IMO Airforce is in for sure. They were ranked in the Top 25 for most of the season. They have a couple of quality wins, and a respectable RPI.
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">IMO Airforce is in for sure. They were ranked in the Top 25 for most of the season. They have a couple of quality wins, and a respectable RPI.</div> A lot of it has to do with how you finish though. Oklahoma State, for example, was a top ten team as recently as January, but then they went on a collapse similar to the one Air Force has gone on, and now they're a real stretch for the tourny as a result. I think I probably jumped the gun by calling Air Force a lock, because I really think they're on the outside looking in at the moment. 1-4 in their last five, including losses to TCU and Wyoming? That's pretty ugly. What does everyone think about Vanderbilt? I always thought they were a lock, but I just overheard some analyst on ESPN radio saying they should be out at the moment in favor of Old Dominion. Thoughts?
Yeah ESPN is slamming Air Force right now. I still say Pac-10 gets in six teams, with Stanford being the 6th one. They did struggle down the stretch, but the reason they were losing was the injury to Aaron Goods. He missed 6 straight games.
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post"> I still say Pac-10 gets in six teams, with Stanford being the 6th one. They did struggle down the stretch, but the reason they were losing was the injury to Aaron Goods. He missed 6 straight games.</div> Stanford is no longer safe. I think their resume is good, but the RPI is weak and they're on a slide. The NCAA might leave Stanford out, which would be a shame, because they have a very talented team...
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Yeah it's tough, there's a lot of teams in the discussion. I'd probably use the LRPI to sort through them. Current LRPI <u> Breakdown by LRPI</u> Drexel - 20 Air Force - 33 Illinois - 40 Kansas State - 44 Syracuse - 51 Texas Tech - 65 Purdue - 93 Georgia Tech - 101 <u>Breakdown by RPI</u> Illinois - 31 Air Force - 32 Drexel - 38 Purdue - 41 Syracuse - 51 Georgia Tech - 52 Texas Tech - 53 Kansas State - 56</div> What exactly is the LRPI? My introduction to that was seeing teams like Sam Houston, TAMU-CC, and Belmont ranked over Michigan State the other week. After that, I've been a real skeptic of it. As for the RPI's you posted, I think it's interesting to note that the most qualified bubble team RPI-wise, Illinois, is also probably the least qualified of the bunch overall. They're 2-10 against teams that are projected in the tournament, they just lost two of their best players, and they have no marquee wins. In fact, I think the strongest resumes are actually the lowest teams in the RPI. I'd take Texas Tech long before I'd take Drexel. What does everyone think about Drexel anyway? I think that if they get in, Old Dominion's got to get in as well. Drexel did fairly decent in their nonconference schedule, but they didn't dominate the Colonial like Old Dominion did, and they got beat both of the times they went up against them. Both of them should probably be out, but hopefully, if only one gets in, it's Old Dominion.
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">LRPI shows how a team performs away from their homecourt.</div> I think that's a horrible predictor of tournament success. Last year aside, the Big Ten is historically one of the top conferences as far as tournament play goes, and yet nobody ever wins on the road in the Big Ten. It just doesn't happen outside of Northwestern and Penn State; teams are too good in their home gyms. Take Michigan State for example. They were able to beat Texas on the road, but then they lost by 24 at Purdue's home gym. Wisconsin, for example, beat Marquette on the road, but then they lost at Michigan State's home gym.
<div class="quote_poster">UKFan33 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Stanford is no longer safe. I think their resume is good, but the RPI is weak and they're on a slide. The NCAA might leave Stanford out, which would be a shame, because they have a very talented team...</div> Their last 2 losses have been because of a food poisoning problem their whole team has had. They got it the day before last Saturday's game against Arizona and only had 6 or 7 players that could actually play. They had their 12th man go off and keep them in the game against Arizona. Then they barely had time to practice going into this week's tourney. Even Trent Johnson had, so it was pretty bad
<div class="quote_poster">Voodoo Child Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I think that's a horrible predictor of tournament success. Last year aside, the Big Ten is historically one of the top conferences as far as tournament play goes, and yet nobody ever wins on the road in the Big Ten. It just doesn't happen outside of Northwestern and Penn State; teams are too good in their home gyms. Take Michigan State for example. They were able to beat Texas on the road, but then they lost by 24 at Purdue's home gym. Wisconsin, for example, beat Marquette on the road, but then they lost at Michigan State's home gym.</div> I disagree, and I don't know what your example proves. Michigan State wins at Texas, that's a quality win. Michigan State beats Ohio State at home, but according to you, home teams usually win in the Big 10, so a home win by Michigan State is something they should accomplish. Michigan State ranks very low on the LRPI because they've been terrible away from home. On the season they're 1-8 on the road. The LRPI obviously isn't perfect, but I like using it to decide between two teams who have similar resumes. It takes out the built in advantages homecourt gives you. Belmont might have a higher LRPI than Michigan State, but you wouldn't use the LRPI to determine who's the better team out of the two. They don't have comparable resumes so it shouldn't hold much weight. MSU has played a much tougher schedule and are in a superior conference. However, if you compare MSU to a team closer to the same resume as them, I would favor the team with the better LRPI, because it would indicate to me, on a neutral site the team with the better LRPI would likely win head to head.
