|
Post by Wolfgang on Sept 6, 2006 18:54:27 GMT -5
Y'all realize it's an arbitrary point system, right? I mean, it could just as well be:
1 pt -- NCAA 1st rd 1.5 pts -- NCAA 2d rd 2 pts - NCAA 3rd rd 3 pts - NCAA 4th rd 3.5 pts - NCAA 5th rd 4 pts - NCAA 6th rd
Or, you can also add:
1 pt: All-American 3rd team and Honorable mentions 2 pts: AA 2nd team 4 pts: AA 1st team
The results might be very volatile depending on the model you use.
I stress again: the numerical values of the points are arbitrary
|
|
|
Post by Ye Olde Dawg on Sept 6, 2006 18:54:37 GMT -5
3-years isn't enough to determine flash-in-the-pannedness. Agreed. Though it pains me to say it, Washington doesn't qualify for any long-term eliteness. A spectacular performance over the last two years, yes. They're even highly regarded after losing most of the starters. But being elite takes more than that. "Elite" means that players and fans expect the team to do well even after big personnel changes. Even if the head coach changes. "Elite" means that players have seen NCAA banners hanging in the arena for as they've been in the program -- and those same players are considered contenders for the final four or championship this year. [They do have banners for winning the regional too, don't they?] "Elite" means that fans and analysts always mention the program when talking about who's good, even if it's to say "and you can never count out [e.g. Stanford]...." Washington may have all of that in a few years, but not yet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2006 20:47:34 GMT -5
Pepperdine!? Pepperdine?!
What the hey?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2006 20:48:18 GMT -5
UCSB?! UCSB?!
What the hey?
|
|
|
Post by bomber on Sept 6, 2006 22:07:26 GMT -5
Wisconsin is on the verge if not there. Not there yet, but closing fast...............
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 6, 2006 22:30:20 GMT -5
Wisconsin is on the verge if not there. Not there yet, but closing fast............... Wisconsin is an "also ran", nothing more.
|
|
|
Post by bomber on Sept 6, 2006 22:35:27 GMT -5
Not there yet, but closing fast............... Wisconsin is an "also ran", nothing more. Bik, as usual, you can be counted on for your subjective, if misinformed, opinions. Incidentally, I can't believe you took the time to put your hat on backwards for your photo. I had you figured for a forward hat wearing kind of guy....... Backward hat wearing is so 2004 ish.....
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 6, 2006 22:40:25 GMT -5
Bik, as usual, you can be counted on for your subjective, if misinformed, opinions. I never disappoint, and I never lie.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2006 22:49:07 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure it's not the hat that's backwards...
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Sept 6, 2006 23:43:53 GMT -5
Following the Point formula, nice idea, Wolfgang, I've done a little research. My 'point formula' is this: (All Americans All-Time*0.1)+(Total 1st Rounds*1)+(Total 2nd Rounds*1.5)+(Total 3rd Rounds*2)+(Total 4th Rounds*2.5)+(Total 5th Rounds*3)+(Total 6th Rounds*3.5)+(Total National Championships*0.5)+(Total NCAA Appearances*0.1) Minimum Criteria to be included: 30+ NCAA Appearances. Teams with incomplete records to 2000 in the tournament are not eligible, but included for comparison's sake). | School | Points | NOTES: | 1 | USC | 67.6 | | 2 | Nebraska | 67 | | 3 | Stanford | 65.5 | | 4 | Hawaii | 55.6 | | 5 | Florida | 53.1 | | 6 | Minnesota | 47.1 | | 7 | UCLA | 46.9 | | 8 | Wisconsin | 42.6 | | 9 | Arizona | 40.2 | | 11 | Penn State | 38.3 | | 11 | Washington | 37.8 | Ineligible (2000, 2001) | 12 | Long Beach State | 30.8 | | 13 | Ohio State | 27.2 | Ineligible (2003) | 14 | Pepperdine | 26.5 | Ineligible (2004) | 15 | Pacific | 25.3 | Ineligible (2005) | 16 | Texas A&M | 24.7 | | 17 | UCSB | 23 | | 18 | Colorado State | 22.8 | | 19 | Texas | 20.8 | Ineligible (2000, 2003) | 20 | BYU | 16.5 | Ineligible (2002, 2004) |
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Sept 6, 2006 23:46:39 GMT -5
I think it's a good mix of 'what have you done for me lately' with historical performance included with "All-Americans" and from "Total NCAA Appearances"
|
|
|
Post by IdahoBoy on Sept 6, 2006 23:49:52 GMT -5
Give me new equation using these parameters and I'll re-run them.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Sept 6, 2006 23:51:57 GMT -5
IB, there must be an error somewhere. I think Wisconsin is too high.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2006 0:04:38 GMT -5
Give me new equation using these parameters and I'll re-run them. You know I really shouldn't say this given the amount of time I spend reading this forum, but geez talk about someone with too much time on their hands!
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Sept 7, 2006 1:26:48 GMT -5
Total National Championships only get 0.5? But first round gets ou double the amount for winning the championship game?
|
|