Below .500 record Topic

thewizard10
Posts: 73 (0)
Rookie
1 6
Prospect
Posted by reinsel on 11/21/2011 3:19:00 PM (view original):
Posted by thewizard10 on 11/21/2011 3:07:00 PM (view original):
Honestly, I think super conferences have it tougher in this regard.

A) It's tougher to win your conference tournament.

B)You run the risk of going below .500..

C)Prestige is effected due to overall record.

D)There is an overall record component in factoring your seed for the NT.

E)You're usually battling the other teams for the better recruits.

Except for superconference teams have crazy amounts of NT/PT money.

ACC in Allen has $65,000 per team this season.  So that's $80,000 for 1 opening!  That's really rough.
That's true and is definitely a major advantage.
11/21/2011 3:35 PM
pjbrankin
Posts: 622 (0)
Hall of Famer
99 1
Prospect
Uh...no. College basketball uses RPI. It would be ridiculous if WIS came up with some arbitrary formula
11/21/2011 3:36 PM
thewizard10
Posts: 73 (0)
Rookie
1 6
Prospect
Posted by pjbrankin on 11/21/2011 3:36:00 PM (view original):
Uh...no. College basketball uses RPI. It would be ridiculous if WIS came up with some arbitrary formula
Okay, fair enough, but I guess I'm saying you can't really have it both ways.

In my first or second post, I had listed a scenario where a team could be 12-14 and still have an RPI around 8-10.  If the RPI is such a great system, how could you not allow someone that is considered one of the best 10 teams into the tournament with the other 64 best teams, despite not finishing at .500?

So then, in fairness if it is your belief that someone with a below .500 record should not be in the tournament, despite being one of the best 10 teams based on RPI, then you would have to agree the RPI system would need a major overhaul.

11/21/2011 3:47 PM (edited)
acn24
Posts: 1020 (0)
Hall of Famer
260 357 172
Rookie
Posted by thewizard10 on 11/21/2011 3:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pjbrankin on 11/21/2011 3:36:00 PM (view original):
Uh...no. College basketball uses RPI. It would be ridiculous if WIS came up with some arbitrary formula
Okay, fair enough, but I guess I'm saying you can't really have it both ways.

In my first or second post, I had listed a scenario where a team could be 12-14 and still have an RPI around 8-10.  If the RPI is such a great system, how could you not allow someone that is considered one of the best 10 teams into the tournament with the other 64 best teams, despite not finishing at .500?

So then, in fairness if it is your belief that someone with a below .500 record should not be in the tournament, despite being one of the best 10 teams based on RPI, then you would have to agree the RPI system would need a major overhaul.

Who is trying to have it two ways?  You are attaching way too much weight to RPI, it is not a definitive list of the best teams in the country.  Here is what we have:

1)  WIS follows the NCAA rule that you need to be .500 or better to receive an at large bid.
2)  If a team is eligible, RPI is one of many tools that the system uses to determine at-large berths and seeding.

11/21/2011 4:22 PM
acn24
Posts: 1020 (0)
Hall of Famer
260 357 172
Rookie
Posted by reinsel on 11/21/2011 3:19:00 PM (view original):
Posted by thewizard10 on 11/21/2011 3:07:00 PM (view original):
Honestly, I think super conferences have it tougher in this regard.

A) It's tougher to win your conference tournament.

B)You run the risk of going below .500..

C)Prestige is effected due to overall record.

D)There is an overall record component in factoring your seed for the NT.

E)You're usually battling the other teams for the better recruits.

Except for superconference teams have crazy amounts of NT/PT money.

ACC in Allen has $65,000 per team this season.  So that's $80,000 for 1 opening!  That's really rough.
I know you aren't forgetting about our carryover.  :)

True story, I have as much cash with 3 openings at Duke as I did with 8 openings with UCLA.
11/21/2011 4:25 PM
metsmax
Posts: 1598 (0)
Hall of Famer
5 2 837 2
Pro
Hmm, the official guidance begins with overall record - this might be better if it mentioned that a .500 record is the minimum, but it is the first criterion mentioned......and there are plenty of guides and threads that mention the .500 requirement - and one can deduce the rule by looking at the high seeds in the PIT which now and then include an rpi in the 40s with a losing overall record

this is so much NOT a problem - at least not in the top 100 things that could be improved

Q: How are the at-large bids determined? What about the seeding?
A: There are in fact two distinct phases that must occur before the National Tournament can begin. The first is the selection process which is used to determine which teams will be receiving the at-large bids to the tournament. Some of the criteria evaluated include:
  • 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
11/21/2011 4:40 PM
isack24
Posts: 1566 (0)
Hall of Famer
81 19
Prospect
Posted by thewizard10 on 11/21/2011 3:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pjbrankin on 11/21/2011 3:36:00 PM (view original):
Uh...no. College basketball uses RPI. It would be ridiculous if WIS came up with some arbitrary formula
Okay, fair enough, but I guess I'm saying you can't really have it both ways.

In my first or second post, I had listed a scenario where a team could be 12-14 and still have an RPI around 8-10.  If the RPI is such a great system, how could you not allow someone that is considered one of the best 10 teams into the tournament with the other 64 best teams, despite not finishing at .500?

So then, in fairness if it is your belief that someone with a below .500 record should not be in the tournament, despite being one of the best 10 teams based on RPI, then you would have to agree the RPI system would need a major overhaul.

I'd like one example in the history of RPI, real life or WIS, in which a team with a sub-.500 record had a top-15 RPI.

I doubt it ever has, but it's absurdly rare if it has.  For all of the flaws inherent in RPI, wins still matter.  Teams that are around .500 have fringe RPIs (30+) anyway.

