That's what my whole post was about....lol. Seeds and rpi don't match. If we end up with rpi of 10...it's not going to matter how many bottom 300 are in there. It's only going to matter about top 50 wins.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Around the AAC
- Thread starter jacobkdoyle
- Start date
Help Support BearcatTalk:
That's what my whole post was about....lol. Seeds and rpi don't match. If we end up with rpi of 10...it's not going to matter how many bottom 300 are in there. It's only going to matter about top 50 wins.
X10. I am tired of the handringing that we don’t have enough top 150 teams on our schedule. The only thing that the committee cared about last year was top 50 wins. There were some bad teams that were seeded high simply because they had a played a high volume of top 50 teams and were able to win 40-50% of the games. It was stupid.That's what my whole post was about....lol. Seeds and rpi don't match. If we end up with rpi of 10...it's not going to matter how many bottom 300 are in there. It's only going to matter about top 50 wins.
cincrulz11
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 4,329
the committee only cares about what is important to them in that specific year to justify what they've done. that mark always moves but they dont tell you until after.
its all a joke. all we can do is win the games we need to win and go from there. even then we'll probably get under seeded and shipped out west. such is life.
its all a joke. all we can do is win the games we need to win and go from there. even then we'll probably get under seeded and shipped out west. such is life.
If they seeded strickly based on the rpi, people would just game the rpi. You seem to be confused by that
Let's say we play 8 teams in the rpi top 50 and we win 5 of them. We also have 4 sub 300 games and we end with an rpi of 10.
Scenario B. We play 5 teams rpi top 50 and we win 3 of them. Now change our sub 300 games to sub 200 games and we end with an rpi of 10.
Which resume would you like to show the committee given their history? I would guess we would move up a seed line or two in scenario #1.
juckerrules
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2014
- Messages
- 520
Beat lots of good teams, you’re golden....beat a few, lose to a few, seeding is iffy - beat mediocre to bad teams in either scenario, not much difference....beat really crappy teams, same resultLet's say we play 8 teams in the rpi top 50 and we win 5 of them. We also have 4 sub 300 games and we end with an rpi of 10.
Scenario B. We play 5 teams rpi top 50 and we win 3 of them. Now change our sub 300 games to sub 200 games and we end with an rpi of 10.
Which resume would you like to show the committee given their history? I would guess we would move up a seed line or two in scenario #1.
Cats beat X, UCLA & Florida, along with a good conference showing & no one cares about the 300’s
cincyguy13
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2017
- Messages
- 4,633
Let's say we play 8 teams in the rpi top 50 and we win 5 of them. We also have 4 sub 300 games and we end with an rpi of 10.
Scenario B. We play 5 teams rpi top 50 and we win 3 of them. Now change our sub 300 games to sub 200 games and we end with an rpi of 10.
Which resume would you like to show the committee given their history? I would guess we would move up a seed line or two in scenario #1.
I agree. People also remember you winning those big games and that matters. I think that one reason whichta is ranked so high this year. They have a good team but they also gave Kentucky all the could handle last year and people remember that. If we beat Florida and Xavier on national stages, we will have some wiggle room
justinhub2003
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2015
- Messages
- 5,583
Tulane is 4-0 after winning the tourney they were in.
Dunleavy has this team playing really hard
Dunleavy has this team playing really hard
Bearcat2016
Active member
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 43
Big game for temple tonight they play Clemson who’s is #44 in kenpom, would be big if they could pick up another solid win this year.
Temple wins 67-60. Nice way to start the season. Hopefully they can keep it up. They have some opportunities in their non-conference for big wins.
jacobkdoyle
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2014
- Messages
- 17,008
Temple wins 67-60. Nice way to start the season. Hopefully they can keep it up. They have some opportunities in their non-conference for big wins.
They seem to be much better than last year.
justinhub2003
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2015
- Messages
- 5,583
They seem to be much better than last year.
IF they would have continued to actually run offense the last 6 minutes, they could have won by 20. But instead played to not lose and ended a little closer.
I like that team, outside of its mental mistakes. Quinton Rose is uber talented but still very raw. I really like their back up PG.
