|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Jul 17, 2024 9:43:15 GMT -5
IMO this best thing about Pablo was providing substance to the argument and facts that RPI had bias, in some cases extreme, and which could have a pretty severe ranking/rating penalty of teams. At one point, I wrote a 30 page report to the NCAA showing the regional biases of RPI compared to Pablo. It was pretty clear. I know the NCAA saw it. I don't know how much of a difference it made. That's the point where I basically gave up. I had done everything I could.
|
|
|
Post by SmokeDogg on Jul 17, 2024 11:16:59 GMT -5
A month ago I paid for another year of RichKern. Now it is no more? I check Pablo at least twice a week maybe more often.
What is the story on RichKern?
|
|
|
Post by exit237a on Jul 17, 2024 11:58:03 GMT -5
A month ago I paid for another year of RichKern. Now it is no more? I check Pablo at least twice a week maybe more often. What is the story on RichKern?
Here's the VT thread where Rich posted the details:
|
|
|
Post by tablealgebra on Jul 17, 2024 13:00:46 GMT -5
IMO this best thing about Pablo was providing substance to the argument and facts that RPI had bias, in some cases extreme, and which could have a pretty severe ranking/rating penalty of teams. At one point, I wrote a 30 page report to the NCAA showing the regional biases of RPI compared to Pablo. It was pretty clear. I know the NCAA saw it. I don't know how much of a difference it made. That's the point where I basically gave up. I had done everything I could. Yeah, it is clear to me that the NCAA does not actually care* about using correct metrics for the purposes of NCAA qualification. RPI is useful to them in (a) making good teams schedule other good teams, and (b) being easy enough to understand to allow meaningful discussion. The controversy about the flawed nature of RPI becomes engagement, thus eyeballs, which helps them more. And a court isn't going to throw out RPI because judges suck at technical aspects thus the basis that RPI is unfair to certain teams won't be able to be properly stated, moreover they'd have to provide a better model (IMO the real reason courts tend to stay away from tough rulings against Gerrymandering, sorry for small political detour). So the NCAA can use a crap metric and it helps them and lets them influence scheduling and we just have to enjoy the good noncon schedule and hate the reason for it. *because if they did care they have an unbelievable amount of resources available to them to make a better one.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jul 17, 2024 14:21:19 GMT -5
Thank you for providing such a valuable metric over the years!
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 29,860
|
Post by trojansc on Jul 17, 2024 15:13:39 GMT -5
Thank you for providing such a valuable metric over the years! Is Massey now our best option? I haven't looked too closely at KPI, but, I think Massey is probably best at measuring the 'best' teams (especially with the normal ranking and the Massey Power ranking).
|
|
|
Post by uofaGRAD on Jul 17, 2024 15:59:27 GMT -5
Thank you for providing such a valuable metric over the years! Is Massey now our best option? I haven't looked too closely at KPI, but, I think Massey is probably best at measuring the 'best' teams (especially with the normal ranking and the Massey Power ranking). KPI is kinda fraudulent idk
|
|
|
Post by staticb on Jul 17, 2024 16:06:54 GMT -5
At one point, I wrote a 30 page report to the NCAA showing the regional biases of RPI compared to Pablo. It was pretty clear. I know the NCAA saw it. I don't know how much of a difference it made. That's the point where I basically gave up. I had done everything I could. They saw it, blah blah, grow the game, etc. But now that the game has grown and it's more than just a regional sport and right people are benefitting--it's another can of worms.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Jul 17, 2024 16:25:59 GMT -5
So let me get this straight.... in the last year the volleyball community has lost the Pac-12, Rich Kern, and Pablo, while here on volleytalk the commentary that gets the most action are the pointless arguments between Texas and Nebraska fans....
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jul 17, 2024 16:27:43 GMT -5
At one point, I wrote a 30 page report to the NCAA showing the regional biases of RPI compared to Pablo. It was pretty clear. I know the NCAA saw it. I don't know how much of a difference it made. That's the point where I basically gave up. I had done everything I could. They saw it, blah blah, grow the game, etc. But now that the game has grown and it's more than just a regional sport and right people are benefitting--it's another can of worms. The problem is that the RPI works such that there is a larger pool of teams who may benefit (Eastern v. Western; non-power conference teams versus mid/bottom power conference teams) that there is a tyranny of the majority.
|
|
|
Post by ned3vball on Jul 17, 2024 17:16:27 GMT -5
Thank you for providing such a valuable metric over the years! Is Massey now our best option? I haven't looked too closely at KPI, but, I think Massey is probably best at measuring the 'best' teams (especially with the normal ranking and the Massey Power ranking). The 3 I have used for my D3 data the last few years have been Pablo, Massey, and HuskerGeek(huskergeek.com). HuskerGeek is currently in summer hibernation.
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Jul 17, 2024 17:48:33 GMT -5
So let me get this straight.... in the last year the volleyball community has lost the Pac-12, Rich Kern, and Pablo, while here on volleytalk the commentary that gets the most action are the pointless arguments between Texas and Nebraska fans.... To be fair, plenty of people joining in lobbing commentary into the scrum. Sometimes people go where the engagement is, and there's an understanding that comments about Nebraska/Texas often have a better chance at engagement than some other teams.
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Jul 17, 2024 22:08:07 GMT -5
Well my Monday's are ruined...
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Jul 18, 2024 9:00:39 GMT -5
At one point, I wrote a 30 page report to the NCAA showing the regional biases of RPI compared to Pablo. It was pretty clear. I know the NCAA saw it. I don't know how much of a difference it made. That's the point where I basically gave up. I had done everything I could. Yeah, it is clear to me that the NCAA does not actually care* about using correct metrics for the purposes of NCAA qualification. RPI is useful to them in (a) making good teams schedule other good teams, and (b) being easy enough to understand to allow meaningful discussion. The controversy about the flawed nature of RPI becomes engagement, thus eyeballs, which helps them more. And a court isn't going to throw out RPI because judges suck at technical aspects thus the basis that RPI is unfair to certain teams won't be able to be properly stated, moreover they'd have to provide a better model (IMO the real reason courts tend to stay away from tough rulings against Gerrymandering, sorry for small political detour). So the NCAA can use a crap metric and it helps them and lets them influence scheduling and we just have to enjoy the good noncon schedule and hate the reason for it. *because if they did care they have an unbelievable amount of resources available to them to make a better one. Note that they do this in (men's at least) basketball. They will use things like KenPom. Because they couldn't get away with the crap the pull for other sports (it's not just volleyball where this is an issue; when this was going on, the exact same discussions were happening with soccer, I know)
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Jul 18, 2024 9:07:34 GMT -5
Thank you for providing such a valuable metric over the years! Is Massey now our best option? . No! I fully expect Pablo rankings to continue (and for this year at least, RichKern is still going to be going, and I think someone will pick up that ball next year). The only difference for Pablo rankings is that it ain't going to be me doing it. No offense to all you boneheads, but, to be honest, my biggest concern with ending Pablo is that it would mean the end of RPI Futures. I am going to tell you all, RPI Futures is THE most important resource we have as fans when talking about the NCAA tournament during the season. I consider that work by BluePenguin (and now vballfan17) to be absolutely brilliant. This is the only reason why I think we need to continue having Pablo rankings and am working with someone willing to take it up.
|
|