PSU Basketball: Building a National Powerhouse One Cupcake at a Time
I've been stewing for the last few days over the out of conference basketball schedule that was announced last week. It's apparent to me that the administration has no clue about how to create a contending program that generates excitement for the students, fans, and alumni.
Now first let me say I completely understand that the athletic department has a dollar target they need to hit. In putting together the basketball schedule, much like putting together the football schedule, heavy emphasis is put on ensuring enough tickets will be sold to turn a considerable profit necessary to support a miriad of Penn State sports teams. I'm not naive to the situation. Money makes the world go around. But let's do a little math. Tell me which of the two home schedules below you would prefer.
| Schedule A | Schedule B | |
| Home Games | 10 | 7 |
| Average Attendance | 6000 | 9000 |
| Total Tickets Sold | 60,000 | 63,000 |
Now you could argue that the difference here is negligible and I'm pulling statistics out of the air, but the point here is that you can take a reduction in the number of home games if you offset it with a boost in attendance. How do you boost attendance without giving away free tickets at the HUB? Easy. Schedule better competition.
For the heck of it I went back and looked at our out of conference home schedule for the past two years. I looked up the attendance for each game, and then I looked up the final RPI ranking of the opponent in that game. I didn't expect to see much of a correlation, but I was surprised to see a noticeable trend. Charts? Hell yeah, charts.
BSD: Now doing Excel charts at a birthday party near you!
Most of the points are jumbled together without much of a pattern, but notice how four of our top five our top four attendance games came against teams with an RPI less than 120. (Ed. - Chart corrected for data entry error). It's pretty obvious that the fans are willing to come out to see games against Seton Hall and Virginia Tech, but they're not so willing to walk from Beaver Avenue or drive from Altoona in the middle of December to see the Nittany Lions play Canisius and Denver.
The non-conference schedule this year is more of the same from Penn State. Take a look at the final RPI rankings of our non-conference home schedule. (Philly classic excluded since opponents aren't yet known.)
| Date | Opponent | 2008 RPI |
| Nov 14 | William & Mary | 154 |
| Nov 17 | New Jersey Institute of Technology | 341 |
| Nov 20 | Hartford | 158 |
| Nov 23 | New Hampshire | 300 |
| Dec 6 | Temple | 51 |
| Dec 10 | Army | 207 |
| Dec 13 | Mount St. Marys | 146 |
| Dec 21 | Lafayette | 163 |
| Dec 23 | Sacred Heart | 155 |
After Temple our toughest competition is Mount St. Marys. And we play Lafayette and Sacred Heart in late December when classes are out of session meaning attendance will barely top 5000 if they're lucky. Why even bother opening up the Jordan Center? Let's just play the games at the IM building and treat the crowd to the Creamery afterward with all the money we'll save by not paying the ushers and cleanup crew.
The problem for Penn State is that we're not at the point where we can go out and load the schedule with Duke, Georgetown, UConn, Pitt, and North Carolina and expect to be competitive. No kid wants to go to a school where they promise to get blown out every night. If they wanted that they would go to New Jersey Tech. But why put games on the schedule like NJ Tech, Army, and New Hampshire if they bring nothing to the table come tournament time?
Of course I'm not alone in my distain for the scheduling. David Jones ripped the schedule apart this week by contacting other college basketball experts to get their analysis.
Palm and Lunardi were told only that the schedule belonged to a BCS-conference school with hopes of making the NCAA tournament.
Palm's response: "I would say they'd better kick some butt in their league. Unless Georgia Tech is better than they've been, there isn't anyone on this list that's going to get anyone's attention. This is a schedule full of potential bad losses. But not many potential good wins. Maybe none."
Lunardi's appraisal: "If this team aspires to be in the field, they'd better plan on winning a lot of conference games. There just isn't enough in the form of likely NCAA teams, the ones who'll probably be in the at-large pool. There certainly aren't enough scalps there. That schedule strikes me along the lines of somebody attempting to stay employed."
These days it's all about the RPI, baby. Now, the Rating Percentage Index can be a complicated thing. Thankfully the Kenpom.com blog breaks it down for us in simple terms.
