| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
 Posted: 01/31/16 12:50 pm ::: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply  |
|
the top ten seeds in order as of this point in time. To be announced during tomorrow's Big Monday broadcast.
Everyone seems to think that the advance announcement by the football playoff committee was a huge success in terms of generating excitement and interest for the remainder of the season. I guess it's worth a try. Anything to generate interest in WCBB.
Anyhow what's your prediction? I believe it's a "if we were making selections today on today's data" rather than a prediction of the future. On that basis I predict
UConn
SCar
ND
Baylor
OhSt
AzSt
Texas
OreSt
aTm
Maryland
(Yeah, I know MD seems low, but the fact is that in the Committee's own RPI metric, MD ranks 21 because its SOS is a horrific 78th. So unless they are going to ignore RPI, MD has to get dinged. Indeed I could see Maryland being left out of the top 10 and perhaps Louisville or FSU getting the 10th spot instead. They say they use RPI and don't use polls, so we shall see. Should provide some more insight into what they actually do. Should also make Charlie Creme even less relevant than usual.)
|
|
Fighting Artichoke
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/31/16 1:19 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
If they really value the RPI that much more than records (to make Louisville knock Maryland out of the top 10), then they would probably give ND the nod over S. Carolina as #2, as ND is quite a bit better in RPI (RPI value, not rank). I think Maryland is easily in the top 10 (8 or better). And get A&M out there! They are 12th in RPI and have 5 losses!
1. UConn
2. South Carolina (no losses yet)
3. Notre Dame
4. Baylor
5. Texas
6. Ohio State
7. Maryland
8. Arizona State
9. Oregon State
10. Florida State
Possible teams: Stanford or UCLA (definitely not both), A&M
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/31/16 3:15 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Fighting Artichoke wrote: |
| If they really value the RPI that much more than records (to make Louisville knock Maryland out of the top 10), then they would probably give ND the nod over S. Carolina as #2, as ND is quite a bit better in RPI (RPI value, not rank). |
There is a difference between inverting the ##1 and 2 RPI teams because of record snd moving the #21 RPi team onto the top 10. If RPI has any meaning at all to the Committee, and if they care as much about SOS as they claim, I don't see how they can jump #21 over eleven other teams.
The concept is that if MD had played a more respectable schedule, they'd likely have more losses.
If they care about polls and record and are willing to disregard their own metric, then Maryland will be among the top 10.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63764
Back to top |
|
Fighting Artichoke
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040
Back to top |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
|
Matt5762
Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 607
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/31/16 4:52 pm ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
This seems stupid. The football playoff selection committee releases their top 25 for a field of 4, so the NCAA thinks it's a good to release a top 10 for a field of 64? If they'd at least do a top 25, it'd be a little more interesting...
Anyhow, the only question that might be answered is whether they believe the Pac-12 is for real or not?
Because at the moment, I project the top 10 as follows (and I don't for a minute expect the NCAA committee to have four P12 teams on their list):
Connecticut
South Carolina
Notre Dame
Baylor
Texas
Ohio State
Oregon State
Arizona State
Stanford
UCLA
Maryland, Texas A&M and Louisville are the other teams I have close, aka likely substitutes for some of the excess P12 teams.
|
|
Fighting Artichoke
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/31/16 7:04 pm ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
| Matt5762 wrote: |
This seems stupid. The football playoff selection committee releases their top 25 for a field of 4, so the NCAA thinks it's a good to release a top 10 for a field of 64? If they'd at least do a top 25, it'd be a little more interesting...
Anyhow, the only question that might be answered is whether they believe the Pac-12 is for real or not?
