+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: AACbbs (/forum-460.html)
+---- Forum: Members (/forum-401.html)
+----- Forum: MemphisTigers.org (/forum-446.html)
+------ Forum: Dockery-Finch Memorial Tiger Sports Forum (/forum-499.html)
+------ Thread: [Computer Rankings thread] (/thread-959945.html)
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - Tiger87 - 12-18-2022 12:17 PM
Update after TAMU win. I'm beginning to think the NCAA NET doesn't like us:
42 - NET
26 - KenPom
26 - Sagarin
15 - Torvik
36 - ESPN BPI
13 - RPI
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - msu35 - 12-18-2022 12:41 PM
(12-18-2022 12:17 PM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after TAMU win. I'm beginning to think the NCAA NET doesn't like us:
42 - NET
26 - KenPom
26 - Sagarin
15 - Torvik
36 - ESPN BPI
13 - RPI
Let's be honest about the NET. It's a joke. Examples:
10 - Utah St.
13 - Florida Atlantic
21 - New Mexico
22 - Sam Houston
24 - Southern Miss
36 - Boise St.
All of those teams are better than us? Enough said.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - Irish - 12-18-2022 12:47 PM
Doesn’t matter, just keep winning.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - UofMstateU - 12-18-2022 12:58 PM
(12-18-2022 12:41 PM)msu35 Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:17 PM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after TAMU win. I'm beginning to think the NCAA NET doesn't like us:
42 - NET
26 - KenPom
26 - Sagarin
15 - Torvik
36 - ESPN BPI
13 - RPI
Let's be honest about the NET. It's a joke. Examples:
10 - Utah St.
13 - Florida Atlantic
21 - New Mexico
22 - Sam Houston
24 - Southern Miss
36 - Boise St.
All of those teams are better than us? Enough said.
Boise St has a Q4 loss and a 155 SOS. I mean, what the literal f*ck are they doing that high? Their RPI is 75, and they've dropped 15 spots in RPI in a week. But they have gained 5 spots in the NET. The only team they played during that timeframe was a 1-7 New Orleans at home.
It makes it look like the NET is over-rewarding teams for beating crappy teams by large margins, and barely rewards you for beating good teams.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - msu35 - 12-18-2022 01:07 PM
(12-18-2022 12:58 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:41 PM)msu35 Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:17 PM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after TAMU win. I'm beginning to think the NCAA NET doesn't like us:
42 - NET
26 - KenPom
26 - Sagarin
15 - Torvik
36 - ESPN BPI
13 - RPI
Let's be honest about the NET. It's a joke. Examples:
10 - Utah St.
13 - Florida Atlantic
21 - New Mexico
22 - Sam Houston
24 - Southern Miss
36 - Boise St.
All of those teams are better than us? Enough said.
Boise St has a Q4 loss and a 155 SOS. I mean, what the literal f*ck are they doing that high? Their RPI is 75, and they've dropped 15 spots in RPI in a week. But they have gained 5 spots in the NET. The only team they played during that timeframe was a 1-7 New Orleans at home.
It makes it look like the NET is over-rewarding teams for beating crappy teams by large margins, and barely rewards you for beating good teams.
As with most everything the NCAA controls, it's a farce. I look forward to the future lawsuits that will destroy the NCAA once and or all.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - SeñorTiger - 12-18-2022 02:03 PM
(12-18-2022 12:58 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:41 PM)msu35 Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:17 PM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after TAMU win. I'm beginning to think the NCAA NET doesn't like us:
42 - NET
26 - KenPom
26 - Sagarin
15 - Torvik
36 - ESPN BPI
13 - RPI
Let's be honest about the NET. It's a joke. Examples:
10 - Utah St.
13 - Florida Atlantic
21 - New Mexico
22 - Sam Houston
24 - Southern Miss
36 - Boise St.
All of those teams are better than us? Enough said.
