G
georgethedog
Guest
Just as I predicted, the Big Ten just went ahead of the Valley in rpi. I am thoroughly... well, you know. The real question is can the Valley stay ahead of the Big 12 and Big East? :x
-
Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.
MacabreMob
New member
Yes yes - saw that.
IU at UConn helped.
Let's not freak out over 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, +.
We are solid as a conference and we are gonna do some damage in the NCAA and NIT tourney.
Bottom line... conferences don't get bids, teams do.
IU at UConn helped.
Let's not freak out over 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, +.
We are solid as a conference and we are gonna do some damage in the NCAA and NIT tourney.
Bottom line... conferences don't get bids, teams do.
G
georgethedog
Guest
MacabreMob said:
That's true, conferences don't get bids, teams do. But mathematically, if the conference rpi is dropping, team rpi must be also dropping. Therefore, wins against teams with an rpi's that are dropping hurts the individual team's rpi's in that league. So, yes the conference does not get a bid, but when the conference is losing ground so are the teams (and even the teams that are winning) so eventually more teams will drop and therefore fewer teams get picked.
MacabreMob
New member
GTD, I will update you tomorrow when JPalm updates his site. What we are viewing are 'overall' rpi of games played. The committee also looks at the non-conference rpi. Plus, there are still a couple non-con games to be played by the bigs. Then... we still have our BracketBuster matchups to determine our own destinies (to think one day of games actually means that much).
What kills me about the whole selection process that NOBODY talks about is how much the committee considers Rankings in Polls, how High and how Long.
So what is sad is a collective group of arrogant arseholes are STILL deciding who gets in and what gravy seed they get. If they want to snub the MVC, don't rank a team... none of them... oh but enough of them to look like you are paying attention and giving them respect.... but not enough to put 2-4 teams in the Top 25 that will get them a 4-6 seed.
What kills me about the whole selection process that NOBODY talks about is how much the committee considers Rankings in Polls, how High and how Long.
So what is sad is a collective group of arrogant arseholes are STILL deciding who gets in and what gravy seed they get. If they want to snub the MVC, don't rank a team... none of them... oh but enough of them to look like you are paying attention and giving them respect.... but not enough to put 2-4 teams in the Top 25 that will get them a 4-6 seed.
G
georgethedog
Guest
MacabreMob said:
Please tell me what you mean by this part of your post.
MacabreMob
New member
georgethedog said:
What I meant by that....
Is....
You see 1-3 MVC amongst teams receiving votes... so it looks like to a common viewer that the pollsters are paying attention.
The bottom line is: the MVC deserves at least 2 if not 3 teams in the top 25. Pollsters are stuck in the mentality that only 1 team is good in the MVC... and they can't figure out which one... so they rank them very low and they only pick one to rank.
So acroos the pollsters... some think UNI, some think CU, some Mo St, some think SIU... and there you have it. 4 amongst those receiving votes. But if the MVC were like the Horizon and we had SIU.... well, then they would be blowing away teams left and right and they would run away with a 'good league' (in their minds - but not as good as the BCS) so they get everyone's vote... thereofer a top 25 ranking.
It is an ABSOLUTE joke that UNFORTUNATELY determines NCAA bids and seeds.
G
georgethedog
Guest
MacabreMob said:
Gotcha... You are right and it will probably always be like that unfortunately. How many losses would the 1988 Braves with the Hawk have in this year's league? Oh, they were ranked in the top 10 and still received an 8 seed that year. So, even if a Valley team is ranked high the seed is still low... Can't win either way!
MacabreMob
New member
Exactly.
It is a Lose-Lose deal for non-BCS.
I can't document it, but I coulda sworn the RPI came out as a justification for the committee to take 5 ACC and 6 B10 (etc) and only 1 MVC....
And now, the RPI has turned on them because teams like in the MVC have figured out how to cheat the formula.
It all comes down to the opinion polls. (and they are skewed and wrong MOST of the time)
It is a Lose-Lose deal for non-BCS.
I can't document it, but I coulda sworn the RPI came out as a justification for the committee to take 5 ACC and 6 B10 (etc) and only 1 MVC....
And now, the RPI has turned on them because teams like in the MVC have figured out how to cheat the formula.
It all comes down to the opinion polls. (and they are skewed and wrong MOST of the time)
MacabreMob
New member
Gtd, this is Conf RPI Rankings from Jerry Palm at collegerpi.com based on Non-Conference games. This quote is from JPalm:
"I think a conference game is like a "team" playing itself, so it shouldn't be included. The NCAA calculates conference rankings both ways."