The Ratings Percentage Index (RPI) is the formula used by the NCAA to rate men’s and women’s college basketball teams. The formula is described below.
The RPI is calculated by adding three parts.
Part I (25% of the formula): Team winning percentage. For the 2005 season, the NCAA added a bonus/penalty system, where each home win or road loss get multiplied by 0.6 in the winning percentage calculation. A home loss or road win is multiplied by 1.4. Neutral games count as 1.0. More on the effect of these changes can be found here.
Part II (50%): Average opponents’ winning percentage. To calculate this, you must calculate each opponent’s winning percentage individually and average those figures. This is NOT calculated from the opponents’ combined record. Games involving the team for whom we are calculating the RPI are ignored.
Part III (25%): Average opponents’ opponents’ winning percentage: Basically taking all of the opponents’ Part II values and averaging them.
Penn State has decided to focus on boosting their RPI through Part I and scheduling easy competition. But they are completely writing off Parts II and III which amount to 75% of the equation. To rely on your conference schedule to make up for the deficiencies of your out of conference schedule is a waste because ultimately it's a wash. For each winner in the conference there is a corresponding loser and the records of your opponents comes in close to 0.500. This is why you need to schedule decent competition outside of the conference. Playing a team like NJ Tech that didn't win a single game last year doesn't do anything for you and their winning percentage counts toward 50% of your RPI. The system rewards teams that play tough competition from tough conferences. It's that simple.
Any respectable school in a major conference like the Big Ten should never schedule a team with an RPI over 150. You're going to have to suck it up and give up a few home games to schedule some one-and-ones with other major programs. How much better would this schedule be if we took off the games against NJ Tech and New Hampshire and replaced them with a home game against Pitt and a road game against Syracuse. Would our record take a hit? Sure, but due to the fact they are traditionally good teams in a good conference their win percentage and opponents' win percentages will probably do more for your RPI than playing a school that is only going to win three or for games a year. And besides that, which is more attractive to a recruit?
A. Come play for Penn State and record unimpressive wins against a no-name schedule that at best gives you an opportunity for an NIT bid.B. Come play for Penn State and compete against a tough schedule that at least gives you a chance to make the NCAA tournament.
You're never going to get the highly talented kids to come play a bunch of exhibition games in front of 5000 people. Not only does it lack excitement, but you are essentially stacking the deck against yourself come selection Sunday. We better hope to run the table at the Big Ten tournament, because given this schedule, that's the only way we're going to be dancing in March.
24 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No excuse at all
It’s really a shameful practice. People love to bitch and moan about the lack of student support and regional non-student support for the basketball program. Goodwill left town a long time ago with this program, even though it’s clear that DeChellis and his team are trying to improve their standing in the league.
Still, fans need a reason to show up. This schedule gives them absolutely no incentive to do so.
by Run Up The Score on Aug 8, 2008 2:25 PM EDT reply actions
'Nova
Just a quick note. Wouldn’t it be possible to see Villanova in the Philly Classic? And St. Joe’s? I’m not excusing the behavior, but I’d guess they’re banking on playing good team in there.
Anyway, this is awful. This is a schedule I’d make on a video game.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
now that's some fancy work mike
question: who is the outlier in the top right of the chart? must have been free hot dog night or something…
I get a lot of questions from people about why in the world our bball program is so terrible. Most of the major football powers have been able to parley their success into a respectable bball program, yet penn state appears to have somehow gotten worse as the years go on. To be honest, I don’t really know what to respond. It’s not that PA people don’t care about Bball, look at Pitt, Temple, Nova and so on…there is a lot local success in the sport. And it’s not that they don’t have the brand name, facilities, or relatively local talent to succeed. The only anwer I can come up with is that those in charge simply don’t care.
Kevin @ Black Shoe Diaries
Pitt Basketball
Pitt demolished their football stadium to build a new arena for their basketball team, which should tell you a little something about their commitment to be a basketball school. By all accounts Pitt had raised the money to keep Ben Howland had he wanted to stay; he just wanted to coach at UCLA instead. They have already come up with two raises for Jamie Dixon.
