2024-2025 Schedule Thread

[GMU79]

Pretty sure the handed out programs were stopped like at least 10 years ago. They have digital programs.

My guess is nobody wants them and they are a waste. Everything is digital these days considering it’s 2024.

I know some of you like paper tickets worth 2 dollars and paper programs printed with dot matrix printers, but I don’t see that being a big demand or interest to the majority.

And your point is?

 

[MasonFanatic]

Doesn’t even have to be a glossy color program. A one page printout might suffice. Are they too fiscally conservative to do that?

They do still print roster sheets like this, if you know where to look.

 

[GMUMiked]

I know you understand this b/c it’s been discussed many times here and other places, but until the NCAA reduces the weight of Margin of Victory in calculating NET, the metrics say you are better off scheduling teams you can run up the score on than taking games you could conceivably lose.

The Big 12 had the worst OOC strength of schedule rating in all of Division I last season, but benefited in NET because many of their teams consistently blew out their opponents by 20 or more.

Thus they entered conference play with most of their games classified as Q1. That inflated their teams’ resumes and maximized opportunities to gain at-large bids.

Other than MTEs and the occasional buy game, A-10 programs should be scheduling blowout wins as much as possible. Sucks for entertaining games but the math is the math until the formula changes.

This only makes sense if you actually blow out the crappy teams you schedule. We have a history of playing down to competition, blowouts are by no means guaranteed, even to sub 300 NET teams at home. Mason was losing in the second half to Loyola last season and they were one of the worst teams in all of college basketball last year. I don't think we should ever pass up opportunities to play at places like Maryland, Wisconsin, Kansas, Tennessee, and Auburn like the last few years and Duke next year.

 

[gmujim92]

This only makes sense if you actually blow out the crappy teams you schedule. We have a history of playing down to competition, blowouts are by no means guaranteed, even to sub 300 NET teams at home. Mason was losing in the second half to Loyola last season and they were one of the worst teams in all of college basketball last year. I don't think we should ever pass up opportunities to play at places like Maryland, Wisconsin, Kansas, Tennessee, and Auburn like the last few years and Duke next year.

I’m not saying you can’t take a buy game, you just shouldn’t schedule games like at Toledo and at Tulane — where you can very easily lose and there’s limited NET benefit even if you win.

The current system sucks, but if you schedule smartly and it turns out you’re not good enough to blow out a bunch of bad teams, you don’t deserve an at-large anyhow.

 

[tblack33]

I’m not saying you can’t take a buy game, you just shouldn’t schedule games like at Toledo and at Tulane — where you can very easily lose and there’s limited NET benefit even if you win.

The current system sucks, but if you schedule smartly and it turns out you’re not good enough to blow out a bunch of bad teams, you don’t deserve an at-large anyhow.

Unless the @ Toledo and Tulane turn into Q1s, which is totally possible for a true road game. The A10 isn’t deep enough to give teams enough Q1 and Q2 opportunities reliably every year to make real resumes for more than two bids, so OOC scheduling is still totally relevant, you just have to do it smartly. Look at Fordham a few years ago — ran through the A10, but their ooc sos was so a** because they played all Q3 and q4 games during the ooc so they weren’t even in the at large discussion. NET ranking does not equal tournament seeding, it’s main purpose is to compare teams across different conferences and levels of play. It is absolutely still more complicated than “beat the dog shit out of the blind and deaf sisters of the Chesapeake bay”. Teams at our level still need to schedule smart, especially for a team like Mason that is looking at a realistic chance of an at large next year. I’d hate to miss it because we didn’t schedule right and caught a few bad breaks during conference play / tournament.

 

[GMUgemini]

Given the abysmal MTEs we’ve been in, I’d advocate for taking two more buy road games against quality P5s (3 in total) to bolster the SOS and test the players against elite competition.

Here are our MTE games over the last four seasons

2023-2024: Jacksonville Classic

Cornell (campus game) NET 95
Charlotte NET 114
South Dakota State NET 135


2022-2023: Paradise Jam

Boston College NET 168
Belmont NET 118
Buffalo NET 193

2021-2022: Crossover Classic

Washington NET 113
Nevada NET 125
South Dakota State NET 67 (first decent game I’ve seen)

2020-2021: Paradise Jam
Queens University (non-D1)
Belmont NET 92
Howard NET 312

0 Q1 and 1 Q2 game in that entire slate of 12.

 

[MasonSAE4]

I’m not saying you can’t take a buy game, you just shouldn’t schedule games like at Toledo and at Tulane — where you can very easily lose and there’s limited NET benefit even if you win.

The current system sucks, but if you schedule smartly and it turns out you’re not good enough to blow out a bunch of bad teams, you don’t deserve an at-large anyhow.

There's gonna have to be some solidarity among teams in the 80-140 range moving forward when it comes to scheduling, but I don't see it happening. NET is indeed a garbage metric and with the P5 consolidating power in the post-NIL landscape, the mid-majors are gonna have to get creative in gaming the system.

 

[mkaufman1]

There's gonna have to be some solidarity among teams in the 80-140 range moving forward when it comes to scheduling, but I don't see it happening. NET is indeed a garbage metric and with the P5 consolidating power in the post-NIL landscape, the mid-majors are gonna have to get creative in gaming the system.

