One of the nice things about Massey's ratings website is that he calculates the odds of winning for every game on the schedule. On the eve of the start of C-USA play, here's how the conference stacks up. School names are followed by the projected number of conference wins:

Houston 16.35
Memphis 14.64
Rice 14.19
Tulane 12.03
Southern Mississippi 12.00
East Carolina 11.49
Alabama-Birmingham 9.27
Central Florida 9.15
Marshall 8.67

The most notable thing so far this year is how C-USA has been declining compared to past seasons. In 2009, 2010 and 2011, C-USA was the sixth-rated conference in Division I according to Massey, but last season it slipped to eighth, and so far this season it's ninth (behind the Sun Belt and Big Ten!). According to Boyd Nation's pseudo-RPIs, C-USA is a one-bid league at this point, so I don't think Rice has the margin of error that it's had for NCAA tournament bids in recent seasons. The winning had better start immediately....

(03-22-2013 12:43 PM)Jonathan Sadow Wrote:  One of the nice things about Massey's ratings website is that he calculates the odds of winning for every game on the schedule. On the eve of the start of C-USA play, here's how the conference stacks up. School names are followed by the projected number of conference wins:

Houston 16.35
Memphis 14.64
Rice 14.19
Tulane 12.03
Southern Mississippi 12.00
East Carolina 11.49
Alabama-Birmingham 9.27
Central Florida 9.15
Marshall 8.67

The most notable thing so far this year is how C-USA has been declining compared to past seasons. In 2009, 2010 and 2011, C-USA was the sixth-rated conference in Division I according to Massey, but last season it slipped to eighth, and so far this season it's ninth (behind the Sun Belt and Big Ten!). According to Boyd Nation's pseudo-RPIs, C-USA is a one-bid league at this point, so I don't think Rice has the margin of error that it's had for NCAA tournament bids in recent seasons. The winning had better start immediately....

It's not a one bid conference if Rice does not win the tournament. Give it a rest already. We need to continue to win consistently both to win our 18th conference championship and to compete for a regional hosting spot (which both Aaron Fitt and Kendall Rogers are confident that Rice will get if it does win the conference). However, should we fail to win the automatic conference bid, so long as we win 35+ games we will get into the post-season.

BTW, I guess you hadn't noticed, but the team is currently on a 7-game win streak, and winners of 9 of their last 10 games. So the winning has, in fact, already started. We had one horrible weekend where we let the frustrations of a very hard-fought and tough loss to UNC carryover into the next two games against A&M and Baylor. It happens.

+1 Walt. Massey needs to work on his algorithm if it predicts us 3rd in CUSA.

Quote:The winning had better start immediately....

Based on the last 7 games, I would say that it already has!

(03-22-2013 04:14 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-22-2013 12:43 PM)Jonathan Sadow Wrote:  One of the nice things about Massey's ratings website is that he calculates the odds of winning for every game on the schedule. On the eve of the start of C-USA play, here's how the conference stacks up. School names are followed by the projected number of conference wins:

Houston 16.35
Memphis 14.64
Rice 14.19
Tulane 12.03
Southern Mississippi 12.00
East Carolina 11.49
Alabama-Birmingham 9.27
Central Florida 9.15
Marshall 8.67

The most notable thing so far this year is how C-USA has been declining compared to past seasons. In 2009, 2010 and 2011, C-USA was the sixth-rated conference in Division I according to Massey, but last season it slipped to eighth, and so far this season it's ninth (behind the Sun Belt and Big Ten!). According to Boyd Nation's pseudo-RPIs, C-USA is a one-bid league at this point, so I don't think Rice has the margin of error that it's had for NCAA tournament bids in recent seasons. The winning had better start immediately....

It's not a one bid conference if Rice does not win the tournament. Give it a rest already. We need to continue to win consistently both to win our 18th conference championship and to compete for a regional hosting spot (which both Aaron Fitt and Kendall Rogers are confident that Rice will get if it does win the conference). However, should we fail to win the automatic conference bid, so long as we win 35+ games we will get into the post-season.

Right now, the numbers say it's a one-bid conference. As of this writing, Houston has the highest pseudo-RPI in C-USA at 41st, and that's bubble material at best. Rice is next-highest at 76th, and that won't get you anywhere. The rest of the conference is worse. That's the problem this year - we're simply not going to get the RPI boost that we've had in previous years by running up a good C-USA record. I suspect Rice is going to have to do better than 14-10 in C-USA to be in the running for an at-large spot, and while you think 35 wins overall will be enough, when I wrote the original post Massey projected Rice to finish with about 33 wins overall. There is cause for concern.

