| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66917
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63778
Back to top |
 Posted: 01/13/15 2:36 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
The coaches haven't liked MIN all season long.
USF? Is Geno on the panel?
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/13/15 3:08 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The thing I'm having the hardest time understanding is how Baylor is ranked ahead of Texas. Only possible (and ridiculous) explanation is that Texas lost more recently. Both have one loss, Baylor to 14-3 Ky, TX to 11-3 IowaSt. Texas has beaten Stanford, aTm, and Tennessee, while Baylor has beaten Syracuse and (a questionable) OkSt. And to me the "eye test" doesn't. place Baylor ahead of Texas either.
Actually same question could also be asked as to why Texas is behind Louisville in this poll when Louisville lost to KY and has exactly zero notable wins. (We'll find out about Louisville soon enough. In about a week they start a series of four games vs FSU, Miami, Syracuse, and Duke.)
If I was voting, Texas would still be #3 on my ballot.
|
|
ripleydc
Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 4778
Location: Washington, DC
Back to top |
|
larmarch5
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Posts: 424
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/13/15 4:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
The thing I'm having the hardest time understanding is how Baylor is ranked ahead of Texas. Only possible (and ridiculous) explanation is that Texas lost more recently. Both have one loss, Baylor to 14-3 Ky, TX to 11-3 IowaSt. Texas has beaten Stanford, aTm, and Tennessee, while Baylor has beaten Syracuse and (a questionable) OkSt. And to me the "eye test" doesn't. place Baylor ahead of Texas either.
Actually same question could also be asked as to why Texas is behind Louisville in this poll when Louisville lost to KY and has exactly zero notable wins. (We'll find out about Louisville soon enough. In about a week they start a series of four games vs FSU, Miami, Syracuse, and Duke.)
If I was voting, Texas would still be #3 on my ballot. |
Texas @ Baylor Jan. 19 5:30 p.m.Central Time on FOX Sports 1
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/13/15 4:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| larmarch5 wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
The thing I'm having the hardest time understanding is how Baylor is ranked ahead of Texas. Only possible (and ridiculous) explanation is that Texas lost more recently. Both have one loss, Baylor to 14-3 Ky, TX to 11-3 IowaSt. Texas has beaten Stanford, aTm, and Tennessee, while Baylor has beaten Syracuse and (a questionable) OkSt. And to me the "eye test" doesn't. place Baylor ahead of Texas either.
Actually same question could also be asked as to why Texas is behind Louisville in this poll when Louisville lost to KY and has exactly zero notable wins. (We'll find out about Louisville soon enough. In about a week they start a series of four games vs FSU, Miami, Syracuse, and Duke.)
If I was voting, Texas would still be #3 on my ballot. |
Texas @ Baylor Jan. 19 5:30 p.m.Central Time on FOX Sports 1 |
Yeah, I understand these things will sort themselves out, but they highlight how lazy and formulaic many voters are. I'm looking forward to that game (via DVR since it overlaps ND-Tenn). Baylor is certainly capable of winning and earning a higher ranking; I just don't understand why they should be ranked higher today.
Last edited by ArtBest23 on 01/13/15 4:16 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
|
SpaceJunkie
Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 4241
Location: Minnesota
Back to top |
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/13/15 10:03 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| linkster wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
So, let me get this straight...
South Florida is #25...Minnesota isn't even getting a single vote?
No wonder the coaches poll isn't taken seriously anymore. 
I guess the wins over East Carolina, Memphis and at Tulane since Christmas swayed the coaches. That must be better than Minnesota's wins over #12 Nebraska, Purdue & Wisconsin combined with a 4-point loss over #8 Maryland (who incidentally beat USF by nearly 20).
Again, 14-2, 3-1 in the B1G and not a single vote???? |
While you are berating the polls you might as well include the performance-based rating systems too.
Sagarin has USF at No 25 and Minn at No 40
Massey has USF at No 16 and Minn at No 26 (Massey also has Nebraska at 25)
Wbb State, which uses a modified RPI has Minn at No 19 and USF at 27.
If one is an RPI fan then Minn looks better but if you go by performance stats USF is playing better. |
I'm actually surprised that it took this long for a UConn fan to jump to the defense of USF and the AAC. That said, those numbers clearly prove my point - that Minnesota should at least be getting votes. To not be receiving any is completely ridiculous.
I'm guessing the coaches don't really pay any attention to all of those things that you posted.  |
Funny, but I thought that was part of your intent. (wink right back at you) LOL
I didn't take sides. You picked the subject. I just tried to add some factual information to your post. I don't know who is the better team but your post suggests that Minn should be rated higher simply because they play B1G teams. I think Tulane, East Carolina & USF would win a lot of games in the B1G this season. I'm looking forward to seeing this Minn post. I never saw Hamson until she play UConn. I'm not going to miss another.
BTW, in another act of obvious bias and homerism, Sagarin disagrees with that 12 rating for Nebraska that they had a month ago, putting them instead at 32. Kind of takes the luster off that win, don't it? They may have been thought of as 12th a month ago, partly due to their win over Duke, another team that that was thought to be better a month ago.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63778
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/13/15 10:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| linkster wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| linkster wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
So, let me get this straight...
