34. USM

110. MTSU
111. UAB
114. La Tech

Yikes!!!!

http://www.rpiforecast.com/live-rpi.html

(12-19-2013 11:33 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  34. USM

110. MTSU
111. UAB
114. La Tech

Yikes!!!!

http://www.rpiforecast.com/live-rpi.html

Our league is very, very bad. Not really much else to say.

Uabs played back to back 300+ RPI teams

We have LSU this weekend which will bring it back up win or lose

Too early for rpi bt the league does stink

(12-20-2013 12:06 AM)Hell_Blazer Wrote:  Too early for rpi bt the league does stink

Disagree, once youv'e got 10-13 games under a conference's belt (right before conference play), this is where you start actually looking at the RPI. It'll change a bit obviously, but now is where the baseline should start IMO.

(12-20-2013 12:15 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(12-20-2013 12:06 AM)Hell_Blazer Wrote:  Too early for rpi bt the league does stink

Disagree, once youv'e got 10-13 games under a conference's belt (right before conference play), this is where you start actually looking at the RPI. It'll change a bit obviously, but now is where the baseline should start IMO.

Yup!

I hate that Tulane has a horrible team, but as long as the NCAA bid is going to someone else in the conference, I'm glad it appears to be going to Southern Miss. Both because they're clearly the best team and will have earned it, but also because they deserve a break after the tornado/storm from February and the recent unpleasantness in football.

I thought UAB's RPI would be higher...they did beat UNC.

(12-19-2013 11:33 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  34. USM

110. MTSU
111. UAB
114. La Tech

Yikes!!!!

http://www.rpiforecast.com/live-rpi.html

after all the crap we had to hear from UAB fans about how our 150+ RPI was hurting CUSA just like UTSA 350th one, two days later they are only 50 spots ahead of us at 110. Hey but UAB is going to be an at large top 35 , that's what it has taken out of a much better CUSA. Good luck even getting to less than 55 RPI in this version of CUSA that it will take to get an NIT bid as bad as the CUSA schedule is the rest of the way.

(12-20-2013 07:16 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 11:33 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  34. USM

110. MTSU
111. UAB
114. La Tech

Yikes!!!!

http://www.rpiforecast.com/live-rpi.html

after all the crap we had to hear from UAB fans about how our 150+ RPI was hurting CUSA just like UTSA 350th one, two days later they are only 50 spots ahead of us at 110. Hey but UAB is going to be an at large top 35 , that's what it has taken out of a much better CUSA. Good luck even getting to less than 55 RPI in this version of CUSA that it will take to get an NIT bid as bad as the CUSA schedule is the rest of the way.

So don't come back here after two pages saying UAB posters baited you into talking smack. You're starting this on your on accord. And not that it matters at this time because it is extremely early, but even Jerry Palm at this moment has two teams from CUSA making the Dance. Now you'll scream and post your per stats and crap. But at this point, you're just wasting other people time even posting on this board. I am done responding to you. I'll let the others keep you entertained.

C-USA is one of only two leagues with an above .500 mark ranked from 12 to 20. Obviously, there is something wrong with that when a league that's only won 35% of its games could be ranked higher.

Clearly, the league is not scheduling the right people. That can be the only explanation. Stop scheduling these schools you know are going to be 300 plus. Even with that this thing is still flawed.

For example, how can this be. Nebraska Omaha has the exact same record as Middle Tennessee yet MT's SOS is rated three percentage points higher, so how is it Omaha has an RPI 16 places ahead of MT? What I'm seeing in the RPI this year is some of the most illogical data I've ever seen in the system. And clearly C-USA is being penalized for it for whatever reason.

(12-20-2013 08:46 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  C-USA is one of only two leagues with an above .500 mark ranked from 12 to 20. Obviously, there is something wrong with that when a league that's only won 35% of its games could be ranked higher.

Clearly, the league is not scheduling the right people. That can be the only explanation. Stop scheduling these schools you know are going to be 300 plus. Even with that this thing is still flawed.

For example, how can this be. Nebraska Omaha has the exact same record as Middle Tennessee yet MT's SOS is rated three percentage points higher, so how is it Omaha has an RPI 16 places ahead of MT? What I'm seeing in the RPI this year is some of the most illogical data I've ever seen in the system. And clearly C-USA is being penalized for it for whatever reason.

And this is why as every year goes by, less and less emphasis is being place on the RPI. Teams have found ways to manipulate it and college basketball experts have caught on to it. More emphasis is being put of SOS and passing the eye test.

It's still pretty early. It only gets more accurate each day as the season progresses. UAB fans are the ones getting all worked up over mid December individual team RPI's.

Harvard #15....

(12-20-2013 09:25 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  It's still pretty early. It only gets more accurate each day as the season progresses. I envy UAB fans because they have a reason to get all worked up over mid December individual team RPI's. ECU fans don't!

FIFY

(12-20-2013 01:32 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I hate that Tulane has a horrible team, but as long as the NCAA bid is going to someone else in the conference, I'm glad it appears to be going to Southern Miss. Both because they're clearly the best team and will have earned it, but also because they deserve a break after the tornado/storm from February and the recent unpleasantness in football.

Southern Miss is clearly the best team? Based off of what? I don't think we have a clear best team, and there are at least 4 teams with a legit argument to be that team right now.

(12-20-2013 11:11 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(12-20-2013 01:32 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I hate that Tulane has a horrible team, but as long as the NCAA bid is going to someone else in the conference, I'm glad it appears to be going to Southern Miss. Both because they're clearly the best team and will have earned it, but also because they deserve a break after the tornado/storm from February and the recent unpleasantness in football.

Southern Miss is clearly the best team? Based off of what? I don't think we have a clear best team, and there are at least 4 teams with a legit argument to be that team right now.

+1

Our RPI is way too high...or low....or whatever....

(12-20-2013 12:37 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Our RPI is way too high...or low....or whatever....

USM RPI is fine right now. I would rather be in the high 30's than in the 100's at the moment. Especially this close to the start of conference play.

(12-20-2013 12:53 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(12-20-2013 12:37 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Our RPI is way too high...or low....or whatever....

USM RPI is fine right now. I would rather be in the high 30's than in the 100's at the moment. Especially this close to the start of conference play.

I think he was saying that he thinks USM is not as good as their rating. I think that USM played the RPI game the right way and deserve their rating. They beat who they should beat, played UofL (which helps win or lose) and then lost a close one on the road to us (which will probably not be a bad loss by the end of the season). I look forward to seeing how the rest of the C-USA season unfolds.