RPI and SOS are subjective and shouldn't even be considered in selection.

[Hawgvillain]

Have you seen Long Beach St. this season?

Long Beach St. played 2 tourney teams in the Non-Conference schedule and they got their brains beat in both times (58-88 vs. UCLA and 61-79 vs USC).  They beat zero (that's right zero) teams that made the tournament, and only played 2 all season.  They did not deserve an at-large bid.

[WindyCityHog]

Have you seen Long Beach St. this season?

Long Beach St. played 2 tourney teams in the Non-Conference schedule and they got their brains beat in both times (58-88 vs. UCLA and 61-79 vs USC).  They beat zero (that's right zero) teams that made the tournament, and only played 2 all season.  They did not deserve an at-large bid.

LBSU got an automatic bid.

[Hawgvillain]

Have you seen Long Beach St. this season?

Long Beach St. played 2 tourney teams in the Non-Conference schedule and they got their brains beat in both times (58-88 vs. UCLA and 61-79 vs USC).  They beat zero (that's right zero) teams that made the tournament, and only played 2 all season.  They did not deserve an at-large bid.

LBSU got an automatic bid.

I know

[hogsanity]

Have you seen Long Beach St. this season?

Long Beach St. played 2 tourney teams in the Non-Conference schedule and they got their brains beat in both times (58-88 vs. UCLA and 61-79 vs USC).  They beat zero (that's right zero) teams that made the tournament, and only played 2 all season.  They did not deserve an at-large bid.

LBSU got an automatic bid.

They did what they had to do, won their league tourney. 

[Bomis Hawg]

You may say that we played a tough schedule, but you only do so based on statistical calculations of a SOS. This was a good schedule, but hardly full of truly top tier teams in the non conference.

I know you'll try to point out Southern Illinois and Texas, which are legit, but Texas Tech was mediocre, so was WVU, ORU, Marist, and Missouri. I would call this an avergage schedule compared to those we normally play, with the exception that some of the lesser teams had better years than normal.

There are 2 ways to look at the game.

Through numbers, which are from from telling the whole story and can be manipulated to say anything, you want them to.

Or through the prism of experience, which again is subjective.

According to the SOS, it's a top SOS.  A definate trump to K-State.

How is their a bias in the SOS formula?  A road win at NC State give you the same value as a road win over New Jersey Institute of Technology.  How is that bias?  That's even.

You schedule who you think will help your team or benefit you later in the season.  There is no flaw or bias in the SOS.  It's the same for Arkansas as it is for Longwood.  The values are the same. 

But, you only listed the pre-conference teams.  That is different than the overall SOS.  Arkansas is #10 overall SOS (including SEC and SECT).  They are #35 in non-conference SOS (excluding the SEC).  Only 13 have better.  When you are a Drexel, ODU, or Appalachian State, you have to step up your pre-conference slate.  If you do that, get a few wins, you have to take care of buisness in conference play.

[jamie72921]

You're kinda getting to where I agree with you.  However, you say that RPI shouldn't be used to compare teams across conferences (majors to mid-majors) and I totally disagree there.  It is designed to be a level playing field for all teams. 

Most college teams play around 32 games a season which are roughly half conference games and half non-conference games.  The conference games for teams in the mid-major conferences are ALL against teams that we would consider cupcakes.  Thus, they have to schedule many difficult teams in the non-conference to make their SOS comparable to teams in the major conferences.  The teams in the major conferences have a choice to schedule cupcakes for their non-conference games like K-State did or to schedule strong teams like the UofA did. 

Compare Arkansas to Drexel like this:  compare our conference schedule to their non-conference schedule and then compare our non-conference schedule to their conference schedule.  In both situations, AR's schedule was much more difficult and that's why we are dancing.

There is a disincentive to play a known good small school. If you talk to coaches who have been there before, they will all say to a man that they tried to schedule certain schools and get turned down for fear that the power conference team could lose the game.

Also, North Carolina has rarely played a nonconference opponent away from home traditionally in order to further assure their chances at win. Just look at what happened to them on a neutral court this season in the preseason NIT, and they are a #1 seed. What kind of RPI would Carolina have if they did a home and home on a regular basis with schools like this?

We will never know, because these schools that aren't supposed to be able to compete seem to be able to put sufficient fear in the bigger school to play them at all unless it is a home game.

Something is rotten in Denmark when we pretend that teams that are FORCED to play road games, which is a big deal in basketball, are playing on a level field in terms of opportunity.

[IMAballHawg]

Arkansas didn't schedule Marist or WVU.  They played their way to those games.  Arkansas didn't "guess" right.

It's not a guessing game.  You either 1) schedule to get your team prepared for conference play; 2) play cupcakes to get your team confidence and wins; 3) or you play a tough schedule regardless to help your in the long run.

Arkansas, I think, picked the first.  They played a tough schedule.  Others didn't.  K-State playing W&M, Coppin State, Cleveland State, ND State, Kennesaw State, Maryland-Eastern Shore (Not the Terps), and New Mexico twice (went 1-1).

They sure guessed right.  You don't play cupcakes then expect a few wins over good teams get you in.  3 wins over NCAAT teams for KSU, 4 for Arkansas.

No one is arguing any of the points you just made.

My beef is that people such as yourself fail to see the inheirent bias of the RPI and SOS against teams from smaller leagues.

Comparing programs like Arkansas and K St. is a good use of RPI as both are from BCS conferences.

Using them to compare, K St and say a Long Beach St. is very close to apples and oranges.

The use of RPI is far too heavily weighted given what I have learned about it in since starting this thread.

