Keith's analysis of connectivity helps put the NC$$ schedule reductions in
one perspective.  I would like to see a different perspective: inter-division
connectivity.  To me the numbers showing average connectivity "fuzz" the
issue of ranking top teams in each division relative to each other.
 
What I am still struggling with is:  how much less sure are we of the
relative standings of the top 12 teams this year vs. last year?  Let me
illustrate the point I am to make:
 
 
	 Div X		 Div Y
	-------		-------
	team x1		team y1
	team x2		team y2
	team x3		team y3
	team x4		team y4
	team x5		team y5
	team x6		team y6
 
In case #1, each team plays each other team in it's division 2 times, plus
the teams in the other division once.  Therefore, it plays 16 games (5x2
intra-division, 6 inter-division).  Of these 16 games, 11 are "new
connections" and 5 are "repeats".
 
In case #2, each team plays the same intra-divisional schedule, but plays
only 1 inter-divisional game.  Thus, there are 6 "new connections" and 5
"repeats".
 
Comparing the two scenarios:
 
			case #1		case#2		%change
			-------		------		------
total new		11			6		~45%
interdiv new	 5			1		~400%
 
While this is a crude analysis, one might quickly see that by separating the
out the "inters", we see a large magnitude change.  If we don't separate them,
the change looks smaller.
 
Conclusion: ranking is an art, not a science :-).
--
Craig McGowan
[log in to unmask]