Just some facts which make u wonder about "RPIs"

[bauman]

Like most of us I can't believe that MVC teams are as strong as their RPIs would indicate. The smell test tells me that Mo. St. (21), N. Ia. (25), Wich. St (28), SIU (31) and Bradley (36) are NOT better than KY (39), NCSt. (40), Geogtwn. (41), UAB (44) or Louisville (63) just to list a few. Which group of 5 teams would you bet the farm on in a round robin tournament? Yet ALL 5 MVC teams are ranked by RPI as better than the other group.

I had a few minutes to do a minimal amout of research and here are a few interesting facts-some are included in other threads.

MO St. has a 39 OOC SOS having played 9 OOC games against teams with an average RPI of 149, YET...........SLU has a 61 OOC SOS having played 12 games against OOC teams with an average RPI of 140. What gives? Does common sense apply here?

To make matters even worse, MO St. has a 6 OOC RPI playing teams with this 149 avg. RPI and has only one significant win--against UW-Mil. which had a 54 RPI. This just makes NO SENSE!!!

SIU's best OOC win was against Kent St., RPI 61 at Carbondale. What could possiby justify them "earning" an RPI of 31? This is nuts!!! I don't care what some computer has been programed to spit out---this just makes no sense. SIU's OOC RPI is 71, which means they got to 31 by beating up on other MVC teams, all of whom I submit are over-ranked when using the RPI formula.

Clearly something is seriously wrong with this system.

[Battlecat455]

It's always been seriously wrong. The power conferences have perpetuated their stranglehold on the RPI and the tournament on the strength of their teams playing one another in conference games. The system is self perpetuating. If you recall, Grawers teams in the 80s could never improve their RPI once the conference season in the MCC began, regardless of their record. Why it took so long for a conference to figure out the scheduling system is beyond me. Of course, figuring it out and getting acceptable deals with teams from the power conferences for games is another matter. There is also the the small matter of actually winning those games against teams with a RPI of 150 or better. This is why I feel that an adjustment to the RPI is inevitable. The Big East, ACC, Big 10,12, etc. won't allow this sort of inroad to their dominance on Selection Sunday. It also may be that the MVC has a hard time scheduling from here on out.

[StLouBlue]

Here is a link to an interesting article that shows some RPI for teams with the "old" RPI, in other words before the road game adjustment was made last year.

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/5388240

Anyway I did some quick checking on the teams that you threw out as teams better than MVC teams like Mo St.

KY had 2 OOC road games and went 1-1. Kansas(34 RPI) beat them bad and they beat Georgia St(241). Also had 5 neutral site games, not sure how RPI handles these.

NC St had 2 OOC road games and went 1-1. Iowa(14) beat them and they beat Alabama(46). Also had 8 OOC home games with teams 250 or higher in RPI.

Georgetown had 5 OOC road games and went 4-1. Lost to Ill(9) and beat Navy(291), James Madison(298), Oregon(162) and UTEP(75). Also had 3 OOC home and 1 neutral site games with teams 234 or higher.

Louisville had 1 OOC road game and lost to KY(39). Had 8 OOC home games with teams 179 or higher. Have a 6-10 conference record.

UAB had 4 OOC road games and went 2-2. Lost to DePaul(89) and Minn(84), beat Nebraska(111) and S Florida(229). 12-2 in conference but 10 conference wins against teams 186 or higher. Also had OOC home games against S Carolina St(231), Centenary(324) and Alcorn St(299).

Mo St had 4 OOC road games and went 3-1. Lost to Arkansas(45) and beat Ark St(227), Oral Roberts(129) and UW-Mil(54). Had 3 games OOC with teams over 200+ RPI, Ark St(227) 2 games and Texas A&M CC(204).

Now looking at this there are some easy things to be seen. KY, NC St and Louisville should play more OOC road games if they want to be concerned with their RPI or change the way RPI handles neutral site games in the case of KY. UAB is in a bad conference and compounded that by playing 3 bad OOC home games as well. Louisville should try to actually get a winning record in conference before they talk about getting into the tournament.

Mo St had a winning OOC road record and had only 3 OOC games with teams at 200+ RPI. While there wasn't many top 50 or 100 games, there weren't any real stinkers either. Mo St went 8-1 in OOC games. SLU went 6-6 in OOC games and had 5 games against 225+ RPI.