You are right, these little league teams should not be compared to big conf teams.  Let Long beach state play in the sec and they would not have to worry about RPI, they would not have 10 wins. 

Are you saying temas like Ark should be punished for playing in tougher leagues?  Is a 23 win Airforce team truly better than a 21 win Ar or Purdue or Stanford?  If you think so, why? 

Have you seen Long Beach St. this season?

I have, yes, they are better than Auburn, South Carolina, and LSU for certain. They have better guards and small forwards than we do and wouldn't be a walk in the park. As a matter of fact, they could have won 7 games in the SEC.

What you are leaving out is that when a mid major plays a power league  team it is almost always at the homecourt of the power league team. When they are fortunate enough to just get a shot on a neutral court, good "little teams" deliver much more often than people think (See this season's preseason NIT and look at how many little teams win games in tournaments over the holidays).

Is a small school better than Florida, no way. Are they better than Arkansas was this season? Often.

Question for you. Why should a program that has the advantages of being in a power conference(facilities, recruiting, money, etc) that isn't clearly living up to their potential of both talent and resources, be rewarded for underachieving?

Do you honestly believe the ACC was worthy of 7 teams this season?

So your picking Long Beach State to beat Tenn?

Your changing argument (your point has changed 3 times in 1 thread) would have more weight if, when the "best" mid-majors make the NCAA tournament and play power teams, they would win more than they lose.  I dont have the stats, but I do know that consistently the 'power' teams beat the pants off of the poor, underrated Mid-majors when they get the chance to play them in the tournament on a neutral court.

Also, 
Exactly what would be a fair system.  This one is broke you say.  Well then tell us exactly what would you would do to make the playing field 100% fair.

[WindyCityHog]

Windy,

you are ridiculous given that one of those little league teams just played in the final four last season.

The only difference between most small schools and a power legue team are the big men. Often some of the best guards in the game are at small colleges and when they are hot they can kick big school butt.

Ignorance is bliss, that is for sure, and if you believe that formulas that are intentionally skewed to allow for a desired result are accurate, then you must be in paradise.

Ridiculous?

George Mason was the first to do that since like 1979.

What's ridiculous is you base your whole argument on that....a once in a every 30 year thing....an anomaly.

Preach on about why the Hogs shouldn't be here....you make valid points....but please don't push the "woe is me I play in a non power conference" down our throats.

The fact remains...there are "highers" and there are "lowers".....and perhaps it isn't "fair"...but it's the way it is.  Frankly....I think there are about 8 conferences that don't belong in D1....

Just my opinion.

I stand by argument....and it isn't ridiculous.

The difference between you and I is that I have no problem with the Hogs being in the tournament.  Conversely, I would have no problem with it if they were NOT in....I see the argument from both sides.

You have an agenda.

You either hate Heath to the point that you will not listen to anything to deter your viewpoint.....or you want to take the populist stance and cry "the rich get richer".

You claim the RPI is "subjective" although there have been numerous posters that have shown that the RPI is obviously more objective than you....but you pull out the old "numbers can be skewed" argument.

Cry me a river.

All I know is that the Hogs are in the NCAA Tournament.....and I am happy and grateful for it.  Grateful because I understand the Hogs MAY have been "lucky" of being given a gift.  Happy because I am a Razorback fan.

[Hawgvillain]

There is a disincentive to play a known good small school. If you talk to coaches who have been there before, they will all say to a man that they tried to schedule certain schools and get turned down for fear that the power conference team could lose the game.

Also, North Carolina has rarely played a nonconference opponent away from home traditionally in order to further assure their chances at win. Just look at what happened to them on a neutral court this season in the preseason NIT, and they are a #1 seed. What kind of RPI would Carolina have if they did a home and home on a regular basis with schools like this?

We will never know, because these schools that aren't supposed to be able to compete seem to be able to put sufficient fear in the bigger school to play them at all unless it is a home game.

Something is rotten in Denmark when we pretend that teams that are FORCED to play road games, which is a big deal in basketball, are playing on a level field in terms of opportunity.

Drexel could have gone to the Old Spice Classic - they let Marist in...

[jamie72921]

According to the SOS, it's a top SOS.  A definate trump to K-State.

How is their a bias in the SOS formula?  A road win at NC State give you the same value as a road win over New Jersey Institute of Technology.  How is that bias?  That's even.

You schedule who you think will help your team or benefit you later in the season.  There is no flaw or bias in the SOS.  It's the same for Arkansas as it is for Longwood.  The values are the same. 

But, you only listed the pre-conference teams.  That is different than the overall SOS.  Arkansas is #10 overall SOS (including SEC and SECT).  They are #35 in non-conference SOS (excluding the SEC).  Only 13 have better.  When you are a Drexel, ODU, or Appalachian State, you have to step up your pre-conference slate.  If you do that, get a few wins, you have to take care of buisness in conference play.

You're right on it now Bomis.

When say a Drexel wants to step up their schedule as you said, whose court do they end up playing on? Theirs, nuetral, or away.

Compare that when Texas Tech wants to step up out of conference. They will get either a home and home, or a nuetral court deal, unless a network sets a game up for them.

Wins and losses are figured into both RPI and SOS, we can agree on that.

Who is more likely to win even between to Great teams, the home team or the visitor?

The bias lies in the fact that powere conferences refuse to play home and home with teams from lesser conferences and their is no correction for the skew.

[WindyCityHog]

NO FAIR!

The real world shouldn't apply to college athletics.

[Biggus Piggus]

Subjective is what they are not objective.

They begin with Supposition that team A is going to be good this year whether they actually are or not.

