7/17/2012 10:44 AM (edited)
and finally Top Players for #60
1. Gaylord Porter Sr. SF Marshall 99 70 47 98 57 100 83 85 77 79 78 64 C 937
2. Albert Neidig Sr. SF Central Florida 74 79 54 76 56 87 99 62 38 80 75 78 C 858
3. James Corrales Sr. SG Marshall 91 73 27 95 41 79 95 98 61 54 89 51 C 854
4. Jason Grijalva Sr. C Marshall 92 48 98 99 92 85 9 52 29 94 88 47 B 833
5. William Crow Sr. PF Houston 75 53 95 75 56 92 54 54 56 63 75 85 B- 833
6. Robert Lizotte Jr. PF Rice 91 60 82 70 56 83 35 45 56 73 87 95 B 833
7. Alva Koslowski Sr. SF UAB 77 48 85 99 62 36 67 54 46 73 86 99 C+ 832
8. Donald McGraw Jr. SG E. Carolina 79 78 29 81 36 44 83 78 77 89 95 63 B- 832
9. Jon Verner Sr. PG Tulsa 71 99 7 66 5 64 99 96 89 76 82 72 B 826
10. Gregory McInnis Sr. PG E. Carolina 73 99 1 85 16 52 87 77 94 68 87 82 B+ 821
11. Ronald Larue Sr. SF E. Carolina 90 66 41 99 22 73 87 53 73 84 76 55 B+ 819
12. Stanford Messenger Jr. SF E. Carolina 99 72 39 77 34 86 69 71 65 64 74 63 B- 813
13. John Brown So. PF Memphis 81 41 64 79 59 61 53 50 61 75 86 99 D+ 809
14. Rolf Ziegenfuss Sr/5 C UTEP 99 29 92 90 99 38 57 38 39 76 77 74 C- 808
15. Eric Brookes Sr. C Tulsa 79 30 96 84 94 99 42 61 17 71 70 62 C 805
16. Ronald Wetherbee Jr. C UAB 82 24 98 77 99 83 35 26 55 64 77 85 C+ 805
17. Freddie Chavis Sr. PF E. Carolina 94 69 77 99 56 76 85 56 57 46 68 19 B 802
18. John Kidd Sr. PF Rice 89 67 62 81 57 45 60 69 71 72 75 50 B- 798
19. Michael Raczynski Sr. C Marshall 99 48 85 96 78 93 57 8 12 73 76 70 C+ 795
20. Andrew Louden Sr. C SMU 66 40 96 81 85 64 68 53 25 82 78 56 C 794
21. Fred Irwin Sr. PF Central Florida 82 37 85 83 51 92 41 31 55 75 74 87 C+ 793
22. Robert Absher Sr. PG Tulane 79 99 3 99 8 2 98 90 83 68 81 75 B+ 785
23. Byron Leonard Jr. C E. Carolina 99 33 79 93 75 85 21 27 30 78 89 67 B 776
24. Kenneth Marsh Jr. PF Marshall 94 64 75 88 84 50 50 52 68 26 71 54 D+ 776
25. Douglas Burg Jr. PG SMU 75 94 3 82 21 20 83 69 73 90 86 76 B+ 772

This will begin season #11

Average of the top-25 players in CUSA

Season #  6 = 760
Season #10 = 794
Season #11 = 816
pretty obvious we are still getting much better. 
I personally, would finally have to say, after 10 seasons, we are probably as good as 2-3 Big-6 conferences in Rupp.
 Opinions.....?
7/17/2012 10:48 AM
That's a tough question.

When it comes to regular season success/rpi/etc there's no doubt we're a top three conference.

I'm not totally sure I'd characterize us as a top three conference when it comes to postseason success/ability to win games in the postseason. I just don't think there are enough teams that are truly capable of deep runs just yet, and that's the function of needing some additional higher level talent.

