MVC conference games

[MadaboutWu]

Some of our opponents must have tanked this week too. But yet our RPI is up. Makes no sense.

Our ooc opponents did struggle, so that was part of it. Our rpi is up because the Valley went 7-3 in BB, we beat a top #75 team and at least some of the Valley losses didn't hurt their rpi: CU seemed to have inched up some too even with a loss based on the Valley's performance and the fact that losing to a top 40 rpi team on the road is no big deal for rpi if you are around 45 yourself.

[AndShock]

Perhaps the Valley will re-think using non-con SOS after this. WSU and CU's opponents were only about 20 RPI spots apart with WSU beating the lower one at home and CU losing to the higher on the road. Result: What looked like an insurmountable SOS lead for WSU turned into a huge gain for CU (in spite of losing) in the SOS rankings to lead WSU (in spite of winning). Just what did the teams do with those SOS rankings? WSU turned it into a 30 non-con RPI ranking while CU ended up at 41. So which one actually helped the Valley more?

Leave it to the Valley to screw up a good idea with good intentions.

On the other hand, this was probably their plan the whole time...

[bunck]

The way the rpi has swung is really lame but I don't know why everyone is getting so worked up about it because we are going to drop the hammer on them in Omaha for a second straight year and this tie break won't even matter.

[MadaboutWu]

Perhaps the Valley will re-think using non-con SOS after this. WSU and CU's opponents were only about 20 RPI spots apart with WSU beating the lower one at home and CU losing to the higher on the road. Result: What looked like an insurmountable SOS lead for WSU turned into a huge gain for CU (in spite of losing) in the SOS rankings to lead WSU (in spite of winning). Just what did the teams do with those SOS rankings? WSU turned it into a 30 non-con RPI ranking while CU ended up at 41. So which one actually helped the Valley more?

Any second tie-breaker is bound to be pretty inane. I like this one in that it encourages tougher scheduling. Being separated from CU by about 10-15 slots is essentially a coin flip. It just sucks that it was our invitational tournament and BB that did us in.

[shoxlax]

Go Bradley!

[jdmee]

I like that in encourages tougher scheduling, but I don't like the fact that is doesn't award results. UNI has the toughest schedule, but with their results were the really ever in the hunt for an at large?

[Ta town]

UNI has the toughest schedule, but with their results were the really ever in the hunt for an at large?

Uh apparently you give no weight to the CFI (Cedar Falls Index) as it has projected UNI in all season long.

Panther Perceived class is the biggest factor in the CFI. Second factor is how many crew cuts are on the roster. 3rd factor is how nice your head coach is from the panther perspective.

[SB Shock]

I like that in encourages tougher scheduling, but I don't like the fact that is doesn't award results. UNI has the toughest schedule, but with their results were the really ever in the hunt for an at large?

They might have been if they had actually done well.

Here is a bigger issue - what if the EU game doesn't get played. If it doesn't get played there will be an out right winner based on the game in Omaha.

[ShockBand]

Or would they push the Evansville game to Thursday.

[newshock1234]

the Evansville game will get played

[ShockerFever]

Uh apparently you give no weight to the CFI (Cedar Falls Index) as it has projected UNI in all season long.

Panther Perceived class is the biggest factor in the CFI. Second factor is how many crew cuts are on the roster. 3rd factor is how nice your head coach is from the panther perspective.

That nice head coach of theirs has scoreboard on technical fouls this year over Marshall.

The UNI bubble talk by their fans has simmered a bit since their turd against Denver at home. Just wait til after a win or two and they'll be back on it.

[ShockTalk]

Any second tie-breaker is bound to be pretty inane. I like this one in that it encourages tougher scheduling. Being separated from CU by about 10-15 slots is essentially a coin flip. It just sucks that it was our invitational tournament and BB that did us in.

I like that in encourages tougher scheduling, but I don't like the fact that is doesn't award results. UNI has the toughest schedule, but with their results were the really ever in the hunt for an at large?

Generally speaking, you don't get a higher non-con RPI without a tougher schedule and doing more with it.

12-1 non-con record.......11-2 non-con record

Team - NC RPI/NC SOS

Kansas -- 6 / 24 ........... NC St ----- 19 / 55
WSU ----10 / 67 ........... Creighton- 21 / 51
Butler ---14 / 47 ........... CO St ---- 25 / 123
Indiana--17 / 78 ........... Missouri-- 27 / 103
Pitt ----- 53 / 258 ......... Oregon -- 67 / 248

You will note that within the "same record" group, higher SOS does not neccesarily mean a higher RPI. See WSU vs Butler, NC St vs Creighton, and CO St vs Missouri.

Note: Numbers from RPIForecast.com

[SB Shock]

I refuse to believe there was that kind of movement in 1 week. If those numbers are indeed accurate, then the previous numbers were bogus unless someone can show me the math. Kind of BS if you ask me, but oh well. I guess the guys will just have to go win 2 more and make that number irrelevant.

I would say MVC is math deficient. By inspection you can tell that CU non-conference schedule is stronger than WSU (before or after bracketbuster).

[WuDrWu]

I agree. However the previous "rankings" were released, the numbers were wrong. If indeed they came from the Valley offices, they should be ashamed of themselves, but it's about par for the course for this 2 bit league.

I wouldn't be surprised if they charged WSU more than the other schools for the fake numbers.

[ShockerFever]

I agree. However the previous "rankings" were released, the numbers were wrong. If indeed they came from the Valley offices, they should be ashamed of themselves, but it's about par for the course for this 2 bit league.

I wouldn't be surprised if they charged WSU more than the other schools for the fake numbers.

Honestly, how could a conference office fudge up something that important so badly?