Boise St has a Q4 loss and a 155 SOS. I mean, what the literal f*ck are they doing that high? Their RPI is 75, and they've dropped 15 spots in RPI in a week. But they have gained 5 spots in the NET. The only team they played during that timeframe was a 1-7 New Orleans at home.
It makes it look like the NET is over-rewarding teams for beating crappy teams by large margins, and barely rewards you for beating good teams.
The NCAA is like the federal government. If you want to ensure something is terribly run and gets broken just turn it over to them…
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - UofMstateU - 12-18-2022 03:16 PM
(12-18-2022 01:07 PM)msu35 Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:58 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:41 PM)msu35 Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:17 PM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after TAMU win. I'm beginning to think the NCAA NET doesn't like us:
42 - NET
26 - KenPom
26 - Sagarin
15 - Torvik
36 - ESPN BPI
13 - RPI
Let's be honest about the NET. It's a joke. Examples:
10 - Utah St.
13 - Florida Atlantic
21 - New Mexico
22 - Sam Houston
24 - Southern Miss
36 - Boise St.
All of those teams are better than us? Enough said.
Boise St has a Q4 loss and a 155 SOS. I mean, what the literal f*ck are they doing that high? Their RPI is 75, and they've dropped 15 spots in RPI in a week. But they have gained 5 spots in the NET. The only team they played during that timeframe was a 1-7 New Orleans at home.
It makes it look like the NET is over-rewarding teams for beating crappy teams by large margins, and barely rewards you for beating good teams.
As with most everything the NCAA controls, it's a farce. I look forward to the future lawsuits that will destroy the NCAA once and or all.
I've dug into this a little deeper and am just shaking my head.
Let's take Colorado St, which is currently 99 in NET. Not great, and they wont get into the tournament. At 6-4, nothing to write home about. But, they are just a few wins away of becoming an away Quad1 win for members of their conference.
They have an RPI of 172 and an SOS of 184. They have no Q1 wins. Nor do they have any Q2 wins. In fact, some of the Q1 losses are in danger of falling to Q2. They have a single Q3 win plus a Q4 loss. But yet somehow the NET believes this team is worthy of a quality Q1/Q2 type of an away win for their conference.
So what have they done? Beaten crappy teams by double digits. Half of their wins are against teams who only have 1 or 2 wins. So while their RPI continued to plunge this past week, their net rose another 5 places when the only team they played was against non-div I Peru State. But they beat Peru St by 40, so I guess thats what the NCAA believes a quality quad 2 team looks like.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - Eagleonpar - 12-18-2022 03:19 PM
(12-18-2022 12:17 PM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after TAMU win. I'm beginning to think the NCAA NET doesn't like us:
42 - NET
26 - KenPom
26 - Sagarin
15 - Torvik
36 - ESPN BPI
13 - RPI
Is ESPN BPI the old Vitale Bald Dome Index ?
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - Tiger87 - 12-19-2022 09:27 AM
(12-18-2022 03:16 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:(12-18-2022 01:07 PM)msu35 Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:58 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:41 PM)msu35 Wrote:(12-18-2022 12:17 PM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after TAMU win. I'm beginning to think the NCAA NET doesn't like us:
42 - NET
26 - KenPom
26 - Sagarin
15 - Torvik
36 - ESPN BPI
13 - RPI
Let's be honest about the NET. It's a joke. Examples:
10 - Utah St.
13 - Florida Atlantic
21 - New Mexico
22 - Sam Houston
24 - Southern Miss
36 - Boise St.
All of those teams are better than us? Enough said.
Boise St has a Q4 loss and a 155 SOS. I mean, what the literal f*ck are they doing that high? Their RPI is 75, and they've dropped 15 spots in RPI in a week. But they have gained 5 spots in the NET. The only team they played during that timeframe was a 1-7 New Orleans at home.
It makes it look like the NET is over-rewarding teams for beating crappy teams by large margins, and barely rewards you for beating good teams.