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I disagree, and I don't know what your example proves. Michigan State wins at Texas, that's a quality win. Michigan State beats Ohio State at home, but according to you, home teams usually win in the Big 10, so a home win by Michigan State is something they should accomplish.</div> What? Is that a hypothetical example? MSU never beat OSU. I don't see what's so hard to understand about it. Michigan State can beat good teams on the road, but not in-conference. In the Big 10, even mediocre teams like Purdue will have their way with them. What's so hard to understand about that? Conference road wins in the Big 10 just aren't going to happen. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Michigan State ranks very low on the LRPI because they've been terrible away from home. On the season they're 1-8 on the road.</div> That's simply not true though. They're actually 3-8 on the road. They've beaten Texas, BYU, and Penn State. Two of those three teams are top 25 teams. It's also a biased way of looking at things, because Michigan State got a much stronger Big 10 schedule than any other school. They showed a graphic during the Illinois/Wisconsin game today that showed the difficulty of the Big 10 schedules based on opponent winning %'s, and Michigan State had the strongest in-conference schedule. By that, I mean that instead of playing Northwestern twice, Penn State twice, Minnesota twice, etc., they played them all once, and then they went out and played Wisconsin three times, Ohio State twice, Indiana twice, etc. So Michigan State's road games were tougher than the average team, even in the Big 10. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">LRPI obviously isn't perfect, but I like using it to decide between two teams who have similar resumes. It takes out the built in advantages homecourt gives you. Belmont might have a higher LRPI than Michigan State, but you wouldn't use the LRPI to determine who's the better team out of the two. They don't have comparable resumes so it shouldn't hold much weight. MSU has played a much tougher schedule and are in a superior conference. However, if you compare MSU to a team closer to the same resume as them, I would favor the team with the better LRPI, because it would indicate to me, on a neutral site the team with the better LRPI would likely win head to head.</div> Why do you need some formula to tell you that a team has won a lot of games at home though? It's obviously flawed anyway. Besides, since when does road success equate to tournament success? Like I said earlier, the Big 10 is usually oen of the strongest conferences in the post season, but they beat eachother up on the road. Last year's national champ, Florida, for example, was largely a home-court team. They wound up only losing two games at home and played almost all of their non-conference games in their own gym. That didn't stop them from going deep in March though, did it?
Michigan 1-8 on the road MSU was 3-2 on neutral sites. So 4-10 overall away from home. Sorry I put Ohio State, it should be Wisconsin. Michigan State winning big games on the road boosts their LRPI. If they can't win road games in their own conference, they shouldn't be rewarded for it. I don't understand why you keep saying the LRPI is flawed. It's just one variable to look at to help you base your decision. Road success has always equated to post-season success. Florida was 8-4 on the road last season. The average points they lost by on the road last year was only 5 points.
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Michigan 1-8 on the road MSU was 3-2 on neutral sites. So 4-10 overall away from home. Sorry I put Ohio State, it should be Wisconsin. Michigan State winning big games on the road boosts their LRPI. If they can't win road games in their own conference, they shouldn't be rewarded for it. I don't understand why you keep saying the LRPI is flawed. It's just one variable to look at to help you base your decision.</div> I'm not saying Michigan State should be rewarded for not winning on the road, but they shouldn't be penalized either, because no one in the Big 10 wins on the road. Wisconsin couldn't even win at Michigan State. Only one team in the Big 10 did all year, and that was the #1 team in the nation, Ohio State. It puts teams in conferences like the Big 10 at a disadvantage because of that. It's not like they're playing in the C-USA. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Road success has always equated to post-season success. Florida was 8-4 on the road last season. The average points they lost by on the road last year was only 5 points.</div> They were 8-4, but they only lost six games the whole year. They were much more of a homecourt team.
