RPI watch

[West Pine Jim]

OT, I know, but in which season did we lose to Mizzou on a buzzer-beater by Stokes ?

[kshoe]

OT, I know, but in which season did we lose to Mizzou on a buzzer-beater by Stokes ?

2001 - 2002 season.

[jjray]

If slim = 4 losses in 16 games then I agree.

Depends on the 4 losses and we are likely on the bubble even with only 4 more losses. 3 should be the target # and, looking at our schedule, it will be difficult to achieve despite the fact that we are projected to win at least that number.

[kshoe]

Depends on the 4 losses and we are likely on the bubble even with only 4 more losses. 3 should be the target # and, looking at our schedule, it will be difficult to achieve despite the fact that we are projected to win at least that number.

Alright, I'll play along. Let's say you are right and 4 more losses which leads to a top 35 RPI, a top 30 Sagarin rating and a top 25 Pomeroy rating plus a 3rd place conference finish puts us right on the bubble, which would you rather have:

1) all the losses be to the best teams in the conference. We'd have only 1 "bad loss" all year but wouldn't have that many good wins.

2) all the losses be to medicore teams but we dominate Xavier, Temple, St. Joes, etc. We'd finish with 5 losses of teams with 100RPIs or worse. We still finish 3rd in conference.

Keep in mind, the RPI doesn't factor in who you lose to, just how many losses you have, so the RPI will be materially the same either way.

Big picture, I don't see how it matters since our various rankings will carry the day but I'm interested in seeing why you think one of the above scenarios is better than the other.

[West Pine Jim]

2001 - 2002 season.

Thanks, shoe. My son is in a jawing match with some tar and mustard supporters.

[MB73]

Roy is correct.

There is a long way to go.

We have played a weak schedule so far, 209th.

Our only quality win was Oklahoma, and it was on a neutral site.

The kids will have to get it done in the A-10, as we always knew.

The New Mexico game was a key, a win would have put us a little ahead of "schedule"; we are now a bit behind.

[moytoy12]

Roy is correct.

There is a long way to go.

We have played a weak schedule so far, 209th.

Our only quality win was Oklahoma, and it was on a neutral site.

The kids will have to get it done in the A-10, as we always knew.

The New Mexico game was a key, a win would have put us a little ahead of "schedule"; we are now a bit behind.

I guess a tie with UNM would have kept us right on schedule.

[NH]

Roy is correct.

There is a long way to go.

We have played a weak schedule so far, 209th.

Our only quality win was Oklahoma, and it was on a neutral site.

The kids will have to get it done in the A-10, as we always knew.

The New Mexico game was a key, a win would have put us a little ahead of "schedule"; we are now a bit behind.

Washington will turn out to be a quality win, mark my words.

[West Pine Jim]

Washington will turn out to be a quality win, mark my words.

The Huskies have been looking better lately.

[Westy03]

Roy is correct.

There is a long way to go.

We have played a weak schedule so far, 209th.

Our only quality win was Oklahoma, and it was on a neutral site.

The kids will have to get it done in the A-10, as we always knew.

The New Mexico game was a key, a win would have put us a little ahead of "schedule"; we are now a bit behind.

Bottom line is we have to go 12-4 at minimum to get an at large even if we would have won at UNM. I feel like we can do it and will do it

[Billsrmajic]

I guess a tie with UNM would have kept us right on schedule.

Hahahahahahahahahaha - love it!

[Billsrmajic]

I agree, but 12-4 will be tough. I am a little more in the Roy camp that we may live to regret our schedule (Rick may have been forced to go with the buy games, but we played some bad teams).

Everyone is talking about our weak our ooc schedule is. Before the season started, I, for one, thought this was the best schedule we've had for some time. Washington, the CA tourney, and at New Mexico are all tough. Perhaps I am not remembering previous years correctly, so can anyone find the ooc strength of schedule since rick has been here?

