2019-20 Schedule (top post is current)

[ace]

They need to make that happen. Would be a great pairing for both conferences.

Agreed. The travel would be rough, but URI- as a top A10 team- would pretty much be guaranteed a solid match-up.


Interesting idea but could lead to some rough looking early season games:

[Rhody83]

P5 working together to squeeze other conferences out of the at large bids.

[RF1]

It would be in the best interests of the A-10, AAC, and MWC to develop some sort of scheduling arrangement with member teams playing a certain number of games versus one another. The P5 and Big East are squeezing them out with their partnerships and expanded conference schedules.

[Rhody83]

It would be in the best interests of the A-10, AAC, and MWC to develop some sort of scheduling arrangement with member teams playing a certain number of games versus one another. The P5 and Big East are squeezing them out with their partnerships and expanded conference schedules.

The AAC thinks they are in the Power. At their media day the press conference backdrop had Power6 all over it. I am assuming they are making a push to be added to the Power5. You can see it on screen in the right of this pic.

[Rhode_Island_Red]

It would be in the best interests of the A-10, AAC, and MWC to develop some sort of scheduling arrangement with member teams playing a certain number of games versus one another. The P5 and Big East are squeezing them out with their partnerships and expanded conference schedules.

The AAC thinks they are in the Power. At their media day the press conference backdrop had Power6 all over it. I am assuming they are making a push to be added to the Power5. You can see it on screen in the right of this pic.

No doubt that when the next and final wave if expansion hits, some schools from the AFC or whatever the hell they call it might be promoted to the cartel. But the whole league? Ha! The cartel exists to make sure no other leagues get into the cartel.

And the Leg-humpers' joke of a football program will forever hemorrhage millions more.

[Rhode_Island_Red]

It would be in the best interests of the A-10, AAC, and MWC to develop some sort of scheduling arrangement with member teams playing a certain number of games versus one another. The P5 and Big East are squeezing them out with their partnerships and expanded conference schedules.

The AAC thinks they are in the Power. At their media day the press conference backdrop had Power6 all over it. I am assuming they are making a push to be added to the Power5. You can see it on screen in the right of this pic.

No doubt that when the next and final wave if expansion hits, some schools from the AFC or whatever the hell they call it might be promoted to the cartel. But the whole league? Ha! The cartel exists to make sure no other leagues get into the cartel.

And the Leg-humpers' joke of a football program will forever hemorrhage millions more.

[RF1]

Since the AAC was first formed, it is actually behind the A-10 in the number of NCAA bids.

[NHRamFan]

It would be in the best interests of the A-10, AAC, and MWC to develop some sort of scheduling arrangement with member teams playing a certain number of games versus one another. The P5 and Big East are squeezing them out with their partnerships and expanded conference schedules.

The AAC thinks they are in the Power. At their media day the press conference backdrop had Power6 all over it. I am assuming they are making a push to be added to the Power5. You can see it on screen in the right of this pic.

[/quote

Given the success of Donny Dollhands, they must be subscribing to the practice of "if you say it often enough, it becomes truth," regardless of overwhelming facts. The AAC is no more a Power conference than the A-10, MWC, etc. There ARE teams that can elevate, but this assumes there is a P5 conference interested in taking them. I believe the better teams from conferences 6 through 8 or 9 would do well to band together....and soon. That is where your P6 will come from.

[Rhody83]

You can’t decide by yourself that your conference is P6. At least with any credibility.
In basketball it s already the P5 + Big East. AAC would have to get in line behind that.

I think the AAC is currently better than the A10 in basketball. I don’t rhink they are the six best football conference though.

It would be great if the top conferences after the P5 organized a scheduling arrangement where the top 4 in each conference played against each other. It would require scheduling flexibility. I recall reading that two conferences had worked out the legistics to do it.
This would help the power ratings for the schools with NCAA hopes.

[reef]

DH standing next to a legend

[URI2006_Andy]

The “second tier conferences” need to find creative ways to boost their schedules. And that may mean agreeing to some type of inter-conference flex schedule which I think is what Rhody83 was suggesting.

The Big East and Big 12 are a combined 4-15 in the NCAAs vs the A10, AAC, MVC, MWC and WCC. (Last 5 years).