Under the current set up, teams that start out high tend to stay high. Look at Bama and LSu this season. The Hogs RPI and SOS were helped mightily by the fact that both of these teams were highly regarded coming into the season. Wins over them, garnered many teams respect throughout the season, when in truth, both of these teams were inconsitent jokes.

There really isn't a system that allows for this skewing of preseason expectations. RPI and SOS would be more fair if the first calculations weren't made until the midway point of the conference seasons.

The way it is done now is based more heavily on the previous season than what happens this season.

This is wholly untrue.  RPI and SOS include nothing, absolutely nothing, from last season.  They include nothing from subjective polls.  Nothing.  You are going the wrong direction on this.

[Biggus Piggus]

RPI and SOS can and are tweaked to skew results.

This is horseshit.  The only time that RPI was "tweaked" was to make home/road distinction, which was an important data series that had been left out.  Schedule strength cannot be tweaked.  It's very basic math. 

What RPI misses:

Injuries and attrition, knows nothing about what players are out there at which time.
How a team might play against a tougher schedule, can't rate what isn't played.

RPI and SOS math favor power conferences because their conference games are generally tougher.  The real indicator of quality is road wins against top 50 opponents, but sometimes scheduling doesn't give many opportunities.  Ohio State had three, all in conference.  UCLA won three.  North Carolina, four.  Georgetown, three.  Florida, one.  Kansas, none.  Memphis, none. 

[razorsox]

Man this is crazy!

Some of you don't even understand the difference between objective and subjective.

I can litterally come up with a formula that when evenly applied to all participants can and will give the results I want. I can accomplish this by applying more weight to one set of data over another.

Both the RPI and SOS measures do exactly that! The second that happens, the process is no longer objective because data are weighted in such a manner as to insure outcomes within certain parameters.

It is exactly like using a computer. The computer does only what it is told to do by its operator. RPI and SOS can and are tweaked to skew results. This isn't a bad thing necessarily, but it isn't as OBJECTIVE as many of you obviously believe it to be.

Dude this isn't a hard concept.  An equation that is used for all teams is objective.  What the committe decides to do after those results is subjective. 

[Bomis Hawg]

The bias lies in the fact that powere conferences refuse to play home and home with teams from lesser conferences and their is no correction for the skew.

That is somewhat true.  But, if they beat a Wisconsin or Kentucky, it still helps a lot.  Some teams go play on the road, some don't. 

But, that point I can agree with.  Not sure if it is bias, though.

[Bomis Hawg]

At the end of the day, a team's inability to schedule the necessary teams do not equate to a the RPI and SOS being subjective.  Allocation rates within the RPI do not make it subjective.

All of these points go back to an inherent flaw in his mind and others that cannot be easily fixed.  That's what this thread was all about initially and I'm still not sure if Jamie has owned up to the fact that these factors do not make the RPI and SOS subjective. 

Agreed.  The big guns not playing on the road at places like ETSU or Appalachian State or others is not a direct link to the SOS.  It's a discussion to be had, just not this one.

Flaws are in the voters poll.  Not in the computer formulas. 

[weresoclose]

All I know is our RPI and SOS are higher than many many teams who should be ahead of us BECAUSE they are better teams.

I've never understood the importance of SOS or RPI, because it rarely matters a darn when teams play each other.

If we played NC ST we would get flattened.  They played 3 or 4 games in 3 or 4 days and almost beat arguably the best team in college basketball Sunday, UNC.  Guess what their RPI is?  91.

If we played Texas, who had a lower RPI when they beat us before, we would get absolutely trounced.  They're just 10 RPIs above us at 25.

Texas Tech beat us at a "neutral" court, Alltel Arena.  Their current RPI is 53, and they're a higher seed than us based on their body of work.

Fact:  The Hogs played like they didn't belong in the NIT for over half the season. 

They didn't even break even in conference play, and somehow we're ranked higher than a Syracuse team who would beat us 9 times out of 10?

RPI and SOS are skewed to favor major conferences and also to help draw interest.  Just look at the MVC.  Since their recent ascent back into the college basketball spotlight, its teams have been given very high RPI ratings.  It's good for college basketball to help these guys out, so that's what they do.  They help them out.  If you don't believe me, check out SMSU.  They're sitting right below us with a 36 RPI. 

The talking heads are upset we made the tourney not because it's some giant conspiracy or because they hate Arkansas.  They're upset because at least two teams better than us got the shaft, and our body of work did not merit a bid.

That body of work was brought to you by Stanley Heath, the nicest mediocre coach to ever live.

12 seed. 

[Hawgvillain]

All I know is our RPI and SOS are higher than many many teams who should be ahead of us BECAUSE they are better teams.

I've never understood the importance of SOS or RPI, because it rarely matters a darn when teams play each other.

If we played NC ST we would get flattened.  They played 3 or 4 games in 3 or 4 days and almost beat arguably the best team in college basketball Sunday, UNC.  Guess what their RPI is?  91.

If we played Texas, who had a lower RPI when they beat us before, we would get absolutely trounced.  They're just 10 RPIs above us at 25.

Texas Tech beat us at a "neutral" court, Alltel Arena.  Their current RPI is 53, and they're a higher seed than us based on their body of work.

Fact:  The Hogs played like they didn't belong in the NIT for over half the season. 

They didn't even break even in conference play, and somehow we're ranked higher than a Syracuse team who would beat us 9 times out of 10?

RPI and SOS are skewed to favor major conferences and also to help draw interest.  Just look at the MVC.  Since their recent ascent back into the college basketball spotlight, its teams have been given very high RPI ratings.  It's good for college basketball to help these guys out, so that's what they do.  They help them out.  If you don't believe me, check out SMSU.  They're sitting right below us with a 36 RPI. 