[MusicCityBilliken]

Everyone is talking about our weak our ooc schedule is. Before the season started, I, for one, thought this was the best schedule we've had for some time. Washington, the CA tourney, and at New Mexico are all tough. Perhaps I am not remembering previous years correctly, so can anyone find the ooc strength of schedule since rick has been here?

I don't know about that. Check out the schedules from the 90s and early 2000s. Always a marquis game. UCLA after a national championship, Kansas after a national championship, Arizona after a national championship, North Carolina after a national championship, etc... Home and away with several BCS teams (like a Washington, California, K State, Iowa State, etc....). Home and away with schools like Gonzaga, etc... We always had the Dayton game when still in CUSA, Plus we always had the MSU/SIU alternate games.

Playing all these schools with the last name of state just does not cut it.

[Schasz]

I will go with the notion that if we are not at or near the top in the A-10 then we do not deserve an NCAA invite. Our team needs to start piling up Conference starting at Dayton. We have a good team and I still think in the end we will be where we need to be in the wins & losses, Lets Go Bills!!!

[Quality Is Job 1]

http://realtimerpi.c...i_conf_Men.html

the A-10 currently is the 8th ranked conference as the MVC (ughhhh!) has pasted the A-10 again. if the season ended today and only one of the two got 3 teams in, it would not be the A-10. our breathing room gets tighter.

currently slu is ranked 4th in the conference with a 60 ranking (amazingly we were 62 prior to the new mexico game. play good teams and our ranking goes up even with a loss).

a team in 4th place with a 60 rpi is NIT bound.

we really will not be able to afford any losses that arent to the temple and xavier imo. and even then, 5-6 total losses may not be good enough. loyola and our non conference schedule are showing right now.

But 4th in the RPI doesn't mean 4th in the conference standings.

[Quality Is Job 1]

I don't know about that. Check out the schedules from the 90s and early 2000s. Always a marquis game. UCLA after a national championship, Kansas after a national championship, Arizona after a national championship, North Carolina after a national championship, etc... Home and away with several BCS teams (like a Washington, California, K State, Iowa State, etc....). Home and away with schools like Gonzaga, etc... We always had the Dayton game when still in CUSA, Plus we always had the MSU/SIU alternate games.

Playing all these schools with the last name of state just does not cut it.

But the Great Midwest and Conference USA permitted the Bills to be a much more attractive team to schedule than that Atlantic 10 does.

[Cowboy]

-if we are the 5th best team (realtime now has us 5th behind x) in the 8th placed conf we don;t deserve a bid

-i would like to think we are better than 5th and we have the next 16 games to determine this

-i hope others aren;t taking a dim view before a single conf game has been played

-jeez, it really is hard work.....

[Billiken Rich]

Your post makes no sense at all, unless you just like to dis Roy everytime he makes a comment. Not exactly sure what your first sentence meant, but I assume you think this thread is the dumbest in history? Why? It's a good time to look at the RPI, SOS, and what it might take to get to the dance. I also enjoy seeing where the A-10 stands among conferences after non-conference games have mostly concluded.

Sure, the RPI will change, but at the same time it is cool to see where we are and where our opponents stand going into conference play. And ya Rich, we all know the RPI needs to improve, now that we know what our RPI is, and of course conference standings are meaningless right now, conference play hasn't started yet. Got it. I think your post is far more assinine than Roy's.

I forgot the word "most" as in most asinine in history. It is completely asinine to bring up conference standings BEFORE conference games start. Wring your hands over the fact we are in forth place with Roy if you like but its nearly meaningless.

[Quality Is Job 1]

I forgot the word "most" as in most asinine in history. It is completely asinine to bring up conference standings BEFORE conference games start. Wring your hands over the fact we are in forth place with Roy if you like but its nearly meaningless.

Totally meaningless, not "nearly." Non-conference RPI ranking by no means predicts conference standings.

[MusicCityBilliken]

But the Great Midwest and Conference USA permitted the Bills to be a much more attractive team to schedule than that Atlantic 10 does.

Yes & no. I think has to do more with winning. Temple and X play an attractive OOC schedule.

