Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (All 80 Power 6 + 41 Miscellaneous Others)

Donate To GopherHole
S

SelectionSunday

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
24,652
Reaction score
4,768
Points
113
Welcome to my 1st annual Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings. The simplest way to describe it (yes, I understand, no ranking system is perfect) is "palatable" opponents (highlighted in bold/italic) are defined as one of the following:

1. A Power 6 opponent (there are 80);
2. A 2023 NCAA Tournament qualifier;
3. The 2023 NIT (North Texas) and CBI (Charlotte) champions; and/or
4. Teams I'm projecting to qualify for the 2024 NCAA Tournament

First out of the gate is West Virginia.

Opponents final 2023 NET rank in parentheses.

WEST VIRGINIA (13 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 38.5%
Average NET: 161.269
Nov. 6: MISSOURI STATE (144)
Nov. 10: MONMOUTH (351)
Nov. 14: JACKSONVILLE STATE (241)
Nov. 20: vs. SMU (209)
Nov. 22: vs. Virginia (29)/Wisconsin (72)
Nov. 26: BELLARMINE (258)
Dec. 1: SAINT JOHN'S (91)
Dec. 6: PITT (56)
Dec. 9: DREXEL (189)
Dec. 16: vs. UMass (203)
Dec. 20: RADFORD (173)
Dec. 23: TOLEDO (82)
Dec. 30: vs. Ohio State (49)
 
Last edited:

This game has a Big Fat L written all over it.
 

Virginia now has a complete non-conference schedule.

Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (2 of 121 complete)
1. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
2. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)

VIRGINIA (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 45.5%
Average NET: 171.863
Nov. 6: TARLETON (165)
Nov. 10: vs. Florida (73)
Nov. 14: NORTH CAROLINA A&T (318)
Nov. 16: TEXAS SOUTHERN (307)
Nov. 20: vs. Wisconsin (72)
Nov. 22: vs. SMU (209)/West Virginia (24)
Nov. 29: TEXAS A&M (28)
Dec. 5: NCCU (187)
Dec. 16: NORTHEASTERN (309)
Dec. 19: @ Memphis (22)
Dec. 27: MORGAN STATE (293)
 
Last edited:

Okay, so the definition of palatable is satisfactory or acceptable. What criteria are you using to determine whether an individual scheduled game meets the threshold?
Guessing at the definition: To be acceptable a game either needs to be either (1) Power 6 opponent (2) Projected NCAA Tournament team in the coming season or (3) Was an NCAA Tournament team last year. And the NET factors in too?

I think everybody's Schedule Palatability should be unique to their team. Are we a veteran team?
Are we projected to be healthy in the non conference or is our best player out until Christmas etc etc.

Scheduling to me unless I have a unanimous Top 10 preseason team...
I wanna play somebody the first game that if my starting 5 has the flu we still are favored to win.
Little better opponent 2nd game. (Colleges have the exhibition game that doesn't count for #1)
The goal for me is to prepare for the conference season. That's going to be unique to my team each season based my personnel and my conference opponents. (For instance, do I wanna schedule an opponent to simulate Edey with a 7'4 center? A team that shoots only 3's to work on 3 point recognition. A team that plays 7 seconds or less and we gotta dial on transition defense. etc etc). If so, the opponent might not meet all the metrics you are charting.
I also want a hard game followed by a cupcake to restore confidence if we happen to lose to the tough opponent. The dates are critical to me...I don't want back to back games early on because I want teaching times between games.

Road games vs Home games vs neutral site games. Location is a huge factor.

Fans factor in somewhere. Will our fans enjoy this game?

Playing somebody just because we want a trip to Florida or California etc etc

A whole raft of considerations unique to my team and our schedule. Ultimately is it good for my purposes, my goals to get my team ready for the conference.

I agree 1000% in the case of the Gophers no matter how bad you think you are if you are in the Big Ten you can't play all NET 300 teams in the preseason and think you are helping your team prepare to face Big Ten teams. But I don't think a formula can determine how good somebody's schedule is compared to somebody else's. Every team should have unique focus on what they are trying to improve, perfect, or challenge their team with. And there is more to that than just
these listed ranking factors.

The NET to me is a deep enough dive to determine how somebody compares to some one else schedule wise. I'm not feeling the value of the Schedule Palatability rankings...convince me of it's value?
 

