Imagine a conference where...

[calfan]

I determine it by USC losing to VCU on the court last night.

That's how I determine it.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

SIU beat WSU in Wichita. WSU beat SIU in Carbondale. Anything can happen in one game. Sometimes it matches expectations. Sometimes, it is an outlier.

If you want to use one single game as your method for "determining it", then our conversation is finished and you can go back to la-la-land.

[ShockMe300]

While I agree that it's tough to prove, it's also just as tough to prove that they aren't over rated, correct? In my opinion you can look to the NCAA tournament for examples since it's tough to get any of the BCS teams to play away from home. Let's take today for example. Temple(mid-major?) beat Penn State. 5 seed West Virginia struggled to beat a "play in" team in Clemson, if they'd been seeded lower, do they lose? NC Ashville hung with Pitt for a while. Richmond is currently hanging with Vandy. And of course, Morehead beat Louisville and lead most of the way I believe (didn't see the whole game). How does a UConn team go from unranked to the top 10 by "beating" the Shockers, and then beating an obviously then over ranked MSU team and Kentucky? I think that's where the over rated part comes in. Just because they are in the Big East they would jump that far. If the Shox had beaten the same teams, would they have jumped to the top 10?

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Why was MSU obviously over ranked at the time? I agree that they were over ranked, but we only know that because of hindsight.

Why was Kentucky over ranked at the time? They sure seem like a pretty good team to me.

If WSU had beaten Uconn, MSU, and Kentucky, you can bet that they would have been top 15 minimum.

[calfan]

Jamar Howard 4 President,

That was the last game that helped me to know that USC didn't deserve to be in the tournament.

They lost to Bradley and two other teams I think that had RPI's in the 200's.

I watched them play a number of games, personally. They just didn't look good enough.

The "talking heads" said VCU had no business being in the tourney, but not one of them thought USC was weak.

That is my only point.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

calfan, you have a solid point about USC. I agree that they are overrated. Unfortunately, your first post came across wrong because you only mentioned one game when I was talking about entire conferences for the entire season. Your attempt to be "cute" made you look less than serious.

[ShockMe300]

Didn't say Kentucky was over ranked. And yes, I agree, it's hard to say that early that MSU was over ranked and I should have been more clear that we can see NOW that they were. But, looky there, they somehow made the tournament also. I disagree that the Shox would have been top 15 if they'd won them all. But again, it's hard to say because it didn't happen. Now, I ask you, prove that they aren't over rated. You can't, just as I can't prove that they are. Until there are mandates in scheduling NCAA wide, which would be impossible, there will be no way to prove anything any way. So, the committee needs to take the names off of the flash cards when they are creating the brackets and just use the facts in front of them and let's see how it plays out.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

UConn jumped in the polls because it was early and the polls were mostly based on expectations. Just as you pointed out with MSU, it is hard to predict how good teams will or won't be. That is exactly why teams SHOULD move up or down quite a bit in the polls during November and December. UConn isn't a very good example of a team being overrated considering their quality record following Maui.

You say the committee should just "use the facts in front of them". Here are 3 different COMPUTER ranking systems that work completely differently from each other. This is a good start to my case that these teams are not overrated. Show me your side of the argument.

Pitt - 1 seed
RPI - 12
Pomeroy - 5
Sagarin - 4
Average of polls divided by 4 - 1.8

Notre Dame - 2 seed
RPI - 8
Pomeroy - 10
Sagarin - 7
Average of polls divided by 4 - 2.1

UConn - 3 seed
RPI - 14
Pomeroy - 16
Sagarin - 15
Average of polls divided by 4 - 3.8

Syracuse - 3 seed
RPI - 18
Pomeroy - 11
Sagarin - 10
Average of polls divided by 4 - 3.3

Louisville - 4 seed
RPI - 17
Pomeroy - 12
Sagarin - 14
Average of polls divided by 4 - 3.6

West Virginia - 5 seed
RPI - 21
Pomeroy - 22
Sagarin - 19
Average of polls divided by 4 - 5.2

Georgetown - 6 seed
RPI - 13
Pomeroy - 32
Sagarin - 17
Average of polls divided by 4 - 5.16

Cincinnati - 6 seed
RPI - 35
Pomeroy - 23
Sagarin - 16
Average of polls divided by 4 - 6.2

Villanova - 9 seed
RPI - 38
Pomeroy - 26
Sagarin - 24
Average of polls divided by 4 - 7.3