The talking heads are upset we made the tourney not because it's some giant conspiracy or because they hate Arkansas.  They're upset because at least two teams better than us got the shaft, and our body of work did not merit a bid.

That body of work was brought to you by Stanley Heath, the nicest mediocre coach to ever live.

12 seed. 

I thought you were drinking your sorrows away and then jumping on the bandwagon.  Sounds like you are still hung up on the fact that Stan is till here...why can't you just be happy?

[WindyCityHog]

That's just it weresoclose...

"I've never understood the importance of SOS or RPI, because it rarely matters a darn when teams play each other."

It doesn't matter if you understand.  The SOS and RPI is not a comparison of any TWO teams....it's a comparison between ALL other teams.

Hogs are in because of a comparison amongst the field, not any one team....and to say Syracuse would beat the Hogs 9 out of 10 teams is ludicrous.....There is NOTHING to support your argument there other than your wrong opinion.

It's been said time and time again....

SOS and RPI are not subjective.....

Follow another team.  I'm sure you will be one to crow if the Hogs lose to USC.

[weresoclose]

I took my time, had a few drinks, and the sadness of having to wait 3 or more years till we have a Nationally competitive coach was just too much.

I'm with Sao.  Fire Heath when he loses to USC.

Screw integrety.  That's out the window anyway, and life's not fair.  This is business.  We cannot afford to turn into Alabama.  That's what you all want.  You want us to be nice to our coach because he "earned" it.  Sickening.  This is not a democracy.  This is not a Miss Congeniality contest.  This is a war, and you either win or lose.  

Heath is the greatest Moral Champion since Houston Dale.  A hugger is a hugger is a hugger.  I can't believe I'm saying this, but at least HDN went 6-1 in reg season conference play.  Stan couldn't even break even.  Why is this so difficult to see.  

Don't let us become Alabama.  Don't let us become LSU.  Fire Heath and let the return to the top begin.

Once again, this is not about fair, and it's not about nice.  It's about competency, and Heath ain't got it.

[weresoclose]

Windy City, how dare you tell me to follow another team?

I think you're just another person blinded by hate for HDN seeing support for Heath as a Proxie War.

Heath cannot get it done, and you want to support him at all costs.  That is not thinking about the welfare of the program.  That is plain selfishness.

If you can't see that Heath can't get it done, why don't you look at this year's scores.  Why don't you look at last years.  Both times a skin-of-your-teeth backing into the NCAAs happened.  That is what you get from Heath.  Underperformance.  Accept it and join the movement for positive change in the basketball program.  

[WindyCityHog]

I took my time, had a few drinks, and the sadness of having to wait 3 or more years till we have a Nationally competitive coach was just too much.

I'm with Sao.  Fire Heath when he loses to USC.

Screw integrety.  That's out the window anyway, and life's not fair.  This is business.  We cannot afford to turn into Alabama.  That's what you all want.  You want us to be nice to our coach because he "earned" it.  Sickening.  This is not a democracy.  This is not a Miss Congeniality contest.  This is a war, and you either win or lose.  

Heath is the greatest Moral Champion since Houston Dale.  A hugger is a hugger is a hugger.  I can't believe I'm saying this, but at least HDN went 6-1 in reg season conference play.  Stan couldn't even break even.  Why is this so difficult to see.  

Don't let us become Alabama.  Don't let us become LSU.  Fire Heath and let the return to the top begin.

Once again, this is not about fair, and it's not about nice.  It's about competency, and Heath ain't got it.

Have a few more....

This is most definitely NOT a war....that's cold and absurd.

There will be a time to discuss whether Heath should go or not.....and yes, I'm one of those who wanted Heath gone after last year.....but to advocate it now?

IF the Hogs lose to USC, play your card then....there will be ample off-season time to discuss it.  I don't get some of you.

I won't go and say you aren't a "real" fan, because I think you are exactly that....but can you possibly drop the tunnel-vision and enjoy the moment?  If Stan Heath TRULY deserves to go, simply making the NCAA's is no roadblock....

Lighten up on the "firing" stance.....and enjoy the moment.

[weresoclose]

RPI and SOS are skewed to favor major conferences and also to help draw interest.  Just look at the MVC.  Since their recent ascent back into the college basketball spotlight, its teams have been given very high RPI ratings.  It's good for college basketball to help these guys out, so that's what they do.  They help them out.  If you don't believe me, check out SMSU.  They're sitting right below us with a 36 RPI. 

That's right.  There is a built-in hose job regarding the other mid-major programs when it deals with the MVC in relation to other conferences.  Care to list more than one team from that league?  I bet the whole conference is ranked inside 100. 

Sure thing, HeathHugger.


RPI                        Conf    All    
 7  Southern Ill.    17-4   26-6  WE BEAT THEM
20  Creighton       16-5   22-10  
36  Missouri State 13-7   21-10  
39  Bradley          11-9   20-12  
86  Northern Iowa 9-10   17-13  
100  Wichita St.    8-11   16-14  


I'm not sure what your point is.  LSU has an RPI of 92, and I would pick them over all these teams, with the exception of S. Illinois maybe.

[WindyCityHog]

Windy City, how dare you tell me to follow another team?

I think you're just another person blinded by hate for HDN seeing support for Heath as a Proxie War.

Heath cannot get it done, and you want to support him at all costs.  That is not thinking about the welfare of the program.  That is plain selfishness.

