(01-28-2014 01:57 PM)alcalde Wrote:  Agreed that those 1 or 2 games make a difference, but one thing that stands out with our profile is our overwhelming % of sub-150 games.

11 out of our 18 games have been against teams with RPI 151 or worse, or 62%

In the example of Ohio State, 4 out of 20 games, or 20% have been sub-150 teams
The plus for them is that 8-1 record vs 51-100

The plus for us of course is we have 2 outstanding wins, both away from home

We did a terrible job of picking buy games.

(01-28-2014 12:15 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:16 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 10:54 AM)lenetzach Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 09:08 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  I never have understood where the rpi starts. Is Duke automatically made number 1 before anyone plays a game?

You're probably snickering, but for the sake of anyone who doesnt know, everyone starts at zero. It's calculated as 25% your winning percentage (weighted for home and away), 50% opponents wp, and 25% opponents' opponents wp. (Neither owp nor oowp weighted). The latter two parts comprise strength of schedule.

So it is volatile and useless early on, and settles in as more data enters the equation.

I'm not big on it, as it is of limited usefulness and can be manipulated to an extent, but if you understand how it works you can use it for what it's worth.

I.E. loading up on RPI 150 or so teams, as opposed to RPI 300 teams. In reality, neither team runs any sort of risk of knocking us off, but you get a huge RPI benefit by playing these 150 teams as opposed to 300 teams. It's fool's gold, though, because you are not at risk of losing either game.

Yep. RPI is pretty simple mathematical calculation that punishes playing against sub 250 teams just as much as it helps to play teams in the top 75. Way too many anchors on the schedule this year. The number of games played doesn't really affect your RPI.

On the other hand, the committee doesn't seem to be treating the RPI as a holy relic these days. We have two outstanding wins, no bad losses, and a nice road record.

I actually think, if we win 2 of 3 vs uconn Cincy & Ville & win all the rest with maybe just one upset we'll be a 2 seed. However, the blowout loss to OK ST may very well be an anchor that is a net negative when you factor in all considered. Wish we had another stab at UF.

(01-28-2014 01:05 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:02 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 09:02 AM)Stammers Wrote:  It is interesting how important the actual number of games played are, when it comes to RPI.

Memphis
14-4
35 RPI
35 SOS

Iowa
15-4
21 RPI
45 SOS

Ohio State
16-4
18 RPI
27 SOS

We are basically 1/2 games played behind everyone. If we had 1 more win against a team in the top 150, our RPI would be in the low teens or high 20's.

I don't necessarily think the number of games hurts us as much us losing at home...A home loss counts as 1.4 losses...That is where we are hurting.

Of course it does. If right now we had one more game played against mediocre competition, our RPI would be 12-14 points higher.

So you're saying playing UT would have helped?

(01-28-2014 01:58 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:57 PM)alcalde Wrote:  Agreed that those 1 or 2 games make a difference, but one thing that stands out with our profile is our overwhelming % of sub-150 games.

11 out of our 18 games have been against teams with RPI 151 or worse, or 62%

In the example of Ohio State, 4 out of 20 games, or 20% have been sub-150 teams
The plus for them is that 8-1 record vs 51-100

The plus for us of course is we have 2 outstanding wins, both away from home

We did a terrible job of picking buy games.

Yep. If our schedule were to be listed in order of current RPI, of the games we have played, there is only 1 team between #38 UConn and #165 South Florida, and that is #65 LSU. (we have two games coming vs #42 SMU)

That is a huge RPI gap of 127 between our 6th and 8th toughest RPI games

(01-28-2014 01:09 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:01 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:51 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:02 AM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  Wow, that national schedule we've replaced UT with is amazing...wait, we didnt replace them at all. Just didnt play that game at all. Makes us look like pansies for dropping UT. Calipari & Pastner are both wrong for dropping regional rivalries. (Burning bridges)

All very good points because...UT is a national program...and they are ranked...and we aren't playing Oklahoma State and Gonzaga home and home...and we won't be playing Louisville home and home...and the program doesn't need to play any buy games...

