@GarryParrishCBS
Every eligible Power 5 school with a top-54 RPI made the NCAA Tournament. But eight non-Power 5 schools with top-54 RPIs did not.
kmacker69 wrote:Looks like I'll get to see both Butler and Providence in Raleigh!
DudeAnon wrote:f--- the P5@GarryParrishCBS
Every eligible Power 5 school with a top-54 RPI made the NCAA Tournament. But eight non-Power 5 schools with top-54 RPIs did not.
DudeAnon wrote:This advanced metrics stuff is bullsh--. RPI is really the only fair metric out there. St. Bonaventure should've been in. We need to go BCS model and make the RPI 2/3 of the calculation then human vote for the last 1/3rd.
Stop trying to justify the P5 f---ing over everyone else stever. I know you are new to this, but Georgetown is no longer a member of the P5 and could very easily be fucked just like SBU was tonight.
stever20 wrote:DudeAnon wrote:f--- the P5@GarryParrishCBS
Every eligible Power 5 school with a top-54 RPI made the NCAA Tournament. But eight non-Power 5 schools with top-54 RPIs did not.
and the 8-
30 St Bonnies
34 Akron
38 St Mary's
39 Princeton
45 UNC Wilmington
49 Valpo
52 Monmouth
54 Hofstra
hardly murderers row.
Also last year every P5 team in the RPI top 64 made the tournament. Last year there were 6 non P5 teams that missed the tourney.
XUFan09 wrote:DudeAnon wrote:This advanced metrics stuff is bullsh--. RPI is really the only fair metric out there. St. Bonaventure should've been in. We need to go BCS model and make the RPI 2/3 of the calculation then human vote for the last 1/3rd.
Stop trying to justify the P5 f---ing over everyone else stever. I know you are new to this, but Georgetown is no longer a member of the P5 and could very easily be fucked just like SBU was tonight.
Considering that the RPI is so inexact that even its creator says that it should only be used for ranges (e.g. 1-25, 101-200, etc), this would be a very bad idea. Also, Kenpom and other advanced metrics are often good to mid-majors, lending future credence to a good profile against a weaker SOS. In the end, though, the advanced metrics didn't have a disproportionate impact on seeding/selection either. They were just another piece of the puzzle, so I don't know why you're railing against them specifically.
DudeAnon wrote:This advanced metrics stuff is bullsh--. RPI is really the only fair metric out there. St. Bonaventure should've been in. We need to go BCS model and make the RPI 2/3 of the calculation then human vote for the last 1/3rd.
Stop trying to justify the P5 f---ing over everyone else stever. I know you are new to this, but Georgetown is no longer a member of the P5 and could very easily be fucked just like SBU was tonight.
stever20 wrote:DudeAnon wrote:This advanced metrics stuff is bullsh--. RPI is really the only fair metric out there. St. Bonaventure should've been in. We need to go BCS model and make the RPI 2/3 of the calculation then human vote for the last 1/3rd.
Stop trying to justify the P5 f---ing over everyone else stever. I know you are new to this, but Georgetown is no longer a member of the P5 and could very easily be fucked just like SBU was tonight.
There were 2 Big East teams 40 and 56 making it....
There were 3 AAC teams 48, 58, and 60 making it
The problem as has been said on here before is you can totally game the RPI. Is there anyone who thinks St Bonnies is 26 spots better than Butler? or South Dakota St is 12 spots better than Providence? No chance.
Also you have the BCS model backwards. It was 2/3 humans, 1/3 computers.
Return to Big East basketball message board
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 16 guests