If you can't see that Heath can't get it done, why don't you look at this year's scores.  Why don't you look at last years.  Both times a skin-of-your-teeth backing into the NCAAs happened.  That is what you get from Heath.  Underperformance.  Accept it and join the movement for positive change in the basketball program.  

Nutt is still here isn't he?

I don't compare the two, other than Heath has more character in his left big toe than HDN does in his entire body.

Character aside....I'm not asking that you give up your disdain for Heath.  Even if I did, you wouldn't listen.

I'm not "blinded" by my hate for HDN.....in fact, I don't hate HDN.  I simply think that HDN should go.  What i do know is that as much as I felt it was past time for Nutt to go, I was actively supporting a hog win in the SECCG and the Capital One Bowl.....and let the coaching argument rest until AFTER the game.

So I call your dare....and double-dog dare you to simply relax for the time being.....and quit being so judgemental about Heath for now...for now.

How dare YOU act as if your position is the only correct one.

Perhaps your buddy Sao (you dropped the name) can chime in and support your viewpoint.

[sage_dragoon]

Man this is crazy!

Some of you don't even understand the difference between objective and subjective.

I can litterally come up with a formula that when evenly applied to all participants can and will give the results I want. I can accomplish this by applying more weight to one set of data over another.

Both the RPI and SOS measures do exactly that! The second that happens, the process is no longer objective because data are weighted in such a manner as to insure outcomes within certain parameters.

It is exactly like using a computer. The computer does only what it is told to do by its operator. RPI and SOS can and are tweaked to skew results. This isn't a bad thing necessarily, but it isn't as OBJECTIVE as many of you obviously believe it to be.

You are are making no sense. You are wrong and should give it up. Take your ball and go home.  The majority of your posts are like the one above, why do you do this to yourself?

[weresoclose]

I shouldn't have dropped the name, I just saw the thread title.  My apologies to Sao.

I just have to come out so strong because the pro-Heath crowd is so large in number that it upsets me.  I'm screaming at the top of my lungs to not settle for this mediocrity.

I can't believe this board has become overrun by HeathHuggers.  I remember when we were going to the Capital One Bowl, and even before then, and the only thing you could read on this board was Fire HDN!!!

Where is the same sentiment over our mediocre basketball coach.  Just because he is a nice guy doesn't mean he deserves to stay.  And just because HDN is a creep doesn't mean he deserves to be fired.  They both deserve to be fired because neither of them can get it done.  

And now I have to endure not just another year of HDN, but I more than likely have to trudge through another year OR THREE of snailball mediocrity on the basketball court, all because of this too-little-too-late push into a 12 seed.

OK I'll stop posting about this until after the USC game.

Point taken, WindyCity, I just have so much disappointment riding on the coaching change, or lack thereof, that it's hard for me to enjoy a 12 seed birth knowing that I'm about to get much more mediocrity because of it.

[WindyCityHog]

I shouldn't have dropped the name, I just saw the thread title.  My apologies to Sao.

I just have to come out so strong because the pro-Heath crowd is so large in number that it upsets me.  I'm screaming at the top of my lungs to not settle for this mediocrity.

I can't believe this board has become overrun by HeathHuggers.  I remember when we were going to the Capital One Bowl, and even before then, and the only thing you could read on this board was Fire HDN!!!

Where is the same sentiment over our mediocre basketball coach.  Just because he is a nice guy doesn't mean he deserves to stay.  And just because HDN is a creep doesn't mean he deserves to be fired.  They both deserve to be fired because neither of them can get it done.  

And now I have to endure not just another year of HDN, but I more than likely have to trudge through another year OR THREE of snailball mediocrity on the basketball court, all because of this too-little-too-late push into a 12 seed.

OK I'll stop posting about this until after the USC game.

Point taken, WindyCity, I just have so much disappointment riding on the coaching change, or lack thereof, that it's hard for me to enjoy a 12 seed birth knowing that I'm about to get much more mediocrity because of it.

WSC....

Don't take me wrong.....I am not a Heath supporter....I'm a Hog fan.

I separate football from basketball....and simply try to enjoy the moment.

I'll say this....

It's agonizing.

You can't get rid of Nutt after an SEC-West crown and 10-4 season...
You can't get rid of Heath after a 2nd straight NCAA bid.

Are they equal?

I feel your pain WSC.....and you do make valid points.  I am just one of those oldtimers that likes to bitch after the season.

I don't see how simply making the NCAA Tournament assures anything for Heath.  It will take more.....but I'm damn sure hoping the Hogs beat USC on Friday.....and that still doesn't make me a HeathHugger".  Just a Hog fan.

[jamie72921]

If these teams are so good, why did they not win their league tourney?  Why did Drexel lose enough league games to finish 4th in their league. 

As for being certain that LBST is better than LSU/Aub/or SC, that is your SUBJECTIVE opinion. 
[/quote]

Never heard of an upset? I guess Kentucky is worthless, they lost to a lesser team in the SEC tournament.

And yes, my opinion is subjective.

Is yours?

[jamie72921]

Man this is crazy!

Some of you don't even understand the difference between objective and subjective.

I can litterally come up with a formula that when evenly applied to all participants can and will give the results I want. I can accomplish this by applying more weight to one set of data over another.

Both the RPI and SOS measures do exactly that! The second that happens, the process is no longer objective because data are weighted in such a manner as to insure outcomes within certain parameters.

It is exactly like using a computer. The computer does only what it is told to do by its operator. RPI and SOS can and are tweaked to skew results. This isn't a bad thing necessarily, but it isn't as OBJECTIVE as many of you obviously believe it to be.

Dude this isn't a hard concept.  An equation that is used for all teams is objective.  What the committe decides to do after those results is subjective. 

