|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Oct 11, 2012 9:34:15 GMT -5
I didn't see that thread, but specifically what is your concern? I just looked at Arkansas, and they don't seem to be crazy off, for example. Arkansas at least has a good win OOC (Kansas)--the other highly ranked ones don't. Florida at 6 is pretty shocking to me, A&M's rank is as well especially if you consider the SOS of the two. But why would you ONLY consider SOS? Pablo takes more than that into account. TAMU has been blowing away teams ranked near 100. It is in fact pretty typical for TAMU - they do this every year, and ride that up to high Pablo rankings. It's nothing to do with the SEC. Well non-conf wise, they did beat #32 North Carolina. They have a couple of not so good losses, too, but they also went to Nebraska and weren't embarrassed. Also not embarrassed at Louisville. They've been competitive with very good teams, and Pablo reflects that. Yes, Florida has been riding on the strength of the SEC, and notice that they weren't ranked high at all going into the conference play, mainly because they didn't have a very informative non-conference season.
|
|
|
Post by volleyhead on Oct 11, 2012 11:49:20 GMT -5
If seeds came out today, this is what I believe they should look like (Mixture of RPI, Pablo, and my opinion) At Texas: 1. Penn State 8. Texas 9. USC 16. San Diego At Cal: 2. Stanford 7. Louisville 10. Florida 15. Hawaii At Purdue: 3. UCLA 6. Oregon 11. Minnesota 14. Kansas At Nebraska: 4. Nebraska 5. Washington 12. Kansas State 13. BYU Just a thought! I highly doubt that Nebraska would like seeing Washington and K-State in their bracket given their recent history with those 2 teams.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Oct 11, 2012 11:52:49 GMT -5
If seeds came out today, this is what I believe they should look like (Mixture of RPI, Pablo, and my opinion) At Texas: 1. Penn State 8. Texas 9. USC 16. San Diego At Cal: 2. Stanford 7. Louisville 10. Florida 15. Hawaii At Purdue: 3. UCLA 6. Oregon 11. Minnesota 14. Kansas At Nebraska: 4. Nebraska 5. Washington 12. Kansas State 13. BYU Just a thought! I highly doubt that Nebraska would like seeing Washington and K-State in their bracket given their recent history with those 2 teams. I have much less sympathy for teams whining about their brackets when they're hosting.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Oct 11, 2012 12:31:16 GMT -5
If seeds came out today, this is what I believe they should look like (Mixture of RPI, Pablo, and my opinion) At Texas: 1. Penn State 8. Texas 9. USC 16. San Diego At Cal: 2. Stanford 7. Louisville 10. Florida 15. Hawaii At Purdue: 3. UCLA 6. Oregon 11. Minnesota 14. Kansas At Nebraska: 4. Nebraska 5. Washington 12. Kansas State 13. BYU Just a thought! I highly doubt that Nebraska would like seeing Washington and K-State in their bracket given their recent history with those 2 teams. Whats their recent history with UW in the tournament?
|
|
|
Post by Cubicle No More ... on Oct 11, 2012 14:57:40 GMT -5
If seeds came out today, this is what I believe they should look like (Mixture of RPI, Pablo, and my opinion) At Texas: 1. Penn State 8. Texas 9. USC 16. San Diego At Cal: 2. Stanford 7. Louisville 10. Florida 15. Hawaii At Purdue: 3. UCLA 6. Oregon 11. Minnesota 14. Kansas At Nebraska: 4. Nebraska 5. Washington 12. Kansas State 13. BYU Just a thought! I highly doubt that Nebraska would like seeing Washington and K-State in their bracket given their recent history with those 2 teams. eh ... why not? ... it'd make for good locker room motivation ...
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Oct 11, 2012 18:48:02 GMT -5
I found posts from ay from years back complaining about RPI and how it was a poor indicator of the strength or weakness of a team- I laughed. Thought about linking them but decided against it because we have these discussions every year so no big deal. ay does cherry pick data but I think many of us are guilty of that as well.