60's Guy said:
Okay, so the definition of palatable is satisfactory or acceptable. What criteria are you using to determine whether an individual scheduled game meets the threshold?
Guessing at the definition: To be acceptable a game either needs to be either (1) Power 6 opponent (2) Projected NCAA Tournament team in the coming season or (3) Was an NCAA Tournament team last year. And the NET factors in too?

I think everybody's Schedule Palatability should be unique to their team. Are we a veteran team?
Are we projected to be healthy in the non conference or is our best player out until Christmas etc etc.

Scheduling to me unless I have a unanimous Top 10 preseason team...
I wanna play somebody the first game that if my starting 5 has the flu we still are favored to win.
Little better opponent 2nd game. (Colleges have the exhibition game that doesn't count for #1)
The goal for me is to prepare for the conference season. That's going to be unique to my team each season based my personnel and my conference opponents. (For instance, do I wanna schedule an opponent to simulate Edey with a 7'4 center? A team that shoots only 3's to work on 3 point recognition. A team that plays 7 seconds or less and we gotta dial on transition defense. etc etc). If so, the opponent might not meet all the metrics you are charting.
I also want a hard game followed by a cupcake to restore confidence if we happen to lose to the tough opponent. The dates are critical to me...I don't want back to back games early on because I want teaching times between games.

Road games vs Home games vs neutral site games. Location is a huge factor.

Fans factor in somewhere. Will our fans enjoy this game?

Playing somebody just because we want a trip to Florida or California etc etc

A whole raft of considerations unique to my team and our schedule. Ultimately is it good for my purposes, my goals to get my team ready for the conference.

I agree 1000% in the case of the Gophers no matter how bad you think you are if you are in the Big Ten you can't play all NET 300 teams in the preseason and think you are helping your team prepare to face Big Ten teams. But I don't think a formula can determine how good somebody's schedule is compared to somebody else's. Every team should have unique focus on what they are trying to improve, perfect, or challenge their team with. And there is more to that than just
these listed ranking factors.

The NET to me is a deep enough dive to determine how somebody compares to some one else schedule wise. I'm not feeling the value of the Schedule Palatability rankings...convince me of it's value?
Click to expand...
All great points! Each team/program has different standards/goals. There is no perfect science to evaluating non-conference schedules. There is no right or wrong.

My very general guideline (for Power 6 teams) is just above or just below half of your non-conference games should be vs. at minimum "decent" teams. Not a hard & fast rule, but generally speaking those teams should be in the top 125 of the NET or whatever ranking one prefers to prioritize. For teams that play 13 non-conference games, the number would be 6 or 7. That still leaves plenty of room for cupcakes.

So using the Gophers as an example, they play 11 non-conference games. I would expect 5 or 6 of those to be opponents that can offer some kind of fight, so to speak. To this point the Gophers have one such opponent, San Francisco (at a neutral site). I hope they add a couple more, and certainly at least one more before their Big Ten opener in early December.
 


Georgetown with a complete non-conference schedule.

Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (3 of 121 complete)
1. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
2. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
3. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)

GEORGETOWN (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 45.5%
Average NET: 230.545
Nov. 7: LE MOYNE (363)
Nov. 11: HOLY CROSS (336)
Nov. 15: @ Rutgers (40)
Nov. 18: MOUNT SAINT MARY’S (268)
Nov. 19: AMERICAN (260)
Nov. 25: JACKSON STATE (308)
Nov. 29: MERRIMACK (301)
Dec. 2: TCU (27)
Dec. 9: SYRACUSE (121)
Dec. 12: COPPIN STATE (328)
Dec. 16: @ Notre Dame (184)
 

SelectionSunday said:
Georgetown with a complete non-conference schedule.

Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (3 of 121 complete)
1. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
2. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
3. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)

GEORGETOWN (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 45.5%
Average NET: 230.545
Nov. 7: LE MOYNE (363)
Nov. 11: HOLY CROSS (336)
Nov. 15: @ Rutgers (40)
Nov. 18: MOUNT SAINT MARY’S (268)
Nov. 19: AMERICAN (260)
Nov. 25: JACKSON STATE (308)
Nov. 29: MERRIMACK (301)
Dec. 2: TCU (27)
Dec. 9: SYRACUSE (121)
Dec. 12: COPPIN STATE (328)
Dec. 16: @ Notre Dame (184)
Click to expand...
What do you cleanse your palate with between posts?
 