It isn't objective is the point. It is weighted. It can't be both weighted and objective.

In this case, it is weighted in favor of the 4th place and lower teams in BCS type conferences.

[jamie72921]

At the end of the day, a team's inability to schedule the necessary teams do not equate to a the RPI and SOS being subjective.  Allocation rates within the RPI do not make it subjective.

All of these points go back to an inherent flaw in his mind and others that cannot be easily fixed.  That's what this thread was all about initially and I'm still not sure if Jamie has owned up to the fact that these factors do not make the RPI and SOS subjective. 

Agreed.  The big guns not playing on the road at places like ETSU or Appalachian State or others is not a direct link to the SOS.  It's a discussion to be had, just not this one.

Flaws are in the voters poll.  Not in the computer formulas. 

Flaws in computer formulas are absolutely unheard of.

[jamie72921]

Have you seen Long Beach St. this season?

Long Beach St. played 2 tourney teams in the Non-Conference schedule and they got their brains beat in both times (58-88 vs. UCLA and 61-79 vs USC).  They beat zero (that's right zero) teams that made the tournament, and only played 2 all season.  They did not deserve an at-large bid.

LBSU got an automatic bid.

They did what they had to do, won their league tourney. 

That is the same thing that all teams used to have to do.

Funny thing too, when all teams had to win their conference tournaments to compete for the national championship, mid majors and smaller programs that weren't supposed to be able to compete, won quite a few of them.

[WindyCityHog]

Have you seen Long Beach St. this season?

Long Beach St. played 2 tourney teams in the Non-Conference schedule and they got their brains beat in both times (58-88 vs. UCLA and 61-79 vs USC).  They beat zero (that's right zero) teams that made the tournament, and only played 2 all season.  They did not deserve an at-large bid.

LBSU got an automatic bid.

They did what they had to do, won their league tourney. 

That is the same thing that all teams used to have to do.

Funny thing too, when all teams had to win their conference tournaments to compete for the national championship, mid majors and smaller programs that weren't supposed to be able to compete, won quite a few of them.

Name them.

[jamie72921]

Windy,

you are ridiculous given that one of those little league teams just played in the final four last season.

The only difference between most small schools and a power legue team are the big men. Often some of the best guards in the game are at small colleges and when they are hot they can kick big school butt.

Ignorance is bliss, that is for sure, and if you believe that formulas that are intentionally skewed to allow for a desired result are accurate, then you must be in paradise.

Ridiculous?

George Mason was the first to do that since like 1979.

What's ridiculous is you base your whole argument on that....a once in a every 30 year thing....an anomaly.

Preach on about why the Hogs shouldn't be here....you make valid points....but please don't push the "woe is me I play in a non power conference" down our throats.

The fact remains...there are "highers" and there are "lowers".....and perhaps it isn't "fair"...but it's the way it is.  Frankly....I think there are about 8 conferences that don't belong in D1....

Just my opinion.

I stand by argument....and it isn't ridiculous.

The difference between you and I is that I have no problem with the Hogs being in the tournament.  Conversely, I would have no problem with it if they were NOT in....I see the argument from both sides.

You have an agenda.

You either hate Heath to the point that you will not listen to anything to deter your viewpoint.....or you want to take the populist stance and cry "the rich get richer".

You claim the RPI is "subjective" although there have been numerous posters that have shown that the RPI is obviously more objective than you....but you pull out the old "numbers can be skewed" argument.

Cry me a river.

All I know is that the Hogs are in the NCAA Tournament.....and I am happy and grateful for it.  Grateful because I understand the Hogs MAY have been "lucky" of being given a gift.  Happy because I am a Razorback fan.

Louisville won the national championship as a midmajor in the 80s. They played in a couple more before Conference USA. Cinncinati spent years winning 20 games and not getting an invite.

Funny thing too, none of the "big" schools would play Cinn back then either.
Then they make a final four, form a "semi real" conference and suddenly they are "legitimate".

The seeding process and the RPI ratings being used to the degree they are today have severely limited legitimate competition from mid majors. When a mid major does anything, it is because they have overcome their seed. Not because they have benefitted from it.

Further bias. Give Southern Illinois a 2 or 3 seed and see how they do. It will be better than when you give them an 8-10.

[revolution]

Jamie is one of those individuals down at the gas station who has an opinion; he states it loudly and when no one agrees with him (because his view is asinine), he shifts direction and gets louder still.  He thinks ultimately he can wear everyone down, and all the while he can't see what everyone else can: the "L" on his forehead.

[jamie72921]

Subjective is what they are not objective.

They begin with Supposition that team A is going to be good this year whether they actually are or not.

Under the current set up, teams that start out high tend to stay high. Look at Bama and LSu this season. The Hogs RPI and SOS were helped mightily by the fact that both of these teams were highly regarded coming into the season. Wins over them, garnered many teams respect throughout the season, when in truth, both of these teams were inconsitent jokes.

There really isn't a system that allows for this skewing of preseason expectations. RPI and SOS would be more fair if the first calculations weren't made until the midway point of the conference seasons.

The way it is done now is based more heavily on the previous season than what happens this season.

This is wholly untrue.  RPI and SOS include nothing, absolutely nothing, from last season.  They include nothing from subjective polls.  Nothing.  You are going the wrong direction on this.

That was established earlier in the thread.

[HouTxRzbck]

People act like they are both gospel truths when in reality, they are the perfect example of garbage in/garbage out.

But boy, did they ever help our Hogs out this weekend! Go Hogs! Beat USC!

