Did the A10 "Figure Out" the RPI

[Postcard]

I know in the past when the MVC had a number of teams with good RPI's that some on this board had suggested that they had figured out how to work the system and schedule so that many of their teams would have respectable RPI's. Has the A10 done the same thing? I'm being serious here. How do you know if we(the A10) or they(MVC) have teams worthy of the high RPI rankings or if they've just "figured" it out.

[mcglotherirvin]

You can't really have a high RPI without beating some good teams. There really is no such thing as being "worthy" of a high RPI. You either have one or you don't. The better question is whether ACC Teams and Big 12 teams that get into the tourney despite having worse RPIs than the "mid-majors" are "worthy" of being in the tourney.

I know in the past when the MVC had a number of teams with good RPI's that some on this board had suggested that they had figured out how to work the system and schedule so that many of their teams would have respectable RPI's. Has the A10 done the same thing? I'm being serious here. How do you know if we(the A10) or they(MVC) have teams worthy of the high RPI rankings or if they've just "figured" it out.

[willie]

I know in the past when the MVC had a number of teams with good RPI's that some on this board had suggested that they had figured out how to work the system and schedule so that many of their teams would have respectable RPI's. Has the A10 done the same thing? I'm being serious here. How do you know if we(the A10) or they(MVC) have teams worthy of the high RPI rankings or if they've just "figured" it out.

NO.

[Bill_Ken R]

You are not being serious and you know it. You are just doing what you do here.

[Billiken Rich]

You are not being serious and you know it. You are just doing what you do here.

For your sanity, use the ignore feature on him.........

[MB73]

RPI, Sagarin, Pomeroy are all very usefull tools but can occasionally have major mathematical flaws.

Some yrs they carry on accurately into the NCAA's and NIT, some yrs they do not, and those flaws are revealed.

It is always interesting to see how conferences match up when NCAA play begins, sometimes you can see early conference matchups produce surprises and then follow it thru the tourney as the trend continues.

[SLUDrew]

I know in the past when the MVC had a number of teams with good RPI's that some on this board had suggested that they had figured out how to work the system and schedule so that many of their teams would have respectable RPI's. Has the A10 done the same thing? I'm being serious here. How do you know if we(the A10) or they(MVC) have teams worthy of the high RPI rankings or if they've just "figured" it out.

Two ways the Valley of a few years ago and this year's A-10 or different;

1) Quality of wins. The Valley played a lot of lower tier BCS schools on the road and beat them. The fact that those were road victories inflated their RPIs and then the RPIs of the team they beat would automatically become inflated when they got into conference and played the top of their respective leagues. The A-10 has a number of wins over a number of BCS teams in the top half of their conferences

2) They "eye test." The reason so many were skeptical of the Valley teams' RPIs was that you could watch a Missouri St for example and easily recognize they were not the 19th best team in the nation as their RPI would have you believe. They just didn't have the horses. You would be hard pressed to find someone that says that Temple, Xavier, URI, Charlotte, Dayton and SLU don't have BCS quality athletes.

[Postcard]

You are not being serious and you know it. You are just doing what you do here.

Huh? I'm curious to hear from those MVC detractors who thought they had just figured it out. This is no way implies that SLU should be in the MVC. McGlotherirvin and MB73 have offered valid responses. You, not so much.

For your sanity, use the ignore feature on him.........

Bdick, you can't even ignore me when you have me on ignore. Pathetic.

[adramos77]

I swear to God that isn't me.

[Postcard]

Two ways the Valley of a few years ago and this year's A-10 or different;

1) Quality of wins. The Valley played a lot of lower tier BCS schools on the road and beat them. The fact that those were road victories inflated their RPIs and then the RPIs of the team they beat would automatically become inflated when they got into conference and played the top of their respective leagues. The A-10 has a number of wins over a number of BCS teams in the top half of their conferences

2) They "eye test." The reason so many were skeptical of the Valley teams' RPIs was that you could watch a Missouri St for example and easily recognize they were not the 19th best team in the nation as their RPI would have you believe. They just didn't have the horses. You would be hard pressed to find someone that says that Temple, Xavier, URI, Charlotte, Dayton and SLU don't have BCS quality athletes.

