(03-01-2018 12:29 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:23 PM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  Alabama & Oklahoma both still 10 seeds on Lunardi

What an absolute joke. Only reasons are the names Collin Sexton and Trae Young.

Tide lost about 5 in a row including 2 in a row at home (1 by about 25 to FLA) and I don't remember the last time Oklahoma didn't get blown out.

My understanding is Lunardi isn't as good as some. My guess is the ESPN bias is strong. Oklahoma is in the same position as Temple.

Oklahoma's wins are quite a bit better than Temples ...

(03-01-2018 12:30 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:29 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:23 PM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  Alabama & Oklahoma both still 10 seeds on Lunardi

What an absolute joke. Only reasons are the names Collin Sexton and Trae Young.

Tide lost about 5 in a row including 2 in a row at home (1 by about 25 to FLA) and I don't remember the last time Oklahoma didn't get blown out.

My understanding is Lunardi isn't as good as some. My guess is the ESPN bias is strong. Oklahoma is in the same position as Temple.

Oklahoma's wins are quite a bit better than Temples ...

37 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

41 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

Oklahoma-
36 RPI
6-9 vs quad 1
0 losses outside quad 1/2
avg of 6 metrics- 37.3 (#35)

Temple-
43 RPI
3-7 vs quad 1
4 losses outside quad 1/2
avg of 6 metrics- 67.8 (#65)

Temple not in the same stratsosphere as Oklahoma right now.

Also, while Oklahoma and Temple both have 9 wins vs quad 1/2 now- Oklahoma is 6/3 while Temple is 3/6. Pretty big difference there.

Temple= NIT
Oklahoma may join them.

(03-01-2018 01:35 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:30 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:29 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:23 PM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  Alabama & Oklahoma both still 10 seeds on Lunardi

What an absolute joke. Only reasons are the names Collin Sexton and Trae Young.

Tide lost about 5 in a row including 2 in a row at home (1 by about 25 to FLA) and I don't remember the last time Oklahoma didn't get blown out.

My understanding is Lunardi isn't as good as some. My guess is the ESPN bias is strong. Oklahoma is in the same position as Temple.

Oklahoma's wins are quite a bit better than Temples ...

37 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

41 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

Oklahoma - 6 Q1 wins (5 Kansas @ 12 WSU, @ 19 TCU, 19 TCU, 23 Texas Tech, N 31 USC)
BPI - 41
KP - 40
Sag - 32
KPI - 24
SOR - 29

Temple 3 Q1 wins (N 7 Auburn, N 10 Clemson, 12 WSU)
BPI - 77
KP - 82
Sag - 78
KPI - 50
SOR - 64

OU wins that one up and down. Lumping Tier 1 and 2 together hides the fact that OU has better wins. OU's computer numbers are drastically better.

Can't just pick and choose items off the team sheets. About the ONLY thing that Temple's resume looks better than OUs is Non-con SOS. Overall SOS is very similar (7 vs 15).

OU is on the right side of the bubble thanks to the good start. Temple is not.

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Sta...Sheets.pdf

Use that and you will see the official team sheets as of earlier this week. ALL of that data is presented to the committee.

It’s amazing how soundly you can be beaten in an argument when you handpick your facts and only present a 1/4 of the story.

saw this site that's pretty cool-
http://barttorvik.com/teamsheets.php

it's a great site to look at teams together.

Losing record in the deep big 12 isn't the same as a losing record in the aac. Nice try though.

(03-01-2018 02:37 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Losing record in the deep big 12 isn't the same as a losing record in the aac. Nice try though.

They are 7-10 and could easily end up 7-11 and bounced from the big xii tournament round one. And 8-10 record or 9-9 is about the same.

(03-01-2018 01:58 PM)ShockerFever Wrote:  It’s amazing how soundly you can be beaten in an argument when you handpick your facts and only present a 1/4 of the story.

You just can't help yourself can you?

(03-01-2018 01:46 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:35 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:30 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:29 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:23 PM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  Alabama & Oklahoma both still 10 seeds on Lunardi

What an absolute joke. Only reasons are the names Collin Sexton and Trae Young.

Tide lost about 5 in a row including 2 in a row at home (1 by about 25 to FLA) and I don't remember the last time Oklahoma didn't get blown out.