[bauman]

None of that answers the question of how MO St. can possibly have a OOC RPI of the 6th BEST in the NATION when playing a OOC schedule that averages 149 AND with a "best win" OOC against a 54 RPI team. Again, something is seriously wrong with that computer program!

[StLouBlue]

I think a couple things are the cause of Mo St's low OOC SOS. First the MVC has 18 league games, most conferences now because they have large numbers of members have changed to 16 league games. In other words the MVC plays 2 less OOC games. Mo St played 4 of their 9 OOC games on the road. Just looking through BCS conference schools 2 or 3 seem to be the normal on OOC road games. Mo St played 44% of their OOC games on the road, compared to 18-27% for most of the BCS schools.

Mo St also avoided putting any really bad teams on their schedule. Ark St at 227 twice and Texas A&M CC at 204. Again looking at most BCS conference schools, they load up on 200+ RPI schools.

The other thing Mo St did was win these games going 8-1. I think when you look at these 3 factors you can see how their SOS isn't as bad as it seems when you first look at their schedule.

[Sheltiedave]

Then you multiply those road wins by 1.4 to get the adjusted wins.

It all adds up, and Elgin put the MVC in a position to have a monster RPI year like this. There is a system, and he knows how to work it.

The other half of the story is that the conference has to go out and win all these games. The teams did, and the MVC should reap a bunch of big dance at large bids.

Now they have to win some games to not embarrass the league.

[StLouBlue]

I agree the MVC schools have to get some wins in the tourney in order to maintain the momentum they have now. I am guessing that WSU will probably be the highest seeded team around a 6 with maybe UNI close by at a 6 or 7. Like every year those 6-11 or 7-10 or 8-9 games are usually a coin flip. I do like the MVC's chances more so now than in the past because the MVC teams have better inside games than before. Outside shooting is often just too unpredictable in the tourney because you are playing a large arenas with tough site lines. Also you have teams like UNI, SIU and CU(if the make it) that have been there recently so hopefully could avoid the deer in headlights type of first half.

These are also reasons for why I want SLU to at least make the NIT this year, any post season experience for our young team should help them the next few years when we are talking NCAA tourney.

[slufanskip]

Thank You, Thank You, Thank You. Someone else gets it.

The question is ... Is the tourney suppossed to find out who the best team is or which conference has the best mathmaticians. I'm dissapointed in the Ivy league schools

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman

[StLouBlue]

Skip, you don't get it. The point I have been trying to make on this thread is that teams like UAB, NC State, Louisville, etc have not proven they are the best teams. They have been playing the system for years, playing weak OOC schedules with few if any road games knowing that the conference season would save them. This year it did not happen RPI wise for all of those traditional powerhouses and so now they are getting upset that some "other" teams might get in the tourney in front of them. Read my earlier responses on this thread and try to tell me that why teams like UAB, Louisville, NC State deserve to be in the tourney. Try to forget for a minute that it is MVC teams that could be replacing them and just look at those teams and why they deserve to be in.

[slufanskip]

I do get it ... but it seems you don't. Here are the only questions that counts. How many MVC teams do you think are in the next 34 after the automatic bids. Do you really think 6 of the top 41 teams in the country are from the MVC? If the answer is yes ... then they deserve to get in ... if it is no ... then they don't.

Syracuse played all the big east schools in conference ... Mo St played the rest of the overrated MVC schools

What was the MVC's out of conference SOS?

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman

[BeeLine]

No you really still don't get it; the MVC had a nonconference SOS that ranked 10th, not spectacular, but consider the ACC was 19th, the Big 12 was 12th, the A-10 11th. The Big East was 5th, but consider teams like WV @ 148, Pitt@ 226,Georgetown @218,Conn@220.

You keep making the classic assumption that the name makes the team as opposed to the competition. When Missouri State beat Northren Iowa at UNI, that is a better win than if they had beaten Syracuse/Georgetown/Kentucky/ Louisville or any other of a number of name teams that simply haven't performed at the same level as UNI.

Look at how few road wins against top 50 rpi teams most BCS teams have outside conference wins. All their significant wins are home conference wins, yet somehow this is a computer trick when the Valley does the same but adds some road noncon wins to the total as well.