Also I saw Obi get some buckets at the rim which he wasn't capable of before. thought his defense was bad though
justinhub2003
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2015
- Messages
- 5,583
Tulane about to pass up Memphis in Kenpom.
cincyguy13
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2017
- Messages
- 4,633
it seems like the league is better this year. It still isn't great and teams will still have questionable losses but I think it will be much better. If uconn and Temple can at least be bubble teams or NIT teams, thats already much better than last year. Tulane doesn't look like the worst team in college basketball. that a plus.
justinhub2003
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2015
- Messages
- 5,583
it seems like the league is better this year. It still isn't great and teams will still have questionable losses but I think it will be much better. If uconn and Temple can at least be bubble teams or NIT teams, thats already much better than last year. Tulane doesn't look like the worst team in college basketball. that a plus.
Houston Losing to Drexel sucked ass. And Tulsa sucks. But I tulane go into the UNC game undefeated and potentially Top 100 in Kenpom. That would be great
jacobkdoyle
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2014
- Messages
- 17,008
Houston Losing to Drexel sucked ass. And Tulsa sucks. But I tulane go into the UNC game undefeated and potentially Top 100 in Kenpom. That would be great
Tulsa needs to get rid of Frank Haith. Each season with him just pushes them further and further away from relevance. They have to fire him, make the right hire, then hope they get decent 3-4 years later. Gonna be rough for them until then.
There are some injuries already that certainly won't help (like UCF). Our marquee game against UCLA will also likely take a hit but should at least remain top 50 rpi.
last year our own rpi was 12...which is a 3-4 seed not a 6 seed. UCLA was #4 which is a 1-2 seed and they got a 3 seed. It was a lack of top 50 rpi wins that killed us...not our own rpi ranking. Even if UCF does not make it...we could still end up with more top 50 wins this year. If the committee looks at other metrics like they said they would...we should be just fine. We are holding steady in Kenpom even with a horrible SOS so far.
I'm beating a dead and decaying horse here, but I made the point ad nauseam last year that it is the height of stupidity to use something like top 50 RPI wins while completely ignoring individual RPI rankings. Put another way, the committee theoretically gave teams that beat UC credit for beating a top 15 team, yet the committee itself viewed UC as only the 23rd or 24th best team. It's something I can't wrap my head around, but as was mentioned before, the committee seeds how they seed and then retroactively assign stats to fit the brackets they want.
UCalum08
Well-known member
Jacob, so do you watch WSU on the regular? Do you root for them outside UC? This is my first time really watching them besides the UK game. I think they do a lot of things right and have some active quality bigs and obviously a really good guard. You think we will beat them at least once?
You're 100% right, and it's a simple but salient point that illustrates how absurd it is.I'm beating a dead and decaying horse here, but I made the point ad nauseam last year that it is the height of stupidity to use something like top 50 RPI wins while completely ignoring individual RPI rankings. Put another way, the committee theoretically gave teams that beat UC credit for beating a top 15 team, yet the committee itself viewed UC as only the 23rd or 24th best team. It's something I can't wrap my head around, but as was mentioned before, the committee seeds how they seed and then retroactively assign stats to fit the brackets they want.
Unfortunately that seems to be a metric they really value
Found this tidbit on how road wins are going to carry more value than in the past with the committee. Basically what is being said here is that a top 30 win at home is equal to a top 50 win on a neutral site and a top 75 road win. And so on down the line. In the past I think a top 50 win was a top 50 win whether at home or on the road. It also sounds like the committee will use more of a composite of several metrics to make these determinations. I think UC would have benefited with this last year.
Column 1: Home games against teams ranked 1-30, neutral games vs. top-50 teams, road games against top-75 teams
Column 2: Home games against teams ranked 31-75, neutral games vs. 51-100, road games vs. 76-135
Column 3: Home games against teams ranked 76-160, neutral games vs. 101-200, road games vs. 136-240
Column 4: Home games against teams ranked 161-351, neutral games vs. 201-351, road games vs. 241-351
Column 1: Home games against teams ranked 1-30, neutral games vs. top-50 teams, road games against top-75 teams
Column 2: Home games against teams ranked 31-75, neutral games vs. 51-100, road games vs. 76-135
Column 3: Home games against teams ranked 76-160, neutral games vs. 101-200, road games vs. 136-240
Column 4: Home games against teams ranked 161-351, neutral games vs. 201-351, road games vs. 241-351