I think ECU has turned the corner from a talent perpsective. UTEP has some really nice players. I think a lot of the other teams are NT-caliber, but are missing a few studs that would take them on a deep run. Not a team full of studs, mind you, but a couple studs sprinkled in with everyone else.
7/17/2012 10:51 AM
Posted by zags27 on 7/6/2012 10:03:00 AM (view original):
  School Players A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT TOT
1. Marshall 12 82 60 47 88 46 59 58 57 51 64 80 55 C 807
2. E. Carolina 12 73 53 51 79 48 64 54 50 51 71 78 54 B- 783
3. UAB 12 67 53 51 73 44 50 54 55 52 65 78 73 C+ 739
4. Memphis 12 68 55 51 72 45 50 56 54 55 57 78 71 C+ 741
5. Tulane 12 72 61 44 80 35 46 56 56 54 60 77 68 C+ 709
6. UTEP 12 79 56 46 82 41 45 53 53 52 58 80 64 C+ 709
7. S. Mississippi 12 56 54 59 61 49 56 51 47 50 65 79 69 B- 716
8. SMU 12 63 54 50 60 44 55 55 53 50 69 78 60 C+ 690
9. Houston 12 63 57 44 66 36 42 50 55 59 65 73 75 C+ 717
10. Tulsa 12 81 63 43 79 37 43 52 54 45 53 77 57 C+ 685
11. Rice 12 75 53 49 75 43 45 49 48 54 50 73 68 C+ 707
12. Central Florida 12 65 52 47 63 37 42 48 42 45 63 71 57 C 683
THIS is after W/O's are removed. Marshall-2, ECU-2, C.Fla-2, UAB, Memphis, S. Miss, Houston, and Rice all with 1

*on a side note: in Sh'niqua's sRPI's defense.
I wouldn't give a team that finished the season with an overall rating of 683 a snow-balls chance in hell at the NT as well.
formula or not... they usually just suck it.
Well done Dac
That is a really nice coaching job by dac, no doubt.
7/17/2012 12:35 PM
Posted by shqipta on 5/29/2012 3:19:00 PM (view original):
Posted by shqipta on 4/9/2012 10:45:00 AM (view original):
Here are some preseason predictions based upon my own "sRPI" calculations. After your team is the sRPI score, followed by what I predict your final RPI will be once the season concludes, and whether you will make the NT or PI. Because my system is flawless, the only way you'll get a different RPI at the end of the season is if you either over coach or under coach your players or more typically, if you screwed up scheduling. 

Also based on fifteen plus seasons of using the sRPI in Phelan, I can tell you this. If your sRPI score is above 250 you will make the NT unless purposely torpedo your team. If your sRPI score is above 235 you have an 80% chance of making the NT. If your sRPI score is above 225 you have any 80% chance of making the PI. If your sRPI score is below 215, you have virtually no chance of making the Postseason. 

EAST
     TEAM          Predicted RPI        sRPI score       Postseason
1. Marshall              9                          267                     NT
2. E.Carolina         27                         247                     NT
3. Memphis           31                         246                     NT
4. Central FL         39                         240                     NT
5. UAB                    70                         230                     PI
6. S. Miss.             130                       218   
            
WEST
     TEAM          Predicted RPI        sRPI score       Postseason
1. UTEP                   53                        235                    NT
2. Tulane                 65                        233                    PI
3. Tulsa                   86                        227                    PI
4. Rice                     96                        225                    
5. SMU                    103                      224                  
6. Houston             123                      221
sRPI for Season 59:

EAST
   TEAM           Predicted RPI        sRPI score    Postseason
1. Marshall              16                        254.1                NT
2. E.Carolina           37                       239.65              NT
3. Memphis             56                       234.62            NT/PI
4. UAB                      59                       233.53               PI
5. S. Miss               120                      220.5 
6. Central FL          175                     212.06

WEST
   TEAM         Predicted RPI     sRPI score         Postseason
1. Tulane               39                        238.6                 NT
2. UTEP                 40                        238.58              NT
3. Tulsa                 54                        234.8               NT/PI
4. Rice                   79                        228.43               PI
5. Houston           99                         222.96              
6. SMU                 112                        221.26 
 
sRPI for season 60:

