Guess this team

RPI 14 (that means according to the RPI formula there are only 13 teams in the country better than this team)

Best win against then #19 New Mexico, now #25.
Other good wins against LSU, BC, BYU, VCU.
Losses include FSU, Richmond, St. Bonaventure, St Joeseph's, George Mason and Dayton.

Overall record 22-6, received 9 votes for top 25, puts them about at #30

RPI 32 (that means according to the RPI formula there are 31 teams better than this one, including RPI 14 above)

Best wins against then #5, OKST, #12 Louisville, #7 Louisville, #23 Gonzaga
Losses include #1 Florida by 2, #7 OKST, #11 Cincinnati, #24 UCONN, #23 SMU and Houston

Overall record 22-7, ranked #21

You tell me, even using the amazing "eye test" how UMASS has a RPI of 14 and ours is 32. That shows a giant flaw in the formula if you ask me. This amazing formula has George Washington, Colorado, Arizona State, Gonzaga, New Mexico, Kentucky, VCU, St Louis and UMASS all ranked better than us or Louisville.

In fact, we are only slightly better than USM, St Joeseph's and Toledo. Thats right, according to the morons that do this RPI crap, Toledo would be about a pick em game against us or Louisville on a neutral sight. The same Toledo team whose best win is a 10 point loss to Kansas and has losses to Western and Eastern Michigan, U of Ohio, and Northern Illinois.

Why would anybody base any decision on this crap? The excuse is always that it takes a few games to settle out. Well, there are only 2 games left, it should be settled.

Yep. The RPI is an archaic formula that really makes no real sense.

It is a shame that there is so much reliance on it.

The RPI has at least as many failings as the so-called "Eye Test".

the problem with the RPI, or the strength, is that it doesn't take into account highs and lows. UMASS probably didn't schedule a bunch of terrible cupcakes at home during the non-conference slate and their rpi numbers reflect it. Same way Southern Miss has figured out how to manipulate the thing.

In the RPI's eyes, it's better to beat the #135 and 136 best teams in the country than it is to beat the #1 team and the #290 team. We all know what's more telling of a team's strength of course, but the rpi doesn't make that distinguishment

The RPI is one of many indicators used by the Selection Committee. It alone will not determine our seeding fate.

(03-03-2014 11:21 AM)holyterror Wrote:  The RPI has at least as many failings as the so-called "Eye Test".

The RPI, unlike the eye test, is an objective mathematical formula. Like any indicator, it has limitations, but it is a useful analytic tool.

OTOH, the eye test is highly subjective and relies on insufficient data. It is impossible for one person to witness enough games of a team to form an viable, informed and, defendable opinion. Only lazy "Experts" use the eye test for analytical purposes.

On Selection Sunday, we may WISH our seed had been determined solely by the RPI. I have a feeling we're going to feel screwed by the committee.

(03-03-2014 11:22 AM)jgardne Wrote:  the problem with the RPI, or the strength, is that it doesn't take into account highs and lows. UMASS probably didn't schedule a bunch of terrible cupcakes at home during the non-conference slate and their rpi numbers reflect it. Same way Southern Miss has figured out how to manipulate the thing.

In the RPI's eyes, it's better to beat the #135 and 136 best teams in the country than it is to beat the #1 team and the #290 team. We all know what's more telling of a team's strength of course, but the rpi doesn't make that distinguishment

In fact, it is better to lose to Kansas by 100 points on road than to beat Temple by 100 at home according to Jerry Palm.

We are a solid 6 as of right now and moving up.. Depends on how we finish


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(03-03-2014 11:22 AM)jgardne Wrote:  the problem with the RPI, or the strength, is that it doesn't take into account highs and lows. UMASS probably didn't schedule a bunch of terrible cupcakes at home during the non-conference slate and their rpi numbers reflect it. Same way Southern Miss has figured out how to manipulate the thing.

In the RPI's eyes, it's better to beat the #135 and 136 best teams in the country than it is to beat the #1 team and the #290 team. We all know what's more telling of a team's strength of course, but the rpi doesn't make that distinguishment

This is correct. All the sub 200 teams on our schedule kills us. We have 5 sub 250 games in our non conference schedule alone. Not bashing the scheduling ability of the coach because sometimes that is uncontrollable, but the way to get a high seed is to play a lot of games against teams that you can easily beat, but are still respectable RPI wise. It's hard to do. Cal always did a good job at scheduling the best teams from bad conferences that we could easily handle, but then they tore through their conferences and got 20+ wins.

