What is the point of creating a weak schedule, beating everyone by 20, and then getting bounced in the first round of the district tournament? Your team doesn't get any better by doing that.

1 hour ago, Packaged Meat said:

What is the point of creating a weak schedule, beating everyone by 20, and then getting bounced in the first round of the district tournament? Your team doesn't get any better by doing that.

Any particular team you're speaking  of?

This has been talked about before.  There are several potential contributing factors that could come into play. 

1) The program has been "down" for many years, and one way of creating some excitement for it is to have a lot of W's during the regular season.  This can be a legitimate reason...for awhile.  Then it likely shifts to the following.

B) The coach or AD is wanting the W's to reinforce that they're the right person for the job.  They hope that 12 weeks of "yes", is better than one week of "no".

III) Sometimes, yes sometimes, it can be as a result of having to play a required number of conference games, in which you have no control over the quality of competition.  It really depends then on what the coach/AD does with regards to those non-conference, non-district games.  If they are just looking for any schmoe to fill in, then see one of the two above.  If they are at least looking for harder opponents, then there's not much more you can say they should be doing.

 

A coach I very much respected always said he tried to schedule this way...it's okay to have 25% of your schedule be against cupcakes, another 25% though, you should definitely be the underdog, and the remaining 50% should be a toss-up, where either team could realistically win.  He said that gave you a good mix of confidence and battle-tested-ness (?), while also preparing your team to play a full four quarters.

48 minutes ago, 4 Quarters said:

Any particular team you're speaking  of?

There was one team I was thinking of. I think they even got called out during a region week in review for having a weak schedule. Then I started thinking about why people are just scheduling easy and trying to get to 20 wins. 

 

Just look at at the OWP and OOWP on the KHSAA site. I like breaking it down by region. Easier to see.

And then the coaches of some of these teams, where the school has 1200 kids and 10-12 gimmees a year are praised for winning 60% of their games. ???

I've talked with a handful of coaches about this over the years. For some coaches, not all, it comes down to an existential dilemma. Schedule to get better, for sure. But schedule too many tough games, then lose a lot of them, and you might lose the job. Some teams have to play an easy schedule because of the district they're in. Or because of their region, especially if budgetary concerns preclude a lot of long travel dates out of the area. There are the majority of coaches who want to test their squads as much as possible. There are also coaches who want to build confidence in their team and there are coaches who want to try out different rotations early on, so an easy schedule at a certain juncture can be somewhat beneficial. Scheduling easy wins can also be an attempt to earn a certain record or make a record look better so they can keep the job and exist another year. That's why I call it an existential dilemma.

Would love to see every team have to play each team in the region.  I know, it would make for some ugly games, but it would help fill a schedule, it would allow each coach to see every player in the region (for a better representation of all region teams), and it could also spark some new rivalries.  JMHO

For some teams, it could be just the luck of the draw that the collective teams that they are playing are all having down years.  Additionally, if they are playing teams from their district and region, then there is little they can do if those traditional rivals are not very strong.

 

2 hours ago, ChuckT said:

Would love to see every team have to play each team in the region.  I know, it would make for some ugly games, but it would help fill a schedule, it would allow each coach to see every player in the region (for a better representation of all region teams), and it could also spark some new rivalries.  JMHO

I'm sorry, this is a terrible idea. Doesn't advance a team's development. The 9th Region has 20 teams, the 15th is going to have 14 next season ...

If your team is in a Conference or for District seeding, once versus each team every season, sure.

Covington Latin does not want to play Covington Catholic, nor should they be "forced" to.

jmho

If I have a young, talented team, I'm playing whoever I can to get them better. You don't get better by playing bad competition just to improve your own personal coaching record. You also schedule harder to get them post season ready and improve for the next year or two. I want to challenge them, not settle for beating bad/mediocre teams. Take your team to the next level if you can.

A very interesting discussion. I think high school basketball scheduling is one the most fascinating yet least discussed prep topics in the media. All it takes is a curious reporter asking an approachable, entrenched coach with a safe job some basic questions and voila, you got a nice story. But alas, Northern Kentucky coverage isn't what it used to be. Man, do I miss the Kentucky Post.