[David King]

I agree that if the Bills don't go at least 12-4 in the conference, they don't deserve to be in the Big Dance. But, really 12-4 should be no problem, and I'm predicting 14-2.

However, from my own personal point of view, tomorrow's Dayton game is a must win. While a loss here won't eliminate the Bills from anything, it would be an indicator that they aren't a top 25-caliber team.

[GOSLU68]

But the Great Midwest and Conference USA permitted the Bills to be a much more attractive team to schedule than that Atlantic 10 does.

These leagues no longer have the same members: our goal should be to win our own conference then we are an attractive gate. This being the first year in a long time that the team is not outright embarrassing I think we should confine ourselves to our own problems without worrying about decisions that were made a long time ago. Everytime we were

in a league with Louisville and Memphis people complained about their lack of academic standards. There is little to be concerned about with this "new league' that winning 25 games won't cure.

[HusakAttack]

So It seems like the people in congruence with Billiken Roy's views are not happy with how we have played so far this season to be complaining about our chances of making the tournament. Please let me know if you really expected to be better than 12-2 in non-conference.

If you tell me you expected to be better than 12-2, I will know you are lying and therefore a giant vagin

[SShoe]

Everyone is talking about our weak our ooc schedule is. Before the season started, I, for one, thought this was the best schedule we've had for some time. Washington, the CA tourney, and at New Mexico are all tough. Perhaps I am not remembering previous years correctly, so can anyone find the ooc strength of schedule since rick has been here?

Our schedule looked a lot tougher at the beginning of the season than it turned out to be. Most expected Washington and Villanova to be significantly better than they have shown to this point, while teams like BC, SIU, Portland, and Vermont are weaker than in previous years. Our schedule would look a little better had MO State not reneged on us, but we also may have scheduled one too many buy games.

[kwyjibo]

There are a lot of good points made here but I would like to add some more.

--I plan on estimating SLU's probability of making the tourney weekly throughout the end of the season. I will use RPIforecast.com/Sagarin predictor, Log 5 tourney prediction, as well as Dance Card info when it becomes available. Right now Sagarin gives us an 78.32% chance of finishing 23-6 or better and I would think with a worse record we would still have a chance (will estimate this more exactly later) but we increase our chances to around 85-86% with the tourney and generous selection (although 23-6 is not 100% as well).

--There is no evidence that conference rank has ANY effect on at-large selection. It is not an official criterion and there is no historical evidence of it being used. There are lots of examples of teams finishing behind other teams within conferences because of better non-conf record. If Rhode Island goes 13-3 (they won't) and SLU goes 12-4 (they might) SLU will get in and Rhodey will not. The same goes with conference slotting. There is no conference "quota" based on how good the conference performs. Teams are evaluated (and the conference does provide the opponents for a good chunk of that evaluation but other than influencing number of big wins and SOS conference success plays no other framing/slotting role).

--K-Shoe was right that 12-4 is a near lock (depending a bit on how teams we have played fair; in any scenario we need Oklahoma and Washington to excel so we can have more top 50 victories). 12-4 with a weak finish and a conference tourney early exit might create some jitters but 12-4

--The New Mexico game was a good one to schedule because winning it means a significant road win but losing to a top 50 team on the road does not hurt your profile. As noted the loss improved our RPI (and our previous 4 wins worsened our RPI).

--The impact of the weak schedule comes in when considering 11-5 conference record (and a win or two in the conf tourney). A weak schedule means that you do not have enough non-RPI factors to fall back on. I still think SLU would be very much in the conversation with an 11-5 conference record as long as there is some decent wins, strong Feb, etc. but obviously we would be at the mercy of what happens to the vagaries of selection.

--Technical RPI point--While it appears that currently the MVC is "ahead" of the A10, I doubt it will stay that way (although it will end up being very close regardless). The A10 played a much tougher schedule so far than the MVC so while the nice records of the MVC will help them in the Opp Record part of RPI, the OPP's Opp Record factor strongly favors the A10.