EAST
  TEAM               Predicted RPI         sRPI score       Postseason
1. Marshall                 5                          267.38                  NT
2. E.Carolina            14                         256.28                  NT
3. Central Fl.             57                         233.79               NT/PI
4. UAB                        79                        228.68                   PI
5. S.Miss                  110                       223.5                   
6. Memphis             134                        220.41 

WEST
   TEAM            Predicted RPI           sRPI score       Postseason
1. Rice                      23                          247.52                 NT
2. Tulsa                    34                          244.27                 NT
3. Houston               43                          239.73                NT
4. UTEP                   51                          236.27                  NT
5. SMU                     55                          234.13              NT/PI
6. Tulane                 73                          229.44                 PI

Looks like the West is going to be a blood bath, any of the six teams could win the division, and it wouldn't be surprising to see all 6 teams in the NT if everyone scheduled well. 
7/31/2012 3:42 PM
Couple days late on this one
School Coach Conf.
W-L
Overall
W-L
Home
W-L
Road
W-L
Top 25
W-L
Last 10 STRK RPI SOS
UAB options 2-0 10-2 2-1 8-1 0-1 9-1 W5 43 129
#7 Marshall girt25 1-0 11-0 4-0 7-0 0-0 10-0 W11 5 27
#21 E. Carolina zags27 1-0 10-1 0-1 10-0 0-1 9-1 W3 44 164
Central Florida dacj501 1-1 11-1 4-1 7-0 0-1 9-1 W1 101 270
S. Mississippi Weena 0-2 6-6 2-4 4-2 0-1 6-4 L2 97 66
Memphis tigerdad 0-2 5-7 2-6 3-1 0-1 3-7 L6 94 22
 
 
 
 
 
West Standings
 
School Coach Conf.
W-L
Overall
W-L
Home
W-L
Road
W-L
Top 25
W-L
Last 10 STRK RPI SOS
#16 UTEP aejones 2-0 11-1 4-0 7-1 2-0 9-1 W2 8 33
#20 Tulsa tianyi7886 2-0 11-1 3-0 8-1 1-0 9-1 W5 13 51
Rice shqipta 1-1 10-2 1-0 9-2 0-1 9-1 L1 18 67
Houston jamespastine 1-1 10-2 4-1 6-1 0-0 8-2 W1 48 133
SMU mr53 0-2 10-2 1-1 9-1 0-0 8-2 L2 60 176
Tulane dedhed1959 0-2 5-7 2-3 3-4 0-4 4-6 L2 69 23
which doesn't show that ECU had about a 90 RPI, and C. Fla, SMU, and ECU all had SOS around 300 after 10 games.  purrrfect
8/20/2012 3:34 PM (edited)
EAST
  TEAM                  Predicted Place    Actual Place               Predicted RPI         Actual RPI      
1. Marshall                     1                            1                                     5                          3                  
2. E.Carolina                  2                            2                                   14                         17
3. Central Fl.                  3                            3                                   57                          51
4. UAB                           4                            4                                   79                          57
5. S.Miss                        5                            5                                  110                         81
6. Memphis                    6                            6                                  134                         94

WEST
 TEAM               Predicted Place     Actual Place          Predicted RPI          Actual RPI
1. Rice                         1                             3                              23                       23
2. Tulsa                        2                            1                              34                       10
3. UTEP                       4                             2                             51                       13
4. Houston                   3                             4                             43                        58
5.SMU                         5                             5                              55                        73
6. Tulane                     6                             6                              73                      106


At least I got Rice's RPI right. 
8/25/2012 5:42 PM (edited)

Here we go!

Conference Post-Season Recruiting Bonus:

