Was Villanova overrated?

[Seahawks08]

Do you believe the MWC was the best conference in basketball during the 2012-2013 season?

Where are you getting your information from? If you are going by RPI, then it was the Big Ten, Big East, then the MWC.

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2013/conferencerpi

[BlueHen86]

I agree. The seeding committee did not. They gave the top 2 Big East teams better seeds than the top two AAC teams. Louisville should not have been a 4 seed, on the day the seeding committee met Louisville was clearly one of the top 12 teams in the county, if not top 8.

For whatever reason the committee didn't like the AAC. I think they gave too much weight to the RPI. The AAC also doesn't have a representative on the committee, that doesn't help their cause. Maybe Pitino pissed the committee off when he said Louisville was going to be a 1 seed.

Wasn't just RPI. AAC SoS was terrible.

SoS is essentially 75% of RPI.

[clenz]

Do you believe the MWC was the best conference in basketball during the 2012-2013 season?

Where are you getting your information from? If you are going by RPI, then it was the Big Ten, Big East, then the MWC.

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2013/conferencerpi

http://realtimerpi.com/2012-2013/rpi_conf_Men.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
1 Mountain West 0.5803 0.5701 2 9
2 Big Ten 0.5772 0.5734 1 12
3 Big East 0.5744 0.5668 3 15
4 Atlantic Coast 0.5613 0.5570 5 12
5 Big 12 0.5581 0.5575 4 10
6 Pacific-12 0.5550 0.5546 6 12
7 Atlantic 10 0.5481 0.5471 7 16
8 Southeastern 0.5420 0.5414 8 14
9 Missouri Valley 0.5336 0.5330 9 10
10 West Coast 0.5288 0.5268 10 9

[clenz]

RANK CONFERENCE W L PCT RPI RANK RPI
1 Mountain West Conference 87 26 0.7699 0.5802 1 0.5803
2 Big Ten Conference 121 31 0.7961 0.5712 2 0.5772
3 American Athletic Conference 151 34 0.8162 0.5651 3 0.5744
4 Atlantic Coast Conference 114 37 0.7550 0.5527 4 0.5613
5 Big 12 Conference 89 33 0.7295 0.5504 5 0.5581
6 Pacific 12 Conference 109 41 0.7267 0.5481 6 0.5549
7 Atlantic 10 Conference 145 77 0.6532 0.5471 7 0.5480
8 Southeastern Conference 117 58 0.6686 0.5339 9 0.5420
9 Missouri Valley Conference 75 45 0.6250 0.5362 8 0.5336
10 West Coast Conference 72 45 0.6154 0.5265 10 0.5288

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... pi/2012-13" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Seahawks08]

Wasn't just RPI. AAC SoS was terrible.

SoS is essentially 75% of RPI.

And? Want a better seed? Have more wins against an easy SoS. Problem solved.

[Seahawks08]

RANK CONFERENCE W L PCT RPI RANK RPI
1 Mountain West Conference 87 26 0.7699 0.5802 1 0.5803
2 Big Ten Conference 121 31 0.7961 0.5712 2 0.5772
3 American Athletic Conference 151 34 0.8162 0.5651 3 0.5744
4 Atlantic Coast Conference 114 37 0.7550 0.5527 4 0.5613
5 Big 12 Conference 89 33 0.7295 0.5504 5 0.5581
6 Pacific 12 Conference 109 41 0.7267 0.5481 6 0.5549
7 Atlantic 10 Conference 145 77 0.6532 0.5471 7 0.5480
8 Southeastern Conference 117 58 0.6686 0.5339 9 0.5420
9 Missouri Valley Conference 75 45 0.6250 0.5362 8 0.5336
10 West Coast Conference 72 45 0.6154 0.5265 10 0.5288

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... pi/2012-13" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I searched for one more site to see if the site I looked at was bogus, and go figure, it had the same results:

1 Big Ten 0.581
2 Big East 0.574
3 Mountain West 0.573

http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basket ... 2013-04-09

So what I can infer is that two different number sets are being used.

[BlueHen86]

SoS is essentially 75% of RPI.

And? Want a better seed? Have more wins against an easy SoS. Problem solved.

Wouldn't it make more sense to have more wins against a harder SOS?

Either way, it doesn't change the point that I am making which is that the committee got the seeding wrong for several teams. And it's not just me saying that, there have been lots of complaints about the seeding.

You keep falling back on SoS. No shit, it's better to have a harder SoS, that doesn't let the committee off the hook. SoS is part of process, but it's not the only part.

Besides, when the committee mis-seeds a team, it doesn't just effect that team, it effects all the teams they play. So, when UConn gets a #7, when they probably should have been a #5 it ends up hurting Villanova who shouldn't have played a top 20 team in the round of 32.

[Seahawks08]

I don't know about UCONN. I feel they had a home court advantage the last 2 games. I need to see them beat Florida in Texas before I pass judgement on them.

[BlueHen86]

I don't know about UCONN. I feel they had a home court advantage the last 2 games. I need to see them beat Florida in Texas before I pass judgement on them.

They didn't have home court advantage when they beat the 2 seed in the second round. You also didn't answer my question.

[clenz]

He's so hell bent on not giving the aac any props he is waiting to judge a team in the final four?

Really?

[BlueHen86]

He's so hell bent on not giving the aac any props he is waiting to judge a team in the final four?

Really?

But he still argues that his team was worthy of a 2 seed. If you are going to wait until the tourney plays out to see where teams should have been seeded you need to be consistent on evaluating all the teams. If he's going to say that UConn deserved their 7 seed because they lost in the FF to the overall #1 seed, then he can't say that Nova deserved their 2 seed when they got beat by the 7 seed. He is trying to have it both ways.

[clenz]

RANK CONFERENCE W L PCT RPI RANK RPI
1 Mountain West Conference 87 26 0.7699 0.5802 1 0.5803
2 Big Ten Conference 121 31 0.7961 0.5712 2 0.5772
3 American Athletic Conference 151 34 0.8162 0.5651 3 0.5744
4 Atlantic Coast Conference 114 37 0.7550 0.5527 4 0.5613
5 Big 12 Conference 89 33 0.7295 0.5504 5 0.5581
6 Pacific 12 Conference 109 41 0.7267 0.5481 6 0.5549
7 Atlantic 10 Conference 145 77 0.6532 0.5471 7 0.5480
8 Southeastern Conference 117 58 0.6686 0.5339 9 0.5420
9 Missouri Valley Conference 75 45 0.6250 0.5362 8 0.5336
10 West Coast Conference 72 45 0.6154 0.5265 10 0.5288

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... pi/2012-13" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I searched for one more site to see if the site I looked at was bogus, and go figure, it had the same results:

1 Big Ten 0.581
2 Big East 0.574
3 Mountain West 0.573

http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basket ... 2013-04-09

So what I can infer is that two different number sets are being used.

Which also shows you just how flawed the RPI can be.


Also, even using your numbers, do you think the MWC was the 3rd best conference in America last year?

[Seahawks08]

He's so hell bent on not giving the aac any props he is waiting to judge a team in the final four?

Really?

False, I know UCONN is good. Their wins over St, Joes, Nova, Iowa State, and Mich. St. prove it. All I question is that if they played Iowa St. or Mich. St. on a true neutral court, that I think UCONN would have lost those games.

[Seahawks08]

I searched for one more site to see if the site I looked at was bogus, and go figure, it had the same results:

1 Big Ten 0.581
2 Big East 0.574
3 Mountain West 0.573

http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basket ... 2013-04-09

So what I can infer is that two different number sets are being used.

Which also shows you just how flawed the RPI can be.


Also, even using your numbers, do you think the MWC was the 3rd best conference in America last year?

Yes.

[clenz]

Which also shows you just how flawed the RPI can be.


Also, even using your numbers, do you think the MWC was the 3rd best conference in America last year?

Yes.

you're full of shit and so ingrained in your rpi Lee you'll never admit to anything else

[BlueHen86]

Which also shows you just how flawed the RPI can be.


Also, even using your numbers, do you think the MWC was the 3rd best conference in America last year?

Yes.

Years ago I worked with a surveyor who was asked to stake out a cul-de-sac on a construction site. As he was performing the stake out it became obvious that he was staking it out in the wrong place. I pointed this out to him, and showed him how I knew he was wrong. His response was to hold up his computer print out of the stake out data and tell me that it can't be wrong. He finished the stake out according to the computer print out.

The next day he and his boss had to do the stake out again, only this time in the right place.

You are like the surveyor. You hide behind spreadsheets and formulas derived my math geeks when you should rely on actual on-court results. The Mountain West might be the third best conference west of the Mississippi, but it has never been the third best conference over-all. Of course you can't admit that because you can't admit when you are wrong.

[vutomcat]

Yes.

you're full of **** and so ingrained in your rpi Lee you'll never admit to anything else

The selection committee erred on a few seeds but for the most part they got it right. Maybe they put too much into SOS.

Let's not forget how dreadful it is in FCS football where SOS isn't taken into consideration enough though. No process is perfect since it's being implemented by humans. And there is no doubt this year especially, TV had tremendous influence on the tournament structure.

[Seahawks08]

Yes.

Years ago I worked with a surveyor who was asked to stake out a cul-de-sac on a construction site. As he was performing the stake out it became obvious that he was staking it out in the wrong place. I pointed this out to him, and showed him how I knew he was wrong. His response was to hold up his computer print out of the stake out data and tell me that it can't be wrong. He finished the stake out according to the computer print out.

The next day he and his boss had to do the stake out again, only this time in the right place.

You are like the surveyor. You hide behind spreadsheets and formulas derived my math geeks when you should rely on actual on-court results. The Mountain West might be the third best conference west of the Mississippi, but it has never been the third best conference over-all. Of course you can't admit that because you can't admit when you are wrong.

So you think you know me after one conversation? I have to be wrong first before I can admit to being wrong. Nothing you provided regarding Nova has proven you are correct. The problem is that you cannot admit to being wrong when shown the facts of the situation. Nice try.

[BlueHen86]

Years ago I worked with a surveyor who was asked to stake out a cul-de-sac on a construction site. As he was performing the stake out it became obvious that he was staking it out in the wrong place. I pointed this out to him, and showed him how I knew he was wrong. His response was to hold up his computer print out of the stake out data and tell me that it can't be wrong. He finished the stake out according to the computer print out.

The next day he and his boss had to do the stake out again, only this time in the right place.

You are like the surveyor. You hide behind spreadsheets and formulas derived my math geeks when you should rely on actual on-court results. The Mountain West might be the third best conference west of the Mississippi, but it has never been the third best conference over-all. Of course you can't admit that because you can't admit when you are wrong.

So you think you know me after one conversation? I have to be wrong first before I can admit to being wrong. Nothing you provided regarding Nova has proven you are correct. The problem is that you cannot admit to being wrong when shown the facts of the situation. Nice try.

Nice deflection. Don't address anything in my post, just accuse me of doing what I accuse you of. Not very clever, but clever apparently isn't in your arsenal.

[BlueHen86]

SoS is essentially 75% of RPI.

And? Want a better seed? Have more wins against an easy SoS. Problem solved.

Wouldn't it make more sense to get wins against a hard SoS?

[Seahawks08]

So you think you know me after one conversation? I have to be wrong first before I can admit to being wrong. Nothing you provided regarding Nova has proven you are correct. The problem is that you cannot admit to being wrong when shown the facts of the situation. Nice try.

Nice deflection. Don't address anything in my post, just accuse me of doing what I accuse you of. Not very clever, but clever apparently isn't in your arsenal.

Oh I addressed the heart of the matter which is that you somehow think I can never admit to being wrong. This is a core issue in this entire thread because it determines how i will be perceived by you in future posts. The fact that you think I cannot state when I'm wrong is laughably ignorant.

[BlueHen86]

And? Want a better seed? Have more wins against an easy SoS. Problem solved.

Wouldn't it make more sense to get wins against a hard SoS?

Still waiting for an answer from the guy who is never wrong.

[Seahawks08]

And? Want a better seed? Have more wins against an easy SoS. Problem solved.

Wouldn't it make more sense to get wins against a hard SoS?

If Louisville lost 2 games this year, say to Cinci and Memphis, would they not be a 1 seed? If they were a 1-2 seed, they should have demolished their 96 ranked SoS.

[BlueHen86]

And? Want a better seed? Have more wins against an easy SoS. Problem solved.

Wouldn't it make more sense to get wins against a hard SoS?

Still waiting for an answer. This isn't that tough. It's yes or no.

[Seahawks08]

Wouldn't it make more sense to get wins against a hard SoS?

Still waiting for an answer. This isn't that tough. It's yes or no.

Yes.