Because at the moment, I project the top 10 as follows (and I don't for a minute expect the NCAA committee to have four P12 teams on their list):
Connecticut
South Carolina
Notre Dame
Baylor
Texas
Ohio State
Oregon State
Arizona State
Stanford
UCLA
Maryland, Texas A&M and Louisville are the other teams I have close, aka likely substitutes for some of the excess P12 teams. |
Why do you think that all of those PAC12 teams are more deserving than Maryland?
|
|
Matt5762
Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 607
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/31/16 7:25 pm ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
| Fighting Artichoke wrote: |
Why do you think that all of those PAC12 teams are more deserving than Maryland? |
I don't think they are, but based on the selection criteria...the Pac schools have actually beaten other "good" teams. Of course, the Pac-12 having 4 teams in the RPI top 10 plus several others in the top 25 helps everybody stock up on quality wins as they beat up on each other.
Maryland's RPI is low for a reason - they have maybe beaten only 1 team that will make the NCAAs (RPI 34 Syracuse). Their resume at the moment is actually pretty similar to a typical mid-major with no bad losses but no real quality wins either.
Based on the committee's recent history (eg Princeton last year), this type of profile has not been highly regarded, but they could ignore that and use the "eye test" to rank Maryland highly anyways, who knows?
|
|
patsweetpat
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2313
Location: Culver City, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/31/16 8:15 pm ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
| Fighting Artichoke wrote: |
| Matt5762 wrote: |
This seems stupid. The football playoff selection committee releases their top 25 for a field of 4, so the NCAA thinks it's a good to release a top 10 for a field of 64? If they'd at least do a top 25, it'd be a little more interesting...
Anyhow, the only question that might be answered is whether they believe the Pac-12 is for real or not?
Because at the moment, I project the top 10 as follows (and I don't for a minute expect the NCAA committee to have four P12 teams on their list):
Connecticut
South Carolina
Notre Dame
Baylor
Texas
Ohio State
Oregon State
Arizona State
Stanford
UCLA
Maryland, Texas A&M and Louisville are the other teams I have close, aka likely substitutes for some of the excess P12 teams. |
Why do you think that all of those PAC12 teams are more deserving than Maryland? |
Maryland's 5 best Ws are against RPI #s...
27 (Syracuse)
44 (Iowa)
47 (Indiana)
62 (SDSU)
64 (Nebraska)
For ASU, the top 5 Ws are against...
6 (Stanford)
12 (Florida St.)
20 (Washington)
27 (Syracuse)
50 (Cal)
For Stanford, the top 5 Ws are against...
13 (Tennessee)
16 (USC)
20 (Washington)
28 (Purdue)
37 (GWU)
For UCLA, the top 5 Ws are against...
6 (Stanford)
10 (Oregon St.)
16 (USC)
42 (St. John's)
50 (Cal)
Maryland hasn't beaten anyone, and ASU and Stanford and UCLA have. That's why they are more deserving than Maryland.
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/31/16 8:19 pm ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| Maryland hasn't beaten anyone, and ASU and Stanford and UCLA have. That's why they are more deserving than Maryland. |
Losses also play a big part as well. I haven't looked at who all these guys have lost to yet but that could be a deciding factor.
|
|
Durantula
Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 5223
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/31/16 8:37 pm ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
| Matt5762 wrote: |
| Fighting Artichoke wrote: |
Why do you think that all of those PAC12 teams are more deserving than Maryland? |
I don't think they are, but based on the selection criteria...the Pac schools have actually beaten other "good" teams. Of course, the Pac-12 having 4 teams in the RPI top 10 plus several others in the top 25 helps everybody stock up on quality wins as they beat up on each other.
Maryland's RPI is low for a reason - they have maybe beaten only 1 team that will make the NCAAs (RPI 34 Syracuse). Their resume at the moment is actually pretty similar to a typical mid-major with no bad losses but no real quality wins either.
Based on the committee's recent history (eg Princeton last year), this type of profile has not been highly regarded, but they could ignore that and use the "eye test" to rank Maryland highly anyways, who knows? |
Is the women's selection criteria the same as the men's? You hear about SOS, RPI and so forth but on the men's side I saw this: • Committee members aren't coming in without preconceived notions. According to Worlock, on a weekly basis throughout the season, a plethora of ratings lists (RPI, BPI, Sagarin, KenPom, etc.) are sent out to the committee members. Requests by media members to be added to this mailing list were sadly declined.
