Are we still supposedly a top 30 team?
Rpi update?
4,343 Views |
50 Replies |
Last: 6 yr ago by PJYoung
why do people get upset that the computers like us? i thought our schtick was complaining that everyone hates usAston04 said:
Are we still supposedly a top 30 team?
Just weird how it's playing out this year. Field sucks I guess.
I remember in past years we would fight and claw for our place and there was a sense of pride about it. Like bcg's first season when we went to the nit. Still very proud of that team.
It shockingly only fell from 21 to 25.
https://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/rankings/nitty-gritty-report
https://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/rankings/nitty-gritty-report
This late in the season it takes a lot to change your RPI much.
But it's worth noting again that your actual RPI isn't really very important.
But it's worth noting again that your actual RPI isn't really very important.
What measure(s) are the committee relying on this year? How do we stand at this point? How damaging was that last loss? Surely, if we lose 3 more in a row we are in trouble, right?
Crazy the next 3 games could swing us from a 5-6 seed to out, if reading the tea leaves correctly. Of course tourney results will factor in too.
Crazy the next 3 games could swing us from a 5-6 seed to out, if reading the tea leaves correctly. Of course tourney results will factor in too.
The committee tell you it's all about quadrants.
The major conference team field will look like it is pulled directly from the RPI rankings, just like every year.
The major conference team field will look like it is pulled directly from the RPI rankings, just like every year.
Aston04 said:
What measure(s) are the committee relying on this year? How do we stand at this point? How damaging was that last loss? Surely, if we lose 3 more in a row we are in trouble, right?
Crazy the next 3 games could swing us from a 5-6 seed to out, if reading the tea leaves correctly. Of course tourney results will factor in too.
If we lose the next 3 that puts us at 6-12 in conference and probably in last place in the sec...so yes Shirley, we would be in trouble.
Aston04 said:
What measure(s) are the committee relying on this year? How do we stand at this point? How damaging was that last loss? Surely, if we lose 3 more in a row we are in trouble, right?
Crazy the next 3 games could swing us from a 5-6 seed to out, if reading the tea leaves correctly. Of course tourney results will factor in too.
2 more conference wins and we are in.
1 more conference win and 3 SEC Tournament wins and we are in.
1 more conference win and 2 SEC Tournament wins and we are likely in... very strong bubble at worst.
RPI is important, but your specific RPI isn't, if that makes sense.
Like the committee never says in interviews "A&M had a strong RPI of 25, so that's why..."
It's always "They played 7 top 30 opponents, had a strength of schedule of 15" or whatever.
So it's less about what your actual RPI is, and more about the other stuff
So, for us, we have a strength of schedule of 6, including a non-con SOS of 18. We've also played 12 "quadrant one" games, which is a lot, and we have some good wins compared to other teams.
The problem for us isn't really in our current resume, it's what direction we're trending. Last night was our worst loss of the season (if you assume the committee factors in injuries), and if we lose at Vandy then that would be our worst loss of the season.
It's like if you took a picture of a NASCAR race, right now we're in the middle of the pack, so if you're doing a mock bracket based on today's numbers, our resume is still pretty good. But in the photo you can see that we've sprung a leak and our engine could be about to explode.
Like the committee never says in interviews "A&M had a strong RPI of 25, so that's why..."
It's always "They played 7 top 30 opponents, had a strength of schedule of 15" or whatever.
So it's less about what your actual RPI is, and more about the other stuff
So, for us, we have a strength of schedule of 6, including a non-con SOS of 18. We've also played 12 "quadrant one" games, which is a lot, and we have some good wins compared to other teams.
The problem for us isn't really in our current resume, it's what direction we're trending. Last night was our worst loss of the season (if you assume the committee factors in injuries), and if we lose at Vandy then that would be our worst loss of the season.
It's like if you took a picture of a NASCAR race, right now we're in the middle of the pack, so if you're doing a mock bracket based on today's numbers, our resume is still pretty good. But in the photo you can see that we've sprung a leak and our engine could be about to explode.
Yeah, one thing we don't really know yet is how obsessed the committee is really going to be with this quadrant thing. Like, I really hope they aren't lumping wins over top ten teams in with wins over teams ranked in the sixties in their conversations but they very well might be.
This is also the first year that there are other metrics on the team sheet. The RPI, Kevin Pauga and ESPN's strength of record are on there as result-based metrics, as are BPI, KenPom and Sagarin as predictive-based metrics. We have no idea if the committee is really going to look at that info much.
There are a few new variables this year.
This is also the first year that there are other metrics on the team sheet. The RPI, Kevin Pauga and ESPN's strength of record are on there as result-based metrics, as are BPI, KenPom and Sagarin as predictive-based metrics. We have no idea if the committee is really going to look at that info much.
There are a few new variables this year.
Rip report is more like it
Using any metric other than rpi and we are squarely on the bubble right now. Obviously how we finish these last 3 will make all the difference, but it is pretty clear rpi values us a lot more than pretty much any other metric.
RPI? More like RIP...
The Kevin Pauga Index actually likes us a little better than RPI (22 vs 25) but we're not really right on the bubble from the predictive metrics eithers. We're #39 in BPI, #34 in KenPom and #34 in Sagarin which, when you remove the conference champions, (ACC, Big East, Big 12, SEC, Mountain West, American, Pac 12, Big Ten, A-10) that are ahead of us would put us at 30, 25 and 25. Say an average of 26.7 puts us about 10 spots clear of the bubble right now.
bobinator said:
Yeah, one thing we don't really know yet is how obsessed the committee is really going to be with this quadrant thing. Like, I really hope they aren't lumping wins over top ten teams in with wins over teams ranked in the sixties in their conversations but they very well might be.