The Big 10 is not much better at 6-7.

[Rhode_Island_Red]

DH standing next to a legend

Storrs, Conn., where the men are men and the women are champions.

[DC_Rams]

Providence website has Rhody game listed to start at 5pm.

[wpbrown8267]

Providence website has Rhody game listed to start at 5pm.

it's on FS1 for anyone that can't make it.

[TruePoint]

[bigappleram]

This is a great development. So would we really have Alabama, Western Kentucky and PC all at the Ryan next year? That’s building towards a great home slate with a Rhody team that should be really good.

[RhowdyRam02]

Not only will we have that great beginning of a home schedule, the schedule as a whole looks tough and interesting

[RF1]

Solid series versus a typically good non P5 school.

The Hilltoppers have one of the best basketball traditions of all teams outside the top ten conferences. They have appeared in the NCAA Tournament 23 times and have a combined record of 19–24.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_K ... basketball

[RamStock]

This is setting up as a very strong schedule. Add a tournament for 2-3 games and maybe 3 more home games and it sets up very nice. They are getting on top of this early which is nice.

[adam914]

Do the right thing and make the first year URI at San Diego State!

[RF1]

Interesting read on OOC scheduling for A-10 teams that came out of media day yesterday:

Atlantic 10 continues to remain relevant even with the opportunity gap for the NCAA Tournament widening
Commissioner Bernadette McGlade's message to her coaches: Take chances and schedule aggressively
Gary Parrish 10/19/18
https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... 4VsE2TZVA0

[reef]

Nice job securing a home and home with W Ky that's usually a team with a fairly decent RPI

[RhodyKyle]

A good high RPI team now that NET is the metric.

[ace]

Nice to get the first one at home when you’re dealing with a guy like Stansbury.

[ace]

This is a great development. So would we really have Alabama, Western Kentucky and PC all at the Ryan next year? That’s building towards a great home slate with a Rhody team that should be really good.

Package some of those game and the attendance numbers will be outstanding. I don’t want to look ahead, but Dowtin as a senior could lead a phenomenal team.

[RF1]

Anyone know what tournament URI will participate in for the 2019-20 season. Rothstein has been posting the lineups of several tourneys on twitter in the last few days. No URI in any of them.

[RamStock]

Anyone know what tournament URI will participate in for the 2019-20 season. Rothstein has been posting the lineups of several tourneys on twitter in the last few days. No URI in any of them.

They may not end up in a tournament or if they do it would probably be a 2 game tourney, because they have 3 strong home games with Western Kentucky, PC and Alabama and potentially 4 road games with Brown, Florida Gulf Coast, West Virginia and Middle Tennessee State. Where they stand with the schedule is probably filling it out with at least 2/3 home games with a mid major and a couple easier games in the mold of Bryant/Maine. It doesn’t leave many games left. I hope they do get in a tourney, because they have potential to showcase a very good team next year.

[RF1]

They may not end up in a tournament or if they do it would probably be a 2 game tourney, because they have 3 strong home games with Western Kentucky, PC and Alabama and potentially 4 road games with Brown, Florida Gulf Coast, West Virginia and Middle Tennessee State. Where they stand with the schedule is probably filling it out with at least 2/3 home games with a mid major and a couple easier games in the mold of Bryant/Maine. It doesn’t leave many games left. I hope they do get in a tourney, because they have potential to showcase a very good team next year.

An exempt tournament only counts as one game. Participating in a four game format basically gets you three additional games on the schedule (31 games ves 28). If the tournament is set up like many, you often can get two more home games.

[RamStock]

They may not end up in a tournament or if they do it would probably be a 2 game tourney, because they have 3 strong home games with Western Kentucky, PC and Alabama and potentially 4 road games with Brown, Florida Gulf Coast, West Virginia and Middle Tennessee State. Where they stand with the schedule is probably filling it out with at least 2/3 home games with a mid major and a couple easier games in the mold of Bryant/Maine. It doesn’t leave many games left. I hope they do get in a tourney, because they have potential to showcase a very good team next year.