My understanding is Lunardi isn't as good as some. My guess is the ESPN bias is strong. Oklahoma is in the same position as Temple.

Oklahoma's wins are quite a bit better than Temples ...

37 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

41 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

Oklahoma - 6 Q1 wins (5 Kansas @ 12 WSU, @ 19 TCU, 19 TCU, 23 Texas Tech, N 31 USC)
BPI - 41
KP - 40
Sag - 32
KPI - 24
SOR - 29

Temple 3 Q1 wins (N 7 Auburn, N 10 Clemson, 12 WSU)
BPI - 77
KP - 82
Sag - 78
KPI - 50
SOR - 64

OU wins that one up and down. Lumping Tier 1 and 2 together hides the fact that OU has better wins. OU's computer numbers are drastically better.

Can't just pick and choose items off the team sheets. About the ONLY thing that Temple's resume looks better than OUs is Non-con SOS. Overall SOS is very similar (7 vs 15).

OU is on the right side of the bubble thanks to the good start. Temple is not.

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Sta...Sheets.pdf

Use that and you will see the official team sheets as of earlier this week. ALL of that data is presented to the committee.

Okay I am putting this together with Steve's for a response because they are virtually the same.

First thanks for the site I like when it's all in one place and I hadn't seen that one yet.

Oklahoma has more wins in quadrant 1 but a similar winning percentage .400 (6-9) of which only two are outside their conference and only two are away from home to .300 (3-7) two on neutral and one in conference at home.

In quad 2s OU is .500 (3-3) and Temple is .875 (7-1)

OU played 2 games against quads 3 (2-0) and 6 games against quads 4 (6-0) none on the road and only Portland neutral. They went 8-0.

Temple played 8 teams in quad 3 including 2 away and one neutral as well as 1 away game vs quad 4. They went 4-4 (.500) vs quad 3 one loss away and one neutral. 4-0 vs quad 4s.



That's the whole picture.

Their isn't much difference in quad 1 when you take into account the extra attempts afforded OU.

Temple easily wins quad 2.

OU is better quad 3, mostly because of the difference in attempts.

Quad 4 is a wash.

Advanced metrics will not be used unless it is an either or situation head to head comparison.

The strongest indicator of them being in the same category is the RPI which as a measuring stick for NCAA capable teams shows them 4 apart #37 to #41

(03-01-2018 03:59 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:46 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:35 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:30 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:29 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  My understanding is Lunardi isn't as good as some. My guess is the ESPN bias is strong. Oklahoma is in the same position as Temple.

Oklahoma's wins are quite a bit better than Temples ...

37 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

41 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

Oklahoma - 6 Q1 wins (5 Kansas @ 12 WSU, @ 19 TCU, 19 TCU, 23 Texas Tech, N 31 USC)
BPI - 41
KP - 40
Sag - 32
KPI - 24
SOR - 29

Temple 3 Q1 wins (N 7 Auburn, N 10 Clemson, 12 WSU)
BPI - 77
KP - 82
Sag - 78
KPI - 50
SOR - 64

OU wins that one up and down. Lumping Tier 1 and 2 together hides the fact that OU has better wins. OU's computer numbers are drastically better.

Can't just pick and choose items off the team sheets. About the ONLY thing that Temple's resume looks better than OUs is Non-con SOS. Overall SOS is very similar (7 vs 15).

OU is on the right side of the bubble thanks to the good start. Temple is not.

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Sta...Sheets.pdf

Use that and you will see the official team sheets as of earlier this week. ALL of that data is presented to the committee.

Okay I am putting this together with Steve's for a response because they are virtually the same.

First thanks for the site I like when it's all in one place and I hadn't seen that one yet.

Oklahoma has more wins in quadrant 1 but a similar winning percentage .400 (6-9) to .300 (3-7)

In quad 2s OU is .500 (3-3) and Temple is .875 (7-1)

OU played 2 games against quads 3 (2-0) and 6 games against quads 4 (6-0) none on the road and only Portland neutral. They went 8-0.

Temple played 8 teams in quad 3 including 2 away and one neutral as well as 1 away game vs quad 4. They went 4-4 (.500) vs quad 3 one loss away and one neutral. 4-0 vs quad 4s.



That's the whole picture.

