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]