An exempt tournament only counts as one game. Participating in a four game format basically gets you three additional games on the schedule (31 games ves 28). If the tournament is set up like many, you often can get two more home games.

I agree that they can go the route of two more home games and a tourney. You can have play 29 total regular season games. If you play in a tournament you are allowed 27 games and up to 4 tournament games for a total of no more than 31. If the 7 non conference games stand currently we could add two more home games and than play in a tournament. I’m not saying we can’t or won’t play in a tourney, because I hope we do, but they will have to decide how many non conference home games they want at their current schedule.

[TruePoint]

They will play in a tournament. Rothstein tweeted out a bunch of tournament lineups, but it was hardly exhaustive. He mentioned (by my count) 27 teams. That leaves 300+ teams he didn’t mention, and many of those teams (the majority of teams from 2+ bid conferences) will end up in exempt tournament fields.

[RhodyRams12]

[RhodyRams12]

[RamStock]

If they do get in a tournament than they are in very good shape schedulewise for the 2019-20 campaign and much further along than last year-partially because of Nevada. Add two more home games and move onto the 2020-21 schedule. This would be a very strong schedule that would go a long way to making the tourney next year as an at large.

[TruePoint]

Rothstein contradicts himself within the hour haha. He starts off saying how tough it is for coaches in the A10 and MWC to schedule because they’re getting squeezed out by the P5 programs, then responds to the idea that two of the better non-P5 conferences work together to boost their schedules by saying that doesn’t do anything for them. So...what should teams in those conferences do? Just give up and schedule 13 low majors in OOC? Obviously they’d prefer to schedule “teams that will be in the tournament” but you have to play the best teams that will schedule you. What a tone deaf take.

[rjsuperfly66]

then responds to the idea that two of the better non-P5 conferences work together to boost their schedules by saying that doesn’t do anything for them.

I think the partnership will only help a select few teams in each conference, teams that are probably already headed to the tournament. If you are the 4th or 5th team in the A10, playing the 4th or 5th team in the MWC likely is not going to move the resume at all. Imagine St. Joseph's last year is battling for an NCAA birth, but their pairing is someone like New Mexico and their 120 RPI, or worse. Unfortunately, every conference partner pairing is going to offer the same disadvantage, a few very good teams at the top but not a lot of depth. The only way it would really benefit teams would be to go into some sort of aggressive pod scheduling, where you say something to the effect of our top 6 will play 3 of their top 6. That's going to guarantee team 4 or 5 the chance at a resume building game or two. The goal is to try to get more teams better resumes, not to just fatten up the top.

[adam914]

The other issue with this line of thinking is that its not like the P5 schools were all going to go ahead and play A10/MWC type conf teams but now have decided not to because they are pairing up in challenges. Those P5 schools weren't going to schedule the mid conference teams anyway, so it doesn't really change anything.

[Section104]

I'm more concerned with the drop off in incoming talent across the A10 than the scheduling piece. If SLU, URI, Dayton, VCU, St. Joes and Davidson can consistently bring in talent we'll be fine. The problem is there's been a significant drop off in talent with VCU and Dayton as a result of coaching changes and it brings down the conference with it. If you're a good program people will play you. The problem is the rest of the league will have challenges and it decreases our likelihood of top 50 wins come conference season.

The American wasn't listed in Rothstein's tweet because they have some really strong programs at the top (Wichita State, Cincinnati, UConn, etc.) and some others (Memphis, SMU, Temple, Houston) that aren't too far behind. They're bringing in talent and in order to keep up we as a conference need to win some of these recruiting battles.

[bigappleram]

then responds to the idea that two of the better non-P5 conferences work together to boost their schedules by saying that doesn’t do anything for them.

I think the partnership will only help a select few teams in each conference, teams that are probably already headed to the tournament. If you are the 4th or 5th team in the A10, playing the 4th or 5th team in the MWC likely is not going to move the resume at all. Imagine St. Joseph's last year is battling for an NCAA birth, but their pairing is someone like New Mexico and their 120 RPI, or worse. Unfortunately, every conference partner pairing is going to offer the same disadvantage, a few very good teams at the top but not a lot of depth. The only way it would really benefit teams would be to go into some sort of aggressive pod scheduling, where you say something to the effect of our top 6 will play 3 of their top 6. That's going to guarantee team 4 or 5 the chance at a resume building game or two. The goal is to try to get more teams better resumes, not to just fatten up the top.

