2016-17 Bracketology

Rhodymob05 · Unread post by **Rhodymob05** » 7 years ago

URI2006_Andy wrote:I agree Belmont at home without their best player is a stretch but we need statements like the ones Rothstein makes to offset some of the garbage that's spewed out in favor of the so called power conference schools who get credit for losing. Plus I don't think the committee will be factoring in that other bubble teams may have got wins versus a team missing players. Off the top of my head, PC beat X when X's roster was decimated and Houston beat us without Martin. I'm sure there are more instances.

People took credit for beating us too without Has, so your're right. As long as the committee stays consistent on the matter with all teams.

spookydog · Unread post by **spookydog** » 7 years ago

hrstrat57 wrote:It really shocks me how much the TV talking heads still love Rhody. Dan played right into it with CBSSports post game interview.

I wonder how much of this is the fact that CBSSports shows a lot of A-10 games, so they want to pump up the conference, so they in turn try to make the case that this league deserves 3 teams in the tournament.

PeterRamTime · Unread post by **PeterRamTime** » 7 years ago

So Georgia Tech and Syracuse have RPI's in the 80's.
In the event they go into selection Sunday with RPI's in the 80's will they get in?
I'm pretty sure no one with an RPI in the 80's has ever been selected. Maybe not even close.
I feel like they maybe can be an exception because the ACC is so strong this year.
They also play each other in the last game of the regular season.

Also, Clemson is 14-13 4-11
Screw them they should be further down than us since they've lost about half their games.

STC · Unread post by **STC** » 7 years ago

And they said the Baron 2.0 thread was dumb....

Rhodymob05 · Unread post by **Rhodymob05** » 7 years ago

Embarrassing for the committee and tournament in general if they had Clemson in front of URI, who has an RPI of 47.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 7 years ago

Rhodymob05 wrote:Embarrassing for the committee and tournament in general if they had Clemson in front of URI, who has an RPI of 47.

What does the RPI matter?

Da_Process_Survivor · Unread post by **Da_Process_Survivor** » 7 years ago

rjsuperfly66 wrote:
Rhodymob05 wrote:Embarrassing for the committee and tournament in general if they had Clemson in front of URI, who has an RPI of 47.
What does the RPI matter?

It matters when Clemson is gaming the system. Their SOS is propped up by the ACC, aka games they are LOSING to a 4-11 tune. So they get credit for losing to good teams and beating no one? There's no medals for trying.

URI...........Clemson
47 rpi..........61 rpi
59 sos..........17 sos
24 ooc sos.....96 ooc sos

Clemson is quite literally riding the coattails of their conference.

A team that is below 500 in their conference is not a tournament team...period. Let alone getting destroyed in conference. 4-11 is not tourney worthy, ever

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 7 years ago

Here's Jay Bilas's take on Rhody:

58. Rhode Island Rams
The Rams have a great early-season win against Cincinnati, but there are no other top-50-caliber wins, which the committee seems to be mindful of. Rhody is good and capable of playing with anyone, but it might take an Atlantic 10 tournament crown to make the NCAA tournament field.

gorhody89 · Unread post by **gorhody89** » 7 years ago

While i do not think we are worthy of at large at this time Clemson being considered is an absolute joke:

their 4 conference wins are wake twice, pitt, and GT....that is not very impressive with a soft out of conference schedule, clemson really should not be even close to being on the bubble

Rhodymob05 · Unread post by **Rhodymob05** » 7 years ago

Da_Process_Survivor wrote:
rjsuperfly66 wrote:
Rhodymob05 wrote:Embarrassing for the committee and tournament in general if they had Clemson in front of URI, who has an RPI of 47.
What does the RPI matter?
It matters when Clemson is gaming the system. Their SOS is propped up by the ACC, aka games they are LOSING to a 4-11 tune. So they get credit for losing to good teams and beating no one? There's no medals for trying.

URI...........Clemson
47 rpi..........61 rpi
59 sos..........17 sos
24 ooc sos.....96 ooc sos

Clemson is quite literally riding the coattails of their conference.

A team that is below 500 in their conference is not a tournament team...period. Let alone getting destroyed in conference. 4-11 is not tourney worthy, ever

Makes sense to me.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 7 years ago

I agree with you, but URI's RPI isn't also gaming the system? It's a team gaming the system slightly better than another, which is why I could care less what one's RPI is versus the other.

Rhodymob05 · Unread post by **Rhodymob05** » 7 years ago

RPI.........."The basic formula is 25% team winning percentage (WP), 50% opponents' average winning percentage (OWP), and 25% opponents' opponents' average winning percentage (OOWP)."