Quote:BTW, I guess you hadn't noticed, but the team is currently on a 7-game win streak, and winners of 9 of their last 10 games. So the winning has, in fact, already started. We had one horrible weekend where we let the frustrations of a very hard-fought and tough loss to UNC carryover into the next two games against A&M and Baylor. It happens.

Well, I meant conference games when I referred to winning, but that brings up a related point. I'm glad that Rice swept the homestand, but six of those seven wins came against teams with RPIs of 134th and below. They weren't very helpful in boosting the Owls' RPI (and it definitely needs boosting). Perhaps the main reason Rice's RPI is where it is is because, for whatever reason, the schedule hasn't been very challenging, and it's not going to get much more challenging the rest of the way. Right now, Rice has only one top 50 RPI win (California) and two losses (North Carolina and Texas A&M). Those results aren't exactly standout at-large qualifications and, other than the series with Houston, no top 50 opponents are on the schedule the rest of the season. I'm not nearly as sanguine as you are about the results of the College Classic; what you consider to be the results of a hangover from a tough loss I see no reason not to consider as losses to superior teams.

(03-26-2013 02:22 AM)Jonathan Sadow Wrote:  

(03-22-2013 04:14 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-22-2013 12:43 PM)Jonathan Sadow Wrote:  One of the nice things about Massey's ratings website is that he calculates the odds of winning for every game on the schedule. On the eve of the start of C-USA play, here's how the conference stacks up. School names are followed by the projected number of conference wins:

Houston 16.35
Memphis 14.64
Rice 14.19
Tulane 12.03
Southern Mississippi 12.00
East Carolina 11.49
Alabama-Birmingham 9.27
Central Florida 9.15
Marshall 8.67

The most notable thing so far this year is how C-USA has been declining compared to past seasons. In 2009, 2010 and 2011, C-USA was the sixth-rated conference in Division I according to Massey, but last season it slipped to eighth, and so far this season it's ninth (behind the Sun Belt and Big Ten!). According to Boyd Nation's pseudo-RPIs, C-USA is a one-bid league at this point, so I don't think Rice has the margin of error that it's had for NCAA tournament bids in recent seasons. The winning had better start immediately....

It's not a one bid conference if Rice does not win the tournament. Give it a rest already. We need to continue to win consistently both to win our 18th conference championship and to compete for a regional hosting spot (which both Aaron Fitt and Kendall Rogers are confident that Rice will get if it does win the conference). However, should we fail to win the automatic conference bid, so long as we win 35+ games we will get into the post-season.

Right now, the numbers say it's a one-bid conference. As of this writing, Houston has the highest pseudo-RPI in C-USA at 41st, and that's bubble material at best. Rice is next-highest at 76th, and that won't get you anywhere. The rest of the conference is worse. That's the problem this year - we're simply not going to get the RPI boost that we've had in previous years by running up a good C-USA record. I suspect Rice is going to have to do better than 14-10 in C-USA to be in the running for an at-large spot, and while you think 35 wins overall will be enough, when I wrote the original post Massey projected Rice to finish with about 33 wins overall. There is cause for concern.

Quote:BTW, I guess you hadn't noticed, but the team is currently on a 7-game win streak, and winners of 9 of their last 10 games. So the winning has, in fact, already started. We had one horrible weekend where we let the frustrations of a very hard-fought and tough loss to UNC carryover into the next two games against A&M and Baylor. It happens.

Well, I meant conference games when I referred to winning, but that brings up a related point. I'm glad that Rice swept the homestand, but six of those seven wins came against teams with RPIs of 134th and below. They weren't very helpful in boosting the Owls' RPI (and it definitely needs boosting). Perhaps the main reason Rice's RPI is where it is is because, for whatever reason, the schedule hasn't been very challenging, and it's not going to get much more challenging the rest of the way. Right now, Rice has only one top 50 RPI win (California) and two losses (North Carolina and Texas A&M). Those results aren't exactly standout at-large qualifications and, other than the series with Houston, no top 50 opponents are on the schedule the rest of the season. I'm not nearly as sanguine as you are about the results of the College Classic; what you consider to be the results of a hangover from a tough loss I see no reason not to consider as losses to superior teams.

