive from Columbia and SC has a massive fan base that will fill up the arena. Mississippi State is a 6.5 hour drive from there. It's like how Oregon was given the Portland regional a year ago as a 2 seed even though Stanford deserved the 2 seed there over the Ducks.

I see the argument, but I don't think you could finalize things in July. Just like some people are finalizing the POY race down to Ionescu and Cox and finalizing Oregon and Baylor as the top 2 teams, same logic applies that you can't just assume SC will go to Greenville before games are even played.

I do think the only way we'll get Greenville is if we're a #1 seed. I know that's not in line with most people's predictions right now, but it's still a shot given we've been #1 for 2 straight years. That's probably the only scenario that sends SC somewhere else. Even though I do agree, SC probably has an 80% chance to play in Greenville.

I agree with that Oregon suggestion..... and they are getting huge gifts 2 years in a row with regionals being in Portland. Though I don't agree that Stanford deserved it more last year. I think Oregon looked like the more impressive team overall despite some questionable games in the end and the Pac-12 title game defeat.

And I agree on your argument about the bottom feeders, though that's only talk in November or December. By the time conference games comes around, we'll be seen by how we play against Stanford and the Vancouver teams and vs SC and A&M, not how we do against Jackson State.

..

 

[nwhoopfan]

It's like how Oregon was given the Portland regional a year ago as a 2 seed even though Stanford deserved the 2 seed there over the Ducks.

"Deserved" seems a bit strong. Teams split 2 head to head match ups, Ducks absolutely destroyed them on The Farm (worst home loss in Tara's career). Oregon won the conference regular season. Conference tourneys are overvalued I think. Stanford probably had a better OOC schedule but it's not like Oregon's was bad.

 

[bballnut90]

I think the only reason State got that 1 seed was winning the SEC. That was the only argument I could see for it.

There were 3-4 teams in the mix but no one really stood out.

Louisville based on traditional formulas looked the strongest but was coming off a game where they were absolutely slaughtered by Notre Dame. Eye test definitely said they weren't a #1 seed.

Oregon was also floundering entering the post season (finishing the year 5-3) and came off a rough loss to Stanford.

Stanford finished strong but had 4 pretty significant losses earlier in the year.

Mississippi State had a close road loss to Oregon early in the year and 1 bad home loss to Missouri but dominated the rest of their schedule. It was a weak schedule, but they had the least wrong with their resume and eye test said they absolutely looked like a top 4 team entering the tournament.


Regional sites were also very significant in deciding seeds, probably more so than actual resumes of the teams above.
-The top 3 seeds were locks for #1 spots with UCONN going to Albany regardless, Notre Dame to Chicago and Baylor going to North Carolina.
-Oregon was a lock (deserved or not) to play in Portland, but they didn't have the resume for a #1 seed.
-Stanford wasn't going to Portland due to Oregon being there and also playing in the PAC


The leaves Louisville and Mississippi State for the last 1 seed. Call it a toss up or even favor Louisville, but watching Louisville lose by 20 vs. Mississippi State win by 29 the same day likely pushed Mississippi State into Oregon.

Honestly it was a lose-lose for each of Stanford, Louisville and Mississippi State since they were going on the road for an Elite 8 battle. People like to cling to Mississippi State being undeserving of a 1 or saying it was given due to favoritism, but there wasn't an obvious option ahead of them.

 

[bballnut90]

"Deserved" seems a bit strong. Teams split 2 head to head match ups, Ducks absolutely destroyed them on The Farm (worst home loss in Tara's career). Oregon won the conference regular season. Conference tourneys are overvalued I think. Stanford probably had a better OOC schedule but it's not like Oregon's was bad.

Oregon went 5-3 entering the tournament last year, Stanford had won 9 straight. Both had almost identical records, but Stanford had a slightly higher RPI and SOS. Close, but they were still ahead and Stanford won the most recent matchup. They weren't light years ahead of Oregon, but based on the body of work they deserved to be in Oregon over the Ducks.

