Near Year's End RPI Update

[MajorMike]

Oklahoma St 0 0 0.000 12 1 0.923 12 1 0.923 0.6409 11
Kansas 0 0 0.000 10 2 0.833 10 2 0.833 0.5802 54
Texas A&M 0 0 0.000 10 2 0.833 10 2 0.833 0.5722 62
Missouri 0 0 0.000 9 2 0.818 9 2 0.818 0.6232 22
Kansas St 0 0 0.000 10 3 0.769 10 3 0.769 0.6003 38
Texas Tech 0 0 0.000 10 3 0.769 10 3 0.769 0.6037 34
Nebraska 0 0 0.000 8 3 0.727 6 3 0.667 0.5842 51
Texas 0 0 0.000 8 3 0.727 8 3 0.727 0.5619 74
Baylor 0 0 0.000 7 3 0.700 6 3 0.667 0.4797 200
Oklahoma 0 0 0.000 7 3 0.700 6 3 0.667 0.5462 96
Iowa State 0 0 0.000 8 5 0.615 7 5 0.583 0.4878 181
Colorado 0 0 0.000 3 6 0.333 3 6 0.333 0.4133 278

1 Arizona 9-1 0.7150 7.0 0.6 0.9211 0.7022 0.5347 2 0.6464 3 0.7098 9 9
2 UCLA 10-0 0.7117 7.2 0.0 1.0000 0.6749 0.4969 6 0.6156 2 0.7117 1 1
3 Duke 11-1 0.7055 7.4 1.0 0.8810 0.7130 0.5150 1 0.6470 1 0.7144 6 6
4 Butler 11-1 0.6893 9.0 0.6 0.9375 0.6405 0.5386 8 0.6065 4 0.6841 16 16
5 Pittsburgh 11-2 0.6628 8.6 1.6 0.8431 0.6427 0.5228 10 0.6027 6 0.6636 7 7
6 North Carolina 10-1 0.6623 8.0 1.0 0.8889 0.6012 0.5579 18 0.5867 5 0.6673 2 2
7 Drexel 7-2 0.6590 8.2 1.2 0.8723 0.6170 0.5298 17 0.5879 16 0.6354
8 Kentucky 9-3 0.6532 6.6 2.6 0.7174 0.6674 0.5605 3 0.6318 7 0.6613
9 Villanova 8-2 0.6486 8.8 2.4 0.7857 0.6509 0.5069 9 0.6029 9 0.6522
10 Maryland 11-2 0.6443 8.6 2.0 0.8113 0.6402 0.4855 16 0.5886 8 0.6530
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 Oklahoma St 12-1 0.6409 9.2 1.0 0.9020 0.5497 0.5623 59 0.5539 11 0.6462 15 14
12 Clemson 12-0 0.6402 10.4 0.0 1.0000 0.5228 0.5153 114 0.5203 13 0.6402 22
13 Appalachian St 7-3 0.6341 7.0 1.8 0.7955 0.6175 0.5060 26 0.5803 34 0.6102
14 Tennessee 10-2 0.6338 8.0 2.0 0.8000 0.5895 0.5560 27 0.5784 12 0.6421


Observations:
- I still don't think OSU is a Top 10 team, but we have an awesome RPI base to go into conf play. Again, we know early RPI doesn't mean much, but the same way crapping out early can ruin your season RPI-wise, having a great early run can carry you, much like the mid-majors are figuring out. I think even if (and I don't think we will, but worst case) we crap out and go 9-7, which I really do think is worst case right now, we still get in to the NCAA.

- Believe it or not, KU had an RPI in the 100s as late as 23 Jan last year. KU is a perfect example of how winning solves most RPI problems. They win 16 of 17 and end up with an RPI of 20 and a #4 seed.

- On the very same note, atm had an RPI in the 100s as late as 3 Feb last year. They won heir last 8 before falling to UT in the B12 semis, and got one of the very last at-large bids with an RPI of 44 and a 10 seed.

What this tells us, is that if you are a team with a low RPI, you have to go on a VERY signifigant winning streak to get back into contention.

- UT had an RPI of 82 as late as 1 Jan last season, and went on to only lose 3 of their remaining 17 games. In that, they had 4 very good wins (above 25) and an additional 2 good (above 50) wins, against one bad loss (@OSU by 21), which ended up being a very good pedigree.