The reality is that even though this would only help the top 4-5 teams, it is still worth doing because those are the teams a league like ours needs to overcompensate for. If the league can enter conference play with 4-5 teams within the Top 50-75 it will be a boon. Adding 1 more quality OOC opponent to each of the Top 4-5 teams schedule will only help that. Then there will be some in the 75-150 range who largely aren't impacted positively or negatively by a like for like matchup with a similar ranked team in MVC, etc, and who cares about the bottom tier. There is no way the A10 will ever be a league that has parity top to bottom, it is always going to be top heavy and that's ok. The commissioner has to do everything in her power to keep the top tier strong and lean heavily upon them to prop up the rest of the league.

[rjsuperfly66]

then responds to the idea that two of the better non-P5 conferences work together to boost their schedules by saying that doesn’t do anything for them.

I think the partnership will only help a select few teams in each conference, teams that are probably already headed to the tournament. If you are the 4th or 5th team in the A10, playing the 4th or 5th team in the MWC likely is not going to move the resume at all. Imagine St. Joseph's last year is battling for an NCAA birth, but their pairing is someone like New Mexico and their 120 RPI, or worse. Unfortunately, every conference partner pairing is going to offer the same disadvantage, a few very good teams at the top but not a lot of depth. The only way it would really benefit teams would be to go into some sort of aggressive pod scheduling, where you say something to the effect of our top 6 will play 3 of their top 6. That's going to guarantee team 4 or 5 the chance at a resume building game or two. The goal is to try to get more teams better resumes, not to just fatten up the top.

The reality is that even though this would only help the top 4-5 teams, it is still worth doing because those are the teams a league like ours needs to overcompensate for. If the league can enter conference play with 4-5 teams within the Top 50-75 it will be a boon. Adding 1 more quality OOC opponent to each of the Top 4-5 teams schedule will only help that. Then there will be some in the 75-150 range who largely aren't impacted positively or negatively by a like for like matchup with a similar ranked team in MVC, etc, and who cares about the bottom tier. There is no way the A10 will ever be a league that has parity top to bottom, it is always going to be top heavy and that's ok. The commissioner has to do everything in her power to keep the top tier strong and lean heavily upon them to prop up the rest of the league.

I would agree with that I just think the problem with the A10, MWC, etc. is that it might only be helpful to the top 2-3 teams and not 4-5 and the 2-3 it helps would likely already be headed to the tournament anyway. If you look at the Top 3 A10 RPI's last season, 19, 24, 47. Very helpful to the MWC counterparts. 4-6 had RPI's of 135, 146, and 147, not helpful at all. Same exercise for the MWC, had top 3 RPI's of 17, 50, and 62. Pretty helpful. 4-6 had RPI's of 98, 103, and 118. Not resume boosting. What scheduling agreements like this need to do is help 4-6, not 1-3. 4-6 need to have more resume building opportunities to be able to play their way to the bubble. I don't think this agreement ultimately accomplishes that. Like I said before though, if you said the top 6 in each conference would play 3 games against each other, you'll get one or two shots at marquee, resume-building opponents. Team 5 who might have matched up against a team with an RPI of 146 might get team 24, 47, and 146. That's extremely helpful. I think that is what is being missed. But can't fault them for trying.

[RF1]

Could this mean that Nevada some day DOES come to Kingston?




MWC Members (11)
Air Force
Boise State
Fresno State
Colorado State
Nevada
UNLV
New Mexico
San Diego State
San Jose State
Utah State
Wyoming

[STC]

This is a great move by both conferences. Now we just need to get a URI @ UNLV matchup going so I can hit Vegas and see Rhody too.

[RF1]

This is a great move by both conferences. Now we just need to get a URI @ UNLV matchup going so I can hit Vegas and see Rhody too.

That better not be the site of the next game between the schools. Nevada has to come here first.