Their isn't much difference in quad 1 when you take into account the extra attempts afforded OU.

Temple easily wins quad 2.

OU is better quad 3, mostly because of the difference in attempts.

Quad 4 is a wash.

Advanced metrics will not be used unless it is an either or situation head to head comparison.

The strongest indicator of them being in the same category is the RPI which as a measuring stick for NCAA capable teams shows them 4 apart #37 to #41

On the two bolded parts. The committee has shown time and time again that it doesn't matter how many attempts a team gets, they only care about raw number of wins vs XX factor. Used to be Top 50, now it will be Q1. That's why power teams ALWAYS have the advantage. 3-10 is better than 1-3 even though percentage wise 1-3 is better.

On the second. The metrics are being used this year. They are on the team sheet, they WILL be looked at. OUs and Temples aren't close.

We don't know how they will use Q2 yet ... Q3 and 4 are pretty much worthless unless you have multiple losses in there.

(03-01-2018 04:04 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 03:59 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:46 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:35 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:30 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  Oklahoma's wins are quite a bit better than Temples ...

37 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

41 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

Oklahoma - 6 Q1 wins (5 Kansas @ 12 WSU, @ 19 TCU, 19 TCU, 23 Texas Tech, N 31 USC)
BPI - 41
KP - 40
Sag - 32
KPI - 24
SOR - 29

Temple 3 Q1 wins (N 7 Auburn, N 10 Clemson, 12 WSU)
BPI - 77
KP - 82
Sag - 78
KPI - 50
SOR - 64

OU wins that one up and down. Lumping Tier 1 and 2 together hides the fact that OU has better wins. OU's computer numbers are drastically better.

Can't just pick and choose items off the team sheets. About the ONLY thing that Temple's resume looks better than OUs is Non-con SOS. Overall SOS is very similar (7 vs 15).

OU is on the right side of the bubble thanks to the good start. Temple is not.

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Sta...Sheets.pdf

Use that and you will see the official team sheets as of earlier this week. ALL of that data is presented to the committee.

Okay I am putting this together with Steve's for a response because they are virtually the same.

First thanks for the site I like when it's all in one place and I hadn't seen that one yet.

Oklahoma has more wins in quadrant 1 but a similar winning percentage .400 (6-9) to .300 (3-7)

In quad 2s OU is .500 (3-3) and Temple is .875 (7-1)

OU played 2 games against quads 3 (2-0) and 6 games against quads 4 (6-0) none on the road and only Portland neutral. They went 8-0.

Temple played 8 teams in quad 3 including 2 away and one neutral as well as 1 away game vs quad 4. They went 4-4 (.500) vs quad 3 one loss away and one neutral. 4-0 vs quad 4s.



That's the whole picture.

Their isn't much difference in quad 1 when you take into account the extra attempts afforded OU.

Temple easily wins quad 2.

OU is better quad 3, mostly because of the difference in attempts.

Quad 4 is a wash.

Advanced metrics will not be used unless it is an either or situation head to head comparison.

The strongest indicator of them being in the same category is the RPI which as a measuring stick for NCAA capable teams shows them 4 apart #37 to #41

On the two bolded parts. The committee has shown time and time again that it doesn't matter how many attempts a team gets, they only care about raw number of wins vs XX factor. Used to be Top 50, now it will be Q1. That's why power teams ALWAYS have the advantage. 3-10 is better than 1-3 even though percentage wise 1-3 is better.

On the second. The metrics are being used this year. They are on the team sheet, they WILL be looked at. OUs and Temples aren't close.

We don't know how they will use Q2 yet ... Q3 and 4 are pretty much worthless unless you have multiple losses in there.

That is a strong point for the first one.

I will go dig up the article on the advanced metrics tonight but they won't be using them to decide who gets in unless two teams are head for the last spot. The advance metrics are suppose to help with seeding and bracket balancing.

I don't think we really know how much they're going to use the advanced metrics. The fact is that they are on the team sheets, and for Temple's advanced metrics to be as bad as they are compared to Oklahoma's- that's definitely not going to help.

As far as doing it out of conference vs in conference- end of the day I don't think it matters all that much.

1 other small point. Oklahoma is actually 17-12 to Temple's 16-13 right now. That might be bigger than you think.

