Why do some coaches schedule SIM AI BCS teams as opponents.  With rare exceptions, those teams do very badly, get few wins and hurt RPI of anyone who schedules them.

Whats the theory behind scheduling them?  Fun beating a BCS opponent?  other?

Most either dont care of have a lack of understanding of the RPI calculation.

I always try to schedule the best teams that I have a chance to beat.  I multiply the number of juniors on a team x juniors rating for all D1 teams then I try to schedule those teams that are the closest to my number.  If that happens to be a Big 6 SIM ... so be it.

No offense, but that's a really poor way of scheduling.  As far as impact on your end of season RPI, ranking, and postseason eligibility, all that matters is the record and schedule of your opponents.  The actual talent level is basically irrelevant.  You can play a weaker team from an empty conference that goes 20-8 with an RPI in the 100 range and it will look much better than having played a "better" or "stronger" team that goes 6-21 in a BCS conference with an RPI of 180.

No offense taken ... thanks for the food for thought.

Back in the day when RPI was the key criteria for selection and seeding, this was always a bad scheduling move. But now that the Projection Report is the main criteria, it's not necessarily a bad move, but you have to be very selective about it. The Projection Report rewards you for beating Top 50 and Top 100 teams. If you beat a 10-17 BCS team that has an 80 RPI, it might well hurt your RPI, but it counts as a quality win in the Projection Report, which is really what matters.

I think this is an obvious answer. I would much rather beat a huge school with a bad RPI than small school with decent RPI.

Posted by professor17 on 8/29/2013 4:49:00 PM (view original):
Back in the day when RPI was the key criteria for selection and seeding, this was always a bad scheduling move. But now that the Projection Report is the main criteria, it's not necessarily a bad move, but you have to be very selective about it. The Projection Report rewards you for beating Top 50 and Top 100 teams. If you beat a 10-17 BCS team that has an 80 RPI, it might well hurt your RPI, but it counts as a quality win in the Projection Report, which is really what matters.

+1 This is exactly why. I never scheduled BCS sims until a couple of seasons ago, but now that RPI doesn't really matter, it makes a lot of sense.

Posted by professor17 on 8/29/2013 4:49:00 PM (view original):
Back in the day when RPI was the key criteria for selection and seeding, this was always a bad scheduling move. But now that the Projection Report is the main criteria, it's not necessarily a bad move, but you have to be very selective about it. The Projection Report rewards you for beating Top 50 and Top 100 teams. If you beat a 10-17 BCS team that has an 80 RPI, it might well hurt your RPI, but it counts as a quality win in the Projection Report, which is really what matters.

This is something I've been meaning to clear up. It is top 50 and 100 in the Projection Report, not top 50/100 in the RPI. Correct?

Posted by ekswimmer on 8/29/2013 10:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by professor17 on 8/29/2013 4:49:00 PM (view original):
Back in the day when RPI was the key criteria for selection and seeding, this was always a bad scheduling move. But now that the Projection Report is the main criteria, it's not necessarily a bad move, but you have to be very selective about it. The Projection Report rewards you for beating Top 50 and Top 100 teams. If you beat a 10-17 BCS team that has an 80 RPI, it might well hurt your RPI, but it counts as a quality win in the Projection Report, which is really what matters.

This is something I've been meaning to clear up. It is top 50 and 100 in the Projection Report, not top 50/100 in the RPI. Correct?

no, its vs top rpi. the system you describe is self referencing which is significantly more complex. you are suggesting the ranking in the projection report depends on the ranking in the projection report of others... their projection report ranking depends on the projection report of others still - including you, as you both play. how do you set a value? there are ways to assign rankings in a system like this, but its massively more complicated that using record vs top 25/50/75/100 rpi - which is well defined and easy to compute.

Posted by dbarth101 on 8/29/2013 5:20:00 PM (view original):
I think this is an obvious answer. I would much rather beat a huge school with a bad RPI than small school with decent RPI.

That's akin to taking players from your favorite NFL team in a fantasy football draft just because you're a fan. If winning and optimum strategy are what matters to you, this is a poor play.

Posted by michgoblue2 on 8/29/2013 8:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by professor17 on 8/29/2013 4:49:00 PM (view original):
Back in the day when RPI was the key criteria for selection and seeding, this was always a bad scheduling move. But now that the Projection Report is the main criteria, it's not necessarily a bad move, but you have to be very selective about it. The Projection Report rewards you for beating Top 50 and Top 100 teams. If you beat a 10-17 BCS team that has an 80 RPI, it might well hurt your RPI, but it counts as a quality win in the Projection Report, which is really what matters.

+1 This is exactly why. I never scheduled BCS sims until a couple of seasons ago, but now that RPI doesn't really matter, it makes a lot of sense.

I think that's overstating things. I'd say you do have more of a chance for it not to blow up in your face now. But the reality is that unless that BCS school is left with some really strong human-recruited talent, it still usually does. As prof said, you have to do it very selectively.

10-17 for a sim AI in a BCS conference is wishful thinking. There aren't many instances when a coach leaves a BCS school in such good shape that it can get a top 100 RPI without a user coach and then that team stays sim for 2 seasons. I still think it's a bad idea to schedule BCS sims, because it will kill your SOS and they won't have a helpful RPI.

Posted by kmasonbx1 on 8/30/2013 8:47:00 AM (view original):
10-17 for a sim AI in a BCS conference is wishful thinking. There aren't many instances when a coach leaves a BCS school in such good shape that it can get a top 100 RPI without a user coach and then that team stays sim for 2 seasons. I still think it's a bad idea to schedule BCS sims, because it will kill your SOS and they won't have a helpful RPI.

No, it doesn't happen all that often, but it does happen occassionally, which is why I said you have to be very selective about it. I'm not saying to schedule any old BCS sim. I'm saying you've got to be smart about it, and that if you guess wrong, it doesn't hurt to the degree it did when RPI was the controlling factor in seeding/selection. In the last several seasons in Phelan we've had the following results from teams that were in the their 2nd consecutive season of Sim control:

Virginia: 12-17, 63 RPI
NC State: 14-15, 85 RPI
Florida St.: 17-14, 45 RPI
Ohio St: 21-9, 20 RPI

All of those would have been considered good quality wins.

There were a few others with RPI's in the 110-140 range, which although not quality wins, are not bad ones, either, and wouldn't hurt you.

i never have and never will schedule BCS sims. play with fire and you get burned! now i know there are occasional instances where its not the worst move you can make, but if the sim is really good enough to win a bunch of games in conference - then you can lose. you dont play sims to lose, you play to win 90-95% or more of the time. plus, unless you schedule right at the end, you risk 9 other coaches deciding to play this guy too. i can see an argument for "its not always terrible to play a BCS sim", but i can not see an argument for "its sometimes optimal to play a BCS sim". i mean look at it this way - NOBODY in that sim's conference is happy about being forced to play them. that should tell you all you need to know. anyone i mentor who schedules a BCS sim immediately gets a lengthy lesson in scheduling 101.