South Florida is #25...Minnesota isn't even getting a single vote?
No wonder the coaches poll isn't taken seriously anymore.
I guess the wins over East Carolina, Memphis and at Tulane since Christmas swayed the coaches. That must be better than Minnesota's wins over #12 Nebraska, Purdue & Wisconsin combined with a 4-point loss over #8 Maryland (who incidentally beat USF by nearly 20).
Again, 14-2, 3-1 in the B1G and not a single vote???? |
While you are berating the polls you might as well include the performance-based rating systems too.
Sagarin has USF at No 25 and Minn at No 40
Massey has USF at No 16 and Minn at No 26 (Massey also has Nebraska at 25)
Wbb State, which uses a modified RPI has Minn at No 19 and USF at 27.
If one is an RPI fan then Minn looks better but if you go by performance stats USF is playing better. |
I'm actually surprised that it took this long for a UConn fan to jump to the defense of USF and the AAC. That said, those numbers clearly prove my point - that Minnesota should at least be getting votes. To not be receiving any is completely ridiculous.
I'm guessing the coaches don't really pay any attention to all of those things that you posted. |
Funny, but I thought that was part of your intent. (wink right back at you) LOL
I didn't take sides. You picked the subject. I just tried to add some factual information to your post. I don't know who is the better team but your post suggests that Minn should be rated higher simply because they play B1G teams. I think Tulane, East Carolina & USF would win a lot of games in the B1G this season. I'm looking forward to seeing this Minn post. I never saw Hamson until she play UConn. I'm not going to miss another.
BTW, in another act of obvious bias and homerism, Sagarin disagrees with that 12 rating for Nebraska that they had a month ago, putting them instead at 32. Kind of takes the luster off that win, don't it? They may have been thought of as 12th a month ago, partly due to their win over Duke, another team that that was thought to be better a month ago. |
Maybe UConn should be rated lower, because they lost to a team that keeps sinking.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15739
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/13/15 10:57 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| linkster wrote: |
Duke, another team that that was thought to be better a month ago. |
Isn't Duke supposed to be one of those very few showpiece wins that we are to believe balance out the SMUs and Tulsas and Houstons that dominate UConn's schedule?
If Duke doesn't count, what's left? A win over a Turner-less ND team that now has lost to Miami, and a loss to a sinking Stanford? Is that it?
If I were a UConn fan I'd be hesitant to bash Duke.
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/14/15 12:16 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| linkster wrote: |
See how USF making it into the coach's poll changes the rhetoric?
|
If USF's tenure had any more likely longevity than WKy's it might. They'll be gone soon enough.
Oh and even if Duke was to fall out of the top 25, ND would still have on its resume MD, UNC, FSU, Louisville, Syracuse, Tenn. And with the ACC tournament, probably a couple more against ranked ACC teams.
There's a greater risk of Stanford falling out of the top 25 than Duke, and if both did, UConn's ranked opponents could well consist of a grand total of 2 - ND and S.Car. How would that "change the rhetoric" about the OOC schedule?
BTW, aside from Duke, there are 5 other ranked SEC teams that S.Car plays; some of them they'll play more than once.
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/14/15 12:46 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| linkster wrote: |
See how USF making it into the coach's poll changes the rhetoric?
|
If USF's tenure had any more likely longevity than WKy's it might. They'll be gone soon enough.
Oh and even if Duke was to fall out of the top 25, ND would still have on its resume MD, UNC, FSU, Louisville, Syracuse, Tenn. And with the ACC tournament, probably a couple more against ranked ACC teams.
There's a greater risk of Stanford falling out of the top 25 than Duke, and if both did, UConn's ranked opponents could well consist of a grand total of 2 - ND and S.Car. How would that "change the rhetoric" about the OOC schedule?
BTW, aside from Duke, there are 5 other ranked SEC teams that S.Car plays; some of them they'll play more than once. |
| Quote: |
| There's a greater risk of Stanford falling out of the top 25 than Duke, and if both did, UConn's ranked opponents could well consist of a grand total of 2 - ND and S.Car. How would that "change the rhetoric" about the OOC schedule? |
If a person believes that the most important factor in ranking a team is the "perceived" quality of their opponents then it would make a big difference. If a person instead uses analytic measures it wouldn't.
Massey:
1-UConn
2-S. Car.
3-Baylor
http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cbw&sub=NCAA%20I
________________________
Wbbstate:
1-UConn
2-S. Car.
3-Baylor
http://www.wbbstate.com/standings/2015/thestate
________________________
Rebkel
1-UConn
2-S. Car.
3-Notre Dame
http://www.rpiratings.com/womrate.php
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/14/15 2:48 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
That is of course today and has no relationship to how things will appear in March after UConn has played 16 or 17 more games against AAC weaklings while ND and S.Car and Tenn and so forth will have played the toughest parts of their schedules and tournaments against conference foes.