The original point I was trying to make was that no one ever considered the option of putting Stanford in Portland and moving Oregon to a different regional even if Stanford did have a stronger resume (which they did).

 

[Plebe]

That speaks to the inconsistency of the committees selection process. Maryland also had a similar record and year in 2017 but got placed a 3 seed in the tournament due to a weak schedule. I also don’t this Miss St will be as good as they were last year so it’s possible that they could run the table OOC and lose a couple SEC games but shouldn’t be awarded a higher seed because of it IMO.

The committee isn't always consistent but Maryland in 2017 had a weaker resume than Miss St in 2019. Yes, Maryland 17's was that bad. MSU at least had multiple top-25 wins (SC x2, TAMU, Marquette, KY). Maryland 17 had only one.

 

[bballnut90]

I see the argument, but I don't think you could finalize things in July. Just like some people are finalizing the POY race down to Ionescu and Cox and finalizing Oregon and Baylor as the top 2 teams, same logic applies that you can't just assume SC will go to Greenville before games are even played.

I do think the only way we'll get Greenville is if we're a #1 seed. I know that's not in line with most people's predictions right now, but it's still a shot given we've been #1 for 2 straight years. That's probably the only scenario that sends SC somewhere else. Even though I do agree, SC probably has an 80% chance to play in Greenville.

I agree with that Oregon suggestion..... and they are getting huge gifts 2 years in a row with regionals being in Portland. Though I don't agree that Stanford deserved it more last year. I think Oregon looked like the more impressive team overall despite some questionable games in the end and the Pac-12 title game defeat.

And I agree on your argument about the bottom feeders, though that's only talk in November or December. By the time conference games comes around, we'll be seen by how we play against Stanford and the Vancouver teams and vs SC and A&M, not how we do against Jackson State.

..

Obviously the season has to play out, but unless SC is unexpectedly horrible or Mississippi State is amazing I don't see it happening. The same can be said about Oregon not going to Portland....it's kind of on par with that even though everyone has Oregon locked in to that location before the season starts.

Plus for Mississippi State, travel time from Starkville to Greenville is about the same as it is to Dallas, so there isn't a big location preference between the two for MSU.

 

[MSUFan2003]

I just don't buy that other teams won't come play us. Maybe I don't understand how this all works, but does that seem like a legitimate reason?

 

[bballnut90]

I just don't buy that other teams won't come play us. Maybe I don't understand how this all works, but does that seem like a legitimate reason?

I agree. Even if it isn't top 20 teams, they should be targeting more teams with top 100 RPIs that may present more of a challenge than bottom feeder D1 schools.

 

[SimpleDawg]

@bballnut90

I agree with most of what you're saying. Louisville probably deserved to be over us (and they were). They shouldn't be penalized that harshly for one bad game. Although a really bad game and the fact that anyone could just say "we'll be #1 anyways, it's against Notre Dame win or lose, why bother playing at all." Still, despite that argument, it really was just one bad game by them and their highs were higher than ours last year. However, I think the fact that UConn had only 4 wins over teams seeded 8 or higher vs ours having 7 is a legitimate argument for putting us over UConn.

Though I agree with you about Oregon and Stanford. And now that you bring it up, I do see how similar their final resumes looked, though based on my eye test I thought Oregon was overall the better team. That game at the Farm was too big of a disaster for Stanford to erase from your eyes even though Stanford boasted some huge wins during the year: in the Pac-12 conference title game and against the #1 overall team.

And no arguments about your discussion on locations. Playing in Dallas is probably what most people are thinking right now, and I don't mind playing there but if Vic could reload his team up as well as he did last year, and grab some key wins on our schedule, and get into that conversation for being a #1 seed, I do think Greenville is definitely possible for us. Those are the two most realistic destinations - hoping dearly we don't get Portland again.

...