[TruePoint]

UNLV and Nevada are different schools

[ramster]

I think the partnership will only help a select few teams in each conference, teams that are probably already headed to the tournament. If you are the 4th or 5th team in the A10, playing the 4th or 5th team in the MWC likely is not going to move the resume at all. Imagine St. Joseph's last year is battling for an NCAA birth, but their pairing is someone like New Mexico and their 120 RPI, or worse. Unfortunately, every conference partner pairing is going to offer the same disadvantage, a few very good teams at the top but not a lot of depth. The only way it would really benefit teams would be to go into some sort of aggressive pod scheduling, where you say something to the effect of our top 6 will play 3 of their top 6. That's going to guarantee team 4 or 5 the chance at a resume building game or two. The goal is to try to get more teams better resumes, not to just fatten up the top.

The reality is that even though this would only help the top 4-5 teams, it is still worth doing because those are the teams a league like ours needs to overcompensate for. If the league can enter conference play with 4-5 teams within the Top 50-75 it will be a boon. Adding 1 more quality OOC opponent to each of the Top 4-5 teams schedule will only help that. Then there will be some in the 75-150 range who largely aren't impacted positively or negatively by a like for like matchup with a similar ranked team in MVC, etc, and who cares about the bottom tier. There is no way the A10 will ever be a league that has parity top to bottom, it is always going to be top heavy and that's ok. The commissioner has to do everything in her power to keep the top tier strong and lean heavily upon them to prop up the rest of the league.

I would agree with that I just think the problem with the A10, MWC, etc. is that it might only be helpful to the top 2-3 teams and not 4-5 and the 2-3 it helps would likely already be headed to the tournament anyway. If you look at the Top 3 A10 RPI's last season, 19, 24, 47. Very helpful to the MWC counterparts. 4-6 had RPI's of 135, 146, and 147, not helpful at all. Same exercise for the MWC, had top 3 RPI's of 17, 50, and 62. Pretty helpful. 4-6 had RPI's of 98, 103, and 118. Not resume boosting. What scheduling agreements like this need to do is help 4-6, not 1-3. 4-6 need to have more resume building opportunities to be able to play their way to the bubble. I don't think this agreement ultimately accomplishes that. Like I said before though, if you said the top 6 in each conference would play 3 games against each other, you'll get one or two shots at marquee, resume-building opponents. Team 5 who might have matched up against a team with an RPI of 146 might get team 24, 47, and 146. That's extremely helpful. I think that is what is being missed. But can't fault them for trying.

For me I think this Atlantic 10 and Mountain West partnership is great. I see all positives, no negatives. Congrats on our A10 Conference Leader for helping with this. No way I would turn my nose up to this.
Nevada is ranked Preseason #7, in some Preseason Polls I have seen Nevada as high as #4.
Villanova is the Big East’s highest ranked team at #9 and in fact they are the only ranked Big East Team - when was the last time that ever happened. Could the lofty Big East be coming down to earth with the other Non Football Conference Schools? The horrors!

This provides good scheduling opportunities for Schools in both conferences and some interesting cross country travel opportunities that helps with recruiting pitches. Wish we had something like this years ago - but love that it is here now regardless of who we match up with.


https://bleacherreport.com/articles/280 ... s-released

[theblueram]

It’s all good until we play Air Force, San Jose St or Fresno. On the road.

[wpbrown8267]

It’s all good until we play Air Force, San Jose St or Fresno. On the road.

I’d be happy with any of the following...

Nevada
Boise state
Unlv
San Diego state

[ramster]

I’m happy with any of the teams. This is an ongoing partnership so every year will bring an interesting game to the schedule either home or away. I hope it goes for years and years.

[reef]

I think the A10 will definetly approve this

I also think they will pair the top schools with the top schools so URI will probably get SDSU, Nevada UNLV or Boise

[rhodylaw]

I’m happy with any of the teams. This is an ongoing partnership so every year will bring an interesting game to the schedule either home or away. I hope it goes for years and years.

I tend to agree. All teams we wouldn’t normally play in places we may not normally go. It’s good for the brand.

[steviep123]

This is a great move by both conferences. Now we just need to get a URI @ UNLV matchup going so I can hit Vegas and see Rhody too.

reef would approve