The debate surrounding college basketball scheduling at the NCAA Tournament has gotten a little one-sided in recent weeks thanks to Miami (OH) and other mid-majors.
The question has been a hot topic that grew further as Miami (OH) moved closer to March Madness. For some programs, the complaint is familiar: Power conference teams avoid scheduling such teams for fear of a loss that could hurt their postseason resume.
Is Texas the new Cinderella? The Longhorns’ shocking Gonzaga has us confused as to how to describe NCAA Tournament upsets
But that argument only goes so far when you hear from coaches like Purdue’s Matt Painter and Alabama’s Nate Oats.
There are only so many non-conference games available. Between marquee events like the Maui Invitational and existing conference commitments, power-four programs have limited flexibility when building their schedules. At least according to some.
And not all medium opponents help.
With teams across leagues like the Sun Belt, MAC, AAC and Mountain West, finding the right matchup — one that bolsters a team’s NET ranking and strength of schedule — isn’t easy.
Slipper didn’t fit: Tennessee overpowers Miami (OH) in March Madness Rout, but RedHawks won’t be forgotten
Painter made that clear when he responded to comments from Miami (OH) coach Travis Steele, who suggested that power conference teams “pop” the mid-majors.
“If he was in my position, you’re going to play 11 non-conference games. Next year it’s going to go to 12. And then we play 6 high-major games and we play 5 mid-major teams,” Painter explained. “So when they say they don’t play mid-majors, we played 5 mid-majors this year. But if he was in our position, he’d be doing the same thing we’re doing.”
Whew, now that’s a strong bet, and he actually makes a valid point about the number of games his Boilermakers can actually play. Throw in the fact that every year whether a team is good enough to snag them a ‘Buy Game’ while also not ruining your SOS rankings changes based on the quality of those teams.
But when it comes to “dumbing down,” as some mid-major coaches have hinted at over the past few weeks, the current schedule sometimes sees some, not all, P-4 schools like Purdue and Alabama inviting the game.
“We’ve played Akron. We’ve played Kent State. We’ve played Oakland. We’ve played mid-major, but everybody plays mid-major,” Painter pointed out. “Every high major plays middle major. They just say they don’t play them. And it’s really a backhanded compliment that they don’t play them. But we’ve proven ourselves.
“The guy in Miami of Ohio says ‘nobody wants to play us,’ well Akron has been the best team in the league. Kent State has been the best team in the league. We played them.”
Nate Oats came from a mid-sized (Buffalo) cast shadow
The question of how teams put together their schedules won’t go away anytime soon.
Many times coaches prefer schedules to be completed months before the season actually starts. In the case of Miami (OH), Steele made it known on numerous occasions that his team was waiting until October to sign contracts with schools that could fill their schedule.
Unable to find opponents at the power-4 level, the RedHawks ended up agreeing to play a pair of NAIA teams. It obviously didn’t help their strength plan and it haunted them for much of this season.
But just because some schools are struggling doesn’t mean there’s a nationwide problem in college basketball given the number of teams looking for ‘buy games’ or tougher opponents to help their SOS.
So when asked Saturday about his thoughts, Alabama’s Oats didn’t seem to have much sympathy for a school like Miami (OH).
“The only mid-major schools we turned down are the ones that aren’t good enough. When we look at our ‘buy’ games, they have to be good enough because I don’t want to play Quad 4 games,” Oats said. “For me, I want to play really well.
“I think if you call around, some of the mid-major schools that we’re talking about that aren’t able to find games have played multiple non-Division I games. I’m not sure how hard you tried if you play three non-Division I games.”
I think it’s fair to say that power-four coaches are tired of hearing about the ‘duking’ component of college basketball.
