| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
 Posted: 06/15/16 7:41 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| I agree. Very hard on the body.
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
Happycappie25
Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 4174
Location: QUEENS!!!!
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/16 8:22 pm ::: Re: Angel McCoughtry calls for W to eliminate back-to-back g |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/basketball/angel-mccoughtry-calls-for-wnba-to-eliminate-back-/nrg24/
| Quote: |
| The WNBA needs to get rid of back-to-backs, McCoughtry said. Its one of the toughest things Ive had to in my career. Players play too much and too long all year around. |
|
should be in the next cba I agree...said this for a while
_________________
"Leave it to the NCAA women's basketball committee to turn a glass slipper into glass ceiling" Graham Hays
|
|
Queenie
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18029
Location: Queens
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/16 8:26 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Pretty sure everybody except the NFL has them, so that's going to be an uphill battle.
_________________
Ardent believer in the separation of church and stadium.
|
|
NYL_WNBA_FAN
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/16 8:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Might not be possible in an Olympic year and I don't know how arena availability plays into it.
Also haven't read the article yet but simply put I agree. They've reduced back to backs this year but between the additional cross country trip with the new schedule and the commercial flights and the year-round play I think back-to-backs are really unfair to WNBA players.
Most of the back-to-backs being weekends, the league wants as many of those as possible too for attendance purposes. Weekend games that is. It's a tough situation.
_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
Last edited by NYL_WNBA_FAN on 06/15/16 8:35 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
blaase22
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 4163
Location: Paradise
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/16 8:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
They could play on Mondays to relieve some of the compaction.
But don't players prefer playing over practice? I've heard that from at least one player that isn't that bothered by back-to-backs.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/16 8:42 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
Might not be possible in an Olympic year and I don't know how arena availability plays into it.
Also haven't read the article yet but simply put I agree. They've reduced back to backs this year but between the additional cross country trip with the new schedule and the commercial flights and the year-round play I think back-to-backs are really unfair to WNBA players.
Most of the back-to-backs being weekends, the league wants as many of those as possible too for attendance purposes. Weekend games that is. It's a tough situation. |
Nobody has back-to-back home games and there's only one set of back-to-back days with more than six games (opening weekend). Move one of those opening weekend home dates and you could arrange the visiting teams so that there are no back-to-backs for the season.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
Nerd2
Joined: 06 Jun 2010
Posts: 7659
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/16 8:46 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Queenie wrote: |
| Pretty sure everybody except the NFL has them, so that's going to be an uphill battle. |
The difference is that they get charters in those other leagues, arrive and can get 8 hours sleep in between.
|
|
miller40
Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 1334
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/16 9:32 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Shades wrote: |
| They could play on Mondays to relieve some of the compaction. |
I agree.
|
|
ChicagoAnnie
Joined: 04 Sep 2009
Posts: 9199
Location: St. Paul, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/16/16 3:59 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| myrtle wrote: |
| I agree. Very hard on the body. |
Especially when having to fly commercial.
|
|
jmpenn90
Joined: 09 May 2008
Posts: 461
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/16/16 8:07 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| miller40 wrote: |
| Shades wrote: |
| They could play on Mondays to relieve some of the compaction. |
I agree. |
Anyone know why there aren't any games on Mondays? They don't think their would be a good audience or fans in the seats?
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/16/16 9:15 am ::: |
Reply |
|
The back-to-back games exist in part to get more weekend games, which generate more income. So if players want to eliminate back-to-back games, they should then volunteer to get less money.
Of course that won't happen, and it's the same in the NBA and MLB and the NFL and NHL: Everyone (owners, players, etc.) agrees the seasons are too long but no one wants to make less money.
Or, to put it another way, everyone wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Admiral_Needa
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 10479
Location: Tiburon, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/16/16 10:02 am ::: |
Reply |
|
10 years ago, I frequently debated Bill Laimbeer/ShockPR/Kevin Pelton/etc on whether back-to-back games have a negative impact on players and teams. It was of my opinion that it does.
In one thread, the discussion ended with this:  
| ShockPR wrote: |
Looking at the broader issue you raised of what athletes tell us about these kind of things, I would suggest that as much as those who play the games can tell us about "how" they play the game and "how they feel" when they play it, that they are far from the best people to actually analyze performance in these kind of situations. Noted baseball author and current Boston Red Sox front office big-wig Bill James called it not being able to see the forest for the trees.