Season #1  = $  30,000                 NT ( 1st )        PIT ( 2nd )
               #2  = $  20,000                  NT ( 1st )
               #3  = $  95,000                  NT ( 1st, 1st, 1st )      PIT ( 2nd, 1st )
               #4  =  $180,000                 NT ( E8, 2nd, 1st, 1st )      PIT  ( F4 )
               #5  =  $155,000                 NT ( S/16, 2nd, 1st, 1st )   PIT  ( 2nd, 1st )
               #6 =   $ 220,000                NT ( E8, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st,)  PIT ( F4, 3rd, 1st)
                #7 =   $ 360,000               NT ( F4, F4, E8, 2nd, 1st, ) PIT ( 2nd, 2nd)
               #8  =   $ 170,000               NT ( E8, 1st, 1st, 1st ) PIT ( F4, 1st, 1st)  boo hiss
               #9  =   $ 200,000               NT ( S16, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st) PIT ( Title , 3rd) little better  (8 post-season)
              #10 =   $ 310,000               NT ( E8, S16, 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 1st, 1st) PIT ( 3rd, 1st, 1st, 1st) Much better! (11 postseason)
              #11 =   $ 375,000               NT ( E8, S16, S16, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd )   PIT ( Title, F4, 1st, 1st )   HUGE!!!!   (10 Postseason)
8/23/2012 10:36 AM (edited)
Final
  School Players A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT TOT
1. Marshall 12 89 64 53 89 51 63 66 64 63 57 77 55 C 789
2. E. Carolina 12 79 61 49 84 44 62 59 59 62 70 81 58 B 791
3. Houston 12 69 61 50 73 44 53 54 58 66 65 74 79 C+ 745
4. Rice 12 83 60 48 85 44 47 57 54 59 50 75 72 C+ 735
5. SMU 12 64 57 53 64 48 57 60 56 51 70 80 63 B- 725
6. Tulsa 12 83 68 40 83 35 42 55 61 51 56 79 61 B- 714
7. Central Florida 12 78 56 50 77 39 50 58 50 54 58 72 63 C+ 705
8. UTEP 12 78 55 48 78 42 42 50 49 52 59 81 65 C+ 727
9. UAB 12 68 59 46 67 41 42 62 54 55 55 78 67 C+ 721
10. Tulane 12 69 57 48 74 36 52 48 56 56 57 73 65 C+ 690
11. S. Mississippi 12 61 55 56 64 46 57 55 53 47 58 76 61 C+ 689
12. Memphis 12 59 52 44 64 36 50 49 51 56 57 76 63 C 707
Walk-ons removed   ECU 1, UTEP 1, UAB 1, Memphis 2

End of season average was: 
#54 =  691.66 with W/O's
#55 =  693.83 with W/O's
#58 =  725.83   removed
#59 =  723.83   removed
#60 =  728.16   removed
8/21/2012 3:35 PM

Top Player Final Season #60

  Name Year Pos School A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT TOT
1. Gaylord Porter Sr. SF Marshall 100 70 47 98 58 100 83 87 77 85 79 64 C 948
2. Robert Lizotte Jr. PF Rice 92 63 84 73 56 93 62 46 60 80 91 95 B 895
3. James Corrales Sr. SG Marshall 93 73 29 95 46 87 95 98 61 63 95 51 C 886
4. Albert Neidig Sr. SF Central Florida 74 80 58 83 59 91 99 62 38 85 75 81 C 885
5. Stanford Messenger Jr. SF E. Carolina 99 78 38 81 35 90 74 79 70 69 84 73 B+ 870
6. Donald McGraw Jr. SG E. Carolina 79 78 37 87 43 44 83 79 82 89 97 64 B- 862
7. William Crow Sr. PF Houston 75 58 96 75 56 97 54 55 57 71 79 89 B 862
8. John Brown So. PF Memphis 81 41 65 90 65 70 53 61 61 81 93 99 C- 860
9. Alva Koslowski Sr. SF UAB 77 48 86 100 63 38 68 54 46 79 86 99 B- 844
10. Jason Grijalva Sr. C Marshall 92 49 98 99 93 85 9 53 29 95 89 48 B 839
11. Jon Verner Sr. PG Tulsa 72 100 7 66 5 65 99 96 89 82 85 73 B 839
12. Freddie Chavis Sr. PF E. Carolina 94 71 84 99 56 76 89 56 59 55 78 21 B 838
13. Gregory McInnis Sr. PG E. Carolina 73 100 1 85 16 56 87 77 94 76 89 83 B+ 837
14. Ronald Wetherbee Jr. C UAB 83 26 98 81 99 83 44 26 55 72 84 86 C+ 837
15. Rolf Ziegenfuss Sr/5 C UTEP 100 29 96 90 99 38 63 41 39 82 79 75 C- 831
16. Ronald Larue Sr. SF E. Carolina 90 66 42 99 22 74 89 54 74 88 76 55 B+ 829
17. Eric Brookes Sr. C Tulsa 80 30 96 85 96 100 43 62 18 78 71 63 C 822
18. Robert Valera So. PG Marshall 74 94 2 92 11 42 92 71 89 79 88 86 C+ 820
19. Fred Irwin Sr. PF Central Florida 82 37 86 83 51 92 50 31 60 81 77 88 C+ 818
20. Michael Raczynski Sr. C Marshall 100 49 85 97 78 98 58 8 12 79 78 71 C+ 813
21. John Kidd Sr. PF Rice 90 68 62 83 58 45 60 71 72 78 76 50 B- 813
22. Randal Lima So. PG E. Carolina 93 94 31 93 41 43 49 84 61 68 90 64 B 811
23. Kevin Logan Fr. SG Marshall 84 64 47 90 40 82 81 65 76 75 77 28 C 809
24. Andrew Louden Sr. C SMU 66 41 98 81 85 64 71 54 25 86 80 57 C+ 808
25. Kenneth Marsh Jr. PF Marshall 94 64 77 89 86 51 56 58 67 29 78 57 D+ 806