I don't believe that the B12 is going to have the teams with the very good RPIs this year to gain ground with. I think the that every team in the B12 is very beatable on any given day, and you won't have any 14-2 teams. Of the 'big four,' KU has the unbelievably advantageous schedule with UT, atm and OSU all at home. These are all away games they could lose, but have the decided edge at home. They have a good shot of winning the other 3 away games @ttek, uo and BU. Barring a complete collapse, KU should finish around 13-3. There will be a jumble of 3 teams fighting for the 12-4/11-5 2nd place thru 4th place. The 4th place team has historically always been 10-6. With all of these teams fighting for 2nd, look for a team like Mizzou or ttek to try and sneak into the top 4, battling for a 10-6/9-7 record. This almost always happens when there is parity just below the top (think CU last year and 2004).

Both Mizzou and ttek can get into the NCAA with a 9-7 record, because their RPI base is high enough. Last year, CU didn't get in at 9-7, but they started the year at 100 and finished in the 50s. The year before, both UT and ISU got in at 9-7, but UT started the year at 34 and ISU at 35. In 2004, ttek started the year at #14, went 9-7 in conf (including losing 7 of 10 from late Jan to late Feb) and ended up with an RPI of 30, getting in as an 8 seed.

At the same time, this means that if KState is for real and goes 9-7, they have a decent shot of getting in with their current RPI of 38.

[johngateswhiteley]

Oklahoma St 0 0 0.000 12 1 0.923 12 1 0.923 0.6409 11
Kansas 0 0 0.000 10 2 0.833 10 2 0.833 0.5802 54
Texas A&M 0 0 0.000 10 2 0.833 10 2 0.833 0.5722 62
Missouri 0 0 0.000 9 2 0.818 9 2 0.818 0.6232 22
Kansas St 0 0 0.000 10 3 0.769 10 3 0.769 0.6003 38
Texas Tech 0 0 0.000 10 3 0.769 10 3 0.769 0.6037 34
Nebraska 0 0 0.000 8 3 0.727 6 3 0.667 0.5842 51
Texas 0 0 0.000 8 3 0.727 8 3 0.727 0.5619 74
Baylor 0 0 0.000 7 3 0.700 6 3 0.667 0.4797 200
Oklahoma 0 0 0.000 7 3 0.700 6 3 0.667 0.5462 96
Iowa State 0 0 0.000 8 5 0.615 7 5 0.583 0.4878 181
Colorado 0 0 0.000 3 6 0.333 3 6 0.333 0.4133 278

1 Arizona 9-1 0.7150 7.0 0.6 0.9211 0.7022 0.5347 2 0.6464 3 0.7098 9 9
2 UCLA 10-0 0.7117 7.2 0.0 1.0000 0.6749 0.4969 6 0.6156 2 0.7117 1 1
3 Duke 11-1 0.7055 7.4 1.0 0.8810 0.7130 0.5150 1 0.6470 1 0.7144 6 6
4 Butler 11-1 0.6893 9.0 0.6 0.9375 0.6405 0.5386 8 0.6065 4 0.6841 16 16
5 Pittsburgh 11-2 0.6628 8.6 1.6 0.8431 0.6427 0.5228 10 0.6027 6 0.6636 7 7
6 North Carolina 10-1 0.6623 8.0 1.0 0.8889 0.6012 0.5579 18 0.5867 5 0.6673 2 2
7 Drexel 7-2 0.6590 8.2 1.2 0.8723 0.6170 0.5298 17 0.5879 16 0.6354
8 Kentucky 9-3 0.6532 6.6 2.6 0.7174 0.6674 0.5605 3 0.6318 7 0.6613
9 Villanova 8-2 0.6486 8.8 2.4 0.7857 0.6509 0.5069 9 0.6029 9 0.6522
10 Maryland 11-2 0.6443 8.6 2.0 0.8113 0.6402 0.4855 16 0.5886 8 0.6530
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 Oklahoma St 12-1 0.6409 9.2 1.0 0.9020 0.5497 0.5623 59 0.5539 11 0.6462 15 14
12 Clemson 12-0 0.6402 10.4 0.0 1.0000 0.5228 0.5153 114 0.5203 13 0.6402 22
13 Appalachian St 7-3 0.6341 7.0 1.8 0.7955 0.6175 0.5060 26 0.5803 34 0.6102
14 Tennessee 10-2 0.6338 8.0 2.0 0.8000 0.5895 0.5560 27 0.5784 12 0.6421


Observations:
- I still don't think OSU is a Top 10 team, but we have an awesome RPI base to go into conf play. Again, we know early RPI doesn't mean much, but the same way crapping out early can ruin your season RPI-wise, having a great early run can carry you, much like the mid-majors are figuring out. I think even if (and I don't think we will, but worst case) we crap out and go 9-7, which I really do think is worst case right now, we still get in to the NCAA.