(03-01-2018 04:16 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 04:04 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 03:59 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:46 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:35 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  37 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

41 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

Oklahoma - 6 Q1 wins (5 Kansas @ 12 WSU, @ 19 TCU, 19 TCU, 23 Texas Tech, N 31 USC)
BPI - 41
KP - 40
Sag - 32
KPI - 24
SOR - 29

Temple 3 Q1 wins (N 7 Auburn, N 10 Clemson, 12 WSU)
BPI - 77
KP - 82
Sag - 78
KPI - 50
SOR - 64

OU wins that one up and down. Lumping Tier 1 and 2 together hides the fact that OU has better wins. OU's computer numbers are drastically better.

Can't just pick and choose items off the team sheets. About the ONLY thing that Temple's resume looks better than OUs is Non-con SOS. Overall SOS is very similar (7 vs 15).

OU is on the right side of the bubble thanks to the good start. Temple is not.

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Sta...Sheets.pdf

Use that and you will see the official team sheets as of earlier this week. ALL of that data is presented to the committee.

Okay I am putting this together with Steve's for a response because they are virtually the same.

First thanks for the site I like when it's all in one place and I hadn't seen that one yet.

Oklahoma has more wins in quadrant 1 but a similar winning percentage .400 (6-9) to .300 (3-7)

In quad 2s OU is .500 (3-3) and Temple is .875 (7-1)

OU played 2 games against quads 3 (2-0) and 6 games against quads 4 (6-0) none on the road and only Portland neutral. They went 8-0.

Temple played 8 teams in quad 3 including 2 away and one neutral as well as 1 away game vs quad 4. They went 4-4 (.500) vs quad 3 one loss away and one neutral. 4-0 vs quad 4s.



That's the whole picture.

Their isn't much difference in quad 1 when you take into account the extra attempts afforded OU.

Temple easily wins quad 2.

OU is better quad 3, mostly because of the difference in attempts.

Quad 4 is a wash.

Advanced metrics will not be used unless it is an either or situation head to head comparison.

The strongest indicator of them being in the same category is the RPI which as a measuring stick for NCAA capable teams shows them 4 apart #37 to #41

On the two bolded parts. The committee has shown time and time again that it doesn't matter how many attempts a team gets, they only care about raw number of wins vs XX factor. Used to be Top 50, now it will be Q1. That's why power teams ALWAYS have the advantage. 3-10 is better than 1-3 even though percentage wise 1-3 is better.

On the second. The metrics are being used this year. They are on the team sheet, they WILL be looked at. OUs and Temples aren't close.

We don't know how they will use Q2 yet ... Q3 and 4 are pretty much worthless unless you have multiple losses in there.

That is a strong point for the first one.

I will go dig up the article on the advanced metrics tonight but they won't be using them to decide who gets in unless two teams are head for the last spot. The advance metrics are suppose to help with seeding and bracket balancing.

They are on the sheets, so they will use them however they need to. They can say one thing officially, but they are on there.

(03-01-2018 04:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I don't think we really know how much they're going to use the advanced metrics. The fact is that they are on the team sheets, and for Temple's advanced metrics to be as bad as they are compared to Oklahoma's- that's definitely not going to help.

As far as doing it out of conference vs in conference- end of the day I don't think it matters all that much.

1 other small point. Oklahoma is actually 17-12 to Temple's 16-13 right now. That might be bigger than you think.

You're right for wins.

Temple has to have 18. OU might slide in with 17 because they lack those quad 3 losses.

(03-01-2018 03:59 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:46 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:35 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:30 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:29 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  My understanding is Lunardi isn't as good as some. My guess is the ESPN bias is strong. Oklahoma is in the same position as Temple.

Oklahoma's wins are quite a bit better than Temples ...

37 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

41 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

Oklahoma - 6 Q1 wins (5 Kansas @ 12 WSU, @ 19 TCU, 19 TCU, 23 Texas Tech, N 31 USC)
BPI - 41
KP - 40
Sag - 32
KPI - 24
SOR - 29

Temple 3 Q1 wins (N 7 Auburn, N 10 Clemson, 12 WSU)
BPI - 77
KP - 82
Sag - 78
KPI - 50
SOR - 64

OU wins that one up and down. Lumping Tier 1 and 2 together hides the fact that OU has better wins. OU's computer numbers are drastically better.