8/25/2012 5:41 PM (edited)
Pac 10  $ 420,000
CUSA    $ 375,000
Big 12   $ 350,000
SEC      $ 250,000
ACC      $ 250,000
B East   $ 240,000
Big 10   $ 195,000
8/26/2012 11:27 PM
Excellent job racking up the postseason cash -- and we finished as the #1 RPI conference as well:

DIConference RPI
1. CUSA .6117
2. PAC 10 .5918
3. Big 12 .5761
4. Big East .5623
5. ACC .5623
6. SEC .5600
7. Big 10 .5477
8. Horizon .5149
9. Big Sky .5121
10. WCC .5075

9/4/2012 3:57 PM (edited)
And we've also at least equaled all other the BCS conferences except for the SEC when it comes to prestige:

6. SEC B+ 192-156 .5605 .5600
1. Conference USA B 224-137 .6051 .6117
2. PAC 10 B 215-143 .5932 .5918
3. Big 12 B 210-146 .5802 .5761
4. Big East B 193-153 .5693 .5623
5. ACC B 198-155 .5590 .5623
7. Big Ten B- 194-151 .5446 .5477
8. Horizon C 169-168 .5256 .5149
9. Big Sky C- 176-167 .5164 .5121
11. Ivy League C- 168-172 .5133 .5073
25. Atlantic 10 C- 143-192 .4757 .4578