SelectionSunday said:
Mostly Trader Joe's dark chocolate peanut butter cups.

I can be talked into discontinuing this thread!
Click to expand...

I love this thread and appreciate seeing the schedules. This year in particular with how badly ours is shaping up, I'm curious to see if any other P5 team has even remotely as bad of a schedule as we do. And I like scouting potential non-Gopher good non-conference games to get to, that I otherwise may not see if I'm not scouring each individual team.

Go Gophers!!
 

This is a heck of a lot of work, so thanks. I’ve got a quibble, though. I don’t think a team like Merrimack or Texas Southern should be considered palatable when teams 100+ spots higher (e.g. Drexel) are not. Making the tourney as a play-in 16 seed doesn’t mean they’re competitive with a P6.
 

formerlybis said:
This is a heck of a lot of work, so thanks. I’ve got a quibble, though. I don’t think a team like Merrimack or Texas Southern should be considered palatable when teams 100+ spots higher (e.g. Drexel) are not. Making the tourney as a play-in 16 seed doesn’t mean they’re competitive with a P6.
Click to expand...
No argument here. I include those teams only because they’re auto qualifiers (or projected to be). “Wins vs. the field” isn’t an official criteria of the committee but it is cited frequently, and IMO the more wins a team has vs. the field, the better.
 




Duke with a complete non-conference schedule.

Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (4 of 121 complete)
1. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
2. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
3. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
4. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)

DUKE (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 45.5%
Average NET: 138.272
Nov. 6: DARTMOUTH (275)
Nov. 10: ARIZONA (10)
Nov. 14: vs. Michigan State (33)
Nov. 17: BUCKNELL (292)
Nov. 21: LA SALLE (223)
Nov. 24: SOUTHERN INDIANA (266)
Nov. 29: @ Arkansas (20)
Dec. 9: CHARLOTTE (98)
Dec. 12: HOFSTRA (85)
Dec. 20: vs. Baylor (17)
Dec. 30: QUEENS (202)
 
Last edited:

Surprised Bucknell is that low. I always felt like they were a team that often competed for a mid-major slot late in season.
 


Nebraska with a complete non-conference schedule.

NEBRASKA (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 27.3%
Average NET: 216.727
Nov. 6: LINDENWOOD (338)
Nov. 9: FLORIDA A&M (359)
Nov. 13: RIDER (215)
Nov. 15: STONY BROOK (327)
Nov. 18: vs. Oregon State (225)
Nov. 22: DUQUESNE (137)
Nov. 26: CAL STATE-FULLERTON (126)
Dec. 3: CREIGHTON (14)
Dec. 17: @ Kansas State (19)
Dec. 20: NORTH DAKOTA (277)
Dec. 29: SOUTH CAROLINA STATE (347)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (5 of 121 complete)
1. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
2. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
3. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
4. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
5. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
 

Creighton with a complete non-conference schedule.

CREIGHTON (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 45.5%
Average NET: 171.954
Nov. 7: FLORIDA A&M (359)
Nov. 11: NORTH DAKOTA STATE (217)
Nov. 14: IOWA (38)
Nov. 18: TEXAS SOUTHERN (307)
Nov. 22: vs. Loyola-Chicago (269)
Nov. 23: vs. Boston College (166)/Colorado State (115)
Nov. 30: @ Oklahoma State (42)
Dec. 3: @ Nebraska (92)
Dec. 9: CENTRAL MICHIGAN (331)
Dec. 13: vs. UNLV (94)
Dec. 16: ALABAMA (2)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (6 of 121 complete)
1. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
2. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
3. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
4. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
5. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
6. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
 

SelectionSunday said:
Creighton with a complete non-conference schedule.