I agree with you that it makes intuitive sense that the back end of a back to back should be more difficult, but how many athletes are saying it is tougher because they've honestly looked at it and can articulate what is different about the way they play in the back end, and how many are just parotting conventional wisdom that has been passed down from generatiom to generation.
I have heard basketball color commentators say on a number of occasions that three pointers get rebounded by the offensive team more often than two-pointers do. Studies I have read indicate that this is not true, but it doesn't stop them from saying it.
Getting back to the back-to-backs, it may be that we aren't giving these world-class athletes the credit they deserve for being in incredible shape and having the ability to bounce back given the rigors of playing, practicing and treveling
Perhaps when teams are winning the first game of a back-to-back by a decent margin, coaches tend to rest players more than they otherwise would to save them for that second game. Perhaps players in that first game don't run full throttle Tamika Catchings style throughtout the game taking more breaks than they otherwise would.
The thing to do is ask the question, 'if it is true that the back-end of a back-to-back is tougher on players, and that difficulty impacts the performance of players playing in those games, how would we know?'
Statistically, we would expect teams to lose more back-ends than they would if the game was a random single game on the schedule. We might expect offensive shooting percentages to decrease and defensive shooting percentages to increase. We might expect the same to be true of rebounding percentage. Perhaps teams take more threes in the back end of a back to back rather than aggressively attack the rim. Perhaps they foul more.
These are all things we can test for, if we have the inclination. If I get some time over the weekend, I'll try and put together the league averages for the past several years just to see what they look like.
Of course, you could go even deeper than this if you wanted. Do we treat a game where both teams are playing the back end of a back to back differently from a game where only one team is. Are we adjusting for the quality of the opposition in those back-end games. I doubt I'll have the time to do that, but we'll see what teams and players over time have been better than others in the these situations.
Your earlier point is true though, just because we don't find any evidence of an impact, doesn't mean their isn't an impact. It may just mean we haven't found a way to measure it yet.
http://boards.rebkell.net/viewtopic.php?p=102321&highlight=enough+general+evidence#102321 |
With that, 10 years later, has anyone found a way to measure it?
Or is Angel McCoughtry just another player who is "parotting conventional wisdom that has been passed down from generation to generation."  
_________________
2002 WNBA Virtual GM Overall Winner
2006 WNBA Triple Threat Overall Winner
2007 NBA ESPN Fast Break Overall Winner
|
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/16/16 10:09 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| You mean someone could actually look at data and figure it out?
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/16/16 10:20 am ::: |
Reply |
|
If they need back to backs then make them so a team is at home for both, that would alleviate some of the strain. But especially for the older players who need to soak and/or ice and/or get PT of whatever type after games, back to back can't help but make a difference in a negative way.
As for weekend games, a Friday - Sunday combo is also available.
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/16/16 11:04 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Seemed like ShockPR was debating the affect of back-to-backs on W-L record or how they play, rather than how it affects a player's body.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
Admiral_Needa
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 10479
Location: Tiburon, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/16/16 4:15 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Randy wrote: |
| You mean someone could actually look at data and figure it out? |
ShockPR certainly believed so and posted specifically about that.. Here's some of the data:
| ShockPR wrote: |
Afternoon everybody:
A week or two ago somebody posted Mark Cuban's weblog article about back-to-backs and I referenced a study I had done once. Finally tracked it down through Clay Kallum at Full Court. I'll probably try and update it at some point during the offseason since we now have another several years of data we can plug in, but here it is with apologies for the lack of coding for the charts. I hope it still makes sense.
-------------------------------------
The WNBA released its 2002 schedule a few weeks ago, which means that for the week just after, head coaches and general managers were on the phone to the league complaining about the specific injustices foisted upon their respective teams. Weather it's too many back-to-backs, not enough home weekend games or that long road-trip to the East Coast to start the season, there's usually something to complain about with regards to every team's schedule if you look at it in the right light.
But is all this hand-wringing over scheduling merely a case of people needing something about which to complain, or is there really a disadvantage inherent in some team's schedules? Today, I'll take a look at back-to-backs and their impact on a team's winning percentages.
Conventional wisdom suggests that back-to-backs are bad for teams because of the fatigue factor inherent in playing that second game -- the back end of the back-to-back. Therefore, it makes intuitive sense that teams with the most back-to-backs would suffer with regards to their won-loss record as compared to teams with fewer back-to-backs.