I've said repeatedly, as in the thread about the RPI not working, that UConn will be a 1 seed. But it will not be because of RPI, good wins, or any other metric; it will be entirely because reputation and some totally subjective eye test drives the committee to ignore all the objective metrics.
I really don't understand why you continue to try to defend UConn'schedule in comparison to that of S.Car., Tenn, Texas, ND, MD or any other P5 team. It's an argument you can't possibly win. UConn will be a 1 because everyone believes they're a 1 (and because ESPN will be telling everyone that UConn's a 1) not because the numbers will say they're a 1.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/14/15 3:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
BTW, are you seriously touting as "more reliable" rankings that place Princeton at number 4 (wbbs), 5 (Massey) or 6 (sagarin)? Do you believe that Princeton is better than Texas, Tennessee, Maryland, OreSt, Florida St, UNC, Duke, Louisville, etc?
If the RPI put Princeton at 4 (which it doesn't; they're a far more rational 16), the committee would ignore the metrics and move them down the same way as they'll ignore the metrics and move UConn up.
|
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/14/15 3:11 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
That is of course today and has no relationship to how things will appear in March after UConn has played 16 or 17 more games against AAC weaklings while ND and S.Car and Tenn and so forth will have played the toughest parts of their schedules and tournaments against conference foes.
I've said repeatedly, as in the thread about the RPI not working, that UConn will be a 1 seed. But it will not be because of RPI, good wins, or any other metric; it will be entirely because reputation and some totally subjective eye test drives the committee to ignore all the objective metrics.
I really don't understand why you continue to try to defend UConn'schedule in comparison to that of S.Car., Tenn, Texas, ND, MD or any other P5 team. It's an argument you can't possibly win. UConn will be a 1 because everyone believes they're a 1 (and because ESPN will be telling everyone that UConn's a 1) not because the numbers will say they're a 1. |
Sounds good to me.
_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/14/15 3:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| cthskzfn wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
That is of course today and has no relationship to how things will appear in March after UConn has played 16 or 17 more games against AAC weaklings while ND and S.Car and Tenn and so forth will have played the toughest parts of their schedules and tournaments against conference foes.
I've said repeatedly, as in the thread about the RPI not working, that UConn will be a 1 seed. But it will not be because of RPI, good wins, or any other metric; it will be entirely because reputation and some totally subjective eye test drives the committee to ignore all the objective metrics.
I really don't understand why you continue to try to defend UConn'schedule in comparison to that of S.Car., Tenn, Texas, ND, MD or any other P5 team. It's an argument you can't possibly win. UConn will be a 1 because everyone believes they're a 1 (and because ESPN will be telling everyone that UConn's a 1) not because the numbers will say they're a 1. |
Sounds good to me. |
I've never questioned that. If I was a UConn fan I'd just accept it, sit back, and smile, and stop trying to defend the indefensible.
And if I was on the committee, barring some shocking loss to a conference opponent, I too would have UConn as a 1 seed regardless of the outcome of the SCar game and regardless of what the RPI says.
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/14/15 3:51 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
That is of course today and has no relationship to how things will appear in March after UConn has played 16 or 17 more games against AAC weaklings while ND and S.Car and Tenn and so forth will have played the toughest parts of their schedules and tournaments against conference foes.
I've said repeatedly, as in the thread about the RPI not working, that UConn will be a 1 seed. But it will not be because of RPI, good wins, or any other metric; it will be entirely because reputation and some totally subjective eye test drives the committee to ignore all the objective metrics.
I really don't understand why you continue to try to defend UConn'schedule in comparison to that of S.Car., Tenn, Texas, ND, MD or any other P5 team. It's an argument you can't possibly win. UConn will be a 1 because everyone believes they're a 1 (and because ESPN will be telling everyone that UConn's a 1) not because the numbers will say they're a 1. |
You say that UConn will be be a 1 seed and:
" it will be entirely because reputation and some totally subjective eye test drives the committee to ignore all the objective metrics."?
Maybe I'm nuts but I'm the one who is using objective metrics and you are the one using subjective polls. The committee has stated that they use many metrics, RPI being only one. Is it unreasonable to think that they look at Massey, Sagarin & Wbb State? Are those the "subjective eyes" you refer to?
Furthermore, I have repeatedly stated that UConn is in a weak conference. I've never defended their schedule. What I do say is that those who dismiss the AAC while touting their conference as being filled with high quality teams are over stating their position. Notre Dame, as I pointed out, has 4 games left against ranked teams. Hardly a challenging state. UConn has 3 and one is better (according to both my and your standards) than any of Notre Dame's future opponents.
My only point (and one I have repeatedly had to repeat ) is that there are no "power" conferences in wcbb. The B1G may have the best football team but what have any of their wcbb teams done in the last 6 years in the NCAA's? (And MD wasn't a member till this year) But some refuse to admit that. Over a month ago I listed the MOV's that Notre Dame had last season in the ACC. My memory may be wrong but it was 20 pts+. I think they had one game that was single digits. Is that what you call a competitive schedule worthy of having POWER placed in front of it? It may be the best that there is in wcbb but that is no great claim.
|
|
|
|