As to point one, the A1O as far as I can tell doesn't have very many big wins against highly ranked schools either home, away or neutrel. A quick check revealed:

Charlotte won at #32 Louisville which is in the middle of the Big East

Dayton beat #29 Georgia Tech on a neutrel court. Gtech is in the middle to lower part of the ACC

RI beat #39 Ok St on a neutrel court. Ok St is a middle of the road Big 12 team

Richmond beat #45 Mizzou on a neutrel court. Mizzou is a middle of the road Big 12 team

Temple beat #6 Villanova at home. Villanova is at the top of the Big East. By far the best win for the conference.

X beat #48 Cincy at home. Cincy is a middle of the road Big East team.

I would have to think if there are not many more signature wins than this that the conference is also feasting on the middlings. Just a guess.

As to poing number two, you're probably right but if that's the criteria people judge teams on, then you probably have no problem with middle of the road BCS teams getting picked over A10 teams because they have more "horses."

I really don't see a big difference. My point being is that the Valley probably deserved what they got a few years ago just as the A10 deserves what they'll get this year. No reason to belittle the MVC for their past success.

[TheChosenOne]

2) They "eye test." The reason so many were skeptical of the Valley teams' RPIs was that you could watch a Missouri St for example and easily recognize they were not the 19th best team in the nation as their RPI would have you believe. They just didn't have the horses. You would be hard pressed to find someone that says that Temple, Xavier, URI, Charlotte, Dayton and SLU don't have BCS quality athletes.

I think that depends on who you ask. I would imagine a lot of people (fans of BCS programs) are a little skeptical as to how good the A-10 really is and I think the poster presents some valid arguments supporting why there would be some doubt. I guess we will have to wait and see how the rest of the season plays out and how many teams from the A-10 get selected and how they perform in the tournament. Right now they are showing the A-10 with 6 teams, but only 3 of those teams would be considered safe with Temple, Richmond, and Xavier. Beyond that, the other three teams have work to do and it will be interesting to see who the committee takes between a middle of the pack BCS team (like Marquette, Cincinnati, or Notre Dame from the Big East or Oklahoma State or Mizzou from the Big 12 or Mississippi State or Ole Miss from the SEC) versus a Dayton or Rhode Island or Charlotte from the A-10. I just hope it is not the A-10's turn to get the short end of the stick come Selection Sunday. If we do get all 6 teams in I will be rooting hard for those 6 teams because in the years to come hopefully SLU will be one of those teams competing for a bid and if the A-10 proves they belong with the big boys it would seemingly help the cause.

[Clock_Tower]

As to point one, the A1O as far as I can tell doesn't have very many big wins against highly ranked schools either home, away or neutrel. A quick check revealed:

Charlotte won at #32 Louisville which is in the middle of the Big East

Dayton beat #29 Georgia Tech on a neutrel court. Gtech is in the middle to lower part of the ACC

RI beat #39 Ok St on a neutrel court. Ok St is a middle of the road Big 12 team

Richmond beat #45 Mizzou on a neutrel court. Mizzou is a middle of the road Big 12 team

Temple beat #6 Villanova at home. Villanova is at the top of the Big East. By far the best win for the conference.

X beat #48 Cincy at home. Cincy is a middle of the road Big East team.

I would have to think if there are not many more signature wins than this that the conference is also feasting on the middlings. Just a guess.

As to poing number two, you're probably right but if that's the criteria people judge teams on, then you probably have no problem with middle of the road BCS teams getting picked over A10 teams because they have more "horses."

I really don't see a big difference. My point being is that the Valley probably deserved what they got a few years ago just as the A10 deserves what they'll get this year. No reason to belittle the MVC for their past success.

Don't forget that X (Ken Pom 20) also beat Florida (Ken Pom 54) at Florida by 12 points.

[Postcard]

Don't forget that X (Ken Pom 20) also beat Florida (Ken Pom 54) at Florida by 12 points.

