FULL OOC schedule is available below.
Basketball Rutgers vs. Stonehill set for December 30th
- Thread starter Richie O
- Start date
did we have posters say this is the best ooc ever....they are blowing smoke...at best its basically similar to last year or slightly worse
I don't recall any saying that. I do remember people being happy about the MSU and Princeton adds. Well, not everyone was thrilled with Princeton. Divided camps on that one.
Some just love to complain. We have six new team members and with twenty Big games and five other big games we will once again be in the top thirty teams in strength of schedule out of about 360 teams. Give it a rest already.
You guys are acting like this is a new addition, Richie is just confirming the date. I think this was the first or second game that was confirmed.... months ago.
I must have missed that.
Let’s be honest , no one even knew Stonehill existed until the game was announced.
Not untrue lol.
Still think overall our schedule is a step up from last year. Not by much.
well Miami is better than Miss State
Temple and Princeton is a wash
RU is playing the same Wake and SHU
Gtown no better than Umass lowell
everybody else is pretty much a wash too
Temple and Princeton is a wash
RU is playing the same Wake and SHU
Gtown no better than Umass lowell
everybody else is pretty much a wash too
The numbers are based on last year's teams not how they are in 23-24. Who know what teams will be with over 1000 players changing teams, they can only guesstimate what they may look like or rank. Minnesota at #132, Penn St #150 in the B1G.
Princeton 22-23 #91, Torvik 23-24 #137
Bryant 22-23 #208, Torvik 23-24 #191
Georgetown 22-23 #219, Torvik 23-24 #158
St Peter's 22&23 #308, Torvik 23-24 #300
Wake Forest 22-23 #86, Torvik 23-24 #64
Seton Hall 22-23 #58, Torvik 23-24 #53
LIU 22-23 #361, Torvik 23-24 #349
Miss St 22-23 # 53, Torvik 23-24 #38
Stonehill 22-23 #331, Torvik 23-24 #344
Howard 22-23 #218, Torvik 23-24 #203
Boston U 22-23 #266, Torvik 23-24 #351
It is an improvement from 6 games in the 300s last year, because a good portion of teams are improved from last year. I expected 24-25 will have little to no games in the 300s if we can help it.
Princeton 22-23 #91, Torvik 23-24 #137
Bryant 22-23 #208, Torvik 23-24 #191
Georgetown 22-23 #219, Torvik 23-24 #158
St Peter's 22&23 #308, Torvik 23-24 #300
Wake Forest 22-23 #86, Torvik 23-24 #64
Seton Hall 22-23 #58, Torvik 23-24 #53
LIU 22-23 #361, Torvik 23-24 #349
Miss St 22-23 # 53, Torvik 23-24 #38
Stonehill 22-23 #331, Torvik 23-24 #344
Howard 22-23 #218, Torvik 23-24 #203
Boston U 22-23 #266, Torvik 23-24 #351
It is an improvement from 6 games in the 300s last year, because a good portion of teams are improved from last year. I expected 24-25 will have little to no games in the 300s if we can help it.
No one is buying them because of Stonehill.
Are we playing Michigan State at a neutral site … like maybe in Ann Arbor?
Are we playing Michigan State at a neutral site … like maybe in Ann Arbor?
No team is a NET killer if you beat them by enough points. Our non-conference SOS should be good enough that it won't be a huge weapon against us.
This is the first time I really looked at the OOC schedule, but it seems a bit crazy to play Princeton first game of year, no? Especially considering the injuries on this team.
Last year non-con avg NET was 206. Broken down by Quads, we had the following:
Q1: 1
Q2: 1
Q3: 3
Q4: 6
That's pretty bad.
Now this year, based on last year's ending NET, the avg slightly improves from 206 to 198. The Quad breakout is slightly better as well:
Q1: 1
Q2: 3
Q3: 0
Q4: 7
Lastly, if you base it on the Bart-Torvik projections for this upcoming season, avg ranking is 199. But the Quad breakout looks quite a bit better with 3 Quad 1 games (Miss St, Seton Hall, and Wake):
Q1: 3
Q2: 0
Q3: 2
Q4: 6
Seems like a fairly decent improvement to me.
Q1: 1
Q2: 1
Q3: 3
Q4: 6
That's pretty bad.
Now this year, based on last year's ending NET, the avg slightly improves from 206 to 198. The Quad breakout is slightly better as well:
Q1: 1
Q2: 3
Q3: 0
Q4: 7
Lastly, if you base it on the Bart-Torvik projections for this upcoming season, avg ranking is 199. But the Quad breakout looks quite a bit better with 3 Quad 1 games (Miss St, Seton Hall, and Wake):
Q1: 3
Q2: 0
Q3: 2
Q4: 6
Seems like a fairly decent improvement to me.
Wake and SHU are both road this year no?
On Edit: Someone beat me to it. Should have read whole thread before responding.
Nov 6, 1869 RU-PU football.
Nov 6, 2023 starts the NCAA basketball season
This is a bad schedule and things like “it’s a new team”, “people will still renew tickets”, “the NET rankings are based on last year” are weak attempts to mask it.