As with most everything the NCAA controls, it's a farce. I look forward to the future lawsuits that will destroy the NCAA once and or all.
I've dug into this a little deeper and am just shaking my head.
Let's take Colorado St, which is currently 99 in NET. Not great, and they wont get into the tournament. At 6-4, nothing to write home about. But, they are just a few wins away of becoming an away Quad1 win for members of their conference.
They have an RPI of 172 and an SOS of 184. They have no Q1 wins. Nor do they have any Q2 wins. In fact, some of the Q1 losses are in danger of falling to Q2. They have a single Q3 win plus a Q4 loss. But yet somehow the NET believes this team is worthy of a quality Q1/Q2 type of an away win for their conference.
So what have they done? Beaten crappy teams by double digits. Half of their wins are against teams who only have 1 or 2 wins. So while their RPI continued to plunge this past week, their net rose another 5 places when the only team they played was against non-div I Peru State. But they beat Peru St by 40, so I guess thats what the NCAA believes a quality quad 2 team looks like.
I've never really studied the NET. But I do trust the algorithms that Sagarin, Pomeroy, and Torvik run. While they may not be the best for an overall ranking system, they are very good at predicting which teams can beat others and by how much.
All of these rankings have preseason bias built-in. With the 3 algorithms I mentioned above, the bias gradually decreases as more teams become "connected" - by playing opponents of opponents, etc. Maybe the preseason bias of the NET is simply not very sophisticated, and it will have a major course correction as the season goes on. We can only hope.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - msu35 - 12-19-2022 09:51 AM
(12-19-2022 09:27 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: I've never really studied the NET. But I do trust the algorithms that Sagarin, Pomeroy, and Torvik run. While they may not be the best for an overall ranking system, they are very good at predicting which teams can beat others and by how much.
All of these rankings have preseason bias built-in. With the 3 algorithms I mentioned above, the bias gradually decreases as more teams become "connected" - by playing opponents of opponents, etc. Maybe the preseason bias of the NET is simply not very sophisticated, and it will have a major course correction as the season goes on. We can only hope.
Out of all of the analytic systems, the NET is the most useless for predicting game outcomes and quality of teams.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - Tiger87 - 12-20-2022 09:44 AM
Update after this week's polls are out. Blue rising from this time last week, red falling, black unchanged:
31 - AP
35 - Coaches
42 - NET
25 - KenPom
14 - Torvik
26 - Sagarin
38 - ESPN BPI
15 - RPI
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - Eagleonpar - 12-20-2022 09:55 AM
(12-19-2022 09:51 AM)msu35 Wrote:(12-19-2022 09:27 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: I've never really studied the NET. But I do trust the algorithms that Sagarin, Pomeroy, and Torvik run. While they may not be the best for an overall ranking system, they are very good at predicting which teams can beat others and by how much.
All of these rankings have preseason bias built-in. With the 3 algorithms I mentioned above, the bias gradually decreases as more teams become "connected" - by playing opponents of opponents, etc. Maybe the preseason bias of the NET is simply not very sophisticated, and it will have a major course correction as the season goes on. We can only hope.
Out of all of the analytic systems, the NET is the most useless for predicting game outcomes and quality of teams.
And that’s why it’s used lol
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - msu35 - 12-20-2022 11:58 AM
(12-20-2022 09:44 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after this week's polls are out. Blue rising from this time last week, red falling, black unchanged:
31 - AP
35 - Coaches
42 - NET
25 - KenPom
14 - Torvik
26 - Sagarin
38 - ESPN BPI
15 - RPI
So basically the popularity contests.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - tiger1016 - 12-20-2022 12:20 PM
(12-20-2022 09:44 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after this week's polls are out. Blue rising from this time last week, red falling, black unchanged:
31 - AP
35 - Coaches
42 - NET
25 - KenPom
14 - Torvik
26 - Sagarin
38 - ESPN BPI
15 - RPI
Other than AP, Coaches (for media exposure) and NET (for seeding purposes), the rest are irrelevant. Hopefully NET can be in the 20s by end of season.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - msu35 - 12-20-2022 12:24 PM
(12-20-2022 12:20 PM)tiger1016 Wrote:(12-20-2022 09:44 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after this week's polls are out. Blue rising from this time last week, red falling, black unchanged:
31 - AP
35 - Coaches
42 - NET
25 - KenPom
14 - Torvik
26 - Sagarin
38 - ESPN BPI
15 - RPI
Other than AP, Coaches (for media exposure) and NET (for seeding purposes), the rest are irrelevant. Hopefully NET can be in the 20s by end of season.