First assumption first, though: Do teams lose more back ends of back-to-backs then we would expect?
In the WNBA's five-year history, there have been 348 regular-season back-to-backs. Teams are 180-168 in front ends of a back-to-back for a 51.7 winning percentage, but in the back ends of back-to-backs they're 158-190 for a 45.4 winning percentage. Winning any game, league-wide, is a 50-percent proposition, so we conclude that winning the back end of a back-to-back is tougher than winning the average game.
The problem is, though, that the back end is not an average game, and I don't mean because of the fatigue factor. Stating the obvious here for a moment, not only is the average winning percentage in the league 50 percent, but 50 percent of a team's games are home games and 50 percent are road games. However -- and here's the kicker -- a disproportionate number of back end games are played on the road. In fact, 242 of 348 back ends have been played on the road -- 69.5 percent.
Here's where the math gets a little heavy. Teams win road games 39.6 percent of the time and home games 60.4 percent of the time over the league's five-year history. If we apply those winning percentages to the home/road distribution of back end games, we get the following.
106 home games * .604 = 64 wins
242 road games * .396 = 96 wins
348 total back ends = 160 wins
We would expect teams that play this distribution of home and road games, regardless of their context, to win 160 of them while losing 188. Take a quick peek back at the actual record in these back end situations: 158 and 190. In five years, teams have won just two fewer games than we would expect them to if they were playing random games throughout the schedule.
I don't know if anybody else is as shocked by that as I am. Not that it will alter anybody's game strategy or that any team that knows this can have some advantage over another team, but I always bought into the idea that fatigue played a roll in the difficulty of winning the back end of a back-to-back. Looking at the data though, playing the back end is no different then playing any other game. It's playing those games on the road that makes it seem like a negative proposition.
Studying the figures with regards to the total number of back-to-backs in a season and how they relate to a team's winning percentage paints an interesting picture as well.
Winning Pct. vs. No. of Back-To-Backs
Back-To-Backs W-L WPct
1 14-14 .500
2 0-0 -----
3 18-10 .643
4 163-207 .441
5 237-199 .544
6 326-296 .524
7 101-123 .451
8 93-99 .484
9 14-18 .438
It seems to suggest that although it's more difficult to win games with more than seven or more back-to-backs on the schedule, it's also more difficult to win games with four or fewer back-to-backs. The sample sizes in those outlying areas are pretty small, making it difficult to draw any sort of conclusions from them. Only time, additional games and additional studies will tell if what we are seeing here is significant.
The more interesting question, if these winning percentages hold up over time and are deemed significant, is why would a team that has four back-to-backs or less suffer in the same fashion as a team with seven or more? The only thing that occurs to me is that there may be other elements of those team's schedules that are impacting their winning percentages.
I took a look at one other possibility with this issue -- that we might see the effect of back-to-backs manifesting itself not in specific back-to-back games or throughout an entire season, but over the second half of the season. The thinking being that it takes time for a team to feel the wear and tear of multiple back-to-back situations. If this hypothesis were true, we would expect teams with more back-to-backs to see a decrease in their winning percentages from the first half of the year to the second, but we don't.
2nd Half Winning Pct. vs. No. of Back-To-Backs
Back-To-Backs No. of Teams 1st Half WPct 2nd Half WPct
1-4 14 .459 .458
5 14 .541 .539
6 20 .522 .529
7 7 .464 .438
8-9 7 .438 .518
Actually, the seven teams that have had eight and nine back-to-backs have improved in the second half of the season. Basically, though, this chart suggests to us that there is no effect of back-to-backs on a team's winning percentages in the second half of the season.
As of now, I'd have to conclude that there is not enough concrete evidence to suggest that back-to-backs have a negative impact on a team's winning percentage. |
_________________
2002 WNBA Virtual GM Overall Winner
2006 WNBA Triple Threat Overall Winner
2007 NBA ESPN Fast Break Overall Winner
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/17/16 10:34 am ::: |
Reply |
|
This morning I decided to make a WNBA schedule with no back-to-backs. My original plan was to keep all the home dates intact as they are now and just switch road teams. That turned out to be impossible. So I decided to do it with as few moved games as possible and making sure to maintain weekend integrity (i.e. weekend games move to other weekend days and weekday games move to other weekdays). I also kept all Mondays free. I wound up moving a total of nine home dates, eight of them by one day and one from a weekend to the next weekend.