- Believe it or not, KU had an RPI in the 100s as late as 23 Jan last year. KU is a perfect example of how winning solves most RPI problems. They win 16 of 17 and end up with an RPI of 20 and a #4 seed.

- On the very same note, atm had an RPI in the 100s as late as 3 Feb last year. They won heir last 8 before falling to UT in the B12 semis, and got one of the very last at-large bids with an RPI of 44 and a 10 seed.

What this tells us, is that if you are a team with a low RPI, you have to go on a VERY signifigant winning streak to get back into contention.

- UT had an RPI of 82 as late as 1 Jan last season, and went on to only lose 3 of their remaining 17 games. In that, they had 4 very good wins (above 25) and an additional 2 good (above 50) wins, against one bad loss (@OSU by 21), which ended up being a very good pedigree.

I don't believe that the B12 is going to have the teams with the very good RPIs this year to gain ground with. I think the that every team in the B12 is very beatable on any given day, and you won't have any 14-2 teams. Of the 'big four,' KU has the unbelievably advantageous schedule with UT, atm and OSU all at home. These are all away games they could lose, but have the decided edge at home. They have a good shot of winning the other 3 away games @ttek, uo and BU. Barring a complete collapse, KU should finish around 13-3. There will be a jumble of 3 teams fighting for the 12-4/11-5 2nd place thru 4th place. The 4th place team has historically always been 10-6. With all of these teams fighting for 2nd, look for a team like Mizzou or ttek to try and sneak into the top 4, battling for a 10-6/9-7 record. This almost always happens when there is parity just below the top (think CU last year and 2004).

Both Mizzou and ttek can get into the NCAA with a 9-7 record, because their RPI base is high enough. Last year, CU didn't get in at 9-7, but they started the year at 100 and finished in the 50s. The year before, both UT and ISU got in at 9-7, but UT started the year at 34 and ISU at 35. In 2004, ttek started the year at #14, went 9-7 in conf (including losing 7 of 10 from late Jan to late Feb) and ended up with an RPI of 30, getting in as an 8 seed.

At the same time, this means that if KState is for real and goes 9-7, they have a decent shot of getting in with their current RPI of 38.


thanks for the update. i have only one thing to say....A&M is winning the big 12. the losses to ucla and lsu have done nothing but motivate this Agg team. a win @ auburn doesn't mean much, but it does when you win by 30 and could have won by 45 holding the tigers to 33% shooting. i haven't seen much from the other big 12 teams that scare me. i do think kansas and osu are good, but i am not sold on either tek or t.u..

A&M wins the big 12.

[JMarkJohns]

ARIZONA! Even had they won vs. Virginia to be undefeated, I don't think they are a top-5 team just yet. They have some issues.

Florida is by far the best team in basketball, but had some issues with sickness and injury. Now that they are healthy, they are my favorites.

UCLA is very good. I've seen three games, including the A&M game. Can't say if they are legit yet. Still, both Arizona and UCLA have helped bring notoriety back to the Pac. Even if they aren't quite at the lofty ranking yet, it's nice to see the media think they are. It's refreshing. For as hyped as USC football is, Pac-10 basketball has been forgotten despite two National Titles and three runner-ups in the last fifteen years.

UCLA and Arizona; brinin' the rest back to the Pac!

[MajorMike]

jgw you are the best for quote fodder!

I have the thread with your comments about the powerhouse that is Winthrop saved as well.

[johngateswhiteley]

jgw you are the best for quote fodder!

I have the thread with your comments about the powerhouse that is Winthrop saved as well.


what did i say about Winthrop? i think you have me confused with another poster...

btw, after A&M beats Cal and finishes in the top 20 and then A&M wins the big 12 in bball....what will you say then?

[tlongII]

Better Duck!

[K-State Spur]

don't sleep on the cats, they are only going to get better as Walker adjusts to the college game.

[Beaverfuzz]

Better Duck!

Better Duck what, Ernie's boys? They've played Georgetown and who else?

[tlongII]

Better Duck what, Ernie's boys? They've played Georgetown and who else?

Nebraska. They're actually pretty good.