I purposely didn't include it because Florida's RPI was 60 and they're middle of the road in the SEC so it didn't seem at least on paper like a "great' win.

[SLUDrew]

I purposely didn't include it because Florida's RPI was 60 and they're middle of the road in the SEC so it didn't seem at least on paper like a "great' win.

I think if you go back, and I realize we are splitting hairs here a little, the MVC wins over BCS opponents were not upper or middle tier, but lower tier road games. I think the road part of this is key as you get "credit" in the RPI for beating an opponent on the road.

I would bet that if you looked at who the A-10 has beaten this year vs who the Valley beat in 2007 I think it was, the A-10 wins this year are more impressive.

[Taj79]

I think there are a lot of holes in all our so-called upper tier A10 teams.

SAINT LOUIS: too young, no real outside shooters and no real interior beef.

RICHMOND: maybe the most complete team right now but still with a lack of any interior game.

XAVIER: guard thin, no real skill set outside Crawford and designated shooter Redford. Interior game is okay but ends with Love and McLean.

TEMPLE: short bench, and not as dominant oninside with Allen almost all alone. Brooks is suspect shooter and Fernandez is streaky.

DAYTON: just flat out cannot shoot -- the trey, the mid-range or even the foul shot.

CHARLOTTE: not impressed. No real exterior game. No bench.

RHODE ISLAND: complete unknown. Have no real idea of what to make of this team. We'll see tomorrow.

Now, having said that, all of these teams do impress in some ways that might, on any given night, make up for the problems.

SAINT LOUIS: youthful exuberance, a team concept and stick to it "D".

RICHMOND: outside shooting, good defense, and the Princeton mindset.

XAVIER: so good for so long, you just start to know you will get the job done and win in the end. Mindset.

TEMPLE: Rep and that variation match-up zone. Philly street fighters and the mindset sticks.

DAYTON: athletes, athletes and more athletes. Brian Gregory can come at you in waves. Wear you out.

CHARLOTTE: hard to argue with those two inside bruisers and Wilderness. Guard play has dropped off since recent past.

RHODE ISLAND: Baron and company seem to always want to run. Again, let's see tomprrow

That is seven nice, yet imperfect teams. Makes for a hellova race this year. We are on an up year and I believe the A10 has more of those than not.

[kshoe]

As to point one, the A1O as far as I can tell doesn't have very many big wins against highly ranked schools either home, away or neutrel. A quick check revealed:

Charlotte won at #32 Louisville which is in the middle of the Big East

Dayton beat #29 Georgia Tech on a neutrel court. Gtech is in the middle to lower part of the ACC

RI beat #39 Ok St on a neutrel court. Ok St is a middle of the road Big 12 team

Richmond beat #45 Mizzou on a neutrel court. Mizzou is a middle of the road Big 12 team

Temple beat #6 Villanova at home. Villanova is at the top of the Big East. By far the best win for the conference.

X beat #48 Cincy at home. Cincy is a middle of the road Big East team.

I would have to think if there are not many more signature wins than this that the conference is also feasting on the middlings. Just a guess.

As to poing number two, you're probably right but if that's the criteria people judge teams on, then you probably have no problem with middle of the road BCS teams getting picked over A10 teams because they have more "horses."

I really don't see a big difference. My point being is that the Valley probably deserved what they got a few years ago just as the A10 deserves what they'll get this year. No reason to belittle the MVC for their past success.

I'll play this game. Lets take a look at the Big 12 and see who their big non-conference wins are. The Big 12 is the top conference per the RPI so I'm sure there are a lot of top 50 non-conference RPI wins...

Kansas: beat #23 California and #12 Temple

K-State: beat #33 Dayton and #20 Xavier and #36 UNLV

Baylor: beat #20 Xavier

Texas A&M: beat #31 Clemson

Texas beat: #13 Pitt and #26 Mich St.

