I really don't know the basis of this poll, but I like it. I got it from the CBS Sports site.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketb...-25-and-1/

Ahead of WVU (13), Duke (14) and Kentucky (15).


College basketball rankings: Kentucky, Kansas, Arizona slip in Top 25 (and 1)
Upsets on Saturday give the Top 25 (and 1) rankings a new look on Sunday.

by Gary Parrish @GaryParrishCBS 9h ago • 1 min read

The schools ranked second, third, fifth, sixth and eighth in Saturday's Top 25 (and one) all lost in the past 24 hours. It was one of the wildest days I can remember.

Meantime, Gonzaga won again.

The Zags improved to 24-0 with a 90-55 victory over Santa Clara. And you could argue their resume also got a boost thanks to Iowa State's surprising win at Kansas because that means Gonzaga now has a victory over the team that snapped KU's 54-game home winning streak, which means Gonzaga now has wins over Arizona, Florida and Saint Mary's - plus a win over the Iowa State team that won at Kansas, the Tennessee team that beat Kentucky and the BYU team that beat the Colorado team that has victories over Oregon and Xavier.

My point?

There is real substance to Gonzaga's perfect record despite what some skeptics insist. It doesn't guarantee the Zags will ultimately make their first Four Final, of course; single elimination tournaments are weird. But it does suggest a 33-0 record on Selection Sunday will make them the No. 1 overall seed in the NCAA Tournament.

The Zags, needless to say, remain No. 1 in the Top 25 (and one). And, please, let me take a moment to apologize to SMU fans. Iowa State's win at Kansas improved Iowa State's resume to the point where I think the Cyclones have to be ranked. They now have five top-50 KenPom wins and just two sub-35 losses. But I couldn't add them without removing somebody, and that's why SMU got bumped from 26th. The Mustangs did nothing to deserve it. If this were the Top 25 (and two), they'd still be listed. So take solace in that, if you can. It's just that SMU has similar losses but nowhere close to the kind of wins that Iowa State now owns.

Tomorrow once the new ap and coaches polls are out the rpi will reset for those rankings. We should go up some in the rpi given the delay in the poll rankings and their impact on the rpi from this weekend's losses to some teams ahead of us.

The RPI has no basis in the AP or coaches poll.

Noticed something interesting over at kenpom.com. In 2014, when UConn made their run in the tournament, their adjusted efficiency rankings were: 39 O, 10 D. (For its part, Cincinnati was 98 O, 9 D that year.)

This year, Cincinnati's rankings are: 43 O, 8 D. In other words, get the banner ready boys.

(02-06-2017 09:59 AM)stevenashville Wrote:  Noticed something interesting over at kenpom.com. In 2014, when UConn made their run in the tournament, their adjusted efficiency rankings were: 39 O, 10 D. (For its part, Cincinnati was 98 O, 9 D that year.)

This year, Cincinnati's rankings are: 43 O, 8 D. In other words, get the banner ready boys.

Also, there has not been an NCAA champion in the last three decades with an Adj. Offensive Efficiency Rank below 50. That's the threshold.

ESPN continues their slow pace with UC's ranking in their poll - only up to # 17 this week. And still no SMU.

17. Cincinnati Bearcats
Record: (21-2)
Last week's ranking: 18
Kyle Washington had a career-high 27 points and the Bearcats won their 14th straight in a home victory over UConn.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...thers-fall

My guess when the AP and Coaches Polls come out we will be ranked #12 or #13.

Typical to see Goodman (ESPN) still only has at #17.

(02-06-2017 10:34 AM)bearcatfan Wrote:  ESPN continues their slow pace with UC's ranking in their poll - only up to # 17 this week. And still no SMU.

17. Cincinnati Bearcats
Record: (21-2)
Last week's ranking: 18
Kyle Washington had a career-high 27 points and the Bearcats won their 14th straight in a home victory over UConn.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...thers-fall

This isn't ESPN, it's one guy at ESPN who has badmouthed UC for a long time. Goodman is a clown.

(02-06-2017 04:49 AM)payday Wrote:  The RPI has no basis in the AP or coaches poll.

There are actually several versions of the rpi one of which does factor in those rankings. I think the Bpi also uses those rankings. Just win the next one and they take care of themselves.

(02-06-2017 10:49 AM)dsquare Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 04:49 AM)payday Wrote:  The RPI has no basis in the AP or coaches poll.

There are actually several versions of the rpi one of which does factor in those rankings. I think the Bpi also uses those rankings. Just win the next one and they take care of themselves.

Any computer rating that uses human polls is beyond idiotic. Computer rating systems are supposed to prevent human bias.