CREIGHTON (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 45.5%
Average NET: 171.954
Nov. 7: FLORIDA A&M (359)
Nov. 11: NORTH DAKOTA STATE (217)
Nov. 14: IOWA (38)
Nov. 18: TEXAS SOUTHERN (307)
Nov. 22: vs. Loyola-Chicago (269)
Nov. 23: vs. Boston College (166)/Colorado State (115)
Nov. 30: @ Oklahoma State (42)
Dec. 3: @ Nebraska (92)
Dec. 9: CENTRAL MICHIGAN (331)
Dec. 13: vs. UNLV (94)
Dec. 16: ALABAMA (2)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (6 of 121 complete)
1. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
2. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
3. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
4. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
5. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
6. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
Click to expand...
How are you calculating the palatable games percentage? I see 6 bolded games, which, out of 11 would be over 50%. Virginia is the same.

Regardless, this is a very respectable schedule. Again, it goes against the methodology, but a game against UNLV is significantly better than two of the bolded games, and is neutral-site, too (if I'm reading how you list the games correctly).
 

formerlybis said:
How are you calculating the palatable games percentage? I see 6 bolded games, which, out of 11 would be over 50%. Virginia is the same.

Regardless, this is a very respectable schedule. Again, it goes against the methodology, but a game against UNLV is significantly better than two of the bolded games, and is neutral-site, too (if I'm reading how you list the games correctly).
Click to expand...
Boston College is bolded because they're Power 6, but it's not definite Creighton will play them so not included in the count.
 

Belmont, the first of our 41 non-Power 6 selectees, with a complete non-conference schedule.

BELMONT (11 games includes 1 non-Division 1)
Palatable Games Percentage: 18.2%
Average NET: 182.5
Nov. 6: GEORGIA STATE (291)
Nov. 10: @ Furman (88)
Nov. 14: NON-DIVISION 1
Nov. 17: @ Arizona (10)
Nov. 24: vs. Monmouth (351)
Nov. 25: @ Penn (138)
Nov. 26: vs. Lafayette (271)
Dec. 6: LIPSCOMB (147)
Dec. 9: @ Middle Tennessee (109)
Dec. 16: @ Samford (135)
Dec. 20: ARKANSAS STATE (285)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (7 of 121 complete)
1. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
2. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
3. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
4. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
5. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
6. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
7. Belmont (18.2%, 182.5)
 
Last edited:

Tennessee now with a complete non-conference schedule after drawing Syracuse in the Maui Invitational.

TENNESSEE (13 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 53.8%
Average NET: 117.487
Nov. 6: TENNESSEE TECH (274)
Nov. 10: @ Wisconsin (72)
Nov. 14: WOFFORD (228)
Nov. 20: vs. Syracuse (121)
Nov. 21: vs. Gonzaga (8)/Purdue (6)
Nov. 22: @ Non-Division 1/vs. Kansas (9)/Marquette (12)/UCLA (4)
Nov. 29: @ North Carolina (44)
Dec. 5: GEORGE MASON (139)
Dec. 9: ILLINOIS (36)
Dec. 12: GEORGIA SOUTHERN (207)
Dec. 16: vs. NC State (43)
Dec. 21: TARLETON (165)
Jan. 2: NORFOLK STATE (183)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (8 of 121 complete)
1. Tennessee (53.8%, 117.487)
2. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
3. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
4. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
5. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
6. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
7. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
8. Belmont (18.2%, 182.59)
 
Last edited:

Purdue now with a complete non-conference schedule after drawing Gonzaga in the Maui Invitational.

PURDUE (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 72.7%
Average NET: 104.484
Nov. 6: SAMFORD (135)
Nov. 10: MOREHEAD STATE (219)
Nov. 13: XAVIER (18)
Nov. 20: vs. Gonzaga (8)
Nov. 21: vs. Syracuse (121)/Tennessee (5)
Nov. 22: @ Non-Division 1/vs. Kansas (9)/Marquette (12)/UCLA (4)
Nov. 28: TEXAS SOUTHERN (307)
Dec. 9: vs. Alabama (2)
Dec. 16: vs. Arizona (10)
Dec. 21: JACKSONVILLE (233)
Dec. 29: EASTERN KENTUCKY (146)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (9 of 121 complete)
1. Purdue (72.7%, 104.484)
2. Tennessee (53.8%, 117.487)
3. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
4. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
5. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
6. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
7. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
8. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
9. Belmont (18.2%, 182.59)
 
Last edited:

Kansas now with a complete non-conference schedule after drawing host Chamindae in the Maui Invitational.