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 7 years ago

RPI should be the only criteria. Top X number of teams that did not earn an autobid should get in. The committee should be retired.

If you prefer a different metric to RPI, fine. Use KenPom or whatever. But everyone should be judged on the same objective criteria and since there are always going to be unbalanced schedules with 350 teams, find the best way to level it out and then go with that with zero exceptions.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 7 years ago

TruePoint wrote:RPI should be the only criteria. Top X number of teams that did not earn an autobid should get in. The committee should be retired.

If you prefer a different metric to RPI, fine. Use KenPom or whatever. But everyone should be judged on the same objective criteria and since there are always going to be unbalanced schedules with 350 teams, find the best way to level it out and then go with that with zero exceptions.

I think most would agree with you, but the problem is everyone knows the RPI is outdated so it's used less and less, but they don't know how to create a new system, so until that point a selection is open for interpretation. KenPom has already come out and said that if his formula were to be a part of the selection process, it would have to be altered since it's currently set up as a predictive/strength metric and not meant to seed teams for the tournament.

Iggy1979 · Unread post by **Iggy1979** » 7 years ago

Like this idea but TV won't allow it because it would take the drama, and viewership, away from Selection Sunday.

rhodysurf · Unread post by **rhodysurf** » 7 years ago

The problem is that every system so far can be gamed, including KenPom. If you come out and say KenPom is the most important, all of the sudden the game will change. Thats the one thing that a subjective committee has going for it, it leaves teams guessing about what matters most and they (usually) are left just to play the games to win as they should.

Theres also no way to measure injury impacts and such well yet. For example, PCs RPI and KenPom would benefit the same from beating Xavier at full strength vs when they didnt have Bluett and Sumner (Ignoring which court)

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 7 years ago

Iggy1979 wrote:Like this idea but TV won't allow it because it would take the drama, and viewership, away from Selection Sunday.

Well, I think it would depend how much information the committee gave out ... For instance, the model many seem to want in basketball, is very much the same model that football got rid of. People seem to want a BCS like system that combines a bunch of inputs and gives one output. And that could work, if the system updates say every Sunday at 6 PM, and the new numbers are given out one time per week, just like the old BCS system. But in it's current form, a BCS-like system would be a complete failure until all of the predictive measures stop working as predictors, or offer a version that does. Because think about it, in KenPom, Wake is 31. In Sagarin, a 38. In BPI, a 34. So KenPom, 8 seed. BPI, 9 seed. Sagarin, 10 seed. Real-life? Struggling to be in the First Four Out. It doesn't work. Or Clemson ... In BPI, a 37. In KenPom, a 37. In Sagarin, a 40. In reality? 14-13, 4-11 in conference.

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 7 years ago

I think the biggest problem with the BCS was the top teams didn't always get to battle it out. If there's two undefeated BCS teams it worked great. 3 undefeated teams or some combination of more than 2 undefeated and one loss teams and you were screwed. I don't think people would have hated the BCS nearly as much if there was a four or eight team playoff taking the teams the computer spit out.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 7 years ago

You could also not reveal the exact formula that the proprietary system uses if you're worried about the system being gamed. Obviously opting for secrecy over transparency would open you up to a whole other series of accusations and criticisms, but at some point you have to just pick the thing the most people agree is the fairest and best, and prepare to live with inevitable criticism.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 7 years ago

RhowdyRam02 wrote:I think the biggest problem with the BCS was the top teams didn't always get to battle it out. If there's two undefeated BCS teams it worked great. 3 undefeated teams or some combination of more than 2 undefeated and one loss teams and you were screwed. I don't think people would have hated the BCS nearly as much if there was a four or eight team playoff taking the teams the computer spit out.

I agree to an extent, but I also believe whether the line was 2, 22, or 102, there will always be a team 103, 104, or 105 who feels they got screwed. Now teams 34-38 won't draw the same levels of public criticism, but it won't necessarily mean it works. Imagine if all these metrics determined Clemson and Wake and Syracuse are borderline locks? People would be livid.

rhodysurf · Unread post by **rhodysurf** » 7 years ago

TruePoint wrote:You could also not reveal the exact formula that the proprietary system uses if you're worried about the system being gamed. Obviously opting for secrecy over transparency would open you up to a whole other series of accusations and criticisms, but at some point you have to just pick the thing the most people agree is the fairest and best, and prepare to live with inevitable criticism.

That has a whole new host of issues then because whats to stop the committee from changing the params to fit something different every year or even right on selection Sunday. Actually thats the same issue that exists now.

I'm pro computer models btw, I just think that currently none of the systems in place are actually good enough to rely on.

