UT's chance at March Madness

#77
#77
bleedingTNorange said:
So regarding Memphis, you're saying their RPI will stay in the 100s? So basically if they don't win C-USA tournament they're not getting in?
Click to expand...

I went back and looked at Memphis on rpiforcast. They show them at expected RPI of 53.1 and an overall record of 22-9, 12-4 in conference. So beating up on C-USA schools would get them well out of the 100's but will leave them on the bubble (RPI-wise)
 
#78
#78
MemphisCanes said:
It's going to be completely different in two months than what it is now. not even a third of the season has been played yet.
Click to expand...

Understood. But early season play is accounted for in RPI. A bad November and December can dig an RPI hole that cannot be climbed out of. Look at UT last year. There have been multiple SEC teams over the last few years have good January and February runs, only to be left out of the tourney because of woeful scheduling/performance in November and December.
 
#79
#79
johnnybravo said:
So it looks like these road games are already "must wins":

at Ole Miss
at Ark
at SC
at Vandy
at GA
at Aub

with acceptable losses at:
at Bama
at KY
at Texas A&M

Not so sure this team can win 6 SEC road games even against the teams listed.
Click to expand...

Losing at Ole Miss would be acceptable (from an RPI stand point). They have a solid team and a solid RPI. Honestly, I think it's one the Vols drop.

I don't think A&M is that good, they look to have beaten up on bad competition, so that would be a great opportunity for quality road win.
 
#80
#80
zansdad said:
Understood. But early season play is accounted for in RPI. A bad November and December can dig an RPI hole that cannot be climbed out of. Look at UT last year. There have been multiple SEC teams over the last few years have good January and February runs, only to be left out of the tourney because of woeful scheduling/performance in November and December.
Click to expand...

But you won't really know if your November/December schedule is bad until February, when the low and mid major teams get into their conference play.

I mean, you'll be able to tell that a loss to a low-major is bad, while a loss to a high-major is not so bad, but not to what extent until later in the season.
 
#81
#81
johnnybravo said:
So it looks like these road games are already "must wins":

at Ole Miss
at Ark
at SC
at Vandy
at GA
at Aub

with acceptable losses at:
at Bama
at KY
at Texas A&M

Not so sure this team can win 6 SEC road games even against the teams listed.
Click to expand...

I don't think ole miss is a must win, they're a good team, better than A&M IMO.
 
#82
#82
MemphisCanes said:
But you won't really know if your November/December schedule is bad until February, when the low and mid major teams get into their conference play.

I mean, you'll be able to tell that a loss to a low-major is bad, while a loss to a high-major is not so bad, but not to what extent until later in the season.
Click to expand...

True to a certain extent, but this thread is just a discussion and a discussion has to start somewhere. So, as I said in my first post, even though it's early there was nothing else going on yesterday.

Also, does "RPI in December not meaning anything" have anything to do with Memphis' horrible RPI currently? If they were sitting at an RPI in the top 10, I am sure you would be much more inclined to talk about its significance.
 
#84
#84
zansdad said:
Losing at Ole Miss would be acceptable (from an RPI stand point). They have a solid team and a solid RPI. Honestly, I think it's one the Vols drop.

I don't think A&M is that good, they look to have beaten up on bad competition, so that would be a great opportunity for quality road win.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was thinking Ole Miss could be a possible acceptable loss, but then I looked at the Home games we could possibly lose. We probably would have to pick up a tough home win if we drop the Ole Miss away game. Just looking at possibilities of losing:

Bama at home
KY at home
FL at home
Missouri at home

and adding road loses of
at Bama
at KY
at Texas A & M
then adding at Ole Miss

Would be too many loses on the year IMO. We may have to win Texas A & M and Ole Miss away.
 
Last edited:
#85
#85
zansdad said:
True to a certain extent, but this thread is just a discussion and a discussion has to start somewhere. So, as I said in my first post, even though it's early there was nothing else going on yesterday.

Also, does "RPI in December not meaning anything" have anything to do with Memphis' horrible RPI currently? If they were sitting at an RPI in the top 10, I am sure you would be much more inclined to talk about its significance.
Click to expand...

I don't know what Memphis' RPI is. I normally don't even pay attention to it until March.

RPI is meaning less and less to the committee anyways.
 
