The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

I was looking through the various ranking systems, and I noticed that they have very different opinions about UC's strength of schedule:

NET - 18
RPI - 36
Bartovik Current: 47
Sagarin - 59
Massey - 59
ESPN BPI - 64
Barttorvik Elite L%: 69

Why such a large difference between the systems?

(02-14-2020 10:37 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I was looking through the various ranking systems, and I noticed that they have very different opinions about UC's strength of schedule:

NET - 18
RPI - 36
Bartovik Current: 47
Sagarin - 59
Massey - 59
ESPN BPI - 64
Barttorvik Elite L%: 69

Why such a large difference between the systems?

Must not be very important in the ranking calculations because the NET with our much better SOS has us at #48 and the RPI has us #26.

Any time I see the letters ESPN, I suspect agenda. They're probably having staff meetings right now trying to figure out how to get North Carolina in.

Since each system quantifies a baseline for teams differently on the input, there is going to be a different output. Lets hear it for stat porn.

Some metrics are results based (RPI) which only consider wins/losses. Others (KenPom) are performance/predictive based, and don't factor wins/losses into their data. The NET is supposed to be a hybrid.

(02-14-2020 11:42 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  Any time I see the letters ESPN, I suspect agenda. They're probably having staff meetings right now trying to figure out how to get North Carolina in.

So much this. But don't just suspect, expect.