This is also the first year that there are other metrics on the team sheet. The RPI, Kevin Pauga and ESPN's strength of record are on there as result-based metrics, as are BPI, KenPom and Sagarin as predictive-based metrics. We have no idea if the committee is really going to look at that info much.
There are a few new variables this year.
I think you or another poster brought it up and the commentators at halftime did as well that this whole quadrant thing is going to be evaluated very interestingly this year because it basically allows almost any SEC conference win to be a "Quadrant 1" win.
So our resume is still going to look pretty darn good with the Quadrant system. I just hope they don't look at every SEC team's resume looking that good and say "maybe we need to re-tweak this" as I'm sure if it was the Big 12 or ACC looking that way they'd say it's fine.
I think it's real hard for the committee to say "Alabama was a good win", even if they are.
In reality, the tweak should be to get rid of the rpi all together, but that is a whole other conversation.
RPI is funny in that if a youth team of 5 year olds played top 10 teams all 30 games during the season and lost by 200 every game without scoring a point, and the Golden State Warriors played UTSA every game and won all games by 60, RPI would have the five year olds ranked much higher than Steph Curry and crew
RPI doesn't mind loses that aren't " bad " I think losing is bad and why I don't look at RPI.
Bingo.
Trust your eyes, this team is bad. If they make the tourney so be it, but that won't change the results with lack of effort. Poorly coached and disciplined.
I think any switch flipping should've happened after the one good SEC week. Quickly went back to junk. Reason I never bought into the idea that injury's or suspensions were as big a problem with the product. Team had enough to not be awful. And now we see something is sour.
The RPI being the sole basis for the team sheets is really bad when there are other metrics readily available. They have a metrics average on the sheet, why not just use that for the whole sheet?
The suspensions were probably more indicative of the underlying problem than being a problem in and of themselves.
But lack of leadership is the obvious problem. With Wilson now out we don't have any at all and it shows. We've gotten our asses kicked in every game without him.
But lack of leadership is the obvious problem. With Wilson now out we don't have any at all and it shows. We've gotten our asses kicked in every game without him.
RPI soley rewards teams in big leagues who can just play and play ok to good teams. Kills good small teams who don't get opportunity's. And anything that can move you up with a loss is awful.
Not really...
This year the RPI has a few smaller conference teams ranked WAY above other metrics.
Rhode Island, for example is 8 in the RPI, 17 points higher than they are in KPI, 9 higher than in ESPN's SOR, and 23 spots better than the predictive-based metrics average.
It's the same with Middle Tennessee, they're 21 in the RPI, significantly higher than they are in any other ranking (SOR has them 26, the next highest) and WAY higher than their predictive-based average of 49.
And the last part of your statement is just flat out wrong. Every system, including the brain of a regular human, could move you up with a loss. Barely losing to a very good team can be an objectively better result than beating a bad team.
This year the RPI has a few smaller conference teams ranked WAY above other metrics.
Rhode Island, for example is 8 in the RPI, 17 points higher than they are in KPI, 9 higher than in ESPN's SOR, and 23 spots better than the predictive-based metrics average.
It's the same with Middle Tennessee, they're 21 in the RPI, significantly higher than they are in any other ranking (SOR has them 26, the next highest) and WAY higher than their predictive-based average of 49.
And the last part of your statement is just flat out wrong. Every system, including the brain of a regular human, could move you up with a loss. Barely losing to a very good team can be an objectively better result than beating a bad team.
Rhode Island plays in an ok conference. RPI killed Wichita State prior to leaving the Valley.
Heck no a loss isn't good. Good gravy rewarding teams for losing is not good. I'm not saying you should get killed for losing to a good team. But being rewarded isn't ok.
RPI is going away because of rewarding loses.
There's no doubt the RPI has a hard time with teams with absolutely absurdly bad schedules, that's why it shouldn't be the only tool the team sheet is based on. I'm certainly not defending the RPI as a metric, I think it has its problems also, but I think the statement that it "solely rewards teams in big leagues" isn't true.
It rewards teams that win a lot and teams that play a lot of good teams.
It rewards teams that win a lot and teams that play a lot of good teams.
There's no way to design a metric based system where every loss is bad, that would be insane. I'd love to hear your theory on how that would work.
I think the first clear sign that there was potential for a bust was the Alabama game. We should have lost. Losing by 23 showed that either A) Our coach was/is unable to make any adjustments with a handicapped roster or B) Our players quit or C) Both.
Maybe the rice loss
Agreed. Flashbacked to previous seasons - where the effort given was embarrassingfree_mhayden said:
I think the first clear sign that there was potential for a bust was the Alabama game. We should have lost. Losing by 23 showed that either A) Our coach was/is unable to make any adjustments with a handicapped roster or B) Our players quit or C) Both.
Featured Stories
See All
2025 Prosper offensive lineman Connor Carty commits to Texas A&M
by Jason Howell
37:35
5h ago
3.5k
The Loochador Podcast: Maroon & White Game storylines abound
by Billy Liucci
6:33
5h ago
1.8k
In-Home Visit: Carty provides more Metroplex muscle for Maroon Goons
by TexAgs Recruiting
7:40
5h ago
18k
2025 OL Connor Carty calls committing to A&M a 'dream come true'
by Jason Howell
0:00
10h ago
4.5k
Struggle and Strifer
2025 Prosper offensive lineman Connor Carty commits to Texas A&M
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
73
rocketman1806
BSB: Thursday's A&M-Alabama game postponed, Friday DH
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
51