They have always used it to get team in.  How else can you measure yourself against other teams that don't play each other.

[hogsanity]

Windy,

you are ridiculous given that one of those little league teams just played in the final four last season.

The only difference between most small schools and a power legue team are the big men. Often some of the best guards in the game are at small colleges and when they are hot they can kick big school butt.

Ignorance is bliss, that is for sure, and if you believe that formulas that are intentionally skewed to allow for a desired result are accurate, then you must be in paradise.

Ridiculous?

George Mason was the first to do that since like 1979.

What's ridiculous is you base your whole argument on that....a once in a every 30 year thing....an anomaly.

Preach on about why the Hogs shouldn't be here....you make valid points....but please don't push the "woe is me I play in a non power conference" down our throats.

The fact remains...there are "highers" and there are "lowers".....and perhaps it isn't "fair"...but it's the way it is.  Frankly....I think there are about 8 conferences that don't belong in D1....

Just my opinion.

I stand by argument....and it isn't ridiculous.

The difference between you and I is that I have no problem with the Hogs being in the tournament.  Conversely, I would have no problem with it if they were NOT in....I see the argument from both sides.

You have an agenda.

You either hate Heath to the point that you will not listen to anything to deter your viewpoint.....or you want to take the populist stance and cry "the rich get richer".

You claim the RPI is "subjective" although there have been numerous posters that have shown that the RPI is obviously more objective than you....but you pull out the old "numbers can be skewed" argument.

Cry me a river.

All I know is that the Hogs are in the NCAA Tournament.....and I am happy and grateful for it.  Grateful because I understand the Hogs MAY have been "lucky" of being given a gift.  Happy because I am a Razorback fan.

Louisville won the national championship as a midmajor in the 80s. They played in a couple more before Conference USA. Cinncinati spent years winning 20 games and not getting an invite.

Funny thing too, none of the "big" schools would play Cinn back then either.
Then they make a final four, form a "semi real" conference and suddenly they are "legitimate".

The seeding process and the RPI ratings being used to the degree they are today have severely limited legitimate competition from mid majors. When a mid major does anything, it is because they have overcome their seed. Not because they have benefitted from it.

Further bias. Give Southern Illinois a 2 or 3 seed and see how they do. It will be better than when you give them an 8-10.

Louisville was far from mid major in the late 70's through the early 90's.  They were at or near the top many many seasons. 

SIU did not earn a 2 seed.  Yet another "mid major" who could not get it done in their conf tourney.

[jamie72921]

The bias lies in the fact that powere conferences refuse to play home and home with teams from lesser conferences and their is no correction for the skew.

That is somewhat true.  But, if they beat a Wisconsin or Kentucky, it still helps a lot.  Some teams go play on the road, some don't. 

But, that point I can agree with.  Not sure if it is bias, though.

It is a bias.

It doesn't take a hard look at it to figure it out that if you are in a power conference you have a built in RPI that is going to be higher year in and year out, even before the season starts based on the fact the teams in your conference can demand and get home games without the return of a home game to the opponent. Seriously increasing the odds of their winning. I think being the fan of a team that hasn't even won 10 conference road games in 5 years should be able to acknowledge that this is not equitable.

If my team drums the bottom portion of your league, without giving the top teams in your league a legitimate shot at me, I have effectively lowered your RPI without even having played you.

Then you are stuck having to play teams who look up at your RPI because I can't take the chance that you will beat me, and actually schedule you in any other capacity than a one time on campus game for me. Which you can't afford to do, because if you do this for all the teams dodging you, you will end up with a mediocre record, based on law of avgs alone, and none of those teams will give you a chance to return the favor by coming to your house.

Equitable? I think not.

So now you go ahead and beat the teams that have no choice but to play you and won't run and hide like the "power league" school and now you are in a lose/lose situation.

If you win, you didn't play anybody. If you lose, you arent' worthy of consideration for having lost to that team.

Those of you that believe this is an ACCURATE system by which to compare the merits of 2 teams, which is what the point is, not fair, might consider tightening your tolerances a little.

[jamie72921]

Louisville was far from mid major in the late 70's through the early 90's.  They were at or near the top many many seasons. 

SIU did not earn a 2 seed.  Yet another "mid major" who could not get it done in their conf tourney.

You are so wrong about Louisville not being a mid major it isn't even funny. The only other team in their conference was Memphis St., and they were only good as long as their current coaches could cheat up teams til the NCAA caught up with them.

As a matter of fact, Louisville's football program very nearly went down a division during that time frame.

Of course it isn't the case these days, obviously.

[hogsanity]

Louisville was far from mid major in the late 70's through the early 90's.  They were at or near the top many many seasons. 

SIU did not earn a 2 seed.  Yet another "mid major" who could not get it done in their conf tourney.

You are so wrong about Louisville not being a mid major it isn't even funny. The only other team in their conference was Memphis St., and they were only good as long as their current coaches could cheat up teams til the NCAA caught up with them.

Look at the tournament as a whole up until they expanded to 64 teams.  Louisville routinely was a top 16 seed, which meant they got a buy.  Conferneces were not classified as major/power, mid major then nearly like they are now.  Look at the tournament fields back in the late 70's through mid 80's. 

[jamie72921]

Louisville was far from mid major in the late 70's through the early 90's.  They were at or near the top many many seasons. 

SIU did not earn a 2 seed.  Yet another "mid major" who could not get it done in their conf tourney.

You are so wrong about Louisville not being a mid major it isn't even funny. The only other team in their conference was Memphis St., and they were only good as long as their current coaches could cheat up teams til the NCAA caught up with them.