You can make all the cracks you want about Pitt’s football team, but it would be unwise to doubt their commitment to play winning basketball. If we put forth the same amount of effort, we might be successful too.
For the Glory; National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,
PSU hoops is a complicated problem...
to solve. I think that there are real problems that can easily be fixed. Exhibit A: the out-of-conference schedule.
But I think there’s also some “university inertia” that works against the program. First of all, though I’m sure the Bryce Jordan Center was built with the best of intentions, it’s not a good college basketball arena. It seems more like a pro facility; it’s big and impersonal. Places like the Dean Dome and Pauley Pavillion are still really big, but they’re also intimate and crowded and have plenty of tradition.
If you bring a recruit to a saturday day game at the BJC, and it’s half empty, it feels emptier than that, it’s freezing cold, and there’s nothing to do for miles in any direction. Compare that to Pitt, where they’ve got a world-class facility that still manages to be intimate, and it’s right in the middle of a city that’s happening.
I think the problem with the BJC is that it was built as much to hold this year’s Britney Spears concert or whatever as much as Penn State hoops. Whereas the Pete (Pitt) is first and foremost a basketball facility.
I think we’re also hamstringed by tradition and the football team’s success. Penn State’s a football school, and almost regardless of how good the hoops team is, the best basketball player will get less attention, fame, notoriety, girls, whatever, than the worst football player. (I’m exagerating for effect, but you get the point.)
I don’t really know how you change those two things: the BJC and the culture. We’re not getting a new basketball facility for at least a decade probably longer, and Penn State students are Penn State students. Maybe we need to buy players.
I also think we should play some of these small non-conference games in rec center to make them more exciting.
Agree with everything
Except for the “football school” excuse. Ohio State, Florida, Tennessee, and Texas put together solid football and basketball teams year after year. There is no reason why we can’t be successful in both sports. If the basketball team was winning the players would get just as much publicity.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
by BSD on Aug 8, 2008 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Pitt has a similar advantage…
to Ohio State, Florida, Texas and Tennessee over Penn State. They play in urban markets that hold a large concentration of their fan base, which makes weeknight basketball a lot more practical. State College is uniquely remote in a lot of ways, Chapel Hill is similar in size, but it’s also 20 minutes away from both Raleigh and Durham. Lawrence is a city of about 90,000 forty minutes from Kansas City.
Another advantage they have is that Pitt donors give money to get basketball tickets, and get football tickets as a bonus where Penn State donors give money to get football tickets, and get basketball tickets as a bonus. Pitt basketball fans are just more into it than ours are.
I don’t know that there is a solution to this.
For the Glory; National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,
If the team wins,
people will start to show up. There’s no question about it. But to get good, you have to sign some marquee prospects. To sign marquee prospects, your program has to have some national cachet. And in the short term, that can come from playing good teams. Right now, PSU brass seem to think the Big10 schedule is enough to shine up this turd of an OOC slate.
In addition, this chart shows playing good teams also brings in some extra people through the turnstiles. It’s win-win!
If the team wins people will show up
They could be 22-0 and I wouldn’t. I live three hours away how am I going to go to a game on a Tuesday night? I have to believe I’m in the majority, not the minorty in terms of distance from State College.
For the Glory; National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,
Of Course You're in the Majority...
but your argument doesn’t hold water. There are 40,000+ students in town during basketball season. However you perceive the student fandom, it’s definitely reasonable to assume that more of those kids will start going to games if the team is decent.
I wasn’t suggesting that people will start traveling several hours to go to games during the week. I also wasn’t suggesting that the BJC was going to be a sell out for every game. All I’m saying is if the team is better, more people local to the area will be more inclined to go to games.
interesting fact
while i agree that more wins will lead to more students coming out to the games, we already have a significant number of students coming out already. I believe on any given night that we have at least 2,000 students attend the games. For most big ten games i believe we had around 4,000, and for three (at least) of the games there was over 6,000 (V.T., Wisc, Michigan St. ). Those are some pretty large numbers in the world of basketball students sections. In comparison, Pitt’s famed “Oakland Zoo” holds only 1,500 -1800 students. Many other big time schools only hold something similar to Pitt.
so whats my point? none really. i just thought I’d point out that a decent amount of students already attend the games. Jesse is right, it will just always be tough for alumni to make it up for games on weeknights. however if we ever get good, i can only imagine what the BJC would be like when filled with all students. Oh wait, that already happens once a year with thon. jeez. in the words of joepa, the bjc would be, “one good, solid and heck of a” basketball atmosphere.