Texas Tech: None

OK State: None

Mizzou: beat #34 Old Dominion

Oklahoma: None

Iowa St. None

Nebraska: None

Colorado: None

So I count 10 total non-conference wins over teams in the top 50 of the RPI, 4 of which were against the A-10. Only 4 of those wins were against BCS top 50 teams.

Somehow in your analysis above, which included 6 A-10 wins against non-conference top 50 BCS opponents you also neglected to mention Temple's win over #35 Sienna and Richmond and Dayton's wins over #34 Old Dominion.

So now I've shown that A-10 has just about as many significant non-confernece wins over top 50 RPI teams as the Big 12 and actually has more BCS top 50 wins. The point isn't to suggest the A-10 is anywhere near as good as the Big 12, as its not, but rather to show that you shouldn't act like the A-10 is short on big-time non conference wins because it is in good company with the Big 12, the number 1 RPI conference around.

[Postcard]

I'll play this game. Lets take a look at the Big 12 and see who their big non-conference wins are. The Big 12 is the top conference per the RPI so I'm sure there are a lot of top 50 non-conference RPI wins...

Kansas: beat #23 California and #12 Temple

K-State: beat #33 Dayton and #20 Xavier and #36 UNLV

Baylor: beat #20 Xavier

Texas A&M: beat #31 Clemson

Texas beat: #13 Pitt and #26 Mich St.

Texas Tech: None

OK State: None

Mizzou: beat #34 Old Dominion

Oklahoma: None

Iowa St. None

Nebraska: None

Colorado: None

So I count 10 total non-conference wins over teams in the top 50 of the RPI, 4 of which were against the A-10. Only 4 of those wins were against BCS top 50 teams.

Somehow in your analysis above, which included 6 A-10 wins against non-conference top 50 BCS opponents you also neglected to mention Temple's win over #35 Sienna and Richmond and Dayton's wins over #34 Old Dominion.

So now I've shown that A-10 has just about as many significant non-confernece wins over top 50 RPI teams as the Big 12 and actually has more BCS top 50 wins. The point isn't to suggest the A-10 is anywhere near as good as the Big 12, as its not, but rather to show that you shouldn't act like the A-10 is short on big-time non conference wins because it is in good company with the Big 12, the number 1 RPI conference around.

Kshoe,

Please reread my original post so you can stay on topic. This has nothing to do with the Big 12. It has nothing to do with the ACC or the Horizon. It has everything to do with the MVC and to a lesser extent the A10. My intent wasn't to "act like the A10 was short on big time non conference wins." My intent was to ask whether they had done anything all that different from the MVC of a couple years ago when the MVC was accused by some on this board of "figuring out" the RPI. So debunch your panties and stay on topic next time.

[SShoe]

Kshoe,

Please reread my original post so you can stay on topic. This has nothing to do with the Big 12. It has nothing to do with the ACC or the Horizon. It has everything to do with the MVC and to a lesser extent the A10. My intent wasn't to "act like the A10 was short on big time non conference wins." My intent was to ask whether they had done anything all that different from the MVC of a couple years ago when the MVC was accused by some on this board of "figuring out" the RPI. So debunch your panties and stay on topic next time.

Well why don't you go back and find out how many non-conference top 50 RPI wins the Valley had three (or four?) years ago and let us know how it compares to the A-10 this year. Then we can decide whether or not your original post and insinuation has any merit.

[Postcard]

Well why don't you go back and find out how many non-conference top 50 RPI wins the Valley had three (or four?) years ago and let us know how it compares to the A-10 this year. Then we can decide whether or not your original post and insinuation has any merit.

I wasn't the one accusing the MVC of "figuring it out." That research should be left to the ones making the accusation. I'm guessing you're one of those so let us know what you turn up. I'm curious to see how it turns out. I have no idea which is why I brought it up in the first place.

[Archy McNally]

Kshoe,

Please reread my original post so you can stay on topic. This has nothing to do with the Big 12. It has nothing to do with the ACC or the Horizon. It has everything to do with the MVC and to a lesser extent the A10. My intent wasn't to "act like the A10 was short on big time non conference wins." My intent was to ask whether they had done anything all that different from the MVC of a couple years ago when the MVC was accused by some on this board of "figuring out" the RPI. So debunch your panties and stay on topic next time.

