|
|
Post by hail2pitt on Oct 31, 2021 19:22:45 GMT -5
Nebraska and OSU are over overranked, but otherwise seems ok Agreed, and I'm also surprised that Pitt is fourth, considering they're No. 1 in RPI right now. Pitt deserves to be 4th based on results up to wednesday. They would be 3rd after Wisconsin’s loss to Purdue today |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Oct 31, 2021 19:25:39 GMT -5
Agreed, and I'm also surprised that Pitt is fourth, considering they're No. 1 in RPI right now. Pitt deserves to be 4th based on results up to wednesday. They would be 3rd after Wisconsin’s loss to Purdue today Eh, maybe. Losing to Maryland is a much worse loss than losing to Louisville and Georgia Tech. |
|
|
|
Post by jwvolley on Oct 31, 2021 19:27:56 GMT -5
Pitt deserves to be 4th based on results up to wednesday. They would be 3rd after Wisconsin’s loss to Purdue today Eh, maybe. Losing to Maryland is a much worse loss than losing to Louisville and Georgia Tech. Wisconsin had more top 10 wins and more top 25 wins and one less loss (1) overall on their record. RPI is a factor, it isn't everything. |
|
|
|
Post by basil on Oct 31, 2021 19:28:27 GMT -5
real question:
who do y'all think 11-20 is? a mess.
|
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Oct 31, 2021 19:28:36 GMT -5
There is no point in even having RPI and the selection criteria if the committee is going to blatantly ignore it for a handful of Big 10 teams only. The 12 to 6 jump would infuriate me in the past, but I know the committee by now, so I’m not even going to raise my blood pressure. Just shake my head. Yeah, Nebraska's ranking is absolutely indefensible based on the merits, but it's not terribly surprising. |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Oct 31, 2021 19:29:09 GMT -5
Eh, maybe. Losing to Maryland is a much worse loss than losing to Louisville and Georgia Tech. Wisconsin had more top 10 wins and more top 25 wins and one less loss (1) overall on their record. RPI is a factor, it isn't everything. Yeah, I'm aware of that. But thanks for repeating what everyone already knows. |
|
|
|
Post by pbmu on Oct 31, 2021 19:30:16 GMT -5
real question: who do y'all think 11-20 is? a mess. would've preferred that reveal lmao |
|
|
|
Post by jwvolley on Oct 31, 2021 19:30:51 GMT -5
Wisconsin had more top 10 wins and more top 25 wins and one less loss (1) overall on their record. RPI is a factor, it isn't everything. Yeah, I'm aware of that. But thanks for repeating what everyone already knows. Says the one who made the bold statement of " Maryland < Georgia Tech" Not sure why you had to get rude. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Oct 31, 2021 19:31:17 GMT -5
There is no point in even having RPI and the selection criteria if the committee is going to blatantly ignore it for a handful of Big 10 teams only. That's what bothers me the most, really. RPI is not a good metric. But what's worse is when the committee *selectively* ignores RPI. It ends up making RPI a tool they can use to justify dropping/excluding teams, and then something they can ignore when they want certain teams to host and/or get favorable seedings. |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Oct 31, 2021 19:32:03 GMT -5
There is no point in even having RPI and the selection criteria if the committee is going to blatantly ignore it for a handful of Big 10 teams only. That's what bothers me the most, really. RPI is not a good metric. But what's worse is when the committee *selectively* ignores RPI. It ends up making RPI a tool they can use to justify dropping/excluding teams, and then something they can ignore when they want certain teams to host and/or get favorable seedings. I 100% agree. I wish the RPI was abolished, but if they're going to use it, they need to be consistent. It gives credence to the claims of bias against them. |
|
|
|
Post by basil on Oct 31, 2021 19:32:13 GMT -5
I think BYU, Tennessee, Purdue, Minnesota, Miami (FL), Washington, Utah, Penn State, Creighton, and Marquette (?) are in the next 11-20 range? Idk, am I missing anyone? I'm not even gonna try to put them in order.
|
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Oct 31, 2021 19:36:02 GMT -5
There is no point in even having RPI and the selection criteria if the committee is going to blatantly ignore it for a handful of Big 10 teams only. That's what bothers me the most, really. RPI is not a good metric. But what's worse is when the committee *selectively* ignores RPI. It ends up making RPI a tool they can use to justify dropping/excluding teams, and then something they can ignore when they want certain teams to host and/or get favorable seedings. Exactly, they did it for penn state giving them a seed when the RPI criteria said NO, they did it with giving Purdue a seed over Utah, they did it putting Nebraska above Pitt, they are trying it now with Nebraska at 6. Nebraska is currently #22 RPI, with a losing record against the top 25, and the #40 SOS. There is NOTHING about this resume that says #6. NOTHING. I’d give these idiots more credit if we could find other teams that defy RPI logic, but it’s almost exclusively reserved for Big 10 teams. They get over seeded year after year and then their fanboys want to claim that they are so great despite the fact that much of the ncaa success is handed to them by the committee ignoring its own criteria. |
|
|
|
Post by azsker on Oct 31, 2021 19:43:03 GMT -5
That's what bothers me the most, really. RPI is not a good metric. But what's worse is when the committee *selectively* ignores RPI. It ends up making RPI a tool they can use to justify dropping/excluding teams, and then something they can ignore when they want certain teams to host and/or get favorable seedings. Exactly, they did it for penn state giving them a seed when the RPI criteria said NO, they did it with giving Purdue a seed over Utah, they did it putting Nebraska above Pitt, they are trying it now with Nebraska at 6. Nebraska is currently #22 RPI, with a losing record against the top 25, and the #40 SOS. There is NOTHING about this resume that says #6. NOTHING. I’d give these idiots more credit if we could find other teams that defy RPI logic, but it’s almost exclusively reserved for Big 10 teams. They get over seeded year after year and then their fanboys want to claim that they are so great despite the fact that much of the ncaa success is handed to them by the committee ignoring its own criteria. lol |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2021 19:49:10 GMT -5
Video is on YouTube with Michaela Chester interviewing the committee chair about the top ten if you’re interested.
|
|
|
|
Post by ndodge on Oct 31, 2021 19:54:18 GMT -5
Video is on YouTube with Michaela Chester interviewing the committee chair about the top ten if you’re interested. |
|