301 Nov. 14 Austin Peay 95-69
261 Nov. 23 Nicholls State 98-59
190 Nov. 28 Siena* 87-60
181 Dec. 7 Northwestern State 96-76
170 Dec. 13 Arkansas-Little Rock 73-59
252 Dec. 21 Southeast Missouri State 77-65
276 Dec. 28 Jackson State 75-61
185 Dec. 31 @ South Florida 88-73
174 Jan. 11 @ Temple 79-69
185 Jan. 26 South Florida 80-58
200 Jan. 29 @ UCF 69-59
205 Feb. 4 Rutgers 101-69
200 Feb. 12 UCF 76-70
205 Feb. 20 @ Rutgers 64-59
174 Feb. 22 Temple 82-79

I think in our case, going to a new conference there were some unknowns as to how strong our conference schedule would be. Is it possible that many of our non conference games were signed when we expected a Big East schedule? Point being, if your conference schedule is tough, not as much need to schedule mid level teams. In CUSA, it was imperative to get those games because the conference schedule was such an anchor.

Going forward it appears we'll need a few more mid-level games.

Looks like the AAC has a few RPI-killers as well. No control over that - gotta play 'em.

(03-03-2014 01:46 PM)Hoopla Wrote:  Looks like the AAC has a few RPI-killers as well. No control over that - gotta play 'em.

Don't disagree with this or previous post but still no excuse for playing 7 cupcakes out of conference, at home, regardless of the conference affiliation. Even with a perceived tougher conference schedule JP ought be wanting to give home fans/season ticket holders their money's worth in a good home schedule. Blowout wins against our OOC cupcakes, most 200+ rpi, is little better (maybe worse) than close games or losses to top 100 teams.

How much could our RPI go up given our last two games and the conference tournament?

If you play sh!t teams and really good teams and no one in between your RPI will suffer...

If you play all mediocre (RPI Wise) teams you will probably have a better SOS which is 75% of the formula.

(03-03-2014 03:24 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 01:46 PM)Hoopla Wrote:  Looks like the AAC has a few RPI-killers as well. No control over that - gotta play 'em.

Don't disagree with this or previous post but still no excuse for playing 7 cupcakes out of conference, at home, regardless of the conference affiliation. Even with a perceived tougher conference schedule JP ought be wanting to give home fans/season ticket holders their money's worth in a good home schedule. Blowout wins against our OOC cupcakes, most 200+ rpi, is little better (maybe worse) than close games or losses to top 100 teams.

ESPN cited our OOC schedule as the 2nd toughest in the nation before the season.

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketbal...chedules-2

(03-03-2014 03:38 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  If you play sh!t teams and really good teams and no one in between your RPI will suffer...

If you play all mediocre (RPI Wise) teams you will probably have a better SOS which is 75% of the formula.

Well, then, that's probably the major flaw in the formula, wouldn't you say? There is no way you can know if a team you schedule will be number 99, 101, 187 or 253 before the season starts.

I'll also say the difference between #50 and #150 is not as great as the difference between #1 and #50. Once a team gets to the .500 range, how in the world can you determine which 15-12 team is better than which 12-15 team or the other way around.

Here's one example, of many:

#98 Canisius 20-10
hasn't played a top 50 team and they are 3-3 against 50-100, 8-4 last 12 games
#144 Utah Valley 16-10
0-3 vs top 50, 1-1 vs 50-100, 9-3 last 12 games

Tell me why 50 spots separate them? I'll tell you why, because the RPI is garbage. We just like a number we can pretend is objective in a very subjective arena where most teams never even play each other.

(03-03-2014 03:43 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 03:24 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 01:46 PM)Hoopla Wrote:  Looks like the AAC has a few RPI-killers as well. No control over that - gotta play 'em.

Don't disagree with this or previous post but still no excuse for playing 7 cupcakes out of conference, at home, regardless of the conference affiliation. Even with a perceived tougher conference schedule JP ought be wanting to give home fans/season ticket holders their money's worth in a good home schedule. Blowout wins against our OOC cupcakes, most 200+ rpi, is little better (maybe worse) than close games or losses to top 100 teams.

ESPN cited our OOC schedule as the 2nd toughest in the nation before the season.

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketbal...chedules-2

This.

How about Boston College 7-21
#179
3-17 against top 150
4-4 against below 150 (wins FAU, Sacred Heart, Va Tech and Va Tech)
and a win against Syracuse!
But they are 33 teams worse than George Mason

George mason #146 (10-18)
5-15 against top 150
Best win UMASS
Included in their top 150 wins are Northern Iowa and (141) Rhode Island

(03-03-2014 03:29 PM)MtownTigers916 Wrote:  How much could our RPI go up given our last two games and the conference tournament?

http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/ct/Memphis.html

Amazingly, if we won 5 in a row @ cincy, vs. SMU, and then 3 against a likely combination of SMU/UConn/UL/Cincy, we'd only be projected to move up to 21. Despite having 10 top 50 wins in that scenario