Unless you actually need the data to be useful, you know for things like team analysis and game prediction.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - tiger1016 - 12-20-2022 12:50 PM
(12-20-2022 12:24 PM)msu35 Wrote:(12-20-2022 12:20 PM)tiger1016 Wrote:(12-20-2022 09:44 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after this week's polls are out. Blue rising from this time last week, red falling, black unchanged:
31 - AP
35 - Coaches
42 - NET
25 - KenPom
14 - Torvik
26 - Sagarin
38 - ESPN BPI
15 - RPI
Other than AP, Coaches (for media exposure) and NET (for seeding purposes), the rest are irrelevant. Hopefully NET can be in the 20s by end of season.
Unless you actually need the data to be useful, you know for things like team analysis and game prediction.
At the end of the day, they are irrelevant on the impact of Tigers’ season. None of the others play a role in seeding or national ranking. It’s common sense but to each his own.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - msu35 - 12-20-2022 12:55 PM
(12-20-2022 12:50 PM)tiger1016 Wrote:(12-20-2022 12:24 PM)msu35 Wrote:(12-20-2022 12:20 PM)tiger1016 Wrote:(12-20-2022 09:44 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: Update after this week's polls are out. Blue rising from this time last week, red falling, black unchanged:
31 - AP
35 - Coaches
42 - NET
25 - KenPom
14 - Torvik
26 - Sagarin
38 - ESPN BPI
15 - RPI
Other than AP, Coaches (for media exposure) and NET (for seeding purposes), the rest are irrelevant. Hopefully NET can be in the 20s by end of season.
Unless you actually need the data to be useful, you know for things like team analysis and game prediction.
At the end of the day, they are irrelevant on the impact of Tigers’ season. None of the others play a role in seeding or national ranking. It’s common sense but to each his own.
If one has the most simplistic needs, I suppose. Do you realize that "national rankings" are just a fiction and don't really mean much of anything at the end of the day? They're popularity polls. Regarding the NET, sure, it's used by the NCAA for tournament seeding, but that's about it. Other people have other needs, like to be able to analyze teams and predict game outcomes, and this is where the NET and ranking polls are effectively useless; but you do you.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - tiger1016 - 12-20-2022 01:02 PM
National rankings do matter in terms of media exposure. But I get it…some folks don’t know how that works. The rest are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things but some folks feel the need to use them, so kudos to them.
Hope the Tigers crack the polls at some point during the season and gets the NET into the 20s or lower.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - msu35 - 12-20-2022 01:11 PM
(12-20-2022 01:02 PM)tiger1016 Wrote: National rankings do matter in terms of media exposure. But I get it…some folks don’t know how that works. The rest are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things but some folks feel the need to use them, so kudos to them.
Hope the Tigers crack the polls at some point during the season and gets the NET into the 20s or lower.
Just wow. Pot, meet kettle. I do agree with two things, though. It would be nice to see the Tigers get into the top 25 for bragging rights (which is all they're good for) and a better NET might get us seeded higher, but you have to keep in mind that the NET does not determine seeding. It is merely used as a component of the process and all boils down to a vote.
RE: Very early RPI rankings...Tigers at 22 - tiger1016 - 12-20-2022 01:18 PM
At least there’s an agreement, o cranky one