"Boy that student section now is up and really making a gigantic amount of noise. You see the sea of white, the white out. Well they are 2 minutes and 28 seconds away from the whiteout of the Buckeyes here tonight." - Ron Franklin
You know what
You made me go back and look at it and I realized that’s a mistake. For the game against Princeton last year I mistakenly plugged in the attendance for our game against Seton Hall. And for the game against Seton Hall I accidently plugged in the number for our game AT St. Joe’s. That one outlier should be 6188 and fall in line with the other lousy teams and further emphasising the need to schedule good teams. Corrected chart going up in a minute.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
by BSD on Aug 8, 2008 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions
An interesting note:
While the schedule is abominable (and I made the case that PSU would have to go 11-7 in conference to merit any consideration for an NCAA bid in the other post), it is interesting to see that chart for the last two years. 15 of 20 home game opponents ranked above 200 in RPI.
This year, 6 of 9 rank 163 or higher. Now granted, most of those 6 are grouped right around 150 (and they’re from last year), but at least you could make the argument that the scheduling department is making somewhat of an effort.
Ah hell, I can’t defend it. At best, the scheduling smacks of being afraid of posting a poor OOC record, since our recent B10 history could be best described as “piss-poor”.
six or seven years ago...
...if you could run your non-confrence schedule and play 500 ball in the Big Ten that was an automatic NCAA bid, no questions asked. That’s just not the case anymore, but they still schedule like it is.
For the Glory; National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,
Sigh
I remember the team going on the road to be Kentucky’s home opener (and Surprise! They won.) before they eventually made the Sweet 16 that same year.
Yea that was Kentucky being stupid.
If I recall, we picked up that game late, Kentucky needed a sacrifical lamb, and we volunteered to go play them knowing we were going to be pretty good that year. The scheduling was similar to what Oregon State did with us this year in football, I believe.
For the Glory; National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,
It worked
Let’s take a Fresno State football approach to scheduling some of these out of conference games. We’ll play big names, anytime, any place. On the road? Your home opener? Let’s do it.
Like I said
It would probably help our RPI if we lost to a Memphis or Florida more than it would if we played Morgan State and won.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
by BSD on Aug 8, 2008 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions
And if by chance we're even slightly competitive
that makes a huge impression in the selection committees eyes, beyond the RPI alone
The consensus...
Seems to be that winning would hopefully help us schedule good teams in future years, and help us with our goal of making the NCAA somehow. I just don’t see that with DeChellis. I wasn’t around for the hiring, but didn’t he leave his previous school with a losing record? Who thought hiring him was a good idea? The year before last we had an 11 game losing streak I believe. Last year was the year I cut him some slack, because we won good games, and played well in some, but just lost for stupid reasons like not being able to make a free throw. This is really a make or break year for DeChellis. Progress in big ten play would show that this is a team on the rise, and hopefully we can get back on track one year at a time.
I was out in the trenches, which enables me to paint such a powerful picture, like Apocalypse Now.-Cormega
No, he did the opposite of losing at his last job
Dechellis at East Tennessee State
96-97 7-20(2-12 in conference)
97-98 11-16(6-9)
98-99 17-11(9-7)
99-00 14-15(8-8)
00-01 18-10(13-3) * Regular season conference champs
01-02 18-10(10-5)
02-03 20-11(18-5) * Conference tournament champs (NCAA Tournament Berth)
So based on this model
We should expect a trip to the tournament in his seventh year? I’m not so sure the fans and alumni can be that patient.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
Given that East Tennessee State is in a conference
with one automatic berth. I don’t think it necessarily means waiting for the seventh year, but given the state of the program he took over it was just as absurd to expect an instant turnaround.

by 





























