.500 Record Requirement for D1 Postseason(Poll) Topic

killbatman
Posts: 523 (0)
Hall of Famer
94 26 19
Rookie
RPI is only a factor in ranking teams for postseason selection, though.  The Projection Report considers many more things:

  • Record
  • Overall RPI
  • Non-conference record
  • Non-conference RPI
  • Conference record
  • Conference RPI
  • Road record
  • Record in last 10 games
  • Record against teams ranked 1-50 by RPI
  • Record against teams ranked 51-100 by RPI
  • Record against teams ranked 101-200 by RPI
  • Record against teams ranked below 200 by RPI


5/13/2014 1:36 PM
taniajane
Posts: 811 (0)
Hall of Famer
97 55 11
Prospect
Yes I have read that. I don't see it working as they claim it is calculated. It certainly is not in the case I mentioned

5/13/2014 1:36 PM
killbatman
Posts: 523 (0)
Hall of Famer
94 26 19
Rookie
Have you calculated the numbers by hand yourself to verify it?  If you'll link the actual team we're talking about, I'll even do it for you.
5/13/2014 1:38 PM
jtt8355
Posts: 593 (0)
Hall of Famer
201
Prospect
why is the poll limited to D1? i understand that the biggest evil that people are trying to correct is seemingly undeserved recruiting cash to a team with a sub-.500 record (and its conference mates), but why not have a rule applicable across the divisions? why should the GLV's of the world benefit from the 10-0 non-con team that can't hit 4-13 in conference? 
5/13/2014 1:49 PM
gillispie1
Posts: 5030 (0)
Hall of Famer
95
Veteran
Posted by jtt8355 on 5/13/2014 1:49:00 PM (view original):
why is the poll limited to D1? i understand that the biggest evil that people are trying to correct is seemingly undeserved recruiting cash to a team with a sub-.500 record (and its conference mates), but why not have a rule applicable across the divisions? why should the GLV's of the world benefit from the 10-0 non-con team that can't hit 4-13 in conference? 
to me, its not at all about the conference, but about the actual, real human coach, who is coaching said team. if you go 4-12 in a brutal conference, thats really not that bad, you can even play a decent non conference and go 8-2 and be looking great for the NT before playing that in conference schedule and falling out. i sympathize with those coaches - they have a huge gap to catch up to the top teams - and don't want to see them missing the PIT too, when they barely miss the NT in the first place.
5/13/2014 3:09 PM
gillispie1
Posts: 5030 (0)
Hall of Famer
95
Veteran
Posted by taniajane on 5/13/2014 1:36:00 PM (view original):
Yes I have read that. I don't see it working as they claim it is calculated. It certainly is not in the case I mentioned

we've spot checked RPIs a ton of times, and they are always dead on. its a very simple formula to get right with a computer, i would almost guarantee, without even needing to look at your example, that they have RPI right. now, the other side of that coin is, RPI is not a great indicator of quality of team. thats why seble made the projection report. 
5/13/2014 3:10 PM
taniajane
Posts: 811 (0)
Hall of Famer
97 55 11
Prospect
I sent in site mail Killbatman...I am not going to point fingers in public to a person not engaged in the conversation. I will be curious to see his analytical review. To me it simply looks like a bad conference performance and weak non conference is enough for teams in the Elite Conferences.
5/13/2014 4:58 PM (edited)
taniajane
Posts: 811 (0)
Hall of Famer
97 55 11
Prospect
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/13/2014 3:10:00 PM (view original):
Posted by taniajane on 5/13/2014 1:36:00 PM (view original):
Yes I have read that. I don't see it working as they claim it is calculated. It certainly is not in the case I mentioned

we've spot checked RPIs a ton of times, and they are always dead on. its a very simple formula to get right with a computer, i would almost guarantee, without even needing to look at your example, that they have RPI right. now, the other side of that coin is, RPI is not a great indicator of quality of team. thats why seble made the projection report. 
I never quite understood the Projection Report. Correct me if I am wrong; is that not simply for the NT and not the PI? That's what I have been seeing. So it really has no bearing on the PIT? Or it Does? I have seen teams on the bubble and close to lock make neither with a conf tourney loss.
5/13/2014 4:49 PM (edited)
killbatman
Posts: 523 (0)
Hall of Famer
94 26 19
Rookie
Haven't checked RPI calculations yet, but quick question.  Where is the team in question listed on the Projection Report?  They only have two Top-100 wins and none in the Top-50, so I'd expect them to be ranked worse in the PR than their 67 RPI. 
5/13/2014 4:57 PM
taniajane
Posts: 811 (0)
Hall of Famer
97 55 11
Prospect
Posted by killbatman on 5/13/2014 4:57:00 PM (view original):
Haven't checked RPI calculations yet, but quick question.  Where is the team in question listed on the Projection Report?  They only have two Top-100 wins and none in the Top-50, so I'd expect them to be ranked worse in the PR than their 67 RPI. 
They are ranked out....I assume for NT not PI? Matter of fact 10th team out.....so will be PI?
5/13/2014 5:03 PM (edited)
killbatman
Posts: 523 (0)
Hall of Famer
94 26 19
Rookie
I meant specifically what number are they ranked in the PR.  My theory is they should be ranked lower because their RPI is sort of artificially inflated by how they scheduled (not that I'm saying that's an evil thing or anything).  I just wanted to test that theory is all.  And actually they only have ONE top-100 win, not two like I misstated. 

As far as your question about NT vs PI..I believe it is used for both.  At least that's the way I think of it.  Not the "lock/bubble/out" part of the report, but the rankings.  What I mean is, after they've filled the NT, all the teams left over are probably ranked exactly the same way as the NT teams were.  So you would just start at say #65--for simplicity's sake--and that's where your rankings for the PI start.
5/13/2014 5:06 PM
taniajane
Posts: 811 (0)
Hall of Famer
97 55 11
Prospect
Not sure how to answer the PR (assuming it means Projection report). Will send it to you  in site mail and  you decide
5/13/2014 5:09 PM
taniajane
Posts: 811 (0)
Hall of Famer
97 55 11
Prospect

Actually I got it they are ranked #90...so if your thinking is true they should not Make the PI without a fast and furious finish? Yet have a better rpi than others? we shall see, I don't see but maybe two more possible conf win in regular season

5/13/2014 5:16 PM (edited)
killbatman
Posts: 523 (0)
Hall of Famer
94 26 19
Rookie
90th, yeah that's about what I was thinking.  So their RPI is 67, but they're not really getting 'full credit' for that in the Projection Report because they haven't beaten anybody good (yet).  I think the PR does a good job in general of handling that issue.

I'm not real familiar with D1 and what spot normally makes the PI, but that sounds like they're probably out of the PI right now..and they probably should be right now.

Still checking the RPI just for the fun of it.  Lets just say it was a very slow day at work.
5/13/2014 5:18 PM
taniajane
Posts: 811 (0)
Hall of Famer
97 55 11
Prospect
ok thanks. I could be wrong, but I will not be the least bit surprised if they are not  in the PI. Seen it before. Others claim they are in elite conference and tough schedule. Not they are mediocre and pad their rpi with losing conference games.

Looking at history he had made the PI the last 4 years with records of 14-14 (5-11 conf), 16-13 (5-11 conf), 12-16 (3-13 conf), 17-14 (5-11 conf). And his team's prestige goes up  with that garbage?

Sorry I don't see your projection working at all
5/13/2014 5:58 PM (edited)
◂ Prev 1|2|3|4|5|6...12 Next ▸
.500 Record Requirement for D1 Postseason(Poll) Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.