I don't see why you can't be in favor of both RPI as a determining factor and the ".500" rule.
11/21/2011 5:08 PM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
I think it makes a lot of sense to have the .500 rule for making the NT. Getting rid of it would only benefit sub .500 teams who got beat up playing in a really strong conference. (And I say this as a member of the one conference that would probably benefit the most from scrapping the rule ... and wizard, I'm just baffled by your assertion that teams in conferences like this have it tougher overall. They do have a few disadvantages, but they're far outweighed by the advantages, and I don't think it makes sense to offer them another one.)

RPI is one of the items that determines NT appearances and seeding, but far from the only one. And RPI has flaws and can be manipulated.
11/21/2011 5:12 PM
Iguana1
Posts: 369 (0)
Hall of Famer
69 65
Rookie
Posted by Weena on 11/21/2011 2:35:00 PM (view original):
It may not be written in the WIS rules but it is written in the NCAA rules that WIS follows in this area. Also, it is based on overall record so the 12-14 record you cite could still end up over .500 depending on your success in the CT.
I don't believe this 500 or better rule actually exists in the RL D1 NCAA.

Of course a team with a losing record getting an at-large has never happened, but in conversations I've had with people that have gone through the media selection process, they've said it never was brought up as an eliminating factor.
11/21/2011 8:32 PM
a_in_the_b
Posts: 1653 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 18 668 3
Pro
Posted by thewizard10 on 11/21/2011 3:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pjbrankin on 11/21/2011 3:36:00 PM (view original):
Uh...no. College basketball uses RPI. It would be ridiculous if WIS came up with some arbitrary formula
Okay, fair enough, but I guess I'm saying you can't really have it both ways.

In my first or second post, I had listed a scenario where a team could be 12-14 and still have an RPI around 8-10.  If the RPI is such a great system, how could you not allow someone that is considered one of the best 10 teams into the tournament with the other 64 best teams, despite not finishing at .500?

So then, in fairness if it is your belief that someone with a below .500 record should not be in the tournament, despite being one of the best 10 teams based on RPI, then you would have to agree the RPI system would need a major overhaul.

There is no such thing as a flawless system that can cover ALL contingencies.
11/21/2011 8:55 PM
thewizard10
Posts: 73 (0)
Rookie
1 6
Prospect
Posted by a_in_the_b on 11/21/2011 8:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by thewizard10 on 11/21/2011 3:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pjbrankin on 11/21/2011 3:36:00 PM (view original):
Uh...no. College basketball uses RPI. It would be ridiculous if WIS came up with some arbitrary formula
Okay, fair enough, but I guess I'm saying you can't really have it both ways.

In my first or second post, I had listed a scenario where a team could be 12-14 and still have an RPI around 8-10.  If the RPI is such a great system, how could you not allow someone that is considered one of the best 10 teams into the tournament with the other 64 best teams, despite not finishing at .500?

So then, in fairness if it is your belief that someone with a below .500 record should not be in the tournament, despite being one of the best 10 teams based on RPI, then you would have to agree the RPI system would need a major overhaul.

There is no such thing as a flawless system that can cover ALL contingencies.
Definitely not, but it certainly can improved quite a bit.
11/21/2011 9:09 PM
blackdog3377
Posts: 1691 (0)
Hall of Famer
190 2 1
Prospect
Posted by Iguana1 on 11/21/2011 8:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Weena on 11/21/2011 2:35:00 PM (view original):
It may not be written in the WIS rules but it is written in the NCAA rules that WIS follows in this area. Also, it is based on overall record so the 12-14 record you cite could still end up over .500 depending on your success in the CT.
I don't believe this 500 or better rule actually exists in the RL D1 NCAA.

Of course a team with a losing record getting an at-large has never happened, but in conversations I've had with people that have gone through the media selection process, they've said it never was brought up as an eliminating factor.
And you can pretty much guarantee that no team below .500 is going to get looked at by the committee.
11/21/2011 9:23 PM
arssanguinus
Posts: 1120 (0)
Hall of Famer
283 1
Pro
Posted by thewizard10 on 11/21/2011 9:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by a_in_the_b on 11/21/2011 8:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by thewizard10 on 11/21/2011 3:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by pjbrankin on 11/21/2011 3:36:00 PM (view original):
Uh...no. College basketball uses RPI. It would be ridiculous if WIS came up with some arbitrary formula
Okay, fair enough, but I guess I'm saying you can't really have it both ways.

In my first or second post, I had listed a scenario where a team could be 12-14 and still have an RPI around 8-10.  If the RPI is such a great system, how could you not allow someone that is considered one of the best 10 teams into the tournament with the other 64 best teams, despite not finishing at .500?

So then, in fairness if it is your belief that someone with a below .500 record should not be in the tournament, despite being one of the best 10 teams based on RPI, then you would have to agree the RPI system would need a major overhaul.

There is no such thing as a flawless system that can cover ALL contingencies.
Definitely not, but it certainly can improved quite a bit.

Why?  I have absolutely no problem with "If you can't win more than you lose, you are out."

 

11/21/2011 10:29 PM
thewizard10
Posts: 73 (0)
Rookie
1 6
Prospect
Never mind guys, just forget it. Nobody saw the point I was trying to make. It had nothing to do with the game.
11/21/2011 10:37 PM
arssanguinus
Posts: 1120 (0)
Hall of Famer
283 1
Pro
No, I really don't.  The fact that you can invent an exception to a system in an extreme case does not invalidate the system.

11/21/2011 10:44 PM
◂ Prev 1234 Next ▸
Below .500 record Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.