#86
#86
johnnybravo said:
Yeah, I was thinking Ole Miss could be a possible acceptable loss, but then I looked at the Home games we could possibly lose. We probably would have to pick up a tough home win if we drop the Ole Miss away game. Just looking at possibilities of losing:

Bama at home
KY at home
FL at home
Missouri at home

and adding road loses of
at Bama
at KY
at Texas A & M
then adding at Ole Miss

Would be too many loses on the year IMO. We may have to win Texas A & M and Ole Miss away.
Click to expand...

Good points. They would definitely need to pick up some good road wins if they drop all 4 home games against the better SEC teams. However, if they drop all 4 of those games at home, they are probably not an NCAA tourney quality team anyway, so it won't matter.
 
#88
#88
zansdad said:
Really? Where did you find this nugget of information?
Click to expand...

The fact that the Committee is now taking Kenpom and Sagarin ratings into account, because of the outcry against the RPI as a useful metric.

Look at some of the teams and where they were seeded last season. Memphis' final RPI on Selection Sunday was 20. They were seeded 8.

That's just off the top of my head.
 
#90
#90
calban said:
They may be looking for more sophisticated algorithms to calculate it , but RPI or equivalent is THE factor.
Click to expand...

Perhaps for inclusion in the dance, as opposed to seeding. But usually an RPI in the top 50 is what you need to get in the door. Then the committee seems to throw any given team's specific RPI rank out the window.
 
#91
#91
MemphisCanes said:
Perhaps for inclusion in the dance, as opposed to seeding. But usually an RPI in the top 50 is what you need to get in the door. Then the committee seems to throw any given team's specific RPI rank out the window.
Click to expand...
I'll buy that.
 
#92
#92
MemphisCanes said:
The fact that the Committee is now taking Kenpom and Sagarin ratings into account, because of the outcry against the RPI as a useful metric.

Look at some of the teams and where they were seeded last season. Memphis' final RPI on Selection Sunday was 20. They were seeded 8.

That's just off the top of my head.
Click to expand...

The committee has access to many tools. But at the end of the day RPI, quality wins and losses, and how a team plays on the road/at neutral sites is what gets a team in.

Memphis had an inflated RPI last year from abusing C-USA opponents but no quality wins. I would bet there Kenpom and Sagarin ratings were equally as high (those sight reward running up the score). Like right now Memphis is much higher in Kenpom and Sagarin than in RPI. Same goes for UK. RPI rewards winning on the road and SOS, which is what the NCAA wants to encourage. Those other 2 polls you you referenced reward running it up against bad competition<----what the NCAA would like to avoid.

RPI is what the committee uses in general. They may use other polls to HELP differentiate for seeding or between bubble teams. But a bad RPI is almost always going to keep a team out of the tourney.
 
#93
#93
MemphisCanes said:
Perhaps for inclusion in the dance, as opposed to seeding. But usually an RPI in the top 50 is what you need to get in the door. Then the committee seems to throw any given team's specific RPI rank out the window.
Click to expand...

That's not true actually but if it makes you feel better about Memphis' 8 seed last year, you go for it.

Besides, RPI has NEVER been the sole determining factor for seeding. If it was, then there would be no selection committee. They would just seed the teams 1-68 based on RPI and geography and just go at it.
 
#94
#94
zansdad said:
That's not true actually but if it makes you feel better about Memphis' 8 seed last year, you go for it.

Besides, RPI has NEVER been the sole determining factor for seeding. If it was, then there would be no selection committee. They would just seed the teams 1-68 based on RPI and geography and just go at it.
Click to expand...
He said pretty much the same thing you said and then you disagreed. I'm getting confused.
 
#95
#95
zansdad said:
Good points. They would definitely need to pick up some good road wins if they drop all 4 home games against the better SEC teams. However, if they drop all 4 of those games at home, they are probably not an NCAA tourney quality team anyway, so it won't matter.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that they would have to win one of the four tough home games and they would be ok. If they lose at Ole Miss, then that would mean that they would have to win 2 of the 4 tough home games. That's why Ole Miss away may have to be put in the "must win" category instead of "acceptable loss".
 
#96
#96
zansdad said:
That's not true actually but if it makes you feel better about Memphis' 8 seed last year, you go for it.