I'm sure everyone here tried to explain to BIGD 50,000 times why playing UT is not benificial to us, but since he is more of an expert on the matter than Cal or Pastner I won't waste my time trying to re-explain it.

The benefits to UT-K are quite clear and that is all that counts to some folks.

Because UT has benefited so much by playing us in the past, with all those great recruits they're stealing. I mean, how many recruits have the vols beat us out for over the last 20 years??? Oh yeah, Tony Harris. & we gave them stokes as charity.

(01-28-2014 01:44 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:06 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:01 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:51 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:02 AM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  Wow, that national schedule we've replaced UT with is amazing...wait, we didnt replace them at all. Just didnt play that game at all. Makes us look like pansies for dropping UT. Calipari & Pastner are both wrong for dropping regional rivalries. (Burning bridges)

All very good points because...UT is a national program...and they are ranked...and we aren't playing Oklahoma State and Gonzaga home and home...and we won't be playing Louisville home and home...and the program doesn't need to play any buy games...

Exactly. Who needs Ok. St. twice, Gonzaga, Louisville, Florida, and the home-and-home games moving forward when we could have played a national powerhouse like UT? I'm sure everyone here tried to explain to BIGD 50,000 times why playing UT is not benificial to us, but since he is more of an expert on the matter than Cal or Pastner I won't waste my time trying to re-explain it.

Or we could play all those games plus UT...DUH

Man, you are the last person that needs to be saying "duh" to people. Do you even know what you wrote? Surely you do since you wrote it. You were mocking the "national schedule" suggesting that Oklahoma St. and Florida and Gonzaga and home-and-home with Louisville moving forward weren't national. You didn't just simply say that you thought we should play UT in addition to those teams, you were mocking the scheduling.

Then you proceeded to declare that Cal and Pastner are wrong, as if you know better than they do....gotta put a big "huh?" on that one and a "wha?".

The only bridge that would be burning would be the one Memphis recruits and their families could walk across to see UT playing at the Forum instead of having to drive across the state to Knoxville. If you want to play for UT then your family and friends are going have to head to Knoxville to see you, not the comfy confines of the Forum.

Nothing wrong with you having the opinion (though many disagree) that in your estimation we should play UT in addition to those other teams, but that is not how you presented it.

Florida was a neutral court game that isn't being returned. OK st's 2nd game was a neutral court game that was matched up because they won all their Old Spice games. The zags??? Really??? You are arguing for them? & don't forget all those juggernaut December games.

(01-28-2014 02:18 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:44 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:06 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:01 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:51 AM)Stammers Wrote:  All very good points because...UT is a national program...and they are ranked...and we aren't playing Oklahoma State and Gonzaga home and home...and we won't be playing Louisville home and home...and the program doesn't need to play any buy games...

Exactly. Who needs Ok. St. twice, Gonzaga, Louisville, Florida, and the home-and-home games moving forward when we could have played a national powerhouse like UT? I'm sure everyone here tried to explain to BIGD 50,000 times why playing UT is not benificial to us, but since he is more of an expert on the matter than Cal or Pastner I won't waste my time trying to re-explain it.

Or we could play all those games plus UT...DUH

Man, you are the last person that needs to be saying "duh" to people. Do you even know what you wrote? Surely you do since you wrote it. You were mocking the "national schedule" suggesting that Oklahoma St. and Florida and Gonzaga and home-and-home with Louisville moving forward weren't national. You didn't just simply say that you thought we should play UT in addition to those teams, you were mocking the scheduling.

Then you proceeded to declare that Cal and Pastner are wrong, as if you know better than they do....gotta put a big "huh?" on that one and a "wha?".

The only bridge that would be burning would be the one Memphis recruits and their families could walk across to see UT playing at the Forum instead of having to drive across the state to Knoxville. If you want to play for UT then your family and friends are going have to head to Knoxville to see you, not the comfy confines of the Forum.

Nothing wrong with you having the opinion (though many disagree) that in your estimation we should play UT in addition to those other teams, but that is not how you presented it.

Florida was a neutral court game that isn't being returned. OK st's 2nd game was a neutral court game that was matched up because they won all their Old Spice games. The zags??? Really??? You are arguing for them? & don't forget all those juggernaut December games.