8/27/2012 4:04 PM
3. Marshall A girt25 CUSA 30-2 .6222 12 .6987
8. Tulsa B+ tianyi7886 CUSA 25-7 .6232 10 .6682
9. UTEP B+ aejones CUSA 22-8 .6348 5 .6659
15. E. Carolina B+ zags27 CUSA 24-7 .6012 21 .6514
41. Central Florida B+ dacj501 CUSA 22-9 .5531 74 .6004
22. Rice B shqipta CUSA 21-9 .5926 28 .6345
34. UAB B options CUSA 20-12 .5932 26 .6093
92. Memphis B tigerdad CUSA 9-18 .6222 13 .5487
55. Houston B- jamespastine CUSA 17-15 .6005 22 .5859
106. Tulane B- dedhed1959 CUSA 8-19 .6230 11 .5379
69. SMU C+ - CUSA 14-15 .5845 32 .5739
76. S. Mississippi C+ Weena CUSA 12-16 .6108 17 .5656
9/6/2012 10:00 AM (edited)
  School Players A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT TOT
1. Marshall 11 81 62 47 80 39 49 66 59 72 51 71 52 C 753
2. E. Carolina 10 75 57 54 79 52 56 51 56 53 67 74 46 B- 779
3. Houston 12 67 58 47 68 40 58 53 54 60 59 70 70 C 705
4. Tulane 12 69 52 51 72 41 58 46 52 54 55 70 67 C 686
5. UAB 12 66 55 50 68 45 47 56 49 56 54 72 62 C 681
6. Memphis 12 64 50 50 66 44 53 51 50 50 57 74 60 C 667
7. SMU 12 63 50 48 63 46 47 55 51 51 54 73 63 B- 665
8. Central Florida 12 77 54 46 76 39 41 51 48 52 53 70 56 C 664
9. S. Mississippi 12 61 54 51 64 44 51 54 51 46 57 71 58 C+ 662
10. Tulsa 12 83 58 44 81 40 32 43 49 48 49 72 56 C 656
11. Rice 9 68 49 41 75 34 36 47 44 47 57 72 65 C 720
12. UTEP     8 57 44 42 54 36 41 33 36 35 68 70 60 C 659
W/O's removed   Marshall = 1, ECU = 2, Rice = 3, UTEP = 4
Beginning team ratings for season #61
9/5/2012 2:48 PM (edited)
Beginning Season #61 Top overall C-USA Players
  Name Year Pos School A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT TOT
1. Robert Lizotte Sr. PF Rice 92 65 86 76 56 99 62 45 60 80 89 95 B 905
2. Stanford Messenger Sr. SF E. Carolina 99 84 40 83 35 97 79 84 73 69 81 75 B+ 899
3. John Brown Jr. PF Memphis 81 41 65 90 66 77 53 65 61 81 89 99 C- 868
4. Donald McGraw Sr. SG E. Carolina 78 78 39 89 45 44 83 80 82 89 94 64 B 865
5. Freddie Chavis Sr/5 PF E. Carolina 94 71 84 100 56 77 91 56 62 55 79 22 B 847
6. Ronald Wetherbee Sr. C UAB 82 26 99 83 99 83 46 27 56 72 81 86 C+ 840
7. Robert Valera Jr. PG Marshall 74 99 2 93 10 43 100 72 92 79 85 88 B- 837
8. Kevin Logan So. SG Marshall 89 68 49 89 40 83 80 70 79 75 79 29 C- 830
9. Randal Lima Jr. PG E. Carolina 93 94 33 99 43 46 49 86 61 68 89 68 B 829
10. Larry Otey Jr. C Houston 86 42 67 96 68 70 40 59 59 69 77 87 D+ 820
11. Eric Brabham Sr. SG Central Florida 87 70 39 93 19 77 69 61 42 71 85 99 B+ 812
12. Robert Spencer Jr. PG Central Florida 99 98 14 100 24 13 95 97 100 57 77 38 C+ 812
13. Kenneth Marsh Sr. PF Marshall 94 63 79 87 86 53 58 57 67 29 77 61 D+ 811
14. Samuel French Sr. SG Rice 86 69 64 91 43 14 83 64 57 65 81 91 B- 808
15. Larry Hess Sr. SF Houston 82 61 69 81 56 84 45 47 63 64 76 80 C+ 808
16. Byron Leonard Sr. C E. Carolina 99 33 79 96 75 86 20 44 30 83 89 67 B 801
17. Earl Alden Jr. C Houston 77 51 100 82 94 71 21 36 50 80 64 68 C+ 794
18. Douglas Burg Sr. PG SMU 76 96 4 83 21 28 83 71 73 93 87 79 B+ 794
19. Harold Butler So. PG Marshall 94 82 48 91 27 9 86 80 89 67 78 42 C 793
20. Gil Armstrong Fr. PG Marshall 95 77 39 94 21 51 93 75 85 51 66 43 C 790
21. Raymond Johnson Jr. PG UTEP 74 94 13 82 5 12 82 98 81 80 80 88 B- 789
22. Darrell Hill Sr. SG SMU 55 70 50 66 38 21 80 78 76 79 91 82 B 786
23. Doyle Millsap Jr. SF Tulsa 84 82 35 98 26 31 86 80 70 41 75 74 C 782
24. Daniel Armstrong Fr. PF Marshall 83 59 75 90 77 65 57 54 70 29 62 57 C 778
25. James Peppers So. SG Marshall 95 79 24 90 15 58 60 78 91 38 65 80 C 773
of 16

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.