Rhode_Island_Red · Unread post by **Rhode_Island_Red** » 7 years ago

rodfromcranston wrote:Here's Jay Bilas's take on Rhody:

58. Rhode Island Rams
The Rams have a great early-season win against Cincinnati, but there are no other top-50-caliber wins, which the committee seems to be mindful of. Rhody is good and capable of playing with anyone, but it might take an Atlantic 10 tournament crown to make the NCAA tournament field.

Another Dookie -- third base, triple etc. He thinks all the at-large bids should go to cartel members.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 7 years ago

It is very subjective when it comes down to it.

They choose to emphasis a metric or statistic when it confirms an eye test.

URI has a great shot to play themselves into the tournament right now.

Even saying "Oh no! They can't make it unless they show up in the A10 final!"

Well if we win out the regular season or go 2-1 from here, that would mean a game against a team we likely beat or Richmond, then a run at VCU likely or Dayton in the semi.

Its not Mt. Everest.

PeterRamTime · Unread post by **PeterRamTime** » 7 years ago

Seawrightspostgame wrote:It is very subjective when it comes down to it.

They choose to emphasis a metric or statistic when it confirms an eye test.

URI has a great shot to play themselves into the tournament right now.

Even saying "Oh no! They can't make it unless they show up in the A10 final!"

Well if we win out the regular season or go 2-1 from here, that would mean a game against a team we likely beat or Richmond, then a run at VCU likely or Dayton in the semi.

Its not Mt. Everest.

Yeah it's really not super impossible.
Just beat three teams that we are superior to and then beat VCU and Dayton. Or VCU twice.
If we can't beat VCU Saturday, which is very unlikely if you look at history... I feel like we will really have a good shot at reaching our goal.

NYGFan_Section208 · Unread post by **NYGFan_Section208** » 7 years ago

rjsuperfly66 wrote:
RhowdyRam02 wrote:I think the biggest problem with the BCS was the top teams didn't always get to battle it out. If there's two undefeated BCS teams it worked great. 3 undefeated teams or some combination of more than 2 undefeated and one loss teams and you were screwed. I don't think people would have hated the BCS nearly as much if there was a four or eight team playoff taking the teams the computer spit out.
I agree to an extent, but I also believe whether the line was 2, 22, or 102, there will always be a team 103, 104, or 105 who feels they got screwed. Now teams 34-38 won't draw the same levels of public criticism, but it won't necessarily mean it works. Imagine if all these metrics determined Clemson and Wake and Syracuse are borderline locks? People would be livid.

Syracuse. Is. A. Lock.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 7 years ago

PeterRamTime wrote:
Seawrightspostgame wrote:It is very subjective when it comes down to it.

They choose to emphasis a metric or statistic when it confirms an eye test.

URI has a great shot to play themselves into the tournament right now.

Even saying "Oh no! They can't make it unless they show up in the A10 final!"

Well if we win out the regular season or go 2-1 from here, that would mean a game against a team we likely beat or Richmond, then a run at VCU likely or Dayton in the semi.

Its not Mt. Everest.
Yeah it's really not super impossible.
Just beat three teams that we are superior to and then beat VCU and Dayton. Or VCU twice.
If we can't beat VCU Saturday, which is very unlikely if you look at history... I feel like we will really have a good shot at reaching our goal.

Yea VCU game presents a ton of challenges. Just deliver. Biggest home game this year now that Dayton was an L.

I might be able to drag my wife in there.

PeterRamTime · Unread post by **PeterRamTime** » 7 years ago

Syracuse just punched their ticket pretty much with a three point bank shot to beat Duke at the buzzer.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 7 years ago

Ouch.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 7 years ago

If Bill Koch says URI still has NCAA life, then you know URI still has life. Unless he is just tweeting that to entice 35 more people into the stands.

Cuse being in hurts our chances though. Really need all the bubbles to burst here.

PeterRamTime · Unread post by **PeterRamTime** » 7 years ago

Yeah looks like wake is going to survive Pitt as well.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 7 years ago

That 31? is it for Wake? The post player. That guy is a master of the post.

Wow. He scores a lot of points down there basically against anyone.

gorhody89 · Unread post by **gorhody89** » 7 years ago

not all bad news, tenn lost vs vandy, TCU blown out by kansas(not gonna hurt them but they dont come up with cuse type win)...

buuuuut PC is up 8 early gross

reef · Unread post by **reef** » 7 years ago

I agree Clemson being mentioned is a joke 4-11 conf

Pitt was being mentioned at 4-10 ??