[K-State Spur]

nebraska = 10th (possibly 11th) best team in the big 12.

[tlongII]

nebraska = 10th (possibly 11th) best team in the big 12.

They're 8 - 3 with a win over #25 Creighton and their only losses have been on the road. The most they have lost by is 12 to Oregon.

[JMarkJohns]

The Pac-10 could have upwards of five bids this year. UCLA, Arizona and Washington are a given, but Oregon, California and Washington State are all good enough. I think only two of the three make it and Cal took a big hit losing Hardin for several weeks, but they have talent to go .500 over that time, then make a run come Pac-10 tourney time. The injury will probably cost them, however... I say of the three Oregon and Washington get in. Next year will be USC's and Cal's time to make a NCAA Tourney push.

I'd say the Pac-10 shakes down like this...

UCLA
Arizona

Washington
Oregon


Washington State
California
USC

Oregon State
Stanford

Arizona State

[K-State Spur]

They're 8 - 3 with a win over #25 Creighton and their only losses have been on the road. The most they have lost by is 12 to Oregon.

that creighton win looked impressive at the time, but the bjays are sitting at just 6-4 right now with really no impressive wins of their own (except for possibly xavier). nebraska's next most impressive win is wyoming, which would really only be impressive if they did it in laramie.

but the point remains that there are probably 9 or even 10 teams that will finish ahead of the huskers in the conference. really, only colorado (and maybe isu) can't argue that they are in better shape heading into next week.

[MajorMike]

btw, after A&M beats Cal and finishes in the top 20 and then A&M wins the big 12 in bball....what will you say then?


Ooops. 0fer2 so far.

[MajorMike]

Creighton was hyped early, but so far has 2 losses that will be bad losses by the end of the year (Fresno, Hawaii). They've also lost to Dayton, who will likely be 100ish. They did beat a very decent Mizzou St this weekend, however.

Neb lost to the same Hawaii team, a terrible Rutgers team, and an undefeated Oreg team who is vastly over rated, but will be brought down to earth next couple weeks with games against USC, UCLA, @ Zona. Wouldn't doubt if they lose all 3 of them. Neb should get another couple wins against Savananah and W Kent, but then start B12 play @ the Hilton against ISU, OSU at home, and @ uo. After a home game against CU, they play UT, @ KSU, KU, @ Mizzou, @ ttek, atm, KSU, @ KU. That is brutal. Any away game in the B12 is tuff.

OSU has a bad history of playing poorly @ Neb, so let's go out on a limb and say they win the 1st 4. Let's also say that they even win 2 of that 8 game sched after that. That is BEST case 6-6 with @ BU, Mizzou, ISU, @ CU left. Personally, I can easily see them losing 2 of the 1st 3, beating CU, and losing 7 of the next 8 to be 3-9. Bottom line is, Neb isn't going anywhere but NIT if they are lucky.

[johngateswhiteley]

Ooops. 0fer2 so far.

actually, i am 1-1....and A&M will win the big 12. quote me on that.

[MajorMike]

So, according to you, atm had no chance in hell against UCLA and LSU in basketball, and no chance in hell in football against ttek, uo or Neb, correct?

[johngateswhiteley]

So, according to you, atm had no chance in hell against UCLA and LSU in basketball, and no chance in hell in football against ttek, uo or Neb, correct?

why must you act like a child? ...having things explained to you as if you need your hand held.

1. A&M is very good in bball
2. osu is above average in football

...you do the math. plus, i made the comment about osu and their football team....and they lost.

[MajorMike]

You did not answer the question; again. Yes or no, or are you afraid to answer? Either you contradict yourself or admit that atm wasn't as good as those teams. Which is it?

[johngateswhiteley]

You did not answer the question; again. Yes or no, or are you afraid to answer? Either you contradict yourself or admit that atm wasn't as good as those teams. Which is it?

...you've got horrible logic and the conclusion you've drawn holds no water.

you act like a child.

[MajorMike]

And you still cannot answer. This is why people keep calling you a "babbling idiot" I assume.

[johngateswhiteley]

And you still cannot answer. This is why people keep calling you a "babbling idiot" I assume.

...i don't answer b/c your question has nothing to do with anything i have said. simply put, your question draws zero parallels to the topic at hand. i think your an idiot....but why would you care what i think...get the picture?

of course, why am i wasting my time. you'll just pose the question again...acting like a complete fool.

[MajorMike]

... you embarrass yourself; constantly.