KANSAS (13 games includes 1 non-Division 1)
Palatable Games Percentage: 53.8%
Average NET: 122.416
Nov. 6: NCCU (187)
Nov. 10: MANHATTAN (299)
Nov. 14: vs. Kentucky (26)
Nov. 20: @ Non-Division 1
Nov. 21: vs. Marquette (12)/UCLA (4)
Nov. 22: vs. Gonzaga (8)/Purdue (6)/Syracuse (121)/Tennessee (5)
Nov. 28: EASTERN ILLINOIS (345)
Dec. 1: UCONN (3)
Dec. 5: KANSAS CITY (313)
Dec. 9: MISSOURI (47)
Dec. 16: @ Indiana (31)
Dec. 22: YALE (65)
Dec. 30: vs. Wichita State (110)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (10 of 121 complete)
1. Purdue (72.7%, 104.484)
2. Tennessee (53.8%, 117.487)
3. Kansas (53.8%, 122.416)
4. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
5. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
6. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
7. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
8. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
9. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
10. Belmont (18.2%, 182.59)
 

Marquette now with a complete non-conference schedule after drawing UCLA in the Maui Invitational.

MARQUETTE (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 54.5%
Average NET: 128.5
Nov. 6: NORTHERN ILLINOIS (255)
Nov. 10: RIDER (215)
Nov. 14: @ Illinois (36)
Nov. 20: vs. UCLA (4)
Nov. 21: @ Non-Division 1/vs. Kansas (9)
Nov. 22: vs. Gonzaga (8)/Purdue (6)/Syracuse (121)/Tennessee (5)
Nov. 28: SOUTHERN U (278)
Dec. 2: @ Wisconsin (72)
Dec. 6: TEXAS (7)
Dec. 9: NOTRE DAME (184)
Dec. 14: SAINT THOMAS (199)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (11 of 121 complete)
1. Purdue (72.7%, 104.484)
2. Marquette (54.5%, 128.5)
3. Tennessee (53.8%, 117.487)
4. Kansas (53.8%, 122.416)
5. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
6. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
7. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
8. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
9. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
10. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
11. Belmont (18.2%, 182.59)
 

Maine, the Gophers' final non-conference opponent, with a complete non-conference schedule.

MAINE (15 games includes 1 non-Division 1)
Palatable Games Percentage: 33.3%
Average NET: 236
Nov. 6: @ Charlotte (98)
Nov. 8: NON-DIVISION 1
Nov. 12: MERRIMACK (301)
Nov. 16: vs. Northwestern State (205)
Nov. 17: vs. Presbyterian (353)
Nov. 18: @ North Florida (236)
Nov. 22: @ USF (159)
Nov. 25: @ Columbia (339)
Nov. 29: @ Holy Cross (336)
Dec. 3: BROWN (176)
Dec. 6: @ Boston U (256)
Dec. 9: CENTRAL CONNECTICUT (341)
Dec. 18: @ UCF (66)
Dec. 21: @ FIU (216)
Dec. 29: @ Minnesota (222)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (12 of 121 complete)
1. Purdue (72.7%, 104.484)
2. Marquette (54.5%, 128.5)
3. Tennessee (53.8%, 117.487)
4. Kansas (53.8%, 122.416)
5. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
6. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
7. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
8. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
9. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
10. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
11. Maine (26.7%, 236)
12. Belmont (18.2%, 182.59)
 
Last edited:

Xavier now with a complete non-conference schedule after drawing Washington in the Continental Tire Main Event.

XAVIER (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 45.5%
Average NET: 146.909
Nov. 6: ROBERT MORRIS (247)
Nov. 10: JACKSONVILLE (233)
Nov. 13: @ Purdue (6)
Nov. 17: vs. Washington (124)
Nov. 19: vs. Saint Mary’s (11)/San Diego State (15)
Nov. 24: BRYANT (179)
Nov. 27: OAKLAND (276)
Dec. 1: HOUSTON (1)
Dec. 5: DELAWARE (224)
Dec. 9: CINCINNATI (63)
Dec. 16: WINTHROP (250)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (13 of 121 complete)
1. Purdue (72.7%, 104.484)
2. Marquette (54.5%, 128.5)
3. Tennessee (53.8%, 117.487)
4. Kansas (53.8%, 122.416)
5. Xavier (45.5%, 146.909)
6. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
7. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
8. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
9. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
10. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
11. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
12. Maine (26.7%, 236)
13. Belmont (18.2%, 182.59)
 
Last edited:

Florida now with a complete non-conference schedule after drawing Pitt in the NIT Season Tip-Off.

