I think Jay Bilas' head is going to explode. And Dick Vitalecompared VCU and UAB to Rosanne Barr and Virginia Tech and Colorado to Scarlet Johansson
ESPN talking heads are in hysterics over UAB and VCU getting in
- Thread starter o_riverdawg
- Start date
...but they're being unfair to UAB. They won their league's regular season and they have a 31 RPI. Bilas said he bets UAB was surprised too, but I am fairly certain they expected to get in.
Bubble team RPI:
UAB 31
Harvard 35
UCLA 43
St. Mary's 45
Georgia 48
VCU 49
Clemson 57
Marquette 64
Colorado 65
USC 69
Alabama 80
Looking at this, it's difficult to say UAB doesn't deserve it. Colorado probably should be in by virtue of who they beat, but they also played a terrible non-conference schedule. Clemson, VCU, Marquette, and especially USC are far less deserving than UAB.
And for those pining for Alabama to make it, their RPI was only two spots higher than Ole Miss. So there you have it.
Bubble team RPI:
UAB 31
Harvard 35
UCLA 43
St. Mary's 45
Georgia 48
VCU 49
Clemson 57
Marquette 64
Colorado 65
USC 69
Alabama 80
Looking at this, it's difficult to say UAB doesn't deserve it. Colorado probably should be in by virtue of who they beat, but they also played a terrible non-conference schedule. Clemson, VCU, Marquette, and especially USC are far less deserving than UAB.
And for those pining for Alabama to make it, their RPI was only two spots higher than Ole Miss. So there you have it.
They beat Arkansas in Fayetteville, but that doesn't mean much lately. Beat VCU, the other suspect team. Lost to Memphis twice and Southern Miss. Killed by Duke.
CU beat K-State three times, Texas once, and Mizzou once. Sure, they had bad losses to USF, @OU, @NU and @ISU. But beating good teams has to mean something.
CU beat K-State three times, Texas once, and Mizzou once. Sure, they had bad losses to USF, @OU, @NU and @ISU. But beating good teams has to mean something.
But Bilas's point is that RPI is overvalued. He calls it "Really Poor Indicator" and I agree. I think it's the bane of college basketball and I hope it dies.
...all have blemishes. Sure, you can say UAB didn't beat anyone. But you also can say Colorado had a non conference SOS of 325 (!). Look, I would've had Colorado in my bracket ahead of Clemson, VCU, and even Marquette. I just think they're piling on UAB too much. A 31 RPI and winning their league's regular season title has to count for something. And I know C-USA has been a punch line recently, but they were much improved this year,
...the bane of college basketball is putting teams like Marquette, Penn State,and Clemsonin the tourney by virtue of the conferences they played in. The RPI isn't perfect, but it rewards teams who win games and play tougher schedules. It shouldn't be the end-all, be-all, but it's a valuable measure.
Since you asked, I'll give you an answer. It doesn't matter. You look at the whole body of work.Those games against Washington State, Hawaii,East Tennessee State, and Florida Atlantic count too. You can't dismiss them because they were early in the year. They aren't any less embarrassing because we somehow found a way to win a couple of games late in the year.
That said, we did have losses to Auburn and LSU late in the season, so I would say, yeah, it was the same old inconsistent bunch.
That said, we did have losses to Auburn and LSU late in the season, so I would say, yeah, it was the same old inconsistent bunch.
especially since you are a Rocket Scientist!
But here is the truth, that GD computer progams that figures all of this, Can't see it either!
But here is the truth, that GD computer progams that figures all of this, Can't see it either!
Not saying we "deserve" to be in the tourney, but the RPI formula has hurt its credibility with me. I think it needs to be tossed in favor of actual analysis of the game of basketball.
14 losses? 19-14 and you get in the NCAA tournament? That is a joke. Looking at cbssports rpi rankings, USC isn't even in the top 50. Well maybe their SOS is high you ask? Not even top 30..
Tennessee also got in at 19-14 which I also disagree with because 14 losses and below 20 wins is just stupid to warrant a NCAA bid. The only break they get is their SOS is top 3.. but whatever
Tennessee also got in at 19-14 which I also disagree with because 14 losses and below 20 wins is just stupid to warrant a NCAA bid. The only break they get is their SOS is top 3.. but whatever
The eye test is becoming less a factor, and every year it seems the committee looks at a different part of the season more importantly than the other part. Bama clearly deserves to be in. 12-4 in conference, beat Georgia, shared theregualr seasonchampionship and got to the conference semifinals,and are just plain better than Georgia. But Georgia gets a 10 seed and Bama is out. Georgia may have deserved to be in, but they didn't deserve to be in over Bama. Bama looks better, plays better, and has a better shot of advancing in the tournament.
Yeah, I'm looking at you USC, Tenn, Mich. State. I don't care if you lost to the top 14 seeds in the tournament, if you lose 14 times you should be playing in the NIT with the other ****** teams.
The fact that the Big East got 11 teams in is also a joke. I don't care how good those teams are, or that some of those teams have Georgetown and Villanova written on their jerseys. Nova lost 10 OF THEIR LAST 15 GAMES! How the 17 is that tournament worthy in any way?
Mich. State, USC, and Nova all got in simply because of the name on their jerseys, which is complete ********. Tennessee probably got in the same way.
I'm pretty sure that VCU and UAB only got in so that the committee can say they didn't cater to the big names (though they clearly did).
The fact that the Big East got 11 teams in is also a joke. I don't care how good those teams are, or that some of those teams have Georgetown and Villanova written on their jerseys. Nova lost 10 OF THEIR LAST 15 GAMES! How the 17 is that tournament worthy in any way?
Mich. State, USC, and Nova all got in simply because of the name on their jerseys, which is complete ********. Tennessee probably got in the same way.
I'm pretty sure that VCU and UAB only got in so that the committee can say they didn't cater to the big names (though they clearly did).