Can't just pick and choose items off the team sheets. About the ONLY thing that Temple's resume looks better than OUs is Non-con SOS. Overall SOS is very similar (7 vs 15).

OU is on the right side of the bubble thanks to the good start. Temple is not.

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Sta...Sheets.pdf

Use that and you will see the official team sheets as of earlier this week. ALL of that data is presented to the committee.

Okay I am putting this together with Steve's for a response because they are virtually the same.

First thanks for the site I like when it's all in one place and I hadn't seen that one yet.

Oklahoma has more wins in quadrant 1 but a similar winning percentage .400 (6-9) of which only two are outside their conference and only two are away from home to .300 (3-7) two on neutral and one in conference at home.

In quad 2s OU is .500 (3-3) and Temple is .875 (7-1)

OU played 2 games against quads 3 (2-0) and 6 games against quads 4 (6-0) none on the road and only Portland neutral. They went 8-0.

Temple played 8 teams in quad 3 including 2 away and one neutral as well as 1 away game vs quad 4. They went 4-4 (.500) vs quad 3 one loss away and one neutral. 4-0 vs quad 4s.



That's the whole picture.

Their isn't much difference in quad 1 when you take into account the extra attempts afforded OU.

Temple easily wins quad 2.

OU is better quad 3, mostly because of the difference in attempts.

Quad 4 is a wash.

Advanced metrics will not be used unless it is an either or situation head to head comparison.

The strongest indicator of them being in the same category is the RPI which as a measuring stick for NCAA capable teams shows them 4 apart #37 to #41

Temple is done. Even a loss in conference finals likely wouldn't get them an at-large berth.

(03-01-2018 04:24 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 04:16 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 04:04 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 03:59 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:46 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  Oklahoma - 6 Q1 wins (5 Kansas @ 12 WSU, @ 19 TCU, 19 TCU, 23 Texas Tech, N 31 USC)
BPI - 41
KP - 40
Sag - 32
KPI - 24
SOR - 29

Temple 3 Q1 wins (N 7 Auburn, N 10 Clemson, 12 WSU)
BPI - 77
KP - 82
Sag - 78
KPI - 50
SOR - 64

OU wins that one up and down. Lumping Tier 1 and 2 together hides the fact that OU has better wins. OU's computer numbers are drastically better.

Can't just pick and choose items off the team sheets. About the ONLY thing that Temple's resume looks better than OUs is Non-con SOS. Overall SOS is very similar (7 vs 15).

OU is on the right side of the bubble thanks to the good start. Temple is not.

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Sta...Sheets.pdf

Use that and you will see the official team sheets as of earlier this week. ALL of that data is presented to the committee.

Okay I am putting this together with Steve's for a response because they are virtually the same.

First thanks for the site I like when it's all in one place and I hadn't seen that one yet.

Oklahoma has more wins in quadrant 1 but a similar winning percentage .400 (6-9) to .300 (3-7)

In quad 2s OU is .500 (3-3) and Temple is .875 (7-1)

OU played 2 games against quads 3 (2-0) and 6 games against quads 4 (6-0) none on the road and only Portland neutral. They went 8-0.

Temple played 8 teams in quad 3 including 2 away and one neutral as well as 1 away game vs quad 4. They went 4-4 (.500) vs quad 3 one loss away and one neutral. 4-0 vs quad 4s.



That's the whole picture.

Their isn't much difference in quad 1 when you take into account the extra attempts afforded OU.

Temple easily wins quad 2.

OU is better quad 3, mostly because of the difference in attempts.

Quad 4 is a wash.

Advanced metrics will not be used unless it is an either or situation head to head comparison.

The strongest indicator of them being in the same category is the RPI which as a measuring stick for NCAA capable teams shows them 4 apart #37 to #41

On the two bolded parts. The committee has shown time and time again that it doesn't matter how many attempts a team gets, they only care about raw number of wins vs XX factor. Used to be Top 50, now it will be Q1. That's why power teams ALWAYS have the advantage. 3-10 is better than 1-3 even though percentage wise 1-3 is better.

On the second. The metrics are being used this year. They are on the team sheet, they WILL be looked at. OUs and Temples aren't close.