1 SEC 0.5781
2 Pac-10 0.5780
3 ACC 0.5764
4 Missouri Valley 0.5720
5 Big Ten 0.5657
6 Big 12 0.5590
7 Big East 0.5508
8 Mountain West 0.5440
9 WAC 0.5151
10 Horizon 0.5135
11 West Coast 0.5076
12 Conference USA 0.5075
13 Southern 0.5068
14 Atlantic 10 0.5058
"I think a conference game is like a "team" playing itself, so it shouldn't be included. The NCAA calculates conference rankings both ways."
1 SEC 0.5781
2 Pac-10 0.5780
3 ACC 0.5764
4 Missouri Valley 0.5720
5 Big Ten 0.5657
6 Big 12 0.5590
7 Big East 0.5508
8 Mountain West 0.5440
9 WAC 0.5151
10 Horizon 0.5135
11 West Coast 0.5076
12 Conference USA 0.5075
13 Southern 0.5068
14 Atlantic 10 0.5058
With regards to george's post about Hersey Hawkins and the 1988 team, I'm still bummed out about the 1986 team that went 32-3. We rolled through the Valley that year, but played three bad games in the conference tournament in Tulsa and lost in the title game to the Golden Hurricane. Natch, the championship was televised on ESPN and Bradley really looked like crap. So what did we get as a reward for our 31-2 record? A number 7 seed in the West Regional at Ogden! We beat UTEP handily in the first round, but lost to second-seeded Louisville in the second round--definitely a Rodney Daingerfield situation for the Braves. In retrospect, if we were as good as our record, we should have beaten Louisville, but on the other hand, the Cardinals did win the National Championship that year in Dallas, so that took the sting off the loss, somewhat.
MacabreMob said:
I think GTD is right in saying that the conference RPI has a cumulative effect on all the teams. That's why I don't buy the "conferences don't get bids, teams do" argument. This is the same mentallity that the pundits on ESPN spout, until they talk about the "big six" BCS conferences. Then they change their language and say "that this or that conference is number two in the RPI, and therefore they deserve 7 or 8 bids!" This is classic doublespeak by the BCS worshipper crowd of Phelps, Packer and others of their ilk.
The next time College Gamenight is on MacabreMob and the "leprechaun" shows up and spouts how his precious Notre Dame should be one of the ten teams that deserves bids out of the Big East, and then he turns around and says the Valley deserves two bids, if they're lucky, then you will see what I mean. :wink:
I do agree about the overrealiance of the media polls in the decision making process. However, the selection committee did realize that the Valley was a good league, and awarded them nicely with four bids. But the seeding definately was influenced by the media polls, and those "other" factors that no one seems to know about except for those dozen or so committee members that spend hours munching on pizza and throwing darts to see which team gets what seeding! And though the Valley was getting more press with Wichita St's amazing start, WSU's collapse probably did more irreversable damage than most people on this board would be willing to admit. We still will get four bids, at least in my opinion, but good luck if any team expects to earn higher than an 8 or 9 seed.
Gary Parrish said as much in his CBS Sportsline capsule about this weekend's impact games. Oh well, bring it on. Maybe the Valley can get 4 #8 or #9 seeds, and perhaps take out a couple #1 seeds in the process! Maybe then we'll get a little more national respect from the so-called experts. Then again, there are some other leagues this year that are just like the Missouri Valley--very competitive from top to bottom--no such thing as an "off night". No doubt there will be several teams feeling shafted on Selection Sunday. This year could be really tough for the Committee to sift through all the information they have available to them. Many teams will have exceptional wins coupled with suspect losses on their tournament resumes.
MacabreMob
New member
I agree with so much of what is being said here.
The thing that really gets me fired up is the polls because of what effect it has on bids and seedings.
This from Jerry Palm...
Everything you need to know about the process for putting a bracket together
Important (in no particular order):
- Conference standings.
- High RPI rating.
- Coaches ratings. (One coach from each conference, selected by the NABC, votes for the top 15 teams in his region [East, Midwest, South and West]. Those aggregate votes are provided to the committee for consideration. This information is not made available to the public.)
- Rated in polls. (Note that the voters in the coaches poll are also one per conference, as selected by the NABC. It is not known if those are the same voters who provide regional ratings to the committee.)
- Good conference record.
- Good finish to season. (This is measured by the committee as record in last 10 games.)
- Good road record.
- Tough non-conference schedule.
- Wins over teams in the top 50.
- Injuries and suspensions to players. (If a key player misses a few games because of an injury or suspension, that is taken into consideration by the committee, as long as that player is expected to play in the tournament. However, if a player is lost for the year, a team may have to re-prove itself to some degree.)
- Conference RPI Ratings. (They are calculated and in the room, so they must matter somehow, but I don't know how they're used.)
Irrelevant:
- Past tournament performance. (Each season stands on its own, as it should.)
- Number of wins. (There's no magic number of wins that automatically gets teams in.)
- Marquee player/coach.
- Perceived TV marketability. (All the ads are sold. CBS doesn't need the help.)