This is what a no back-to-back schedule could look like...
5/14
Indiana at Washington
Phoenix at Minnesota
Connecticut at Chicago
Atlanta at San Antonio
5/15
Seattle at Los Angeles
Dallas at New York
5/18
Minnesota at Chicago
Dallas at Washington
Seattle at Indiana
5/19
Connecticut at San Antonio
5/20
Chicago at Washington
Atlanta at Indiana
Seattle at Phoenix
5/21
Los Angeles at New York
San Antonio at Dallas
5/22
Chicago at Atlanta
Minnesota at Seattle
Phoenix at Indiana
Washington at Connecticut
5/24
Atlanta at New York
Los Angeles at Chicago
5/25
Minnesota at Phoenix
5/26
Los Angeles at Connecticut
Washington at Seattle
5/27
Phoenix at Minnesota
Chicago at San Antonio
Atlanta at Dallas
5/28
Connecticut at Seattle
5/29
Indiana at Atlanta
Chicago at Dallas
New York at Phoenix
5/31
Minnesota at New York
Connecticut at Phoenix
6/1
Atlanta at Washington
Dallas at Indiana
6/2
San Antonio at Los Angeles
6/3
Atlanta at Connecticut
Indiana at New York
Washington at Chicago
Phoenix at Seattle
6/4
Dallas at Minnesota
Los Angeles at San Antonio
6/5
Indiana at Connecticut
Washington at Atlanta
New York at Seattle
6/7
Indiana at Minnesota
New York at Los Angeles
6/8
Washington at Dallas
San Antonio at Phoenix
6/10
Seattle at Connecticut
Phoenix at Indiana
Chicago at Atlanta
6/11
Minnesota at Washington
New York at San Antonio
Los Angeles at Dallas
6/12
Connecticut at Atlanta
Chicago at Phoenix
Seattle at Indiana
6/14
Washington at Connecticut
Dallas at New York
Indiana at Minnesota
Seattle at San Antonio
Chicago at Los Angeles
6/16
New York at Connecticut
Phoenix at Dallas
6/17
Minnesota at Atlanta
Indiana at San Antonio
Seattle at Los Angeles
6/18
Chicago at Washington
Dallas at Phoenix
6/19
San Antonio at Connecticut
New York at Indiana
Minnesota at Seattle
6/21
Phoenix at Los Angeles
San Antonio at Chicago
Seattle at Dallas
6/22
Connecticut at Atlanta
New York at Washington
6/23
San Antonio at Dallas
6/24
Phoenix at Washington
Chicago at New York
Los Angeles at Minnesota
Connecticut at Seattle
6/25
Atlanta at San Antonio
Indiana at Dallas
6/26
Phoenix at New York
Minnesota at Washington
Connecticut at Los Angeles
6/28
Atlanta at Seattle
Dallas at Los Angeles
6/29
San Antonio at Washington
Indiana at Chicago
New York at Minnesota
Connecticut at Phoenix
6/30
Atlanta at Los Angeles
Dallas at Seattle
7/1
San Antonio at Indiana
New York at Chicago
Washington at Phoenix
7/2
Seattle at Minnesota
Connecticut at Dallas
7/3
New York at Los Angeles
Phoenix at Atlanta
7/5
Seattle at Atlanta
Chicago at Minnesota
Phoenix at Dallas
7/6
Washington at San Antonio
Indiana at Los Angeles
7/7
Seattle at New York
Minnesota at Connecticut
7/8
Dallas at Atlanta
Washington at Chicago
Los Angeles at San Antonio
Indiana at Phoenix
7/10
Dallas at Minnesota
Atlanta at Connecticut
San Antonio at New York
Phoenix at Chicago
Washington at Los Angeles
Indiana at Seattle
7/12
Minnesota at San Antonio
7/13
Atlanta at New York
Connetcicut at Indiana
Los Angeles at Chicago
Washington at Phoenix
7/15
Los Angeles at Connecticut
Atlanta at Indiana
New York at Minnesota
Dallas at Chicago
Washington at Seattle
7/16
San Antonio at Phoenix
7/17
Connecticut at New York
Los Angeles at Atlanta
Minnesota at Dallas
Chicago at Seattle
7/19
Los Angeles at Indiana
Chicago at Phoenix
New York at Washington
7/20
Connecticut at Dallas
Atlanta at Minnesota
San Antonio at Seattle
7/21
Indiana at New York
7/22
Los Angeles at Washington
Dallas at Atlanta
San Antonio at Minnesota
Connecticut at Chicago