If the women's committee uses measures other than RPI/SOS than maybe we could see different seedings. They should make it easier to understand what they are looking at in terms of criteria.
|
|
Fighting Artichoke
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/31/16 10:23 pm ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| Fighting Artichoke wrote: |
| Matt5762 wrote: |
This seems stupid. The football playoff selection committee releases their top 25 for a field of 4, so the NCAA thinks it's a good to release a top 10 for a field of 64? If they'd at least do a top 25, it'd be a little more interesting...
Anyhow, the only question that might be answered is whether they believe the Pac-12 is for real or not?
Because at the moment, I project the top 10 as follows (and I don't for a minute expect the NCAA committee to have four P12 teams on their list):
Connecticut
South Carolina
Notre Dame
Baylor
Texas
Ohio State
Oregon State
Arizona State
Stanford
UCLA
Maryland, Texas A&M and Louisville are the other teams I have close, aka likely substitutes for some of the excess P12 teams. |
Why do you think that all of those PAC12 teams are more deserving than Maryland? |
Maryland's 5 best Ws are against RPI #s...
27 (Syracuse)
44 (Iowa)
47 (Indiana)
62 (SDSU)
64 (Nebraska)
For ASU, the top 5 Ws are against...
6 (Stanford)
12 (Florida St.)
20 (Washington)
27 (Syracuse)
50 (Cal)
For Stanford, the top 5 Ws are against...
13 (Tennessee)
16 (USC)
20 (Washington)
28 (Purdue)
37 (GWU)
For UCLA, the top 5 Ws are against...
6 (Stanford)
10 (Oregon St.)
16 (USC)
42 (St. John's)
50 (Cal)
Maryland hasn't beaten anyone, and ASU and Stanford and UCLA have. That's why they are more deserving than Maryland. |
There were 4 PAC12 teams mentioned as more deserving, so why did you only give the argument for 3? Oregon State's top 5 wins are against
#6 Stanford
#15 USC
#63 Cal
#64 Utah
#65 UC Riverside
Thus their best OOC win is UC Riverside, so Maryland has them beat there.
I'll provide the other side of the stats (as you already provided the quality of wins for the other 4 teams in the discussion):
19-2 Maryland, 3-2 record against the top 50 RPI.
Losses are RPI #4 UConn, #5 tOSU
Ratings: RPI 18, AP 5, Coaches 5, Sagarin 2, Massey 6
17-3 Oregon State 2-3 record against the top 50 RPI
Losses were #1 Notre Dame, #7 UCLA, #12 Tennessee
Ratings: RPI 9, AP 9, Coaches 8, Sagarin 6, Massey 8
17-5 Stanford, 6-4 record against the top 50 RPI
Losses were #7 UCLA, #8 Texas, #9 Oregon State, #73 Santa Clara
Ratings: RPI 6, AP 16, Coaches 16, Sagarin 10, Massey 10
16-5 UCLA 4-4 record against the top 50 RPI
Losses were #1 Notre Dame, #2 South Carolina, #15 USC, #16 Washington, #63 Cal
Ratings: RPI 7, AP 15, Coaches 19, Sagarin 11, Massey 12
18-3 Arizona State 4-2 record against the top 50 RPI
Losses were #2 South Carolina, #19 Kentucky, #109 VCU
Ratings: RPI 9, AP 9, Coaches 8, Sagarin 6, Massey 8
I am neither a PAC12 fan nor a PAC12 detractor, and I am also ambivalent towards the B1G, but I would put Maryland in the top 10.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 01/31/16 10:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
UCLA has zero chance of being in the top 10 tomorrow. Nor should they be with losses to USC, UW and Cal. Some of them recent.
I think they take into account that a team like Louisville has won 14 straight since early December and have much better wins than MD (including FSU and Mich St).