Not sure i agree with either of you. We don't need UT. But wtf difference does it matter if we play them? I'd helluva lot rather then than waste a game on lemoyne Owen.

(01-28-2014 12:06 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:01 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:51 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:02 AM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  Wow, that national schedule we've replaced UT with is amazing...wait, we didnt replace them at all. Just didnt play that game at all. Makes us look like pansies for dropping UT. Calipari & Pastner are both wrong for dropping regional rivalries. (Burning bridges)

All very good points because...UT is a national program...and they are ranked...and we aren't playing Oklahoma State and Gonzaga home and home...and we won't be playing Louisville home and home...and the program doesn't need to play any buy games...

Exactly. Who needs Ok. St. twice, Gonzaga, Louisville, Florida, and the home-and-home games moving forward when we could have played a national powerhouse like UT? I'm sure everyone here tried to explain to BIGD 50,000 times why playing UT is not benificial to us, but since he is more of an expert on the matter than Cal or Pastner I won't waste my time trying to re-explain it.

Or we could play all those games plus UT...DUH

What do we get out of playing UT this season?

(01-28-2014 02:27 PM)justballen Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:18 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:44 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:06 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:01 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  Exactly. Who needs Ok. St. twice, Gonzaga, Louisville, Florida, and the home-and-home games moving forward when we could have played a national powerhouse like UT? I'm sure everyone here tried to explain to BIGD 50,000 times why playing UT is not benificial to us, but since he is more of an expert on the matter than Cal or Pastner I won't waste my time trying to re-explain it.

Or we could play all those games plus UT...DUH

Man, you are the last person that needs to be saying "duh" to people. Do you even know what you wrote? Surely you do since you wrote it. You were mocking the "national schedule" suggesting that Oklahoma St. and Florida and Gonzaga and home-and-home with Louisville moving forward weren't national. You didn't just simply say that you thought we should play UT in addition to those teams, you were mocking the scheduling.

Then you proceeded to declare that Cal and Pastner are wrong, as if you know better than they do....gotta put a big "huh?" on that one and a "wha?".

The only bridge that would be burning would be the one Memphis recruits and their families could walk across to see UT playing at the Forum instead of having to drive across the state to Knoxville. If you want to play for UT then your family and friends are going have to head to Knoxville to see you, not the comfy confines of the Forum.

Nothing wrong with you having the opinion (though many disagree) that in your estimation we should play UT in addition to those other teams, but that is not how you presented it.

Florida was a neutral court game that isn't being returned. OK st's 2nd game was a neutral court game that was matched up because they won all their Old Spice games. The zags??? Really??? You are arguing for them? & don't forget all those juggernaut December games.

Not sure i agree with either of you. We don't need UT. But wtf difference does it matter if we play them? I'd helluva lot rather then than waste a game on lemoyne Owen.

Ok, your post history is really strange. WTH?

(01-28-2014 02:31 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:06 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:01 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:51 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:02 AM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  Wow, that national schedule we've replaced UT with is amazing...wait, we didnt replace them at all. Just didnt play that game at all. Makes us look like pansies for dropping UT. Calipari & Pastner are both wrong for dropping regional rivalries. (Burning bridges)

All very good points because...UT is a national program...and they are ranked...and we aren't playing Oklahoma State and Gonzaga home and home...and we won't be playing Louisville home and home...and the program doesn't need to play any buy games...

Exactly. Who needs Ok. St. twice, Gonzaga, Louisville, Florida, and the home-and-home games moving forward when we could have played a national powerhouse like UT? I'm sure everyone here tried to explain to BIGD 50,000 times why playing UT is not benificial to us, but since he is more of an expert on the matter than Cal or Pastner I won't waste my time trying to re-explain it.

Or we could play all those games plus UT...DUH

What do we get out of playing UT this season?

A bigger RPI bump than lemoyne Owen & semo. DUH

(01-28-2014 02:33 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:31 PM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:06 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:01 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:51 AM)Stammers Wrote:  All very good points because...UT is a national program...and they are ranked...and we aren't playing Oklahoma State and Gonzaga home and home...and we won't be playing Louisville home and home...and the program doesn't need to play any buy games...