8/26
Minnesota at Connecticut
New York at San Antonio
Atlanta at Chicago
Dallas at Phoenix
Los Angeles at Seattle
Washington at Indiana
8/28
New York at Atlanta
Chicago at Dallas
Seattle at Minnesota
San Antonio at Washington
Los Angeles at Phoenix
8/30
San Antonio at Connecticut
Chicago at Indiana
8/31
Dallas at Seattle
9/1
New York at Indiana
Atlanta at San Antonio
9/2
Phoenix at Connecticut
Washington at Minnesota
Seattle at Chicago
Los Angeles at Dallas
9/4
Phoenix at New York
Washington at Dallas
San Antonio at Chicago
Seattle at Atlanta
Indiana at Los Angeles
Connecticut at Minnesota
9/6
Phoenix at Atlanta
Indiana at San Antonio
Minnesota at Los Angeles
9/7
Seattle at New York
Connecticut at Washington
9/8
Minnesota at Los Angeles
9/9
Seattle at Washington
Chicago at Indiana
Connecticut at New York
Dallas at San Antonio
9/11
Chicago at Connecticut
Indiana at Washington
New York at Dallas
Minnesota at San Antonio
Atlanta at Phoenix
Los Angeles at Seattle
9/13
Indiana at Connecticut
Washington at New York
San Antonio at Atlanta
Minnesota at Chicago
Phoenix at Los Angeles
9/15
Washington at Atlanta
Seattle at Phoenix
9/16
Dallas at Connecticut
Minnesota at Indiana
New York at Chicago
San Antonio at Los Angeles
9/18
Atlanta at Minnesota
Los Angeles at Washington
Dallas at Indiana
Phoenix at San Antonio
Chicago at Seattle
The dates I moved:
Indiana from 5/14 to 5/22
Connecticut from 5/21 to 5/22
Phoenix from 6/9 to 6/8
New York from 7/6 to 7/7
Minnesota from 7/9 to 7/10
Washington from 7/20 to 7/19
Indiana from 8/27 to 8/26
New York from 9/3 to 9/4
Minnesota from 9/17 to 9/18
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/17/16 11:10 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| You have too much time on your hands! But good job. There are probably some venue conflicts in there, but still the W should hire you for scheduling!
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/17/16 11:16 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| myrtle wrote: |
| You have too much time on your hands! But good job. There are probably some venue conflicts in there, but still the W should hire you for scheduling! |
I moved less than 5% of currently scheduled home dates. I doubt the venue availability is so tight that they can't move a handful of dates. If the W really wanted to eliminate back-to-backs they could do it.
Also, making a schedule from scratch is far more difficult that what I did. The W's schedule makers had already done the hard part, I just tweaked it a bit.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
NYL_WNBA_FAN
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/16 5:35 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
So given Pilight's schedule adjustments, I would think there has to be a reason for a few back to backs.
Some possibilities are arena availability and travel costs. I would like to think if arena availability wouldn't interfere with Pilight's scheduling that back to backs would have been eliminated.
_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/23/16 11:08 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I've been working on this some more. I'm down to moving three home games and having a schedule with no back-to-backs. I find it hard to believe the venue availability is so tight that they can't move three games out of 204. I suspect it can be done with just two dates moved, but it was giving me a headache trying to save San Antonio's 5/19 game.
