Nate Oats and the High-Major/Mid-Major Scheduling Debate
ST. LOUIS – The debate surrounding high-major programs’ responsibility to provide scheduling opportunities for mid-majors continues to be a hot topic in college basketball. Recently, Purdue coach Matt Painter offered a particularly insightful perspective, echoing sentiments that resonate with coaches like Nate Oats and sparking further discussion about fairness and access in the pursuit of an NCAA Tournament berth.
The Miami (Ohio) Story and the Scheduling Challenge
Travis Steele’s remarkable undefeated regular season with Miami (Ohio) brought the issue to the forefront. The RedHawks’ success, coupled with a relatively weak nonconference schedule, ignited a debate about how mid-majors can navigate the analytics that determine NCAA Tournament selection. The question arises: do high-major programs have a duty to offer mid-majors opportunities to strengthen their schedules and improve their tournament resumes?
Steele himself advocated for his team, suggesting difficulty in securing high-major opponents. However, Painter’s Purdue provides a counter-example. “If he was in our position,” Painter stated, “he’d be doing the same thing.” This highlights a core principle: coaches prioritize what’s best for their own programs.
Purdue’s Approach and the Importance of Perspective
Painter’s comments were particularly impactful because of his credibility and experience. He understands the pressures faced by both high-major and mid-major programs. Purdue, for instance, regularly schedules games against MAC teams like Akron and Kent State. Indiana even played Miami twice in prior seasons. Other mid-majors, like Kent State and Toledo, have also found takers in programs like Auburn, Alabama, Houston, and Michigan State.
The issue isn’t necessarily a lack of available opponents, but a lack of desirable partners. Miami struggled to find high-major teams willing to schedule them, and didn’t necessarily bolster their schedule with strong mid-major competition. Toledo, in contrast, scheduled eventual NCAA Tournament teams Wright State and Troy. Akron played Yale and Murray State, achieving a higher KenPom ranking than Miami.
The NET Rankings and Program Priorities
Painter emphasizes the importance of focusing on the NET rankings. “You’ve got to get wired to do what’s best for the NET,” he said. Coaches must prioritize factors that impact their seeding and tournament chances. This isn’t a criticism of Miami, but a recognition that scheduling is a strategic decision. Steele actively sought tougher opponents, but ultimately made choices based on what he believed was best for his team.
The debate extends beyond scheduling. Roster construction, player retention, and overall program development all contribute to the challenges faced by mid-major programs. Power-conference coaches are often quick to recruit players from successful mid-major teams, further exacerbating the imbalance.
A Two-Way Street and the Role of Analytics
Painter’s argument applies to both mid-major and high-major coaches. Some high-major programs schedule too easily, potentially harming their own seeding. Miami, despite a challenging nonconference schedule strength (ranked in the 360s nationally), earned an at-large bid and even won a tournament game, proving that a strong on-court performance can overcome scheduling limitations.
Ultimately, scheduling is a blend of art and science. While analytics play a crucial role, they don’t tell the whole story. Miami’s success demonstrates that a team can achieve great things with or without high-major help. Painter’s perspective, informed by his experience as both a mid-major and high-major coach, provides valuable insight into this complex issue. He understands the pressures and priorities of all involved, and his voice carries weight in the ongoing conversation about fairness and opportunity in college basketball. Like Nate Oats, he recognizes the need for strategic decision-making in a constantly evolving landscape.
As Painter aptly put it, “I didn’t set the NET rankings. The NET rankings set themselves.”