I put MD in my likely ten, and I think there is a perception they belong, but if the Comm is paying attention to SOS, quality wins, and RPI like they say they do, I'm not at all convinced they should be. They have not won a single game demonstrating they belong anywhere near the top 10. That's no one's fault but their own.
|
|
patsweetpat
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2313
Location: Culver City, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 8:04 am ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
| Fighting Artichoke wrote: |
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| Fighting Artichoke wrote: |
| Matt5762 wrote: |
This seems stupid. The football playoff selection committee releases their top 25 for a field of 4, so the NCAA thinks it's a good to release a top 10 for a field of 64? If they'd at least do a top 25, it'd be a little more interesting...
Anyhow, the only question that might be answered is whether they believe the Pac-12 is for real or not?
Because at the moment, I project the top 10 as follows (and I don't for a minute expect the NCAA committee to have four P12 teams on their list):
Connecticut
South Carolina
Notre Dame
Baylor
Texas
Ohio State
Oregon State
Arizona State
Stanford
UCLA
Maryland, Texas A&M and Louisville are the other teams I have close, aka likely substitutes for some of the excess P12 teams. |
Why do you think that all of those PAC12 teams are more deserving than Maryland? |
Maryland's 5 best Ws are against RPI #s...
27 (Syracuse)
44 (Iowa)
47 (Indiana)
62 (SDSU)
64 (Nebraska)
For ASU, the top 5 Ws are against...
6 (Stanford)
12 (Florida St.)
20 (Washington)
27 (Syracuse)
50 (Cal)
For Stanford, the top 5 Ws are against...
13 (Tennessee)
16 (USC)
20 (Washington)
28 (Purdue)
37 (GWU)
For UCLA, the top 5 Ws are against...
6 (Stanford)
10 (Oregon St.)
16 (USC)
42 (St. John's)
50 (Cal)
Maryland hasn't beaten anyone, and ASU and Stanford and UCLA have. That's why they are more deserving than Maryland. |
There were 4 PAC12 teams mentioned as more deserving, so why did you only give the argument for 3? Oregon State's top 5 wins are against
#6 Stanford
#15 USC
#63 Cal
#64 Utah
#65 UC Riverside
Thus their best OOC win is UC Riverside, so Maryland has them beat there.
I'll provide the other side of the stats (as you already provided the quality of wins for the other 4 teams in the discussion):
19-2 Maryland, 3-2 record against the top 50 RPI.
Losses are RPI #4 UConn, #5 tOSU
Ratings: RPI 18, AP 5, Coaches 5, Sagarin 2, Massey 6
17-3 Oregon State 2-3 record against the top 50 RPI
Losses were #1 Notre Dame, #7 UCLA, #12 Tennessee
Ratings: RPI 9, AP 9, Coaches 8, Sagarin 6, Massey 8
17-5 Stanford, 6-4 record against the top 50 RPI
Losses were #7 UCLA, #8 Texas, #9 Oregon State, #73 Santa Clara
Ratings: RPI 6, AP 16, Coaches 16, Sagarin 10, Massey 10
16-5 UCLA 4-4 record against the top 50 RPI
Losses were #1 Notre Dame, #2 South Carolina, #15 USC, #16 Washington, #63 Cal
Ratings: RPI 7, AP 15, Coaches 19, Sagarin 11, Massey 12
18-3 Arizona State 4-2 record against the top 50 RPI
Losses were #2 South Carolina, #19 Kentucky, #109 VCU
Ratings: RPI 9, AP 9, Coaches 8, Sagarin 6, Massey 8 |
If the committee is utilizing the AP Poll and the Coaches' Poll, I think I may put a bullet in my brain. Why not also go by jersey color and which DBO won the Miss Congeniality award?
|
|
patsweetpat
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2313
Location: Culver City, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 8:25 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| UCLA has zero chance of being in the top 10 tomorrow. Nor should they be with losses to USC, UW and Cal. Some of them recent. |
The two "recent" losses UCLA has are at Washington (RPI 18, Sagarin 21) and at USC (RPI 28/ Sagarin 20)-- back before USC lost both of its starting guards to an "administrative error", whatever the heck that is. They also did lose, in double OT, at Cal (56/48 ), in an OOC game in mid-December.