We don't know how they will use Q2 yet ... Q3 and 4 are pretty much worthless unless you have multiple losses in there.

That is a strong point for the first one.

I will go dig up the article on the advanced metrics tonight but they won't be using them to decide who gets in unless two teams are head for the last spot. The advance metrics are suppose to help with seeding and bracket balancing.

They are on the sheets, so they will use them however they need to. They can say one thing officially, but they are on there.

I disagree these are older guys set in there ways from a generation that was never into advanced metrics. They'll stick to the devil they know and rpi will win. The quads ensure the rpi is valued more since that's how they divide up wins.

ESPN pushed for the committee to use advanced metrics and I think they token agreed to it. Now ESPN can pontificate on the BPI and SOR for the big schools. The committee will do it the same old way for a while.

(03-01-2018 04:30 PM)DBSUC1982 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 03:59 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:46 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:35 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:30 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  Oklahoma's wins are quite a bit better than Temples ...

37 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

41 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

Oklahoma - 6 Q1 wins (5 Kansas @ 12 WSU, @ 19 TCU, 19 TCU, 23 Texas Tech, N 31 USC)
BPI - 41
KP - 40
Sag - 32
KPI - 24
SOR - 29

Temple 3 Q1 wins (N 7 Auburn, N 10 Clemson, 12 WSU)
BPI - 77
KP - 82
Sag - 78
KPI - 50
SOR - 64

OU wins that one up and down. Lumping Tier 1 and 2 together hides the fact that OU has better wins. OU's computer numbers are drastically better.

Can't just pick and choose items off the team sheets. About the ONLY thing that Temple's resume looks better than OUs is Non-con SOS. Overall SOS is very similar (7 vs 15).

OU is on the right side of the bubble thanks to the good start. Temple is not.

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Sta...Sheets.pdf

Use that and you will see the official team sheets as of earlier this week. ALL of that data is presented to the committee.

Okay I am putting this together with Steve's for a response because they are virtually the same.

First thanks for the site I like when it's all in one place and I hadn't seen that one yet.

Oklahoma has more wins in quadrant 1 but a similar winning percentage .400 (6-9) of which only two are outside their conference and only two are away from home to .300 (3-7) two on neutral and one in conference at home.

In quad 2s OU is .500 (3-3) and Temple is .875 (7-1)

OU played 2 games against quads 3 (2-0) and 6 games against quads 4 (6-0) none on the road and only Portland neutral. They went 8-0.

Temple played 8 teams in quad 3 including 2 away and one neutral as well as 1 away game vs quad 4. They went 4-4 (.500) vs quad 3 one loss away and one neutral. 4-0 vs quad 4s.



That's the whole picture.

Their isn't much difference in quad 1 when you take into account the extra attempts afforded OU.

Temple easily wins quad 2.

OU is better quad 3, mostly because of the difference in attempts.

Quad 4 is a wash.

Advanced metrics will not be used unless it is an either or situation head to head comparison.

The strongest indicator of them being in the same category is the RPI which as a measuring stick for NCAA capable teams shows them 4 apart #37 to #41

Temple is done. Even a loss in conference finals likely wouldn't get them an at-large berth.

there you are wrong. If Temple wins this wekeend vs Tulsa, then wins 1st rd game, and vs Wichita/Cincy and Houston- they would be easily in regardless of what happens in the title game.

(03-01-2018 04:33 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 04:30 PM)DBSUC1982 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 03:59 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:46 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:35 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  37 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

41 RPI
Losing conference record
16 wins
8 wins vs quad 1+2

Oklahoma - 6 Q1 wins (5 Kansas @ 12 WSU, @ 19 TCU, 19 TCU, 23 Texas Tech, N 31 USC)
BPI - 41
KP - 40
Sag - 32
KPI - 24
SOR - 29

Temple 3 Q1 wins (N 7 Auburn, N 10 Clemson, 12 WSU)
BPI - 77
KP - 82
Sag - 78
KPI - 50
SOR - 64

OU wins that one up and down. Lumping Tier 1 and 2 together hides the fact that OU has better wins. OU's computer numbers are drastically better.

Can't just pick and choose items off the team sheets. About the ONLY thing that Temple's resume looks better than OUs is Non-con SOS. Overall SOS is very similar (7 vs 15).