5/14
Atlanta at Washington
Dallas at Minnesota
Indiana at Chicago
Phoenix at San Antonio
5/15
Connecticut at Los Angeles
Seattle at New York
5/18
Minnesota at Chicago
Connecticut at Washington
Seattle at Indiana
Atlanta at San Antonio
5/20
Seattle at Washington
Los Angeles at Indiana
Atlanta at Phoenix
5/21
Chicago at New York
Minnesota at Connecticut
San Antonio at Dallas
5/22
Washington at Indiana
Los Angeles at Atlanta
Phoenix at Seattle
5/24
Washington at New York
Dallas at Chicago
5/25
Los Angeles at Phoenix
5/26
Indiana at Connecticut
Chicago at Seattle
5/27
New York at Minnesota
Los Angeles at San Antonio
Atlanta at Dallas
5/28
Connecticut at Seattle
5/29
New York at Atlanta
Minnesota at Dallas
Washington at Phoenix
5/31
Dallas at New York
Seattle at Phoenix
6/1
San Antonio at Washington
Connecticut at Indiana
6/2
Dallas at Los Angeles
6/3
Atlanta at Connecticut
Washington at New York
Phoenix at Chicago
Indiana at Seattle
6/4
Dallas at Minnesota
Los Angeles at San Antonio
6/5
Chicago at Connecticut
Phoenix at Atlanta
Washington at Seattle
6/7
Chicago at Minnesota
San Antonio at Los Angeles
6/8
Indiana at Dallas
New York at Phoenix
6/10
Seattle at Connecticut
Phoenix at Indiana
Minnesota at Atlanta
6/11
Chicago at Washington
New York at San Antonio
Washington at Dallas
6/12
Seattle at Atlanta
Connecticut at Phoenix
Minnesota at Indiana
6/14
Dallas at Connecticut
Atlanta at New York
Seattle at Minnesota
Chicago at San Antonio
Washington at Los Angeles
6/16
New York at Connecticut
Phoenix at Dallas
6/17
Indiana at Atlanta
Minnesota at San Antonio
Seattle at Los Angeles
6/18
New York at Washington
Chicago at Phoenix
6/19
Los Angeles at Connecticut
San Antonio at Indiana
Minnesota at Seattle
6/21
Phoenix at Los Angeles
San Antonio at Chicago
New York at Dallas
6/22
Minnesota at Atlanta
Indiana at Washington
6/23
San Antonio at Dallas
6/24
Connecticut at Washington
Los Angeles at New York
Chicago at Minnesota
Indiana at Seattle
6/25
Phoenix at San Antonio
Atlanta at Dallas
6/26
Chicago at New York
Seattle at Washington
Connecticut at Los Angeles
6/28
New York at Seattle
Atlanta at Los Angeles
6/29
San Antonio at Washington
Indiana at Chicago
Connecticut at Minnesota
Dallas at Phoenix
6/30
New York at Los Angeles
Atlanta at Seattle
7/1
Connecticut at Indiana
Washington at Chicago
San Antonio at Phoenix
7/2
New York at Minnesota
Seattle at Dallas
7/3
Chicago at Los Angeles
San Antonio at Atlanta
7/5
Seattle at Atlanta
Phoenix at Minnesota
Connecticut at Dallas
7/6
Indiana at New York
Chicago at San Antonio
Washington at Los Angeles
7/7
Minnesota at Connecticut
7/8
Dallas at Atlanta
New York at Chicago
Seattle at San Antonio
Indiana at Phoenix
7/9
Washington at Minnesota
7/10
San Antonio at Connecticut
Phoenix at New York
Atlanta at Chicago
Indiana at Los Angeles
Dallas at Seattle
7/12
Washington at San Antonio
7/13
Minnesota at New York
Los Angeles at Indiana
Atlanta at Chicago
Seattle at Phoenix
7/15
New York at Connectiut
Dallas at Indiana
Atlanta at Minnesota
Los Angeles at Chicago
San Antonio at Seattle
7/16
Washington at Phoenix
7/17
Los Angeles at New York
Connecticut at Atlanta
Chicago at Dallas
San Antonio at Seattle
7/19
New York at Indiana
Los Angeles at Phoenix
7/20
Atlanta at Washington
Connecticut at Dallas
San Antonio at Minnesota
Chicago at Seattle
7/21
Phoenix at New York
7/22
Dallas at Washington
Connecticut at Atlanta
Indiana at Minnesota
Los Angeles at Chicago
8/26
Atlanta at Connecticut
Minnesota at San Antonio
Washington at Chicago
Dallas at Phoenix
Los Angeles at Seattle
8/27
New York at Indiana
8/28
San Antonio at Atlanta
Los Angeles at Dallas
Seattle at Minnesota
Chicago at Washington
Connecticut at Phoenix
8/30
Phoenix at Connecticut
Washington at Indiana
8/31
Minnesota at Seattle
9/1
Atlanta at Indiana
New York at San Antonio
9/2
Seattle at Connecticut
Los Angeles at Minnesota
Phoenix at Chicago
Washington at Dallas
9/3