(02-06-2017 10:57 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 10:49 AM)dsquare Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 04:49 AM)payday Wrote:  The RPI has no basis in the AP or coaches poll.

There are actually several versions of the rpi one of which does factor in those rankings. I think the Bpi also uses those rankings. Just win the next one and they take care of themselves.

Any computer rating that uses human polls is beyond idiotic. Computer rating systems are supposed to prevent human bias.

Not necessarily true.

No matter the algorithm, calculated polls are only effective when there is sufficient data. That is why all of the computer basketball polls are wildly inaccurate near the beginning of the season and they tend to be more accurate near the end of the season.

When one is presented with insufficient data, adding experienced, honest humans to the equation greatly increases the accuracy level of a poll.

(02-06-2017 11:17 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 10:57 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 10:49 AM)dsquare Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 04:49 AM)payday Wrote:  The RPI has no basis in the AP or coaches poll.

There are actually several versions of the rpi one of which does factor in those rankings. I think the Bpi also uses those rankings. Just win the next one and they take care of themselves.

Any computer rating that uses human polls is beyond idiotic. Computer rating systems are supposed to prevent human bias.

Not necessarily true.

No matter the algorithm, calculated polls are only effective when there is sufficient data. That is why all of the computer basketball polls are wildly inaccurate near the beginning of the season and they tend to be more accurate near the end of the season.

When one is presented with insufficient data, adding experienced, honest humans to the equation greatly increases the accuracy level of a poll.

That is something that ESPN lacks.

(02-06-2017 10:49 AM)dsquare Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 04:49 AM)payday Wrote:  The RPI has no basis in the AP or coaches poll.

There are actually several versions of the rpi one of which does factor in those rankings. I think the Bpi also uses those rankings. Just win the next one and they take care of themselves.

Which version of the RPI uses human voters? The RPI is really basic. It's 1/4 your record, 1/2 your opponents' record and 1/4 your opponents' opponents' records. Record isn't just record though, it's .6 wins for home wins and 1.4 losses for home losses, 1.4 wins for road wins and .6 for road losses. Neutral sight wins and losses are just that 1 win, 1 loss.

It's also why this system is so insane. You have no control over 75% of your ranking once the seasons starts.

(02-06-2017 11:56 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 10:49 AM)dsquare Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 04:49 AM)payday Wrote:  The RPI has no basis in the AP or coaches poll.

There are actually several versions of the rpi one of which does factor in those rankings. I think the Bpi also uses those rankings. Just win the next one and they take care of themselves.

Which version of the RPI uses human voters? The RPI is really basic. It's 1/4 your record, 1/2 your opponents' record and 1/4 your opponents' opponents' records. Record isn't just record though, it's .6 wins for home wins and 1.4 losses for home losses, 1.4 wins for road wins and .6 for road losses. Neutral sight wins and losses are just that 1 win, 1 loss.

It's also why this system is so insane. You have no control over 75% of your ranking once the seasons starts.

Mark, you are correct. The RPI calculation does not use humans at all. It also might be the worst metric in all of sports next to a pitcher's won/loss record.

(02-06-2017 11:17 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 10:57 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 10:49 AM)dsquare Wrote:  

(02-06-2017 04:49 AM)payday Wrote:  The RPI has no basis in the AP or coaches poll.

There are actually several versions of the rpi one of which does factor in those rankings. I think the Bpi also uses those rankings. Just win the next one and they take care of themselves.

Any computer rating that uses human polls is beyond idiotic. Computer rating systems are supposed to prevent human bias.

Not necessarily true.

No matter the algorithm, calculated polls are only effective when there is sufficient data. That is why all of the computer basketball polls are wildly inaccurate near the beginning of the season and they tend to be more accurate near the end of the season.

When one is presented with insufficient data, adding experienced, honest humans to the equation greatly increases the accuracy level of a poll.

One of the things that 538 adds to their prediction model for the NCAA tournament is a team's preseason ranking. Apparently it correlates better than most other factors. One theory is that preseason polls are based on a team's talent (or the voters' perception of it), and talent often wins out in big win-or-go-home games, even if a team may have underperformed over the length of the season.

UC is # 11 in AP. SMU is now in at # 25.

Egg-zavier is back in at # 24.

http://collegebasketball.ap.org/article/...-wild-week

http://collegebasketball.ap.org/poll

Bearcats up to #11 in the AP.

Up to 11 in the AP poll.

(4) UofL @ (12) UVA
UofL minus 2 players for curfew violation.

(8) UNC @ (21) Duke
(5) Oregon @ (10) UCLA