OU is on the right side of the bubble thanks to the good start. Temple is not.

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Sta...Sheets.pdf

Use that and you will see the official team sheets as of earlier this week. ALL of that data is presented to the committee.

Okay I am putting this together with Steve's for a response because they are virtually the same.

First thanks for the site I like when it's all in one place and I hadn't seen that one yet.

Oklahoma has more wins in quadrant 1 but a similar winning percentage .400 (6-9) of which only two are outside their conference and only two are away from home to .300 (3-7) two on neutral and one in conference at home.

In quad 2s OU is .500 (3-3) and Temple is .875 (7-1)

OU played 2 games against quads 3 (2-0) and 6 games against quads 4 (6-0) none on the road and only Portland neutral. They went 8-0.

Temple played 8 teams in quad 3 including 2 away and one neutral as well as 1 away game vs quad 4. They went 4-4 (.500) vs quad 3 one loss away and one neutral. 4-0 vs quad 4s.



That's the whole picture.

Their isn't much difference in quad 1 when you take into account the extra attempts afforded OU.

Temple easily wins quad 2.

OU is better quad 3, mostly because of the difference in attempts.

Quad 4 is a wash.

Advanced metrics will not be used unless it is an either or situation head to head comparison.

The strongest indicator of them being in the same category is the RPI which as a measuring stick for NCAA capable teams shows them 4 apart #37 to #41

Temple is done. Even a loss in conference finals likely wouldn't get them an at-large berth.

there you are wrong. If Temple wins this wekeend vs Tulsa, then wins 1st rd game, and vs Wichita/Cincy and Houston- they would be easily in regardless of what happens in the title game.

I disagree, but I don't think we need to worry about Temple winning their next 4 games to get to Final. They're done.

(03-01-2018 04:31 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 04:24 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 04:16 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 04:04 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 03:59 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  Okay I am putting this together with Steve's for a response because they are virtually the same.

First thanks for the site I like when it's all in one place and I hadn't seen that one yet.

Oklahoma has more wins in quadrant 1 but a similar winning percentage .400 (6-9) to .300 (3-7)

In quad 2s OU is .500 (3-3) and Temple is .875 (7-1)

OU played 2 games against quads 3 (2-0) and 6 games against quads 4 (6-0) none on the road and only Portland neutral. They went 8-0.

Temple played 8 teams in quad 3 including 2 away and one neutral as well as 1 away game vs quad 4. They went 4-4 (.500) vs quad 3 one loss away and one neutral. 4-0 vs quad 4s.



That's the whole picture.

Their isn't much difference in quad 1 when you take into account the extra attempts afforded OU.

Temple easily wins quad 2.

OU is better quad 3, mostly because of the difference in attempts.

Quad 4 is a wash.

Advanced metrics will not be used unless it is an either or situation head to head comparison.

The strongest indicator of them being in the same category is the RPI which as a measuring stick for NCAA capable teams shows them 4 apart #37 to #41

On the two bolded parts. The committee has shown time and time again that it doesn't matter how many attempts a team gets, they only care about raw number of wins vs XX factor. Used to be Top 50, now it will be Q1. That's why power teams ALWAYS have the advantage. 3-10 is better than 1-3 even though percentage wise 1-3 is better.

On the second. The metrics are being used this year. They are on the team sheet, they WILL be looked at. OUs and Temples aren't close.

We don't know how they will use Q2 yet ... Q3 and 4 are pretty much worthless unless you have multiple losses in there.

That is a strong point for the first one.

I will go dig up the article on the advanced metrics tonight but they won't be using them to decide who gets in unless two teams are head for the last spot. The advance metrics are suppose to help with seeding and bracket balancing.

They are on the sheets, so they will use them however they need to. They can say one thing officially, but they are on there.

I disagree these are older guys set in there ways from a generation that was never into advanced metrics. They'll stick to the devil they know and rpi will win. The quads ensure the rpi is valued more since that's how they divide up wins.

ESPN pushed for the committee to use advanced metrics and I think they token agreed to it. Now ESPN can pontificate on the BPI and SOR for the big schools. The committee will do it the same old way for a while.

Eh, the committee has never really used Raw RPI numbers though besides to define "quality wins" ... That's why you have teams as low as 21 getting left out but teams as high as the high 60s/low 70s.