FLORIDA (13 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 53.8%
Average NET: 174
Nov. 6: LOYOLA-MARYLAND (319)
Nov. 10: vs. Virginia (29)
Nov. 14: FLORIDA A&M (359)
Nov. 17: FLORIDA STATE (220)
Nov. 22: vs. Pitt (56)
Nov. 24: vs. Baylor (17)/Oregon State (225)
Nov. 29: @ Wake Forest (89)
Dec. 5: MERRIMACK (301)
Dec. 9: vs. Richmond (160)
Dec. 14: vs. East Carolina (190)
Dec. 19: vs. Michigan (57)
Dec. 22: GRAMBLING (186)
Dec. 30: QUINNIPIAC (175)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (14 of 121 complete)
1. Purdue (72.7%, 104.484)
2. Marquette (54.5%, 128.5)
3. Tennessee (53.8%, 117.487)
4. Kansas (53.8%, 122.416)
5. Florida (53.8%, 174)
6. Xavier (45.5%, 146.909)
7. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
8. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
9. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
10. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
11. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
12. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
13. Maine (26.7%, 236)
14. Belmont (18.2%, 182.59)
 
Last edited:

Pitt now with a complete non-conference schedule after drawing Florida in the NIT Season Tip-Off.

PITT (11 games)
Palatable Games Percentage: 36.4%
Average NET: 194.545
Nov. 6: NORTH CAROLINA A&T (318)
Nov. 10: BINGHAMTON (297)
Nov. 13: FLORIDA GULF COAST (181)
Nov. 17: JACKSONVILLE (233)
Nov. 22: vs. Florida (73)
Nov. 24: vs. Baylor (17)/Oregon State (225)
Nov. 28: MISSOURI (47)
Dec. 6: @ West Virginia (24)
Dec. 9: CANISIUS (261)
Dec. 16: SOUTH CAROLINA STATE (347)
Dec. 20: PURDUE FORT WAYNE (238)

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (15 of 121 complete)
1. Purdue (72.7%, 104.484)
2. Marquette (54.5%, 128.5)
3. Tennessee (53.8%, 117.487)
4. Kansas (53.8%, 122.416)
5. Florida (53.8%, 174)
6. Xavier (45.5%, 146.909)
7. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
8. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
9. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
10. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
11. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
12. Pitt (36.4%, 194.545)
13. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
14. Maine (26.7%, 236)
15. Belmont (18.2%, 182.59)
 
Last edited:

Texas Southern with a complete non-conference schedule.

TEXAS SOUTHERN (11 games includes 1 non-Division 1)
Palatable Games Percentage: 72.7%
Average NET: 94.9
Nov. 6: @ New Mexico (64)
Nov. 11: @ Arizona State (61)
Nov. 16: @ Virginia (29)
Nov. 18: @ Creighton (14)
Nov. 21: @ ORU (50)
Nov. 25: @ Drake (59)
Nov. 28: @ Purdue (6)
Dec. 16: vs. North Carolina A&T (318)
Dec. 17: vs. Howard (213)
Dec. 21: SAMFORD (135)
Dec. 28: NON-DIVISION 1

Updated Non-Conference Schedule Palatability Rankings (16 of 121 complete)
1. Texas Southern (72.7%, 94.9)
2. Purdue (72.7%, 104.484)
3. Marquette (54.5%, 128.5)
4. Tennessee (53.8%, 117.487)
5. Kansas (53.8%, 122.416)
6. Florida (53.8%, 174)
7. Xavier (45.5%, 146.909)
8. Virginia (45.5%, 171.863)
9. Creighton (45.5%, 171.954)
10. Georgetown (45.5%, 230.545)
11. West Virginia (38.5%, 161.269)
12. Duke (36.4%, 138.272)
13. Pitt (36.4%, 194.545)
14. Nebraska (27.3%, 216.727)
15. Maine (26.7%, 236)
16. Belmont (18.2%, 182.59)
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom