Except it wasn't Pederson who did this.
It was Jeff Long who instituted this policy. Pederson had nothing to do with it.
Game Night
- Thread starter Delpanther
- Start date
Except it wasn't Pederson who did this.
It was Jeff Long who instituted this policy. Pederson had nothing to do with it.
This isn't entirely true.
The "committee" will tell you they use "everything."
Still don't get why you have an issue with Pomroy though.
They've probably been ranked in the 300's at some point, just not this year.
I don't know what you're arguing. I've conceded that the RPI is used in Tournament seeding. Which is what you're saying is 100% correlated. You're right, that it's correlated.
What I'm saying, is that RPI doesn't tell you how good a team on the court actually is. I'm also saying that the NCAA Tournament is using inferior information and the NCAA is horrible at determining who the best team actually is. I'm also right.
This feels more like an anti-KenPom thing where we're trying to grasp at anything possible to be more predictive than him, despite any and all evidence to the contrary suggesting otherwise.
First off, Kent State was never ranked that low, they were ranked 127 when we played them. Second, what have we done to deserve much higher the 28 that we are ranked right now? We got beat by double digits by the only legit team we've played so far.
Alright buddy, we've played the 285th ranked non-conf SOS so far. You can take those concerns about our offense and stuff them.
Its 100% true. This was last years NCAA Tournament with seeding and RPI rank. Its been like this for decades. Notice the correlation.
1 Seeds
Kentucky-RPI Rank 1
Villanova -2
Wisconsin-4
Duke-6
2 Seeds
Arizona-5
Gonzaga- 8
Kansas- 3
Virginia- 7
3 Seeds
Notre Dame-16
Oklahoma- 18
Iowa State- 9
Baylor- 10
4 Seeds
North Carolina- 11
Georgetown- 25
Maryland- 13
Louisville- 21
What would be hilarious would be to have you put your predictions versus Pomeroy's and see how hard you get owned by him.
For the umpteenth time, you're debating 2 different things.
You're talking what is used by the NCAA committee. I'm glad they look at that. They are dumb.
I'm talking about what is actually predictive and indicative of the team's true talent. Whatever happens in the NCAA Tournament, and whatever is given to you in the NCAA selection process, is irrelevant in gauging your team.
I'm glad Pitt can get in or get a better seed because of some clever maneuvering and manipulation, but it doesn't make the team itself any better or any worse.
I feel like this is all going over your head at this point. Which isn't a bad thing, just something that will be kept in mind going forward.
Been posting them all year on the college basketball main board. Since preseason, been hyping u
You can say that it is, but it isnt. Your top RPI teams get the best seeds, period. Pitt needs to get its RPI into the Top 16 to get a good seed. I think we can do it.
Actually Im not.
Im saying the RPI is used to seed teams, which it is. Pomeroy is not used to seed teams, and never was.
Im saying the RPI is better than Pomeroy, which it was, is, and always will be.
Im also saying the way Pitt is beating the shit out of teams, Pomeroy must be giving Vegas bad information. Because Pitt's been blowing out the spread all year long minus Purdue. Just saying.
To clarify, I think Pitt can do it as well, but I don't think it means that Pitt is one of the 16 best teams in the nation.
This is the crux of my belief. The RPI winners get the best seed, the RPI winners are not the best teams.
In general, the NCAA Tournament Committee is dumb. They rely on inferior numbers to seed, hence all of the upsets. Plus in general, a one-and -done is a horrible way to determine the best team.
KenPom tells you who the best team is over a full season. The NCAA just tells you who the best team is in 1 game, over a random multi-round single-game sample.
RPI will get Pitt a better seed. KenPom will be more useful in identifying how good/bad Pitt is relative to the rest of college basketball.
I'm officially out of this thread. It's reached Delpanther and sherepower levels of ignorance.
You would probably be shocked of how Top RPI teams generally dominate the NCAA Tournament year after year. That's proven history too.
Then why are Gonzaga and Pitt so good at RPI ratings? Why do they always wind up near the top? Because they're good? Or because they manipulate the hell out of it?
Go ahead and post your proof.
KenPom has pretty much been established as the best predictor of teams in March, feel free to post your information.
Pitt's RPI last year was 76. The year before 39. The year before 46. The year before, gulp, 93. Pitt's RPI has sucked the last 4 years.
Gonzaga's RPI last year was 8. And hey, they went to the Elite 8!!!!
Is that cherry picking, or nah?
Pitt and Gonzaga were among the top 2 or 3 RPI teams for several years running -- how did that work out for them? It was all over Pitt's media guide, after all.
Pitt's official RPI
2011-10th-1 Seed, Big East Champions
2010-15th, 3 Seed
2009-2nd-1 Seed, Elite 8
2008-16th-4 Seed-Big East Champions
2007-5th-3 Seed
2006-10th-5 Seed
2005-54th-8 Seed
2004-8th-3 Seed, Big East Champions
-I think you are mistaken, or the media guide lied. Either way, our RPI has been pretty good, but no where near what you had thought. Pitt is also known as arguably the biggest NCAA Tournament choker in the last 20 years too.
-With that said, Pitt has both had absolute horrible seeding selections and draws in a few tournaments, where our seeding was underseeded, and we lost early. Example, 2004 and having to beat a Top 10 Wisconsin team in Wisconsin. Disgrace. We also got a complete gift in 2011 with one of the easiest brackets ever, and failed miserably against Butler. Actually, Dixon failed miserably, he lost Pitt the game, not Nasir Robinson or the players. His game management was one of the worst ever in an Ncaa Tournament game.
I'm sorry yes the team we played is not good but did you see all those empty seats at the Pete? It was ridiculous.
Interest seems to really have fallen off the past few seasons.
Nothing however that a top recruiting class or 2 couldn't fix. This game though was a total yawn fest.
Interest seems to really have fallen off the past few seasons.
Nothing however that a top recruiting class or 2 couldn't fix. This game though was a total yawn fest.
I watch enough basketball to know that everyone plays cupcakes. But I also watch enough to know that if you want to be a top program you have to play and win enough "big games" in and outside the conference to be both nationally relevant and to generate excitement among your fans. The last 4 years Pitt hasn't done this-they got complacent, lazy and scheduled with a lack of confidence. They pi$$ed away the fan support they built during the Howland/first 6-8 years of the Dixon tenure. Talk about dense-by your own admission, you won't have anything to do with Pitt basketball until they do something worthwhile-that's the very lack of enthusiasm that permeates the program which I described(duh) and it's totally Pitt's fault. Pedersen was an idiot and he let Dixon's obsession with playing teams he knew he could beat control scheduling. And at the same time the quality of the teams declined. This doesn't mean Pitt can't get its mojo back but it means they have to generate some excitement nationally. They have to play and beat name teams like they did when they were a BE power. Stomped by Indiana last year, by Purdue this year, stomped by Duke at home two years ago, beaten by ACC also rans at home, miss the NCAAs two of the last 4 years. Pitt's responsible for its own attendance issues.
This isn't Pitt's fault with at all. I won't even watch Duke play Kentucky until March now because I've grown away from the product in general. 8 years ago, I'd watch Nevada play Pepperdine at nearly any hour.
At least the "nobody will play us at the Pete" mantra should be laid to rest. The mojo is gone. We gotta get it back.
a couple tidbits that are at the very least interesting...
Louisville is the number #12 RPI team in the country. Here is their home schedule...
Samford (187)
Hartford (278)
N Florida (130)
St Francis (275)
Grand canyon(152)
E Michigan (88)
Kenessaw st (305)
W Kentucky (125)
UMKC (189)
Utah valley (316)
To get to #12, they beat most of those teams to date, and lost on the road at Michigan St.
I am tired of the tired argument in regards to our home schedule. Using this board's rationale, pitino better start scheduling better or he's going to lose the interest of the Louisville community.
Btw...OOC away games for Louisville is the big10 game at Michigan St (we had Purdue) and Kentucky (we had Duquesne at Consol). Sorry Louisville's rival is Kentucky and ours is Duquesne. Louisville had a neutral floor game against St Louis. We have 2, Gonzaga and Davidson.
Louisville is the number #12 RPI team in the country. Here is their home schedule...
Samford (187)
Hartford (278)
N Florida (130)
St Francis (275)
Grand canyon(152)
E Michigan (88)
Kenessaw st (305)
W Kentucky (125)
UMKC (189)
Utah valley (316)
To get to #12, they beat most of those teams to date, and lost on the road at Michigan St.
I am tired of the tired argument in regards to our home schedule. Using this board's rationale, pitino better start scheduling better or he's going to lose the interest of the Louisville community.
Btw...OOC away games for Louisville is the big10 game at Michigan St (we had Purdue) and Kentucky (we had Duquesne at Consol). Sorry Louisville's rival is Kentucky and ours is Duquesne. Louisville had a neutral floor game against St Louis. We have 2, Gonzaga and Davidson.
Reading comprehension issues? Read the whole post
Kentucky will be played at Kentucky.
You've been beating the Pitt home schedule drum forever. Who on Louisville's home schedule should we add to ours to make ours acceptable?
I agree with you. However, I still think there were different models that could have been chosen to meet that same end.
Yes, the home schedule is critical when you're trying to sell tickets but as i also said, if you want to be nationally relevant and generate excitement you simply have to schedule high profile teams, whether home or away. It's unfortunate the Gonzaga game was a washout but it's been a while since you can say that Pitt played in a headliner game that anyone outside the 412 area code was likely to be interested in.
I just don't get the "cup-cake" argument for interest and attendance. I watch because Pitt is my team and I enjoy watching these kids play regardless of the competition. There are more than enough great plays, athletic moves, beautiful shots, etc. to keep my interest. Sure, perhaps a few more early marquee games would be fun, but there will be more than enough tough games in ACC play to see how good this team really is.
No. Not true at all. To do what you ask, you gotta produce in the NCAA tourney. That's what separates Syracuse from Pitt from an "national excitement" standpoint. There are plenty of seasons Syracuse doesn't leave the general area until January.
And you still haven't acknowledged Pitino's home schedule. Who would you like to see Pitt play? To be honest, because we don't have a rival like Kentucky, I think Jamie could and should schedule one additional H/H game each year. WVU as an example. But one game is all the schedule needs.
You want to argue NCAA tourney production? I am not sure you'll get An argument out of me, or anyone else for that matter.
I think you guys are exceptions. Most people savor a game that gets their juices flowing which is a game you have some chance of losing or which you know carries some notable stakes if you win or lose. Most people go to the opera to just enjoy the experience....no offense.
Been trending down for a few years. The novelty of excellent basketball has worn off. It'll turn around in our favor as the Pens struggle and Steelers miss the playoffs. This is a frontrunner town. UBER will never beat out the Bandwagon Transportation Co. I think interest will pick up tremendously once ACC play begins....and we win.
I'm sure the players lose interest a bit for these rent-a-victims. And I'd expect Barnes to have some say in the schedule. Unfortunately, he's a FB-oriented guy, so his hoops network won't be too broad. At least he seems like a real human, unlike SP.
Look, I don't know how far you want to carry the analysis. Sure winning in the NCAA tournament trumps playing big and winning big games during the regular season but if you do not succeed in doing either then you surely squelch enthusiasm and that's exactly what Pitt has done. You're telling me that every year Pitt can't play a couple of teams from power 5 conferences home and away. In past years, while in the BE, Pitt played Duke, Kentucky, Indiana, Ok. St. and Washington out of conference. Why did they stop playing these kinds of teams. The teams in the tournaments they have played in recently have also been very average. How many big games has Pitt actually won the last 4 years? Louisville and Pitino for obvious reasons are proven commodities; Dixon and Pitt aren't which is precisely why Pitt has to take some scheduling risks if they want to be a high profile team and Louisville doesn't but having said that, without doing research, I'd hazard a guess (and that's all it is) that year in and out for the past let's say 5-7 years Louisville has played more "name" schools on the OOC schedule than Pitt has.
And don't underestimate the impact that playing and beating name teams has on recruiting which, much like the scheduling,has trended downward.