Louisville's won its most recent games, but has lost to Dayton (44/54) and Western Kentucky (52/71) and at home against Cal (56/48 )
Meanwhile, UCLA's Top 5 wins (RPI/Sagarin)...
6/10 (Stanford)
10/6 (Oregon St.)
16/20 (USC)
41/45 (St. John's)
50/48 (Cal)
...are better than-- or at the very least comparable to-- Louisville's Top 5 wins (RPI/Sagarin)...
11/8 FSU
15/12 Michigan St.
29/23 'Cuse
42/27 Duke
43/58 NC St.
I genuinely don't see how one can look at the above two resumes and declare that Louisville is obviously deserving of Top 10 status and UCLA clearly not.
|
|
Fighting Artichoke
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 9:13 am ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| If the committee is utilizing the AP Poll and the Coaches' Poll, I think I may put a bullet in my brain. Why not also go by jersey color and which DBO won the Miss Congeniality award? |
Why do you think that the RPI is a better indicator of worthiness than the polls? Which ranking does better in picking tournament seedings and tournament winners? UConn is clearly better than Notre Dame but they are 4th in RPI while the Irish are 1st. Is Tennessee really the 12th best? The RPI places a huge weight on schedule strength, as 75% of the metric is based on what other teams did instead of your own performance. The other 25% is based on your record; nowhere does the metric consider margin of victory, which is essential in predicting outcomes of future games.
Below are the RPI ratings of the PAC12, and their Sagarin and Massey rank.
PAC12 RPI ranking with (Sagarin and Massey)
6th Stanford (10th, 11th)
8th UCLA (11th and 12th)
9th Oregon State (6th and 8th)
10th ASU (13th and 9th)
16th Washington (21st and 16th)
32nd USC (20th and 31st)
56th Washington St. (53rd and 58th)
63rd Cal (48th and 71st)
64th (Utah (78th and 72nd)
82nd Oregon (39th and 38th)
94th Arizona (105th and 102nd)
158th Colorado (129th and 147th)
Oregon State and Oregon seem to be undervalued by the RPI, but Stanford and UCLA seem overranked. This is probably explained by the differences in SOS.
UCLA's SOS is 2nd Sagarin, 5th Massey, and 6th RPI.
Stanford's SOS is 3rd in Sagarin, 4th in Massey, and 3rd in RPI.
Oregon State's SOS is 23rd in Sagarin, 9th in Massey, and 33rd in RPI.
Oregon's SOS is 77th in Sagarin, 47th in Massey, and 100th in RPI.
The committee uses many metrics in determining their ranking. I do not believe that the RPI is any better than the polls or the computer ratings. In fact, I would argue it is less valuable.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 9:47 am ::: |
Reply |
|
There are legitimate complaints about the RPI.
And every year there are complaints about the NCAA's reliance on it. Particularly that it favors the big conference schools. And they claim to have reduced their reliance on it.
But the fact remains that the RPI was developed by the NCAA itself over thirty years ago. specifically for selection purposes and seeding and is used not only for basketball but for the hockey, lacrosse, soccer, baseball and softball tournaments.
Plus they say they don't rely on polls.
Which is why I said that to get Maryland into the top ten, the Comm essentially has to ignore its own metric.
So whether the rpi is "better" than other metrics is not necessarily relevant to the question of whether it is relied upon to a greater extent than other metrics in the selection process.
That's probably the ONLY reason so much attention is paid to the rpi. If it wasn't used by the NCAA, probably no one would even bother calculating it or talking about it.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66903
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 10:54 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Alphabetically...