Show me something substantial that counters those numbers

[ShockMe300]

I'll be honest. I like to play devil's advocate. I don't have the time or desire to do the research you have access to. What I will say is this. You said those are computer generated numbers. RPI's and polls are all derived from human input. Yes, the computers do a lot of work a lot faster. Big East schools RPI's etc. look better because they play each other and ESPN analysts and others assume that makes them better. For example, take Villanova or Marquette out of the Big East, same team, same players same coach, and put them in the Valley. What does that do to their RPI? What about the Big XII? What about the Pac 10? Do they make the tournament with the same conference record? Probably not. What's different? The conference? That makes them better? I don't see how.

The only "point" I can make, isn't very good because, as you said before, anyone can beat anyone on any given day. I mentioned it before, and I'll mention it again. The NCAA tournament is my example. Look at what happened today. I don't understand how Uconn deserves a 3 seed by finishing at 9-9 in the conference and winning the tournament. I don't understand how they can still be ranked in the top 10. They should not be getting the cakewalk they are getting with Bucknell. They should have some competition in the first round. Are they even ranked at the end of the year if they get the loss they deserved in Maui? The only proving ground is teams playing each other. Until that happens, there's only one way to determine who's the best. Some teams just get preferential treatment based on location, population of the area they are in, and of course, the conference. It's no different in football, except there is a "real" champion crowned at the end of the best month of the year.

[lostshocker]

Show me something substantial that counters those numbers

your numbers are skewed. you wont look beyond what you want them to tell you. when a top 10 team loses by 22 at HOME, that team shouldnt be ranked in the top 25 at all the next week. but yet after losing a second game that week there they were still in the top 20. guess what, that loss just pulled up the numbers of the other team. funny how that happens.

as for the computer part, who determines what input goes into the computer? it's still biased by human thought processes.

[The Mad Hatter]

Wichita State - NIT
RPI - 51
Pomeroy - 46
Sagarin - 48
Average of polls divided by 4 - 12.1

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

lostshocker, do you have a better suggestion for ranking teams? I mentioned that those computer rankings were all completely different formulas just to point out that different formulas end up providing similar results. While the RPI is strictly wins and losses, Ken Pomeroy's ratings don't even count wins and losses at all. It seems that you (like many others) want to complain and complain without offering any solutions. When talking heads use "the eye test", everyone on Shockernet complains. When the computer rankings are roughly followed, more complaints follow. What would YOU do?

The Mad Hatter, I commend you for a solid post. Short, concise, point made, logical. My thought is that considering a 12 seed is usually the last seed to be filled with atlarge teams, WSU is clearly a bubble team by those numbers. Considering WSU played poorly down the stretch and had 0 quality wins, it seems logical that the Committee would knock WSU down a notch, leaving them in the NIT. Heck, look at Villanova. Their computer profile averaged out to a 7.3, yet they received a 9 seed and many on here were complaining about them still being overrated. Once again, I commend you for your post, but I think an honest evaluation shows why WSU was given slightly less than what their computer numbers suggested they deserved.

[NCAABound]

Imagine a conference where your RPI isn't inflated by playing other teams with inflated RPI's.

You get 5-7 gimmee's from the bottom 5 dogs (who by the way also have inflated RPI's because they play such a tough schedule in the BE). Then if you pick up another 3-4 wins somewhere - you're golden.

I can't believe I joined this debate. You should probably start a Big East blog.

[The Mad Hatter]

Comparison of Valley Schools

Wichita State - NIT
RPI - 51
Pomeroy - 46
Sagarin - 48
Average of polls divided by 4 - 12.1

Missouri State - NIT
RPI - 36
Pomeroy - 74
Sagarin - 63
Average of polls divided by 4 - 14.4

[The Mad Hatter]

Comparison of 12 Seeds

Utah St. - 12 Seed
RPI - 17
Pomeroy - 26
Sagarin - 20
Average of polls divided by 4 - 5.3

Richmond - 12 Seed
RPI - 35
Pomeroy - 42
Sagarin - 30
Average of polls divided by 4 - 8.9

Clemson - 12 Seed
RPI - 55
Pomeroy - 38
Sagarin - 23
Average of polls divided by 4 - 9.6

Memphis - 12 Seed
RPI - 30
Pomeroy - 72
Sagarin - 89
Average of polls divided by 4 - 15.9