If it’s this bad of a schedule after the selection committee’s snub last year, the internal expectations might not be that high, or at least there might be some nerves. It’s understandable with all the roster turnover but it’s still disappointing for those who want to make the tourney this year.
If it’s this bad of a schedule after the selection committee’s snub last year, the internal expectations might not be that high, or at least there might be some nerves. It’s understandable with all the roster turnover but it’s still disappointing for those who want to make the tourney this year.
You can also look at it this way, Princeton will have a lot of new players as well and might be a better team later in the year than the beginning of the season, beat a good team before they become good. The NET(22-23), Ken Pom and Torvik could improve or decline over the season. These are just preseason projections nothing more or less. There is no way to predict chemistry.
Yawn to people complaining. Most teams play 6 or 7 quad 3 & 4 games.
At least this year we’re only playing three sub-300 teams, compared to six last year.
At least this year we’re only playing three sub-300 teams, compared to six last year.
Checking this statement for B1G teams last season:
Purdue: Q3 5-0, Q4 5-1
Indiana: Q3 3-0, Q4 6-0
Maryland: Q3 2-0, Q4 9-0
Michigan State: Q3 2-1, Q4 4-0
Illinois: Q3 3-0, Q4 7-0
Northwestern: Q3 2-0, Q4 7-0
Iowa: Q3 1-1, Q4 5-1
Rutgers: Q3 2-4, Q4 7-0
Penn State: Q3 4-0, Q4 6-0
Ohio State: Q3 N/A, Q4 6-1
Michigan: Q3 5-0, Q4 4-1
Wisconsin: Q3 2-1, Q4 5-0
Nebraska: Q3 1-0, Q4 7-1
Minnesota: Q3 1-2, Q4 5-0 (how did we lose that game....)
By quads, we don't look all that different from our peers. However, taking a deeper look...
Non-con SOS for B1G teams:
Michigan State 37 (always a TOUGH schedule for these guys)
Wisconsin 72
Nebraska 80
Purdue 81
Indiana 104
Illinois 116
Ohio State 120
Iowa 126
Michigan 145
Maryland 159
Penn State 278
Northwestern 295
Rutgers 314
Minnesota 348
That's sad. Second-worst nonconference schedule in the league, only behind a Minnesota team that knew they were going to stink. We could play this game better and get to a top 150 non-conference schedule without that much more risk of a bad loss.
Good job putting it all in perspective. I thought we would have learned a lesson from last year. I was wrong.
And we lost both Q1 and Q2 games if I'm correct.
It wasn't the OOC schedule. It was that we literally lost the only 2 OCC games of note.
If we lose SH, Wake and MSU and miss the tournament, it won't be because we scheduled Stonehill.
LOL, my exact words. Never heard of that one. Probably no worse than UMES, though...
I do not understand how entire schedule strength is not the important measurement.
The criteria changes on a whim. 4 teams from the MWC made the tournament and some bad ACC teams as well. They cannot possibly convince even the dumbest people that those teams made it due to their OOC schedule. It definitely wasn’t their overall SOS.
If you schedule only one Q1 and one Q2 games and the rest of your OOC is junk you put pressure on yourself to win both games.
Agreed. I think the concept of you can pick your nose, you can pick your friends, but you can’t pick your family gets applied. Teams can not pick and choose their conference schedules, thus the out of conference schedule gets scrutinized separately to see who did a team pick to play. I don’t agree with it, too much emphasis gets placed upon OOC as opposed to overall SOS, not too mention if someone like say, I don’t know, Gonzaga, does not make a game happen with RU then they miss an opportunity to upgrade the OOC. Richie mentioned this about Gonzaga on a pod this week. Rutgers has a long way to go to improve their OOC scheduling and who they choose to play, no doubt, but the OOC tends to get overemphasized for tourney selection purposes. Did Rutgers improve their OOC this year? Yes, a little bit improved, but similar to a student going from a C minus to a C.
There’s always excuses…new team members, home for Thanksgiving, blah, blah, blah. We’ve had some very solid teams the past few years and it never changes, even after it bit us in the ***.
I love Pike but he’s scared to death of playing good teams. Simple as that. We might as well just accept it. It won’t change.
SHU and Wake are at least away games this time around. Agree on everything else.
Obviously I’m not excited for this schedule, but it is a lot of new pieces. Hoping we’re healthier coming into the season than we were last year and can handle business. Otherwise we are setting ourselves up to get burned again.
Now if next season’s non-conference schedule still looks like this, then I will be annoyed.
When at seasons end and we are at the edge of the seats again on Selection Sunday we may point to this game.
Latest
-
01
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football Injury Report: Latest ahead of the Nebraska game
-
02
The Knight Report
Rutgers Women's Basketball Signing Day Central: 2027 Edition
-
03
The Knight Report Football
Three Nebraska Cornhuskers to watch versus Rutgers Football
-
04
The Knight Report Wrestling
Rutgers Wrestlers in the latest InterMat Rankings - Week Two
-
05
The Knight Report
Rutgers Basketball inks Top 20 recruiting class