Arizona State
Baylor
Connecticut
Duquesne
Maryland
Notre Dame
Ohio State
Stanford
South Carolina
Texas
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
SpaceJunkie
Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 4241
Location: Minnesota
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 11:18 am ::: |
Reply |
|
My guess:
UConn
South Carolina
Norte Dame
Baylor
Ohio St
Texas
Stanford
Arizona St.
Kentucky
UCLA
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63764
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 11:25 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| SpaceJunkie wrote: |
My guess:
UConn
South Carolina
Norte Dame
Baylor
Ohio St
Texas
Stanford
Arizona St.
Kentucky
UCLA |
Kentucky lost two games last week. They should be sitting at #18-#20 in the new AP poll today.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63764
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 11:28 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| SpaceJunkie wrote: |
My guess:
UConn
South Carolina
Norte Dame
Baylor
Ohio St
Texas
Stanford
Arizona St.
Kentucky
UCLA |
Kentucky lost two games last week. They should be sitting at #18-#20 in the new AP poll today.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
patsweetpat
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2313
Location: Culver City, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 4:27 pm ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
| Fighting Artichoke wrote: |
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| If the committee is utilizing the AP Poll and the Coaches' Poll, I think I may put a bullet in my brain. Why not also go by jersey color and which DBO won the Miss Congeniality award? |
Why do you think that the RPI is a better indicator of worthiness than the polls? |
Because I believe that almost *anything* is a better indicator of worthiness than the polls. We could just pull team names out of a hat and it'd a better indicator of worthiness than the polls.
The polls rely on the votes of SIDs and journalists who cannot, and do not, watch all of the games-- and in some cases don't much care about women's basketball-- and therefore make their choices based, at least in part, on subjective and irrelevant factors like name recognition, prior accomplishments, media buzz and regional affiliations.
Now, if your point is that RPI is a less-valid yardstick than score-sensitive rankings like Sagarin or Massey, I won't argue that with you. Fine. Go ahead and pick one of 'em, and let's get to discussing/debating the selection resumes of UCLA vs. Louisville vs. Maryland vs. whoever.
But if your point is that RPI is a less-valid yardstick than the AP poll or the "coaches" poll, then... yeesh, is all I can say.
|
|
FollowtheCardinalRule
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 5153
Location: Denver
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 6:52 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Actual Poll:
1: UConn
2. South Carolina
3. ND
4. Baylor
5: Texas
6. tOSU
7. Arizona State
8. Oregon State
9. Maryland
10. UCLA
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66903
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/01/16 7:01 pm ::: Re: The Selection Comm is announcing tomorrow a snapshot of |
Reply |
|
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| Fighting Artichoke wrote: |
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| If the committee is utilizing the AP Poll and the Coaches' Poll, I think I may put a bullet in my brain. Why not also go by jersey color and which DBO won the Miss Congeniality award? |
Why do you think that the RPI is a better indicator of worthiness than the polls? |
Because I believe that almost *anything* is a better indicator of worthiness than the polls. We could just pull team names out of a hat and it'd a better indicator of worthiness than the polls.
The polls rely on the votes of SIDs and journalists who cannot, and do not, watch all of the games-- and in some cases don't much care about women's basketball-- and therefore make their choices based, at least in part, on subjective and irrelevant factors like name recognition, prior accomplishments, media buzz and regional affiliations.
Now, if your point is that RPI is a less-valid yardstick than score-sensitive rankings like Sagarin or Massey, I won't argue that with you. Fine. Go ahead and pick one of 'em, and let's get to discussing/debating the selection resumes of UCLA vs. Louisville vs. Maryland vs. whoever.
But if your point is that RPI is a less-valid yardstick than the AP poll or the "coaches" poll, then... yeesh, is all I can say. |
In my annual bracket competition between ratings systems, the polls generally do very poorly and RPI does slightly better. However, the polls did win the competition in 2010 and RPI won in 2008.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
|
|