San Antonio at New York
9/4
Phoenix at Dallas
Connecticut at Chicago
Washington at Atlanta
Seattle at Los Angeles
Indiana at Minnesota
9/6
Chicago at Atlanta
Indiana at San Antonio
Minnesota at Los Angeles
9/7
Dallas at New York
Phoenix at Washington
9/8
Atlanta at Los Angeles
9/9
Minnesota at Washington
Phoenix at Indiana
Connecticut at New York
Dallas at San Antonio
9/11
Chicago at Connecticut
Minnesota at Washington
Los Angeles at Dallas
Indiana at San Antonio
Atlanta at Phoenix
New York at Seattle
9/13
San Antonio at Connecticut
Phoenix at New York
Indiana at Atlanta
Dallas at Chicago
Minnesota at Los Angeles
9/15
New York at Atlanta
Minnesota at Phoenix
9/16
Washington at Connecticut
Dallas at Indiana
Seattle at Chicago
San Antonio at Los Angeles
9/17
Phoenix at Minnesota
9/18
Los Angeles at Washington
Chicago at Indiana
Connecticut at San Antonio
Dallas at Seattle
Dates moved
Indiana 5/14 to 5/22
San Antonio 5/19 to 5/18
Phoenix from 6/9 to 6/8
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/06/16 3:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I got it down to two moved dates, which is the fewest that can be done with the current home schedule. One of the 5/14 games had to move because they had seven games in two days, which is impossible with only 12 teams and no back-to-backs. So I moved Indiana's game to the next weekend. On 6/10-11 there were six games, meaning every team has to play. Phoenix has home games scheduled on both the 9th and the 12th, so they would be back-to-back if I tried to place them in that set. So I moved their game from the 9th to the 8th.
There's no way the venue availability is so tight that they can't move two games out of 204. Back-to-backs are not required.
5/14
Indiana at Washington
Dallas at Minnesota
Phoenix at Chicago
Seattle at San Antonio
5/15
Atlanta at Los Angeles
Connecticut at New York
5/18
Minnesota at Chicago
New York at Washington
Phoenix at Indiana
5/19
Los Angeles at San Antonio
5/20
Seattle at Washington
Atlanta at Indiana
Minnesota at Phoenix
5/21
Chicago at New York
San Antonio at Connecticut
Los Angeles at Dallas
5/22
Washington at Indiana
Phoenix at Atlanta
Minnesota at Seattle
5/24
Dallas at New York
Connecticut at Chicago
5/25
Indiana at Phoenix
5/26
New York at Connecticut
Washington at Seattle
5/27
Los Angeles at Minnesota
Indiana at San Antonio
Chicago at Dallas
5/28
Connecticut at Seattle
5/29
San Antonio at Atlanta
Minnesota at Dallas
Chicago at Phoenix
5/31
Los Angeles at New York
Seattle at Phoenix
6/1
San Antonio at Washington
Dallas at Indiana
6/2
Minnesota at Los Angeles
6/3
Atlanta at Connecticut
Phoenix at New York
Dallas at Chicago
Indiana at Seattle
6/4
Los Angeles at Minnesota
Washington at San Antonio
6/5
Phoenix at Connecticut
Chicago at Atlanta
New York at Seattle
6/7
Seattle at Minnesota
Chicago at Los Angeles
6/8
Indiana at Dallas
San Antonio at Phoenix
6/10
New York at Connecticut
Phoenix at Indiana
Los Angeles at Atlanta
6/11
Minnesota at Washington
Chicago at San Antonio
Seattle at Dallas
6/12
New York at Atlanta
Los Angeles at Phoenix
Connecticut at Indiana
6/14
Seattle at Connecticut
Chicago at New York
Phoenix at Minnesota
Atlanta at San Antonio
Washington at Los Angeles
6/16
Chicago at Connecticut
Washington at Dallas
6/17
Seattle at Atlanta
Minnesota at San Antonio
New York at Los Angeles
6/18
Chicago at Washington
Dallas at Phoenix
6/19
Los Angeles at Connecticut
Atlanta at Indiana
San Antonio at Seattle
6/21
San Antonio at Los Angeles
New York at Chicago
Connecticut at Dallas
6/22
Minnesota at Atlanta
Phoenix at Washington
6/23
San Antonio at Dallas
6/24
Connecticut at Washington
Los Angeles at New York
Indiana at Minnesota
Chicago at Seattle
6/25
Phoenix at San Antonio
Atlanta at Dallas
6/26
Indiana at New York
Minnesota at Washington
Connecticut at Los Angeles
6/28
San Antonio at Seattle
Dallas at Los Angeles
6/29
Atlanta at Washington
