|
|
Post by maigrey on Nov 12, 2024 14:15:51 GMT -5
I wish Mommy and Daddy and all the drunk uncles would stop fighting over some man named Pablo who can't even hold down a job and is 6 months behind on child support payments 😭😭😭😭😭 You've been day drinking again, haven't you? |
|
|
|
Post by bruinsgold on Nov 12, 2024 14:20:01 GMT -5
I wish Mommy and Daddy and all the drunk uncles would stop fighting over some man named Pablo who can't even hold down a job and is 6 months behind on child support payments 😭😭😭😭😭 You've been day drinking again, haven't you? it's 5 o'clock somewhere!! 🍾🍷🍸🍹🍺🍻🥂🥃🧋🧃 |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,304 
|
Post by bluepenquin on Nov 12, 2024 16:39:40 GMT -5
Agan - I tend to trust the sample of 3,500 points played in a season to determine how good a team is vs. your belief that we should just cherry pick a couple hundred points played. I think this is a bit disingenuous, as that's not what I said. I think we should look at who teams have beaten and who teams have lost to. The point is to win matches, preferably against good teams, not to have a higher season-long scoring differential against varied competition. The latter is often correlated with a better W/L record, but there are exceptions. Based on your other comments, it seems that agree that resume should be used for seeding. So I'm not really sure what your purpose is when you keep touting Pablo as evidence that Penn State isn't that good. You agreed with another commentor that Pablo isn't infallible. But respectfully, I am hard-pressed to think of a time where you have ever said that Pablo was wrong about something. I continue to talk who is better - not who should be seeded higher or ranked higher. Those are two completely different things. |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,304
|
Post by bluepenquin on Nov 12, 2024 16:44:25 GMT -5
Yes. There has been a large group of people on this board that believes; 1) Pablo is greatly superior to RPI 2) Pablo should be used as one of the key metrics for determining seeding. I agree that it’s a better predictive measure and better at telling the skill level of a team. But seeding shouldn’t be based on that, it should be based on how a team has performed. If Team A wins all its matches 3-2 getting outscored in each one including over Team B at home on the first day of the season, the Team B wins the rest of its matches in dominant fashion, who should be seeded higher? It has to be Team A due to performing better, though Pablo would certainly have B rated higher and favored in the rematch. You’re very much blurring the lines between whether a team is good and whether they have performed well with you seemingly asserting Penn State should be seeded lower because they dropped sets to Iowa and Northwestern.Well - this is the EXACT opposite of what I have been saying. Pablo gives a strong indication of which team is better than another. That is different than how a team should be seeded. I continue to say that based on the win and losses right now and who they have beaten - Penn State should be a top 4 seed. That seeding should not be based on Pablo. I bring up Pablo (and EVollve) to say that the best evidence is telling us that Creighton is a better team than Penn State. |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,304
|
Post by bluepenquin on Nov 12, 2024 16:57:41 GMT -5
This thread is about Bracketology. For those posters who are derailing this thread because you don't like the criteria used by the NCAA committee to seed teams, consider creating a new thread for that discussion/debate. Interesting that the post I made that started this whole derailed stuff was me claiming that there is no way that a 3 loss Penn State team will not be nor doesn't deserve to be a top 4 seed. Some were claiming/wondering if the loss to Wisconsin and a season ending loss to Nebraska would knock Penn State out of the top 4 - and the answer is heck no. I then said that a 4 loss Penn State team (which I said I didn't think will happen) would create real uncertainty. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Nov 12, 2024 17:01:20 GMT -5
This thread is about Bracketology. For those posters who are derailing this thread because you don't like the criteria used by the NCAA committee to seed teams, consider creating a new thread for that discussion/debate. Interesting that the post I made that started this whole derailed stuff was me claiming that there is no way that a 3 loss Penn State team will not be nor doesn't deserve to be a top 4 seed. Some were claiming/wondering if the loss to Wisconsin and a season ending loss to Nebraska would knock Penn State out of the top 4 - and the answer is heck no. I then said that a 4 loss Penn State team (which I said I didn't think will happen) would create real uncertainty. See the trouble you started? |
|
|
|
Post by Millenium on Nov 13, 2024 0:57:02 GMT -5
This thread is about Bracketology. For those posters who are derailing this thread because you don't like the criteria used by the NCAA committee to seed teams, consider creating a new thread for that discussion/debate. The discussion is definitely on topic, even if a little tedious. |
|