Besides, RPI has NEVER been the sole determining factor for seeding. If it was, then there would be no selection committee. They would just seed the teams 1-68 based on RPI and geography and just go at it.
Click to expand...

I never said RPI was the sole factor in seeding. I'm arguing that RPI is getting largely ignored by the committee once you get your foot in the door, as you pointed out the committee largely "ignored" Memphis' RPI last season. You seem to be agreeing with me.
 
#97
#97
MemphisCanes said:
I never said RPI was the sole factor in seeding. I'm arguing that RPI is getting largely ignored by the committee once you get your foot in the door, as you pointed out the committee largely "ignored" Memphis' RPI last season. You seem to be agreeing with me.
Click to expand...

Let's add some more confusion.
Most of the automatics are included regardless of RPI.
Hence Martin's last season(MS). RPI 41 but excluded because the format only included 1 team from his conference.
A lot of the seeding is simply match ups with the automatics that are seeded by format.
Correct if I'm wrong.
 
#98
#98
calban said:
He said pretty much the same thing you said and then you disagreed. I'm getting confused.
Click to expand...

No, not really. He's trying to say that RPI doesn't matter much anymore and that the committee is moving to other polls, like Kenpom and Sagarin. He also says that RPI no longer matters when it come to seeding.

He makes it sound like there is some move to this new way of thinking when in reality these things (or whatever things existed at the time) have always been used.

He also makes a subtle generalization that RPI is just tossed out the window once a team is in the tourney and it comes time for seeding. This isn't true either. RPI is one of the main factor the committee looks at, it's just not the only factor. But it's not like it's importance is waning as years go by. Teams with good RPI's and few quality wins have always been punished. Conversely, teams with suspect RPI's but good road records and a large number of quality wins have often been "over-seeded".

RPI has never been the end all and be all for selection or seeding. But it is very important. ( Much like wheels on a car, no one wheel is going to get you down the road but you still need all of them). MC is saying that there is this recent push to use other criteria and reduce the importance of RPI, when that other criteria has always been used (within the confines of its existance, they obviously couldn't have used Kenpom before it Poleroy created the site) and the RPI is the brainchild of the NCAA itself.
 
#99
#99
zansdad said:
No, not really. He's trying to say that RPI doesn't matter much anymore and that the committee is moving to other polls, like Kenpom and Sagarin. He also says that RPI no longer matters when it come to seeding.

He makes it sound like there is some move to this new way of thinking when in reality these things (or whatever things existed at the time) have always been used.

He also makes a subtle generalization that RPI is just tossed out the window once a team is in the tourney and it comes time for seeding. This isn't true either. RPI is one of the main factor the committee looks at, it's just not the only factor. But it's not like it's importance is waning as years go by. Teams with good RPI's and few quality wins have always been punished. Conversely, teams with suspect RPI's but good road records and a large number of quality wins have often been "over-seeded".

RPI has never been the end all and be all for selection or seeding. But it is very important. ( Much like wheels on a car, no one wheel is going to get you down the road but you still need all of them). MC is saying that there is this recent push to use other criteria and reduce the importance of RPI, when that other criteria has always been used (within the confines of its existance, they obviously couldn't have used Kenpom before it Poleroy created the site) and the RPI is the brainchild of the NCAA itself.
Click to expand...
Interesting.
 
#100
#100
calban said:
Let's add some more confusion.
Most of the automatics are included regardless of RPI.
Hence Martin's last season(MS). RPI 41 but excluded because the format only included 1 team from his conference.
A lot of the seeding is simply match ups with the automatics that are seeded by format.
Correct if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

I am not sure what you are saying exactly, but it looks like you are saying that the AQ's are basically pre-assigned some seed. Is that what you're saying? If so, then that would not be how it works.


Also, I remember Martin's Missouri St team being left out as a controversial exclusion. Just glancing at their schedule that year they didn't have many obvious quality wins (thought there might be some buried in there). Also, let's not misunderstand, the committee can make some head scratching moves (like UT's 2 seed in CBP's first year at UT), but that is not an indication that RPI is being tossed out the window.

Edit: I just went back and saw the bolded part. I don't know if it was a slip of the tongue (or keyboard in this case), but to be clear, ALL automatics are included regardless of RPI.
 
Last edited:
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top