I'm sure someone on this board probably thought that, but I will say this, it was obvious that the national media stressed it along with representatives and members of the BCS institutions because of the outcry against the MVC and Colonial teams making the NCAA tourneys.

Those teams ended up just being darn good as George Mason, Wichita St, and Bradley proved.

So my answer to you is, those teams were just good just like the A10 this year is just good, and its a shame that the money-driven NCAA tourney selectors have to make up some story as to why a Pac10 team with an RPI of close to 60 deserves to be there in front of a mid-major with an RPI in the 30s.

I can see some on this board arguing against the MVC since we just went to the A10, but to be honest, I hear a lot more crap like this from alumni at the BCS schools every year during the selection, because they are just trying to keep the little man down.

[SShoe]

I wasn't the one accusing the MVC of "figuring it out." That research should be left to the ones making the accusation. I'm guessing you're one of those so let us know what you turn up. I'm curious to see how it turns out. I have no idea which is why I brought it up in the first place.

I'm sure that whoever made the accusation had their reasons at the time. But you're the one rehashing old arguments, so I'll let you do the research and prove us all wrong.

[billikendave]

Two ways the Valley of a few years ago and this year's A-10 or different;

1) Quality of wins. The Valley played a lot of lower tier BCS schools on the road and beat them. The fact that those were road victories inflated their RPIs and then the RPIs of the team they beat would automatically become inflated when they got into conference and played the top of their respective leagues. The A-10 has a number of wins over a number of BCS teams in the top half of their conferences

2) They "eye test." The reason so many were skeptical of the Valley teams' RPIs was that you could watch a Missouri St for example and easily recognize they were not the 19th best team in the nation as their RPI would have you believe. They just didn't have the horses. You would be hard pressed to find someone that says that Temple, Xavier, URI, Charlotte, Dayton and SLU don't have BCS quality athletes.

the other factor that the MVC used was to eliminate bad buy games. They would schedule a 150-200 RPI instead of a + 300 RPI teams. To that extent, I think the A10 has partially followed that model on scheduling.

[Postcard]

I'm sure that whoever made the accusation had their reasons at the time. But you're the one rehashing old arguments, so I'll let you do the research and prove us all wrong.

What is the old argument that I'm rehashing? When has this specific topic been discussed before? Who am I proving wrong? As stated in my previous post, I started this topic because I was curious what the difference in the two conferences was. It seems a couple people agree that both conferences deserved the RPI's and selections that came with them. Others like you and your brother completely change to topic for no apparent reason. Both of you are looking for an argument you're not going to find.

[SShoe]

What is the old argument that I'm rehashing? When has this specific topic been discussed before? Who am I proving wrong? As stated in my previous post, I started this topic because I was curious what the difference in the two conferences was. It seems a couple people agree that both conferences deserved the RPI's and selections that came with them. Others like you and your brother completely change to topic for no apparent reason. Both of you are looking for an argument you're not going to find.

I haven't changed the topic. I'm just saying that you have an opportunity to do some research and support your statement that the MVC deserved their 4 bids in 06 (right year?), which would go against the theory that many on this board have had for years - that the Valley schools inflated their RPIs that year with smart scheduling, but weren't really that good.

So, once again, good luck on your research. I look forward to seeing how many top 50 RPI wins the Valley had out of conference.

[Postcard]

I haven't changed the topic. I'm just saying that you have an opportunity to do some research and support your statement that the MVC deserved their 4 bids in 06 (right year?), which would go against the theory that many on this board have had for years - that the Valley schools inflated their RPIs that year with smart scheduling, but weren't really that good.

So, once again, good luck on your research. I look forward to seeing how many top 50 RPI wins the Valley had out of conference.

We'll just agree, until you prove me wrong, that there is no difference in the top teams of the A10 this year and the top teams of the MVC from a few years ago. They both apparently "figured out the RPI" with smart scheduling but aren't really that good.