Mizzou
- Thread starter NJCat
- Start date
Actually, it will improve our RPI, and we all know that is the gold standard for selection in the Dance, per MysticCat. But I did enjoy them nearly blowing a 20 point halftime lead...
But credit the Illini. This game was essentially their Dance game due to the Tilmon situation and they came through
Missouri was just too young to counter the adversity they faced, particularly in the first half.
As for me, I quickly consoled myself with a reviewing of the Illinois football game from this season. So no effect on my posts.
Merry Christmas!
And after your ripping of the Illini for losing to NMSU, all the Aggies did next was come out and beat previously undefeated #6 Miami (who went to Minnesota and handled the Gophers about three weeks ago).
Once again, the Illini are not nearly as bad as you think (or want) them to be.
As per mystic cat...... the NCAA Selection committee for the last 2 decades and as per any casual college basketball fan.
Here’s an exercise: look at every at large team of the last 20 years and try to find the one thing they all have in common.
Didn't read my artciles, I see. RPI is essentially transitive property; and the committee no longer relies on it. I should know, since I Googled it as you suggested.
Relies, no.
Uses, yes.
From their own website:
"Selection Criteria
The Rating Percentage Index (RPI) is one of many factors used by NCAA sports committees when evaluating team selection, seeding and bracketing."
http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/mens-basketball-selections-101-selections
The NCAA will also place more emphasis on road wins this year. Read the article in CBS Sports for details:
https://www.cbssports.com/college-b...mphasize-road-results-in-new-bracket-process/
As far as RPI:
"There is one anticipated change that didn't happen in Chicago: removal of the RPI as the primary ranking source. It's the data point that builds team sheets, and has been criticized for as outdated and manipulated by savvy schedulers. The NCAA notes in its press release that there is a "likelihood of a new metric being in place for the 2018-19 season." The NCAA will attempt to run a composite ranking system, plus a separate, unique, independent formula next season as test run behind the scenes. Think of it like a dress rehearsal: the NCAA wants to see how a composite metric and how its individual ranking system performs vs. other established metrics before signing off on an overhaul."
They weren't coached by Bill Carmody?
Nice research, but Mystic has repeatedly indicated that the selection Committee relies on RPI. so all for naught if you were attempting to support his argument (though why on earth would you?). You are smart enough to realize that, if our KenPom were worse than our RPI, Mystic would be bringing up our KenPom every chance he could, correct? And even our RPI is at 75 now.
Fitzphile quotes yet another article that says rpi is still THE single most important determining factor (how many such articles are we up to now?), and you question why he would be honest about his findings?
Weird.
What is your obsessiveness about Kenpom (which some committee members said they didn’t even consider last year), and your strange aversion to RPI?
If you get ESPN, watch Bracketolgy this year. If you literally had to sum up selection criteria in one primary idea: it’s RPI.
Not sure why you’re so defiantly and self evidently wrong about something so simplistic and knowable, and something 4 posters have explained to you, and even taken the time to provide links.
???
Still didn't read any of the first three articles that I popped up when I Googled the topic, I see. All state that RPI is falling out of favor. But let;
's cut to the chase, if our RPI was 50 and not 75, we would not be hearing a peep out of you about RPI. And don't know where you are getting 4 posters from; one poster posted that RPI is basically a transiitve property measure (hint: he was NOT supporting your position). And if you're wagering the farm on Fitzphile (the only poster I have seen who suported your argument a bit, god knows why, guessing he likes trolls), keep in mind that he has already lost his screenname to me...
Since we are discussing the infallibility of RPI, did you notice our RPI Strength of Schedule ranking? It is #58, 5th best in the BIG. So much for your cupcake schedule theory.! Or will you attempt to argue that RPI means everything but RPI SOS means nothing? FYI, even if you throw out the two BIG games our noncon RPI is still 6th in the BIG, just a shade behind Ohio State. As an aside, Holy Cross' SOS is as stunning #319, so maybe it was just Carmody who knew how to schedule the cupcakes...
And our infallible RPI is now 66, good enough for 6th in the BIG, when most prognosticators predict that 7 or more BIG teams will make it to the Dance. Will your head explode if we make it to the Dance two years in a row, having never done so under Lord Carmody?
Please, impress us with more of your RPI-related basketball knowledge..You sure as heck can't effectively troll to save your life, so you might as well be good at something!
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/rpi/_/groupId/7
1). It doesn’t matter if it’s transitive, or what it is, or what the committee “might” do in future years.
2). It’s not my “position.” It’s the position of the fricken selection committee. It doesn’t have to be infallible, it could be the worst metric out there, all that matters is it is the “primary” metric and has been for decades.
3). Where we rank in the big ten is totally irrelevant.
4). “Or will you attempt to argue that RPI means everything but RPI SOS means nothing?”
Yes, SOS is totally irrelevant (other than to the the extent it helps or hurts your overall RPI.). It’s a VERY simple formula, it takes 3 steps. You can play the 5th hardest sos in the country, but if you go 5-25, your not next 4 out. It’s RPI, not any sub component of rpi by itself.
5). Fitzphile posts ANOTHER quote about what this board has been telling you for years, and you suspect the reason he did so was because he must, “like trolls.” Wow!
6) And our infallible RPI is now 66, good enough for 6th in the BIG.
Right. In other words, not even close to being on the bubble, and where it ranks in the BIG is totally irrelevant.
You've duped yourself into this strange self-referential math game about “prognosticators,” but you admittedly don’t even understand what the primary metric is, or how the sum of the parts are meaningless in and of themselves (ie. kenpom, sos, big ten rank.....), etc.
After we factor Brown into the “big boy” list and drop further out of the top 50, our chances to gain the 30 needed rpi slots back in half a year leaves very little room for losses, thanks to another historically bad big ten, and an nc sched that included Lewis and the chicago states of the world.
If you could separate what you wanted, and were rooting for, from the simple facts and math of the situation, you’d be much less off course here.
Tell me about our cupcake schedule again...
Memba this thread? Have a feeling we will be laughing as much about these posts in the future as that classic...
https://northwestern.forums.rivals.com/threads/next-year.24249/
Last edited:
I'm not taking sides in the juvenile argument between you and mystic. Just posted the bits about RPI for the sake of accuracy since it comes up from time to time on this board. To claim that the selection committee no longer use RPI is simply incorrect according to their own website! Unless one needs Alternate Facts to support their thesis!!
Link to post where I stated that the selection committee no longer uses RPI. I'll wait.
I cut out of this thread when mike started essentially saying- I KNIOW what the actual expert people do, but I want to use my own poll! Mine. Me and my friends use it, and it’s the BEST EVER!
And any poll that doesn’t have us in the final four, is a bad, bad poll.
I "essentially" said that? Just lol! Reading comprehend much?
Hey, memba this? Guess I DO know than what actual "experts" like MysticCat do, since we made the Dance last year...
https://northwestern.forums.rivals.com/threads/rpi.30623/