UCH21377 · Unread post by **UCH21377** » 7 years ago

Forget everyone else. Beat VCU.

NYGFan_Section208 · Unread post by **NYGFan_Section208** » 7 years ago

'Cuse being in is totally unrelated to Rhody's chances...think about it...before tonight...winning record in the best conference in the country...wins over FSU, VA, two teams in the Top 10 (3 now).... For compare sake, Rhody beat Cincy, and then we're talking about Belmont as a good win?

I want Rhody in as much as anyone, but the Orange has no impact on their position....NONE.

reef · Unread post by **reef** » 7 years ago

We can't really worry about all this bubble stuff

Win all the way to the a10 finals and it should be good enough

In that scenario we then root for all the locks to win their conf tourney

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 7 years ago

Yea Reef I am game-to-game on Rhody.

But NYG there is obviously a reason CBS sports has Syracuse first 4 out right now and ESPN has nearly the whole ACC in the tournament today. I say this as an ACC basketball follower and someone that graduated from an ACC school not named BC. (OHHH! BC!!! There is a school that beat Syracuse!!! 1 of their 12!)

The Duke win for Cuse is big. But it isn't a traditional Duke team. And Cuse still can drop 3 in a row and finish with 6 losses in their last 7. For a grand total of 17-15.

The fact is many teams are down across the country and everyone is just choosing the teams they prefer because teams are so flawed.

I choose URI.

reef · Unread post by **reef** » 7 years ago

True they say this year is a weak bubble so if we take care of business and win our next 5 maybe we sneak in

Unread post by **ATPTourFan** » 7 years ago

When PC needs big wins, they get them.

Rhodymob05 · Unread post by **Rhodymob05** » 7 years ago

ATPTourFan wrote:When PC needs big wins, they get them.

Yup, and theyre gonna take our spot too, just another kick in the balls.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 7 years ago

We lost any right to bitch about PC when played them in December. If we'd have won that game as we should have, there would be no discussion now about whether they might get in and we might not. If it comes down to us or them, they should go even though we are the better team and would beat them 7 or 8 out of 10. If you don't take care of your own business then you don't get to feel bad for yourself when everyone else gets the things you want.

Rhodymob05 · Unread post by **Rhodymob05** » 7 years ago

TruePoint wrote:We lost any right to bitch about PC when played them in December. If we'd have won that game as we should have, there would be no discussion now about whether they might get in and we might not. If it comes down to us or them, they should go even though we are the better team and would beat them 7 or 8 out of 10. If you don't take care of your own business then you don't get to feel bad for yourself when everyone else gets the things you want.

I'm not bitching about them, it's just sad.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 7 years ago

Yes sorry, was not saying anyone in particular was bitching I'm just making the point that we have nothing to bitch about.

Agree it is very sad.

PeterRamTime · Unread post by **PeterRamTime** » 7 years ago

Had a dream last night that we beat Villanova in the Ryan center. There was great rejoicing. We made the tournament.
Then I somehow made it from RI back home to VA in 6 hours...

Hey we accomplished our goal somewhere...my dreams...

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 7 years ago

Dan may yet be able to take credit for helping a RI team make the dance. Unfortunately that team will likely not be URI.

Rhode_Island_Red · Unread post by **Rhode_Island_Red** » 7 years ago

If that hideous, disgusting institution that shall not be named makes the NCAA -- AGAIN -- and we don't -- AGAIN -- it's going to be a long, cold, dark summer.

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 7 years ago

Rhode_Island_Red wrote:If that hideous, disgusting institution that shall not be named makes the NCAA -- AGAIN -- and we don't -- AGAIN -- it's going to be a long, cold, dark summer.

Do not put your winter clothes away.

rhodyrudder · Unread post by **rhodyrudder** » 7 years ago

TruePoint wrote:We lost any right to bitch about PC when played them in December. If we'd have won that game as we should have, there would be no discussion now about whether they might get in and we might not. If it comes down to us or them, they should go even though we are the better team and would beat them 7 or 8 out of 10. If you don't take care of your own business then you don't get to feel bad for yourself when everyone else gets the things you want.

They have 7 straight TP.
To say we would win 8 out of 10 requires us to actually, you know, win once.
Once.
One time.
I'll believe it when I see it.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 7 years ago

Well most of their teams over the last seven years have been better than our team that year. This year, though, our team was better and should have won the game. Probably should have won it easily, to be honest, based on the respective talent on the teams.

Unread post by **ATPTourFan** » 7 years ago

TP was talking about this year's teams relative strength. The previous annual game outcomes are not relevant.

This year we had them and shit in our pants to blow a late road lead.

Login • Register