Sending out an SOS: The risks and rewards of nonconference scheduling

At the beginning of the college basketball season, the schedules of most top teams are riddled with what fans call “cupcakes”—games in which the team favored to win usually does, and in a big way. 

These opponents are the ones that fans of teams from the big six conferences—Big East, Big Ten, ACC, Pac 12, Big 12 and SEC—see once and quickly forget, and they have names that sound vaguely like East Coast boarding schools the bad guy from an early John Cusack movie would’ve attended.

But it’s not all Woffords and Colgates and Monmouths for the more prominent teams. Some challenge themselves with a competitive nonconference slate. That might include marquee matchups with other perennial residents of the top 25 at well-known neutral sites such as Madison Square Garden or a boat floating in San Diego harbor. It might also include what some people call a trap game against a solid opponent from outside the big six conferences.

Looking at the three options—cupcake, marquee and trap—each carries inherent risks and rewards. But how does a team weigh those pros and cons to produce a nonconference schedule that fits it best? Or, as would befit this particular blog, how would an economist break down the options to create an advantageous nonconference schedule?

First, let’s ignore annual rivalries and preseason tournaments because most teams have little to no control over which opponent they face in those situations. We should also look past the financial considerations that come into play because it would require more in-depth discussion than this short form permits.

From an economist’s point of view, setting up a nonconference schedule is an exercise in analyzing risk vs. reward and cost vs. benefit for each of the three situations:

Cupcake

Costs/risks:

• A win hurts your strength of schedule (SOS) if you’re a bubble team when tournament time rolls around.
• A loss absolutely destroys your SOS if you wind up as a bubble team and can even push a team into the bubble category that would otherwise not be there.

Benefits/rewards:

• Almost always going to be a win.
• Get to play at home.
• Eases your team into the season and helps build confidence (known in some circles as “The Tom Crean Approach").

Just about every team that either starts the season or thinks it will end the season in the top 25 will schedule one or two cupcakes for the benefits. They can do so because, being a member of one of the big six conferences, their SOS will balance itself out provided they do well in their conference.

Teams outside the big six conferences, less confident about their residence in the top 25 by regular season’s end or unlikely to succeed during the conference schedule take on more risk by scheduling a cupcake because their SOS is likely to be called into question at the end of the year (cough … Virginia Tech … cough).

If a team doesn’t fall into either of those groups … well, to paraphrase an old gambler’s mantra: If you can’t find a cupcake on your schedule, you’re it.

Marquee

Costs/risks:

• Higher potential of an early loss.
• Likely not playing at home.
• Possibility of getting blown out, which can hurt team confidence and immediately derail your season.

Benefits/rewards:

• A win helps your SOS and, if you’re a top 25 team, can even make any SOS discussion irrelevant at tournament time.
• A win boosts team confidence.
• Game is likely to be on national television, which is great exposure for the program.
• Even if you lose, it’s not going to kill your SOS.
• Regardless of the outcome, it’s a good experience for the team early in the year, which can translate into season-long success (known in some circles as “The Tom Izzo Approach”).

Looking at the pros and cons, most top teams that have the opportunity to line up a marquee game should. Unless the coach knows the team won’t be at full strength at the outset or needs to hide a few shortcomings until the kinks can be worked out, these are prime matchups.

Trap game

Costs/risks:

• The home team (aka, the favorite) won’t get much of a bump in SOS with a win and will take a major hit with a loss.
• A loss decreases confidence.
• A loss, and even a close win, can expose a team’s weaknesses.

Benefits/rewards:

• As the favored team, if you win and the team you beat has a successful season, it can boost your SOS.
• The underdog could steal a road win against a top team, which is a major boost to SOS.
• A loss won’t be a detriment to the underdog’s SOS.
• As the underdog, a win or competitive losing effort will increase confidence and provide valuable experience to carry forward.

Weighing the pros and cons, any team in the top 50 should probably avoid this type of matchup; there’s very little reward and significant risk. As stated earlier, teams that are not as confident in their standing by the end of the year, not sure how they’ll fare in conference play or not from a big six conference are likely to have their SOS closely scrutinized at the end of the season. So it would be wise for them to schedule a couple of these games (cough … Virginia Tech … again … cough).

As fans, remember it’s easy to grouse about a schedule that looks like your program of choice replaced its athletic director with Little Debbie. Or, on the opposite end of the spectrum, compiled a slate of marquee games that could leave your record looking more Washington General than Harlem Globetrotter.

But take a step back and ask yourself whether the costs and risks of potential trap games are worth the limited benefits and rewards. If you’re honest with yourself, you’ll be glad your team made the choices it did. And if you’re not, trust us, you will be at tournament time. 

The table below provides our first rankings (Top 50) and also shows the RPI through games finishing 11/21/2011 for comparison.  We welcome feedback and discussion through comments.

Click here for full rankings.

For an explanation of how our rankings are calculated please click here.