Nail on the head here. That is why the Power 5s schedule their "challenge" games against one another, mix in an MTE, some buy games and a solid MTE and largely end up fine. The "dead zone" teams of 80-140 NET can't do much but have to figure out a way to get through it.

I don't know what the solution is. Probably just trying to find the best MTE, a top 50 neutral game (possibly within the MTE), and playing 1-2 road buy games and try to win 1 is best solution but its probably not even practical and it may not mean much. Takes 2 to tango and irrelevancy doesn't help.

Some schools have easy outs (Dayton being Dayton, Joes playing Villanova every year) to help. My hope is that Mason can find a good h/h partner to replace Toledo. I personally would love Virginia Tech but who knows if that is a pipe dream.

 

[Pablo]

I personally would love Virginia Tech but who knows if that is a pipe dream.

Mason has played VT twice in men's basketball - https://hokiesports.com/sports/mens-basketball/opponent-history/george-mason-university/450

History from Dec 4, 1991 - Feb 10, 1992

Date	Season	Location	Score	Media
2/10/1992	1991-92	Away Fairfax, Va.	L 53 - 54
12/4/1991	1991-92	Home Blacksburg, Va.	W 76 - 64

 

[mkaufman1]

Mason has played VT twice in men's basketball - https://hokiesports.com/sports/mens-basketball/opponent-history/george-mason-university/450

History from Dec 4, 1991 - Feb 10, 1992

Date	Season	Location	Score	Media
2/10/1992	1991-92	Away Fairfax, Va.	L 53 - 54
12/4/1991	1991-92	Home Blacksburg, Va.	W 76 - 64

That’s good and all. Been a while. Hopefully they’d be interested.

 

[phoenix-arizona]

VA Tech couldn't stand to lose so they never scheduled Mason again. I'd love to see them or Georgetown as an in-state game.

 

[Verdad]

We gotta remember it is humans that ultimately make the selections with the Net only being a part of the equation. If we are at large worthy in the A10, our Net should be pretty good, and it would likely be road statement wins (until we get in better MTE's and can get neutral ones) that would be needed to put us over the top vs other bubble teams in similar NET company.

Plus games against the big boys are exciting and generate fan/community interest.

 

[mkaufman1]

VA Tech couldn't stand to lose so they never scheduled Mason again. I'd love to see them or Georgetown as an in-state game.

I only say VT would be more likely than Gtown because

1) local flavor with plenty of DC area alums to attend the game in Fairfax and its been years since we've matched up
2) They finished in the 60s in NET, Mason finished in the 90s. Projections would say nothing much to lose in a ranking level going forward. Not sure it would help them enough, but whatever.
3) They recently did play Dayton in a h/h, worked out fine for them. I know they won't play vcu after giving them a "neutral" game at the Coliseum like 10+ years ago, but that shouldn't matter for us.

Again, not saying its likely, happening or anything. It just dawned on me like a week ago that it could be a good potential match. I'd also argue UVA would be a nice match as well and Tony Bennett has been known to play in state teams. It takes two to tango, and if they aren't interested, they aren't interested.

Unfortunately Georgetown being a Big East program, having an ego, and the 100s of other reasons we've beaten on the boards, won't happen, ever.

 

[Verdad]

Absolutely criminal we didn't copy vcu and put the h/h clause in our coaches contract to get Providence to come to Fairfax.

 

[phoenix-arizona]

I like Georgetown but they need to get over themselves.

 

[GMUSSTN]

I like Georgetown but they need to get over themselves.

Unlikely

 

[GMUgemini]

Unlikely

They are a double whammy of being in a power conference and an elite institution. Zero chance they come down to Earth.

Wasn’t the vcu-VT neutral site game part of the VA governor’s challenge that lasted all of like 1-2 years (in other words, it was kind of mandated by the state). Assuming they got pushback from VT and UVA and said screw it.

 

[gmujim92]

We gotta remember it is humans that ultimately make the selections with the Net only being a part of the equation. If we are at large worthy in the A10, our Net should be pretty good, and it would likely be road statement wins (until we get in better MTE's and can get neutral ones) that would be needed to put us over the top vs other bubble teams in similar NET company.

Plus games against the big boys are exciting and generate fan/community interest.

You know what is more exciting and generates more fan/community interest? Making the NCAA tournament.

 

[Verdad]

You know what is more exciting and generates more fan/community interest? Making the NCAA tournament.

Yes - beating good teams is a prerequisite to making the NCAAT. Increasing fan/community interest would also lead to increased attendance, money and home court advantage.

 

[mkaufman1]

They are a double whammy of being in a power conference and an elite institution. Zero chance they come down to Earth.

Wasn’t the vcu-VT neutral site game part of the VA governor’s challenge that lasted all of like 1-2 years (in other words, it was kind of mandated by the state). Assuming they got pushback from VT and UVA and said screw it.

That is correct. Somehow they agreed to do a neutral game basically on the vcu campus, lol.

Of course we're talking like 10+ years ago with different staff etc, so who knows if the grudge is still there.

I am just throwing out the suggestion because I thought it had a chance and sounded practical.