bearcat jeff
Hoops Moderator
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2010
- Messages
- 7,502
Your Bearcats are up to 35th on live-rpi.com. Your 22-6 Bearcats that is 
.
.
Live-RPI
- Thread starter bearcat jeff
- Start date
Help Support BearcatTalk:
34th on espn insider rpi, but idk which is more accurate. really thought theyd move up more though so a lil disappointing :-(
now 4 top 25 rpi wins and 0 bad losses when there are teams that dont have 3 top 50 rpi wins and 1 or 2 really bad losses . feels good, yes it feels really good
now 4 top 25 rpi wins and 0 bad losses when there are teams that dont have 3 top 50 rpi wins and 1 or 2 really bad losses . feels good, yes it feels really good
The RPI is a joke.
UAB, Memphis, Xavier, Temple, UNLV, Vanderbilt, Old Dominion are all ranked above UC despite UC having a better record, more top 25 wins and 0 bad losses where each one of those other teams has at least two questionable losses.
Give me KenPom.com or Sagarin any day, I don't know why ESPN still references the RPI in all of their bubble watch segments instead of more accurate formulas.
UAB, Memphis, Xavier, Temple, UNLV, Vanderbilt, Old Dominion are all ranked above UC despite UC having a better record, more top 25 wins and 0 bad losses where each one of those other teams has at least two questionable losses.
Give me KenPom.com or Sagarin any day, I don't know why ESPN still references the RPI in all of their bubble watch segments instead of more accurate formulas.
The jury is still out for me on RPI. Here's what I don't get though... Utah St has only 3 losses. The only 2 teams they played in the top 100 - they lost except for a win against St. Mary's. Every other win is to other teams outside the top 100. And they are ranked in the top 20 ? St. Mary's is the same. Mind boggling... I guess this was the same argument the SEC was making about UC's football ranking in 2009.
+ 9 billion
i only reference it, and really think espn does too, cuz thats what the committee uses as its primary objective standard for who gets in/ out of the tourney, which we both agree is asinine.
although some espn guys agree with us. bilas, eamon brennan, pat forde and plenty of others
I just wanted to say that Eamon Brennan is a joke. The last three times I've read something of his where he referenced UC, he referred to them as the "Bears" instead of the "Bearcats." He often doesn't say anything intelligent, although I'm glad that he does find the worth in KenPom and Sagarin.
hmm. that surprises me. I pretty much disagree on the "not saying anything intelligent" though, bc he seems to do a good job of not overreacting to a teams one game performance for losses or wins.
i guess I missed those columns where he got the mascot wrong though bc on average his stuff has been pretty solid imo. Still, its not like getting a schools mascot wrong discredits someone argument when that could be as simple as an editing error on espn's part. I dont know how much he truly "knows" about actually playing basketball or in actual strategy/matchups, but statistically he understands the basics which is more than most
psax889906
Well-known member
Looking good. It's amazing to think how high they'd be if those games against 200+ RPI teams were games against 100-200 RPI teams instead. They'd be top 15 right now.
By the way, even though it was against a short handed Boston team last night (though they did have their big 3) I came to the realization:
The Denver Nuggets are now the Cincinnati Bearcats of the NBA.
Melo and Chauncey leave (Lance and Deonta) and suddenly you can see a renewed purpose on defense and the ball moving much better on offense.
Oh and Kenyon played like a man last night too.
By the way, even though it was against a short handed Boston team last night (though they did have their big 3) I came to the realization:
The Denver Nuggets are now the Cincinnati Bearcats of the NBA.
Melo and Chauncey leave (Lance and Deonta) and suddenly you can see a renewed purpose on defense and the ball moving much better on offense.
Oh and Kenyon played like a man last night too.
UCalum08
Well-known member
With that being said. Do you think UC will start to look at their scheduling a little bit closer in future years and try harder to get more 100-200 rpi teams? There is no question SOS has been a concern among everyone this year and if they would replace those 200+ teams with just a bit lower teams would make a bigger difference for the Cats.
psax889906
Well-known member
MONEY. This athletic department is essentially bankrupt. They had to cut track and field scholarships and that program has produced OLYMPIANS in the past decade.
Without more money they can't schedule those slightly better teams because they're getting better offers elsewhere.
UCalum08
Well-known member
I knew money was a factor I guess I never knew how much is cost to get some of those 100-150 rpi teams. That sucks ha. They also cut scholarships for swim team where they had a guy win the national championship, sad.
i dont really understand the inner workings of the financial realities of scheduling, but if we cant afford to pay them to come to cincy for a home game for us but no return game for them, wouldnt a lot of those smaller schools be thrilled to do a 2 home games for uc and 1 home game in return for the small school against, say a quality horizon league school? that may not be feasible though for reasons beyond what i know