I don't believe Hawai'i has ever entered the NCAA's as an unseeded team but that looks to be the case at the moment. Some unlucky team is going to have a rough first and/or second round match against Hawai'i. With all of its personnel changes, the Wahine will be a formidable opponent in the NCAA tourney.
|
|
|
Post by midnightblue on Oct 11, 2012 18:59:35 GMT -5
I found posts from ay from years back complaining about RPI and how it was a poor indicator of the strength or weakness of a team- I laughed. Thought about linking them but decided against it because we have these discussions every year so no big deal. ay does cherry pick data but I think many of us are guilty of that as well. I don't believe Hawai'i has ever entered the NCAA's as an unseeded team but that looks to be the case at the moment. Some unlucky team is going to have a rough first and/or second round match against Hawai'i. With all of its personnel changes, the Wahine will be a formidable opponent in the NCAA tourney. It's the NCAA.. so Hawaii will most likely end up at the Galen Center.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Oct 12, 2012 1:01:34 GMT -5
I found posts from ay from years back complaining about RPI and how it was a poor indicator of the strength or weakness of a team- I laughed. Thought about linking them but decided against it because we have these discussions every year so no big deal. ay does cherry pick data but I think many of us are guilty of that as well. I don't believe Hawai'i has ever entered the NCAA's as an unseeded team but that looks to be the case at the moment. Some unlucky team is going to have a rough first and/or second round match against Hawai'i. With all of its personnel changes, the Wahine will be a formidable opponent in the NCAA tourney. It's the NCAA.. so Hawaii will most likely end up at the Galen Center. I don't know about "most likely" but definitely a possibility, especially with LBSU perhaps in danger of not making the tournament. I don't. think Haley would be too happy to see Shoji and his team on the other side of the court so early in the tournament but Shoji and the Wahine wouldn't be pleased either. San Diiego would also be a possiblity. Still early but fun to speculate sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Oct 12, 2012 4:19:33 GMT -5
I found posts from ay from years back complaining about RPI and how it was a poor indicator of the strength or weakness of a team- I laughed. Thought about linking them but decided against it because we have these discussions every year so no big deal. ay does cherry pick data but I think many of us are guilty of that as well. I don't believe Hawai'i has ever entered the NCAA's as an unseeded team but that looks to be the case at the moment. Some unlucky team is going to have a rough first and/or second round match against Hawai'i. With all of its personnel changes, the Wahine will be a formidable opponent in the NCAA tourney. and I still agree that the RPI is not the best indicator of the strengths and weaknesses of a team. but THAT is not what has been argued in the past few pages. What I have said is that objective tools like the rpi (meaning we know exactly how it works and all teams have an equal starting point) are fairer measures to determine seeds than subjective polling which gives preference to certain name brand teams regardless if they have earned it within the year or not.
|
|
|
Post by FreeBall on Oct 12, 2012 7:06:40 GMT -5
I'm guessing you meant "subjective polling"? Otherwise the last part of your post doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Oct 12, 2012 12:54:01 GMT -5
Hawaii is being hurt much more by their conference this year than by a couple pre-conference losses. If they end up unseeded, that'll be the reason why.
Apart from being biased, the problem with RPI is that it can be, and is being, gamed. Not only is it biased against western schools, it is more easily gamed by eastern schools.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Oct 12, 2012 12:57:34 GMT -5
I'm guessing you meant "subjective polling"? Otherwise the last part of your post doesn't make sense. yeah sorry
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Oct 12, 2012 13:12:32 GMT -5
Hawaii is being hurt much more by their conference this year than by a couple pre-conference losses. If they end up unseeded, that'll be the reason why. Apart from being biased, the problem with RPI is that it can be, and is being, gamed. Not only is it biased against western schools, it is more easily gamed by eastern schools. true I will be the first to say that RPI has input flaws. but all the teams know how to game the system whereas with the AVCA that isn't the case because in the AVCA the traditional named programs have a big advantage.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Oct 12, 2012 13:22:06 GMT -5
I found posts from ay from years back complaining about RPI and how it was a poor indicator of the strength or weakness of a team- I laughed. Thought about linking them but decided against it because we have these discussions every year so no big deal. ay does cherry pick data but I think many of us are guilty of that as well. I don't believe Hawai'i has ever entered the NCAA's as an unseeded team but that looks to be the case at the moment. Some unlucky team is going to have a rough first and/or second round match against Hawai'i. With all of its personnel changes, the Wahine will be a formidable opponent in the NCAA tourney. and I still agree that the RPI is not the best indicator of the strengths and weaknesses of a team. but THAT is not what has been argued in the past few pages. What I have said is that objective tools like the rpi (meaning we know exactly how it works and all teams have an equal starting point) are fairer measures to determine seeds than subjective polling which gives preference to certain name brand teams regardless if they have earned it within the year or not. Did you feel like this when you complained about UNI's high seed (which was based solely on RPI) just a couple of years ago? If this is how you feel ay2013, that is fine. I don't really have a problem with what you're saying, you make a fair argument but it's the consistency of your arguments that I take some issue with.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Oct 12, 2012 13:28:11 GMT -5
I'm guessing you meant "subjective polling"? Otherwise the last part of your post doesn't make sense. yeah sorry Regarding subjects and objects, I hope you will be future perfect.
|
|