It's very simple, road wins vs decent competition plus home wins vs quality teams minus few to none against 200+ rpi teams plus a normal conference home and home schedule against teams that scheduled similar equals a great SOS and RPI, as opposed to lots of home wins vs marginal to bad teams plus a couple quality neutral site games vs great teams plus a normal conference home and home schedule against teams that scheduled similar.

[slufanskip]

Why doesn't anyone want to answer the question. Does the MVC have 6 of the top 41 teams in the country.

Just one word yes or no

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman

[BeeLine]

This year, yes.While I don't think the MVC teams will probabaly ever [or if so only in a rarity like the Larry Bird years] have the kind of talent the top 6-8 teams each year do, the reality is neither do the majority of very good but not great teams from the BCS conferences. Once you get past the truly upper echelon teams, there is great parity in college basketball from about #10 thru probabaly about #70 most years. A team like Florida State will get a win against a Duke every couple years because they get to play them at home in the course of a grueling conference schedule; it doesn't make them on par with Duke any more than Creighton is. The very good teams in the BCS conferences prosper by association with the few programs that year in and out are great and challenge for the national titles.

All you have to do is look at what happens when you either have those very good BCS programs play the upper tier teams from the Valley and like conferences in neutral settings or on the road. Guess what, they lose as much as they win, just like those Valley teams do most of the time they have to do similar, and they all lose the majority of the time they have to play the Dukes of the world.

I always find it laughable that every NCAA tourney the BCS conferences start with their 5-7 teams, pair a good number of them with the 12-16 seeds from the obscure conferences, then proclaim evidence of superiority because 3-4 make it to the 2nd round or sweet 16. Those that don't are usually ones that got paired with an equal level BCS team or one of the 1-2 quality teams from a conference like the Valley. Comeon, in a good year don't ya think if SLU got an opening round game against Georgia Southern, then a second round game against a team that finished in the 5-7 range in the Big 12 or a quality team from a upper mid level conference they'd have a good chance of getting to the sweet 16 vs starting with the 2nd game first and then getting a Duke or Conneticut or like team in the 2nd round. That second scenario is what the top level teams from the Valley always get; seeding is everything especially if you can get to that mid [3-7] level, you don't have to face elite teams till the 3rd round. Guess what, you probabaly have a pretty good shot at getting to the sweet 16 if you play well . Does that mean you were more like Duke than UAB if you're a team like Iowa or Alabama or Seton Hall; I think not.

[slufanskip]

but only the top 20 or so get those peachy seeds. 12 plays 5 and the winer has to play the same team. The tough ones are 13-16 seeds, they have to play a top 4 seed. the best 20 teams are in the major conferences.

My real problem is the mathmatics of the RPI. When Texas out of conference rpi is rated equal to Mo State's that is a joke. The rpi makes it so much better to play a 180 team than a 280 team and if you have any thoughts of being a top 50 team, they should be treated as equal games like they are.

Texas played out of conference Duke, Tenn, Memp, Villanova, Iowa, 4 teams in the top 10 5 of the top 15 plus W.Virg in the top 30 and went 3-2 in the top 15 and 4-2 in the top 30.

Mo St played 1 team ranked 49 and lost, no one else in the top 50.

How do the SOS end up about equal ... Why because UT plays it's close in state schools. My point is for top 50 schools playing 280 shouldn't bring you down any more than playing 180. They should both be easy blow out wins. There is no way you can tell me MO St's out of conference should be even in the same ball park as UT's ... but it is. The same goes for all the MVC schools ... including N. Iowa though there's should have been the closest. There is my problem ... The MVC came into the conference schedule with all these teams who hadn't played anyone but beat poor teams alot and were ranked too high so that when they played each other their SOS continued to climb. They were over rated to begin with.

Mo State's out non conf SOS shouldn't have been as high. Neither should have SIU's or any of them.

We will just have to disagree ...