Exactly. Who needs Ok. St. twice, Gonzaga, Louisville, Florida, and the home-and-home games moving forward when we could have played a national powerhouse like UT? I'm sure everyone here tried to explain to BIGD 50,000 times why playing UT is not benificial to us, but since he is more of an expert on the matter than Cal or Pastner I won't waste my time trying to re-explain it.

Or we could play all those games plus UT...DUH

What do we get out of playing UT this season?

A bigger RPI bump than lemoyne Owen & semo. DUH

When do we play road games at LO and SEMO? How badly will LO affect our SOS and RPI?

You're a little slow as it is...take your time answering.

Dude, your own statements in this thread support my point. I get it though, BigD said it, therefore it must be disagreed with.

(01-28-2014 02:18 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:44 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:06 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:01 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:51 AM)Stammers Wrote:  All very good points because...UT is a national program...and they are ranked...and we aren't playing Oklahoma State and Gonzaga home and home...and we won't be playing Louisville home and home...and the program doesn't need to play any buy games...

Exactly. Who needs Ok. St. twice, Gonzaga, Louisville, Florida, and the home-and-home games moving forward when we could have played a national powerhouse like UT? I'm sure everyone here tried to explain to BIGD 50,000 times why playing UT is not benificial to us, but since he is more of an expert on the matter than Cal or Pastner I won't waste my time trying to re-explain it.

Or we could play all those games plus UT...DUH

Man, you are the last person that needs to be saying "duh" to people. Do you even know what you wrote? Surely you do since you wrote it. You were mocking the "national schedule" suggesting that Oklahoma St. and Florida and Gonzaga and home-and-home with Louisville moving forward weren't national. You didn't just simply say that you thought we should play UT in addition to those teams, you were mocking the scheduling.

Then you proceeded to declare that Cal and Pastner are wrong, as if you know better than they do....gotta put a big "huh?" on that one and a "wha?".

The only bridge that would be burning would be the one Memphis recruits and their families could walk across to see UT playing at the Forum instead of having to drive across the state to Knoxville. If you want to play for UT then your family and friends are going have to head to Knoxville to see you, not the comfy confines of the Forum.

Nothing wrong with you having the opinion (though many disagree) that in your estimation we should play UT in addition to those other teams, but that is not how you presented it.

Florida was a neutral court game that isn't being returned. OK st's 2nd game was a neutral court game that was matched up because they won all their Old Spice games. The zags??? Really??? You are arguing for them? & don't forget all those juggernaut December games.

RPI History
Gonzaga
2014 - 25
2013 - 7
2012 - 24

UT
2014 - 52
2013 - 66
2012 - 90

You are really going out of your way to make yourself look like a dimwit.

(01-28-2014 02:50 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  Dude, your own statements in this thread support my point. I get it though, BigD said it, therefore it must be disagreed with.

BigD got strangled by his umbilical cord at birth.

(01-28-2014 02:52 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:18 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:44 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:06 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:01 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  Exactly. Who needs Ok. St. twice, Gonzaga, Louisville, Florida, and the home-and-home games moving forward when we could have played a national powerhouse like UT? I'm sure everyone here tried to explain to BIGD 50,000 times why playing UT is not benificial to us, but since he is more of an expert on the matter than Cal or Pastner I won't waste my time trying to re-explain it.

Or we could play all those games plus UT...DUH

Man, you are the last person that needs to be saying "duh" to people. Do you even know what you wrote? Surely you do since you wrote it. You were mocking the "national schedule" suggesting that Oklahoma St. and Florida and Gonzaga and home-and-home with Louisville moving forward weren't national. You didn't just simply say that you thought we should play UT in addition to those teams, you were mocking the scheduling.

Then you proceeded to declare that Cal and Pastner are wrong, as if you know better than they do....gotta put a big "huh?" on that one and a "wha?".

The only bridge that would be burning would be the one Memphis recruits and their families could walk across to see UT playing at the Forum instead of having to drive across the state to Knoxville. If you want to play for UT then your family and friends are going have to head to Knoxville to see you, not the comfy confines of the Forum.