- Friends on the committee.
- Fan support.
- Number of teams from a conference.
- My opinion.
The thing that really gets me fired up is the polls because of what effect it has on bids and seedings.
This from Jerry Palm...
Everything you need to know about the process for putting a bracket together
Important (in no particular order):
- Conference standings.
- High RPI rating.
- Coaches ratings. (One coach from each conference, selected by the NABC, votes for the top 15 teams in his region [East, Midwest, South and West]. Those aggregate votes are provided to the committee for consideration. This information is not made available to the public.)
- Rated in polls. (Note that the voters in the coaches poll are also one per conference, as selected by the NABC. It is not known if those are the same voters who provide regional ratings to the committee.)
- Good conference record.
- Good finish to season. (This is measured by the committee as record in last 10 games.)
- Good road record.
- Tough non-conference schedule.
- Wins over teams in the top 50.
- Injuries and suspensions to players. (If a key player misses a few games because of an injury or suspension, that is taken into consideration by the committee, as long as that player is expected to play in the tournament. However, if a player is lost for the year, a team may have to re-prove itself to some degree.)
- Conference RPI Ratings. (They are calculated and in the room, so they must matter somehow, but I don't know how they're used.)
Irrelevant:
- Past tournament performance. (Each season stands on its own, as it should.)
- Number of wins. (There's no magic number of wins that automatically gets teams in.)
- Marquee player/coach.
- Perceived TV marketability. (All the ads are sold. CBS doesn't need the help.)
- Friends on the committee.
- Fan support.
- Number of teams from a conference.
- My opinion.
MacabreMob
New member
Bravesfan said:
Well, in JPalm's most recent bracket on Friday, UND was in with a #7 seed.
The MVC had 4 in:
#6 Mo St
#8 SIU
#10 UNI (to play UND)
#11 Creighton
Note:
#3 Butler
#4 Nevada
MacabreMob said:
Well, that's not much better than last year, and that was before Creighton's loss to SIU. And with MSU in a dogfight with Evansville right now, a loss would be damaging for them. I'd expect SIU with no higher than a #7 seed since they are lacking a real meaty non-confernce win. We'll see what happens between now and Arch Madness time. Quite a lot of storylines left to be written.
As far as Butler and Nevada are concerned, they both have stellar wins, especially Butler, and are dominating their respective conferences. A gaudy conference record, even in a so-so conference looks better than a decent record in a tough conference. I'll say this though. If the Valley can't get any decent seeds, I'd love to see Butler and Nevada get great seeds. That would be a great nod to the "mid-majors" to see these two teams rewarded for a great season and therefore have a great chance to go deep into the tournament.
MacabreMob
New member
I am not overly impressed by any wins from Nevada.
Their profile looks like this:
RPI 31
SOS 133
Wins
RPI - Date - Opponent - Score
43 Dec 3 vs California 77-71
57 Dec 30 vs Gonzaga 82-74
73 Nov 25 @ Santa Clara 78-70
104 Jan 8 Boise St 90-86
109 Dec 22 @ Akron 73-71
111 Jan 18 Fresno St 85-75
130 Jan 13 @ Hawaii 68-66 OT
139 Dec 12 St. Mary's 76-58
171 Nov 21 UC Irvine 83-64
182 Nov 15 @ Oregon St 75-47
205 Dec 16 Pacific 60-53
224 Dec 28 Maine 89-69
226 Jan 11 @ San Jose St 72-63
283 Jan 6 Idaho 81-55
292 Nov 29 @ UL Lafayette 86-74
295 Nov 18 Ark-Pine Bluff 82-63
Losses
Rank - Date - Opponent - Score
18 Dec 9 UNLV 49-58
71 Jan 20 @ New Mexico St 73-80
Their profile looks like this:
RPI 31
SOS 133
Wins
RPI - Date - Opponent - Score
43 Dec 3 vs California 77-71
57 Dec 30 vs Gonzaga 82-74
73 Nov 25 @ Santa Clara 78-70
104 Jan 8 Boise St 90-86
109 Dec 22 @ Akron 73-71
111 Jan 18 Fresno St 85-75
130 Jan 13 @ Hawaii 68-66 OT
139 Dec 12 St. Mary's 76-58
171 Nov 21 UC Irvine 83-64
182 Nov 15 @ Oregon St 75-47
205 Dec 16 Pacific 60-53
224 Dec 28 Maine 89-69
226 Jan 11 @ San Jose St 72-63
283 Jan 6 Idaho 81-55
292 Nov 29 @ UL Lafayette 86-74
295 Nov 18 Ark-Pine Bluff 82-63
Losses
Rank - Date - Opponent - Score
18 Dec 9 UNLV 49-58
71 Jan 20 @ New Mexico St 73-80