Indiana at Chicago
New York at Minnesota
Connecticut at Phoenix
6/30
San Antonio at Los Angeles
Dallas at Seattle
7/1
Connecticut at Indiana
Atlanta at Chicago
New York at Phoenix
7/2
Washington at Minnesota
Seattle at Dallas
7/3
Phoenix at Los Angeles
Indiana at Atlanta
7/5
Connecticut at Atlanta
Chicago at Minnesota
Washington at Dallas
7/6
Indiana at New York
Phoenix at San Antonio
Seattle at Los Angeles
7/7
Minnesota at Connecticut
7/8
New York at Atlanta
Washington at Chicago
Seattle at San Antonio
Los Angeles at Phoenix
7/9
Dallas at Minnesota
7/10
San Antonio at Connecticut
Washington at New York
Indiana at Chicago
Atlanta at Los Angeles
Phoenix at Seattle
7/12
Minnesota at San Antonio
7/13
Atlanta at New York
Seattle at Indiana
Dallas at Chicago
Washington at Phoenix
7/15
Atlanta at Connecticut
Dallas at Indiana
San Antonio at Minnesota
Los Angeles at Chicago
New York at Seattle
7/16
Washington at Phoenix
7/17
San Antonio at New York
Minnesota at Atlanta
Los Angeles at Dallas
Indiana at Seattle
7/19
New York at Indiana
Atlanta at Phoenix
7/20
San Antonio at Washington
Connecticut at Dallas
Chicago at Minnesota
Los Angeles at Seattle
7/21
Phoenix at New York
7/22
Indiana at Washington
Dallas at Atlanta
Connecticut at Minnesota
San Antonio at Chicago
8/26
Minnesota at Connecticut
New York at San Antonio
Washington at Chicago
Dallas at Phoenix
Atlanta at Seattle
8/27
Los Angeles at Indiana
8/28
Chicago at Atlanta
San Antonio at Dallas
New York at Minnesota
Seattle at Washington
Connecticut at Phoenix
8/30
Washington at Connecticut
Minnesota at Indiana
8/31
Phoenix at Seattle
9/1
Washington at Indiana
New York at San Antonio
9/2
Seattle at Connecticut
Phoenix at Minnesota
Los Angeles at Chicago
Atlanta at Dallas
9/3
Washington at New York
9/4
Phoenix at Dallas
Seattle at Chicago
San Antonio at Atlanta
Connecticut at Los Angeles
Indiana at Minnesota
9/6
Connecticut at Atlanta
Chicago at San Antonio
Indiana at Los Angeles
9/7
Minnesota at New York
Dallas at Washington
9/8
Seattle at Los Angeles
9/9
Atlanta at Washington
Chicago at Indiana
Dallas at New York
Connecticut at San Antonio
9/11
Chicago at Connecticut
Los Angeles at Washington
New York at Dallas
Indiana at San Antonio
Atlanta at Phoenix
Minnesota at Seattle
9/13
Indiana at Connecticut
Seattle at New York
Washington at Atlanta
Phoenix at Chicago
Dallas at Los Angeles
9/15
Seattle at Atlanta
Minnesota at Phoenix
9/16
Dallas at Connecticut
San Antonio at Indiana
New York at Chicago
Washington at Los Angeles
9/17
Atlanta at Minnesota
9/18
Connecticut at Washington
Los Angeles at Indiana
Dallas at San Antonio
Chicago at Seattle
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/08/16 12:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Some other notes on this last no-back-to-back schedule: Every team had nine home and nine away against the opposite conference and eight home and eight away against their own conference. I switched the 4 game partners to pair the top two, middle two, and bottom two from last year's standings in each conference together. The west 4 game partners are Minnesota-Phoenix, Dallas-Los Angeles, and San Antonio-Seattle. The east partners are Chicago-New York, Indiana-Washington, and Atlanta-Connecticut (same as the actual schedule). I also gave home advantage based on last year's record/championship. Minnesota, as champs, got home ad over the top three east teams and the middle two west teams. New York, who had the best record, got home ad over the 2-4 west teams and middle two east teams, and so on down the line. This results in the bottom teams, who probably need the attendance boost, getting more visits from the top teams.
I tried to keep teams from playing the same opponent consecutively or twice within a week, but there are still a couple of instances of both. This would be much easier if we had more teams.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
|
|
