I call bs that a low level d1 team gets screwed out of the PT with a higher rpi and a way better win loss record...I count 7 teams with a lesser resume....this happens too much

RPI and raw win loss are not accurate measures. Who were the wins against? Who were the losses against?

0-7 vs top 100 teams, losses to 105 and 155, best win against 120.
Alvernia has basically even RPI, but two wins against top 100 teams.
Carthage has a better RPI anyway.
Shenandoah does as well.

Which teams have the much worse resumes that you are talking about?

You want BS.....Explain how my Limestone team MADE the NT......We didn't beat anyone!

Posted by a_in_the_b on 12/6/2014 5:36:00 PM (view original):
RPI and raw win loss are not accurate measures. Who were the wins against? Who were the losses against?

Then why is wins & loses and RPI used? Why don't we just give the eye ball test to determine who makes the dances. lets just take turns on who makes the tournament and give everyone trophies

Do you know how the tournament teams are selected?If you don't you should figure it out, your team hasn't earned a postseason birth.

Posted by joco45215 on 12/6/2014 9:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by a_in_the_b on 12/6/2014 5:36:00 PM (view original):
RPI and raw win loss are not accurate measures. Who were the wins against? Who were the losses against?

Then why is wins & loses and RPI used? Why don't we just give the eye ball test to determine who makes the dances. lets just take turns on who makes the tournament and give everyone trophies

RPI is one element. Wins against top fifty teams. Against top 100 teams. Losses against bad teams. All of those things matter. Tell me, what in your season makes that a pt team? If you think teams with worse resumes got in, why not name them? Let people actually look at their records, because if it's the team associated with this name ... you really don't have an argument. No signature or even good wins, several not so good losses. RPI can be gamed. It's not even the be all end all of the real life selection committee. At best it's a tool they use to sort through some teams that might deserve more attention.

Let's try again; just name and or link to the teams you think 'unjustly' got in ahead of you?

You are right scaturo didn't win my conference tourney title. I guess I need to reevaluate my scheduling and take a few more but whoopings on ooc

Posted by a_in_the_b on 12/6/2014 11:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by joco45215 on 12/6/2014 9:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by a_in_the_b on 12/6/2014 5:36:00 PM (view original):
RPI and raw win loss are not accurate measures. Who were the wins against? Who were the losses against?

Then why is wins & loses and RPI used? Why don't we just give the eye ball test to determine who makes the dances. lets just take turns on who makes the tournament and give everyone trophies

RPI is one element. Wins against top fifty teams. Against top 100 teams. Losses against bad teams. All of those things matter. Tell me, what in your season makes that a pt team? If you think teams with worse resumes got in, why not name them? Let people actually look at their records, because if it's the team associated with this name ... you really don't have an argument. No signature or even good wins, several not so good losses. RPI can be gamed. It's not even the be all end all of the real life selection committee. At best it's a tool they use to sort through some teams that might deserve more attention.

Let's try again; just name and or link to the teams you think 'unjustly' got in ahead of you?

Don't be a douche it's not a good look

Why do you not want to name the teams? You said there were about seven. Who were they? Then perhaps people could give you the reasons they got in ahead of you.

It isn't being a douche to ask you to 'show your work'.

If you think there were seven that unfairly got in ahead of you, let people see who those seven, in your opinion, were.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 12/6/2014 6:51:00 PM (view original):
You want BS.....Explain how my Limestone team MADE the NT......We didn't beat anyone!

We need to look more closely at this. That is undoubtedly a disservice to some more deserving team that was left out.

Where were you in the projection report?

Posted by a_in_the_b on 12/6/2014 11:46:00 PM (view original):
Why do you not want to name the teams? You said there were about seven. Who were they? Then perhaps people could give you the reasons they got in ahead of you.

It isn't being a douche to ask you to 'show your work'.

If you think there were seven that unfairly got in ahead of you, let people see who those seven, in your opinion, were.

I agree completely. Seems like you've caught him in a rage post.

No rage just frustration, I'll name them in the morning I did my homework some RPI teams into the hundreds, with weak sos and barley an above .500 team. Phelan

Loyala Chicago 94th in projection report
3-6 vs top 100
4-2 vs 101-200
13-0 vs 200+

Robert Morris (joco's team) 103 in projection report
0-7 vs top 100
8-2 vs 101-200
11-0 vs 200+

Which team do you think make the PIT?








Answer... neither.

Denver 87th in projection report 8 seed in PIT
3-15 vs top 100
5-1 vs 101-200
4-0 vs 200+