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman

[cheeseman]

Interesting thread - the problem with any computer generated model is that once the underlying architecture is analyzied you can always find a way to beat it. Just like companies find loop holes in the tax code or regulatory laws. This does not make those companies better run or even more secure - see Enron. It just makes them look good on paper. If the MVC figured it out - well good for them, at least nobody is going to loose their investments with what they did. I applaud Elgin and the MVC for playing the system's game. Now the problem is this - Skip - no, nobody thinks that 6 of the top 41 teams in the country are in the MVC and anybody who makes that arguement is sticking their head in the sand but none-the-less the computer program says they are and that is the rule this year. Will this change - probably. SLU can tweak their non-conf. schedule easily enough to warrant a better SOS and thus RPI but those of you who have pointed out that without the rest of the A10 doing the same thing it will not have the total desired impact for us. Also, while I understand the math, I will tell you that when SLU played Iowa, Gonzaga and UNC along with their buy games I was more excited as a fan than if they had played 8 OOC with the likes of Western Kentucky, Marist, or Oral Roberts to name a few examples. I understand that strategy would have been more system friendly but not fan friendly. I am looking forward to the return game with UNC already but I could never say the same thing about Western KY. At this point, SLU needs to take care of business in the A10 Tourney and hope for a post season run/experience of some sort. The MVC will be the darlings for now and time will tell how well they do when they go Dancing this year and for next year. I still think that the MVC had the "perfect storm" so to speak happen for them this year - they got lucky that the OCC teams they scheduled in the 150 or below level performed as they had expected, they won most of those games, and the other confs had not figured the system out yet. All it would have taken is for one of those legs of the stool to not come up perfect for them and the stool would have fallen down. What I did find of interest was that the MVC's overall SOS was only 10th and the A10 was 11th. If the MVC had played such a tough OCC schedule as some would suggest - then their SOS should have been higher.

[slufanskip]

but the tourney isn't for the conference or school with the best mathmaticians ... and there is no rule that says the selection committee has to follow the rpi. If they look and see it is flawed and wrong ... I hope they try to put the best 34 at large teams in not the best 34 with the highest flawed rpi.

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman

[Sheltiedave]

Now you are nosing the nexus of the RPI program, Cheeseman. As long as you don't schedule any horrible RPI teams - the "buy" games - and you win virtually all you OOC away games, then the weighting formula will MAXIMIZE your wins. If you win the majority of your OOC home games as will, then you will be guaranteed an overall RPI in the 70s or higher.

If you go on and have a winning conference record, you are in the 30s or better, provided all conference teams participate in this scheduling strategy.

The linchpin is always setting the scheduling bar to a certain level. While we can't always predict whether a team will perform at a 150 or a 200 level, forecasting is usually solid.

The NCAA will end up with 8 to 10 conferences that will enact such scheduling edicts to informally form mid-major and major conferences. The distance will grow between the haves and have nots, again.

[StLouBlue]

Yes.

People much smarter than me have developed tools for ranking teams and for the most part this is what those systems are saying.

RPI 6 in top 43.

Saragin 6 in top 46.

Pomeroy 5 in top 44, Creighton at 53.

I haven't watched near enough basketball to make a ranking of teams myself, so I am kind of dependent upon these systems.

I understand your argument that the traditional top conferences have the best teams and the best teams are the ones that should go to the tournament. I just think those teams have to prove that they are the best each year and I don't think all of those teams have proved it. Parity is here for college basketball. Teams ranked from around 25-30 through 60's are all pretty similar for the most part. It is not easy trying to figure out which teams are better, I would guess without looking it up, most of the teams in this range have some bad losses, like 15+ point losses or road loss to bad teams.

I know there are lots of people out there saying the RPI is flawed, MCV figured out the system, etc. I just wish people would give these teams some credit. Sure the athletes that take the floor for a lot of MVC teams are not near as impressive looking as teams from BCS conferences. These same athletes for the MVC probably didn't have the huge high school rankings of the BCS conference kids either. While the MVC schools may not have the flash and athletism of these other schools, the MVC schools play good basketball. Most coaches run very good defenses, a system offense and play most schools tough.

The SLU team this year is very similar to these MVC schools except SLU was a little more dependent upon freshmen early on and couldn't get over the hump and win more OOC games. Soderberg's defense kept SLU in a lot of games that athlete wise SLU should have been blown out. Also the A10 is a lot closer to the MVC than it is to the BCS conferences. So while this year you are saying it is not fair for the MVC to send 4-6 schools to the tournament, if we flipped it to where the A10 was having this success would you be saying the same thing? If the A10 was the 6th ranked conference and SLU was the 4th ranked team, wouldn't you be arguing why SLU should be included in the dance?