Do you honestly expect this Rice team to go 14-10 in conference this year-- with Kubitza-Stephens-Simms as our weekend rotation? I certainly do not. While RPI is a very important criteria used by the selection Committee, they do factor in a number of other considerations; not least of which is how a team has played the final one-third of the season. Our very low RPI is more a factor of unfortunate/unlucky scheduling (who would have expected Hawaii to have the record they have, or Stanford to have fallen on it's face the past 2 weeks?) than our level of play. How many teams in the country have an 8-2 road record, which is something the Committee does look at? How many teams are 5-0 in weekend series; another consideration of the Committee? How many teams have won 11 of their last 13 games?

No question, this team has to continue to take care of business, but there's no denying the offense (regardless to how inefficient still) has started showing signs of life the past 2 - 3 weeks....and should get even better when Hoelscher returns in a couple weeks. Our starting pitching and defense is very strong. If we can get the bullpen stabilized, this Rice team WILL be a factor nationally going forward.

(03-26-2013 02:22 AM)Jonathan Sadow Wrote:  

Quote:BTW, I guess you hadn't noticed, but the team is currently on a 7-game win streak, and winners of 9 of their last 10 games. So the winning has, in fact, already started. We had one horrible weekend where we let the frustrations of a very hard-fought and tough loss to UNC carryover into the next two games against A&M and Baylor. It happens.

Well, I meant conference games when I referred to winning, but that brings up a related point. I'm glad that Rice swept the homestand, but six of those seven wins came against teams with RPIs of 134th and below. They weren't very helpful in boosting the Owls' RPI (and it definitely needs boosting). Perhaps the main reason Rice's RPI is where it is is because, for whatever reason, the schedule hasn't been very challenging, and it's not going to get much more challenging the rest of the way.

Jonathan - like you, I am concerned like I have not been in over 15 years. I did want to point out that a win is a win as far as RPI is concerned. For calculating RPI, it doesn't matter if you are 18-8 with a loss vs. UNC and a win against LSP (little sisters of the poor) or if you're 18-8 with a win against UNC and loss against LSP. Those things definitely do matter to the committee, but the wins better keep coming because the SoS is crap - this is a down year for the state of Texas and Conference USA. A mid-season funk would be like a triple-witching for the Owls and could leave them out of the tournament. I don't see a lot of room for error, and the best path forward is to win the conference outright along with the CUSA tournament.

The automatic bid goes to the TOURNAMENT champ - correct?

(03-26-2013 09:16 AM)CoatzaOwl Wrote:  The automatic bid goes to the TOURNAMENT champ - correct?

Yes

Again, so long as we win 35+ games (and we're definitely on track to do so) and a share of the conference championship (even if the regular season title), we will be in the tournament at no lower than a #2 seed. We would have to go on a history-setting swoon during the second half of the season (which is usually when we play our best ball and put up our best record) to be denied post-season selection.

Now that the regular season is over, let's take a look and see how Massey did.

Team, Predicted wins, Actual wins, Difference:
Houston 16.35 13 -3.35
Memphis 14.64 14 -0.64
Rice 14.19 15 +0.81
Tulane 12.03 11 -1.03
Southern Mississippi 12.00 15 +3.00
East Carolina 11.49 14 +2.51
Alabama-Birmingham 9.27 7 -2.27
Central Florida 9.15 13 +3.85
Marshall 8.67 6 -2.67

Average difference = 2.24

He got three of the schools within a game of the actual total and had all within four games. Over a 24-game schedule that may not seem to be a lot, but thanks to the relative parity in C-USA this season that meant a big variation in the final standings (e.g., Houston finishing in fifth instead of first and Southern Miss in first instead of fifth).

As the RPI numbers were indicating, C-USA did indeed wind up being a one-bid conference. I'd have to check to be sure, but I think it's the first time in its history that the conference failed to get multiple bids to the baseball tournament. The Owls obviated any need for at-large qualifications by winning the conference tournament, but it would've been suspenseful if they hadn't won it. If Rice had lost in the final to Southern Miss, it might still have gotten a bid by virtue of its marginal RPI and having shared the regular-season title with the Golden Eagles, but not making the tournament final might well have knocked the Owls out of at-large consideration. Fortunately, it never came to that.