Nothing wrong with you having the opinion (though many disagree) that in your estimation we should play UT in addition to those other teams, but that is not how you presented it.

Florida was a neutral court game that isn't being returned. OK st's 2nd game was a neutral court game that was matched up because they won all their Old Spice games. The zags??? Really??? You are arguing for them? & don't forget all those juggernaut December games.

RPI History
Gonzaga
2014 - 25
2013 - 7
2012 - 24

UT
2014 - 52
2013 - 66
2012 - 90

You are really going out of your way to make yourself look like a dimwit.

No, just embracing our replacement rival Lemon Owen. Pun intended

(01-28-2014 02:05 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:15 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:16 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 10:54 AM)lenetzach Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 09:08 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  I never have understood where the rpi starts. Is Duke automatically made number 1 before anyone plays a game?

You're probably snickering, but for the sake of anyone who doesnt know, everyone starts at zero. It's calculated as 25% your winning percentage (weighted for home and away), 50% opponents wp, and 25% opponents' opponents wp. (Neither owp nor oowp weighted). The latter two parts comprise strength of schedule.

So it is volatile and useless early on, and settles in as more data enters the equation.

I'm not big on it, as it is of limited usefulness and can be manipulated to an extent, but if you understand how it works you can use it for what it's worth.

I.E. loading up on RPI 150 or so teams, as opposed to RPI 300 teams. In reality, neither team runs any sort of risk of knocking us off, but you get a huge RPI benefit by playing these 150 teams as opposed to 300 teams. It's fool's gold, though, because you are not at risk of losing either game.

Yep. RPI is pretty simple mathematical calculation that punishes playing against sub 250 teams just as much as it helps to play teams in the top 75. Way too many anchors on the schedule this year. The number of games played doesn't really affect your RPI.

On the other hand, the committee doesn't seem to be treating the RPI as a holy relic these days. We have two outstanding wins, no bad losses, and a nice road record.

I actually think, if we win 2 of 3 vs uconn Cincy & Ville & win all the rest with maybe just one upset we'll be a 2 seed. However, the blowout loss to OK ST may very well be an anchor that is a net negative when you factor in all considered. Wish we had another stab at UF.

I doubt people will hold a road loss on the second game of the season that was later avenged against us.

(01-28-2014 02:54 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:52 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:18 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:44 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:06 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  Or we could play all those games plus UT...DUH

Man, you are the last person that needs to be saying "duh" to people. Do you even know what you wrote? Surely you do since you wrote it. You were mocking the "national schedule" suggesting that Oklahoma St. and Florida and Gonzaga and home-and-home with Louisville moving forward weren't national. You didn't just simply say that you thought we should play UT in addition to those teams, you were mocking the scheduling.

Then you proceeded to declare that Cal and Pastner are wrong, as if you know better than they do....gotta put a big "huh?" on that one and a "wha?".

The only bridge that would be burning would be the one Memphis recruits and their families could walk across to see UT playing at the Forum instead of having to drive across the state to Knoxville. If you want to play for UT then your family and friends are going have to head to Knoxville to see you, not the comfy confines of the Forum.

Nothing wrong with you having the opinion (though many disagree) that in your estimation we should play UT in addition to those other teams, but that is not how you presented it.

Florida was a neutral court game that isn't being returned. OK st's 2nd game was a neutral court game that was matched up because they won all their Old Spice games. The zags??? Really??? You are arguing for them? & don't forget all those juggernaut December games.

RPI History
Gonzaga
2014 - 25
2013 - 7
2012 - 24

UT
2014 - 52
2013 - 66
2012 - 90

You are really going out of your way to make yourself look like a dimwit.

No, just embracing our replacement rival Lemon Owen.

Slowleak; 2 simple questions.

1. How badly will the Lemoyne Owen game affect our RPI?
2. When do we play at SEMO?

(01-28-2014 02:55 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:05 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 12:15 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 11:16 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 10:54 AM)lenetzach Wrote:  You're probably snickering, but for the sake of anyone who doesnt know, everyone starts at zero. It's calculated as 25% your winning percentage (weighted for home and away), 50% opponents wp, and 25% opponents' opponents wp. (Neither owp nor oowp weighted). The latter two parts comprise strength of schedule.