Let's use some 2007 examples. These teams have comparable numbers (RPI, SOS, Record.) I'm contesting the LRPI seperates the better teams from the sample group. <div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><br/>Michigan State SOS - 9 RPI - 23<br/>Maryland SOS - 10 RPI - 16<br/>Marquette SOS - 12 RPI - 21<br/>Villanova SOS - 7 RPI - 19<br/>Tennessee SOS - 4 RPI - 11<br/></div> Based on those variables, these teams have played a similar schedule and have had similar results. Now we look at LRPI of each team. <div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><br/>Marquette LRPI - 10<br/>Villanova LRPI - 14<br/>Maryland LRPI- 22<br/>Michigan State LRPI - 71<br/>Tennessee LRPI - 73<br/></div> So according to the LRPI Marquette should be considered the best out of that group and Tennessee is last.
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Let's use some 2007 examples. These teams have comparable numbers (RPI, SOS, Record.) I'm contesting the LRPI seperates the better teams from the sample group. <div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><br/>Michigan State SOS - 9 RPI - 23<br/>Maryland SOS - 10 RPI - 16<br/>Marquette SOS - 12 RPI - 21<br/>Villanova SOS - 7 RPI - 19<br/>Tennessee SOS - 4 RPI - 11<br/></div> Based on those variables, these teams have played a similar schedule and have had similar results. Now we look at LRPI of each team. <div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><br/>Marquette LRPI - 10<br/>Villanova LRPI - 14<br/>Maryland LRPI- 22<br/>Michigan State LRPI - 71<br/>Tennessee LRPI - 73<br/></div> So according to the LRPI Marquette should be considered the best out of that group and Tennessee is last.</div> Maryland is better than Michiagn State, but by 49 places?!?! That's a little extreme. They played earlier this year at a neutral site, and the end result was a last-minute two point win for the Terps. And Tennessee is way better than #73. They played some great teams away from home, like Ohio State, North Carolina, Florida, and Butler. Those are some tough games regardless of location. I don't think they should be penalized for losing all those games, nor for beating teams like Memphis, Florida, or a streaking Oklahoma State at home. Either way, I think we can both agree that there's no perfect statistical measure of a team success, and you have to consider a variety of factors. I think road success is important, but I'm just a little more skeptical than most about measuring it with statistics.
Well I don't look at it as Maryland is 49 spots better because they have a higher LRPI. I just view them as having a better chance to win on a neutral court if they faced MSU, who has a higher LRPI. I agree statistics can't measure everything, but it's a fair starting point.
Here are my updated predictions: <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"><font size=""1"">1 seeds – Ohio State Kansas North Carolina Florida 2 seeds – UCLA Georgetown Wisconsin Memphis 3 seeds – Texas A&M Oregon Pittsburgh Southern Illinois 4 seeds – Washington State Texas UNLV Nevada 5 seeds – Maryland Louisville Creighton Notre Dame 6 seeds – Tennessee Duke Butler BYU 7 seeds – Marquette Virginia Winthrop Xavier 8 seeds – Virginia Tech Southern Cal Kentucky Arizona 9 seeds – Boston College Vanderbilt Syracuse Indiana 10 seeds – Villanova Michigan State Texas Tech Georgia Tech 11 seeds – Purdue VCU Kansas State Stanford 12 seeds – Air Force Gonzaga Davidson New Mexico State 13 seeds – George Washington Wright State TAMU-CC Holy Cross 14 seeds – Pennsylvania Oral Roberts Long Beach State Albany 15 seeds – Miami (OH) Belmont North Texas Eastern Kentucky 16 seeds – Niagra Weber State Central Connecticut State * Jackson State * Florida A&M </font></div>
It looks like we've got one less team to worry about with Wisconsin falling. And if Kansas can't wrap this one up against Texas, the picture might actually become pretty clear. 1 Seeds: Ohio State, North Carolina, Florida, UCLA 2 Seeds: Kansas, Georgetown, Wisconsin, Texas A&M/Memphis/Oregon
Something tells me that Georgetown is going to get that last #1 seed...but that's if Texas takes out Kansas in overtime. If Kansas wins, i'd put them in as a #1 seed and remove UCLA from the list...
<div class="quote_poster">UKFan33 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Something tells me that Georgetown is going to get that last #1 seed...but that's if Texas takes out Kansas in overtime. If Kansas wins, i'd put them in as a #1 seed and remove UCLA from the list...</div> They said something interesting on ESPN the other day. Did you know that no team has pulled off a #1 seed after losing their last two games of the season since Ohio State did it in 1991? That doesn't bode well for the Bruins. EDIT: It looks like Kansas has this won. So now it'll be coming down to UCLA or Florida, with Georgetown having an outside chance. I think that Florida will get the nod having won their conference tournament, but if I were personally in charge, I'd give it to UCLA.
Well, it looks like Kansas is going to hold on to win this one... My guess would be- OSU, Florida, UNC, Kansas I would love to see Georgetown get a #1, though...