I think the NCAA did the right thing by adjusting the RPI for road games, maybe this formula should be lightened or maybe adjusted somewhat for true neutral site games, but the idea that BCS conference schools don't have to go on the road in OOC had to change.

Beeline, thank you for your support. My computer at home is out for now and can only get on the board at work which unfortunately I do have to get some work done at least once in a while.

[StLouBlue]

I don't think anyone has said the MVC schools played a tough schedule. I think the played a more consistant schedule, they played good teams at home and on the road and for the most part avoided playing the RPI dogs of 250 or greater.

I agree though that SLU schedule was a lot more attactive with the top schools, unfortunately those top schools or other similar ones will not schedule MVC schools. I guess I should say will not schedule home and home games with MVC schools. We will have to see if SLU will be able to continue to schedule these top teams now that SLU is in the A10, will have a winning team and especially after SLU opens its new arena. I would guess a lot of these top schools will stop taking a call from SLU when they realize it is a good chance they could lose that game at SLU.

[Billiken Rich]

You are so full of it that I can't believe that YOU would make a post like that. Yeah, UNC will stop doing home and homes with us when we are successful???? Please tell me you aren't serious.

That's why UNC won't come to play Bradley....Because they're just too good......You're killing me.....

[StLouBlue]

UNC is one of the true elite schools in college basketball. They rarely go on the road for OOC, only 2 times each the last 3 years. Roy is coming the SLU because of his trying to play near recruit's families so maybe with Roy UNC might start going on the road a little more. UNC can put whoever they want on the schedule.

Yes, I do think other top teams or BCS conference teams will start avoiding SLU in the next few years, unless the NCAA keeps it's RPI where it forces them to go on the road. SLU and Soderberg have a reputation by now of playing tough defense and any team coming to SLU will have a tough game. Factor in that our talent is young and getting better, I doubt many teams will be looking to schedule SLU in the future. Once the new arena opens and it is a loud packed house, again not sure how many of those BCS conference teams will want to travel to SLU.

[kwyjibo]

I have no idea who "the best" 34 teams are and neither do you. I have no idea how good the MVC teams are in comparison against every other team and neither does anyone (although we all can and do guess).

People keep asking the wrong question and it is tiring. The RPI is NOT designed to decide who the BEST teams are--that is EXACTLY what the NCAA tournament is for (and even that does not really decide it conclusively). The RPI is simply a means for assessing the GENERAL worth of a given teams results in an objective way (I do think their are better ways to do this objectively but that is seldom what people are saying). Results are NOT the same thing as "how good a team is". If two teams are truly equal one team has to win and that team gets credit for the "W" and the other team is punished with an "L" (it does NOT mean that that team is 100% better than the other team).

All teams are free to schedule who they want and the published rules of the RPI mean you pay a 40% penalty for winning at home. Syracuse is free to play all their games at home but no one should cry when they do not get a bid.

I think the MVC did schedule somewhat smartly but even that is overblown. Part of what happened was simply things out of their control going well (which is part of the process and the weakness of the RPI). They played teams they had a good chance of beating and for the most part did. Mo State deserves to be rewarded for their wins.

Now, RPI is only part of the selection story and we will see how much the RPI means is the total picture. It should play a significant part of how one looks at teams.

[Billiken Rich]

Maybe UNC is not a great example BUT Slu has not had trouble getting home and homes with decent programs in the past whether we've been good or bad. I doubt the future will be much different.

[cheeseman]

Mark Sauer on Frank's show said that he does not believe SMS is getting in to the NCAA Tourney. He said he saw all the games at the MVC tourney and he just does not think that the MVC is as deep as people think. He was cautious about saying anything bad about the MVC but you could clearly tell he was suspect of them.

[bauman]

He also said that the MVC is 1-7 in the Tournament the last 3 years.

If the RPI is not intended to say which teams are "best" or "better" than other lower ranked teams then it should go away. Again my point about MO St.'s OOC RPI of SIX (yes that is six as in 6) when:

1) The average of its 9 OOC opponents is an RPI of 149, and;

2) Its best OOC win is against a team with a RPI of 54,

is a clear sign that this years RPI formula is just flat out badly flawed. No one backing the MVC in this thread has yet tackled trying to explain this obvious indication of just how bad this system is. Applying simple math logic along with a dose of common sense results in a conclusion that things are $@r#8ed up in this formula.