So it is volatile and useless early on, and settles in as more data enters the equation.

I'm not big on it, as it is of limited usefulness and can be manipulated to an extent, but if you understand how it works you can use it for what it's worth.

I.E. loading up on RPI 150 or so teams, as opposed to RPI 300 teams. In reality, neither team runs any sort of risk of knocking us off, but you get a huge RPI benefit by playing these 150 teams as opposed to 300 teams. It's fool's gold, though, because you are not at risk of losing either game.

Yep. RPI is pretty simple mathematical calculation that punishes playing against sub 250 teams just as much as it helps to play teams in the top 75. Way too many anchors on the schedule this year. The number of games played doesn't really affect your RPI.

On the other hand, the committee doesn't seem to be treating the RPI as a holy relic these days. We have two outstanding wins, no bad losses, and a nice road record.

I actually think, if we win 2 of 3 vs uconn Cincy & Ville & win all the rest with maybe just one upset we'll be a 2 seed. However, the blowout loss to OK ST may very well be an anchor that is a net negative when you factor in all considered. Wish we had another stab at UF.

I doubt people will hold a road loss on the second game of the season that was later avenged against us.

Let's hope so. Not that often you see a two game turn around in college sports like that.

(01-28-2014 02:56 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:54 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:52 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:18 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 01:44 PM)QDoodle Wrote:  Man, you are the last person that needs to be saying "duh" to people. Do you even know what you wrote? Surely you do since you wrote it. You were mocking the "national schedule" suggesting that Oklahoma St. and Florida and Gonzaga and home-and-home with Louisville moving forward weren't national. You didn't just simply say that you thought we should play UT in addition to those teams, you were mocking the scheduling.

Then you proceeded to declare that Cal and Pastner are wrong, as if you know better than they do....gotta put a big "huh?" on that one and a "wha?".

The only bridge that would be burning would be the one Memphis recruits and their families could walk across to see UT playing at the Forum instead of having to drive across the state to Knoxville. If you want to play for UT then your family and friends are going have to head to Knoxville to see you, not the comfy confines of the Forum.

Nothing wrong with you having the opinion (though many disagree) that in your estimation we should play UT in addition to those other teams, but that is not how you presented it.

Florida was a neutral court game that isn't being returned. OK st's 2nd game was a neutral court game that was matched up because they won all their Old Spice games. The zags??? Really??? You are arguing for them? & don't forget all those juggernaut December games.

RPI History
Gonzaga
2014 - 25
2013 - 7
2012 - 24

UT
2014 - 52
2013 - 66
2012 - 90

You are really going out of your way to make yourself look like a dimwit.

No, just embracing our replacement rival Lemon Owen.

Slowleak; 2 simple questions.

1. How badly will the Lemoyne Owen game affect our RPI?
2. When do we play at SEMO?

1. How greatly did lemon owen help our RPI?
2. How much more would a win against UT have helped us?

(01-28-2014 02:59 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:56 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:54 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:52 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-28-2014 02:18 PM)BIGDTiger Wrote:  Florida was a neutral court game that isn't being returned. OK st's 2nd game was a neutral court game that was matched up because they won all their Old Spice games. The zags??? Really??? You are arguing for them? & don't forget all those juggernaut December games.

RPI History
Gonzaga
2014 - 25
2013 - 7
2012 - 24

UT
2014 - 52
2013 - 66
2012 - 90

You are really going out of your way to make yourself look like a dimwit.

No, just embracing our replacement rival Lemon Owen.

Slowleak; 2 simple questions.

1. How badly will the Lemoyne Owen game affect our RPI?
2. When do we play at SEMO?

1. How greatly did lemon owen help our RPI?
2. How much more would a win against UT have helped us?

Shame on me for trying to rationalize with stupids.

1. What was the effect of the Lemoyne Owen game on our RPI?
2. When do we play at SEMO? Next year? The year after? Never?