Look at the tournament as a whole up until they expanded to 64 teams.  Louisville routinely was a top 16 seed, which meant they got a buy.  Conferneces were not classified as major/power, mid major then nearly like they are now.  Look at the tournament fields back in the late 70's through mid 80's. 

Where they were seeded had nothing to do with whether the conference they played in was considered legitimate. They paid their dues in the tournament and earned respect from the committee by competing well in the tournament.

It was a we shook up the world moment when they beat UCLA for the title.

UCLA had Kiki Vanderwe(can't spell it) and Louisville had Darrell Griffith( I think that was his name). The coaches were Denny Crum and Larry Brown. A classic game.

I believe that one of Louisvilles best players only had one thumb or was missing some fingers.

[silvertip]

People act like they are both gospel truths when in reality, they are the perfect example of garbage in/garbage out.

But boy, did they ever help our Hogs out this weekend! Go Hogs! Beat USC!

What does subjective mean to you?  They are objective measures in that they are calculated using the same formula for everyone, the same inputs with no human judgment.  Just based on wins, losses, opponents' wins and losses, their opponents' wins and losses, and home/road.

Subjective is Dick Vitale and Digger Phelps ignoring RPI and SOS when wailing about Drexel, Syracuse and Kansas State.

Owned!  Might as well shut this thread down. 

And to think not long ago Jamie was the guy talking down to everyone.  That's laughable at best.

They are not a static calculation until AFTER certain SUBJECTIVE values have been ASSIGNED to both teams and conferences.

The truth is, both are figured from a factor of the previous season's results and returning players and are horrible measures of the current season's results.

I'm sure it's been pointed out in this thread before now---but you have NO CLUE about how the RPI & SOS are calculated. Prior seasons have NOTHING to do with it.

[jamie72921]

People act like they are both gospel truths when in reality, they are the perfect example of garbage in/garbage out.

But boy, did they ever help our Hogs out this weekend! Go Hogs! Beat USC!

What does subjective mean to you?  They are objective measures in that they are calculated using the same formula for everyone, the same inputs with no human judgment.  Just based on wins, losses, opponents' wins and losses, their opponents' wins and losses, and home/road.

Subjective is Dick Vitale and Digger Phelps ignoring RPI and SOS when wailing about Drexel, Syracuse and Kansas State.

Owned!  Might as well shut this thread down. 

And to think not long ago Jamie was the guy talking down to everyone.  That's laughable at best.

They are not a static calculation until AFTER certain SUBJECTIVE values have been ASSIGNED to both teams and conferences.

The truth is, both are figured from a factor of the previous season's results and returning players and are horrible measures of the current season's results.

I'm sure it's been pointed out in this thread before now---but you have NO CLUE about how the RPI & SOS are calculated. Prior seasons have NOTHING to do with it.

You are right it was pointed out and admitted 2 pages ago.

Does this mean you don't have a clue as to what is currently being discussed in the thread?

[silvertip]

The bias lies in the fact that powere conferences refuse to play home and home with teams from lesser conferences and their is no correction for the skew.

That is somewhat true.  But, if they beat a Wisconsin or Kentucky, it still helps a lot.  Some teams go play on the road, some don't. 

But, that point I can agree with.  Not sure if it is bias, though.

It is a bias.

It doesn't take a hard look at it to figure it out that if you are in a power conference you have a built in RPI that is going to be higher year in and year out, even before the season starts based on the fact the teams in your conference can demand and get home games without the return of a home game to the opponent. Seriously increasing the odds of their winning. I think being the fan of a team that hasn't even won 10 conference road games in 5 years should be able to acknowledge that this is not equitable.

If my team drums the bottom portion of your league, without giving the top teams in your league a legitimate shot at me, I have effectively lowered your RPI without even having played you.

Then you are stuck having to play teams who look up at your RPI because I can't take the chance that you will beat me, and actually schedule you in any other capacity than a one time on campus game for me. Which you can't afford to do, because if you do this for all the teams dodging you, you will end up with a mediocre record, based on law of avgs alone, and none of those teams will give you a chance to return the favor by coming to your house.

Equitable? I think not.

So now you go ahead and beat the teams that have no choice but to play you and won't run and hide like the "power league" school and now you are in a lose/lose situation.

If you win, you didn't play anybody. If you lose, you arent' worthy of consideration for having lost to that team.

Those of you that believe this is an ACCURATE system by which to compare the merits of 2 teams, which is what the point is, not fair, might consider tightening your tolerances a little.

You might consider doing a LITTLE research & learning how the RPI is calculated.

The RPI adjusts for home vs road games. For eaxample, IF your team was somehow able to play nothing but home games & had a 20-10 W-L record---THEN your W-L record for calculating your RPI would be 12-14.

Playing a ton of home games in the non-conference schedule is not the best way to boost your RPI.

[silvertip]

People act like they are both gospel truths when in reality, they are the perfect example of garbage in/garbage out.

But boy, did they ever help our Hogs out this weekend! Go Hogs! Beat USC!

What does subjective mean to you?  They are objective measures in that they are calculated using the same formula for everyone, the same inputs with no human judgment.  Just based on wins, losses, opponents' wins and losses, their opponents' wins and losses, and home/road.

Subjective is Dick Vitale and Digger Phelps ignoring RPI and SOS when wailing about Drexel, Syracuse and Kansas State.

Owned!  Might as well shut this thread down. 

And to think not long ago Jamie was the guy talking down to everyone.  That's laughable at best.

They are not a static calculation until AFTER certain SUBJECTIVE values have been ASSIGNED to both teams and conferences.

The truth is, both are figured from a factor of the previous season's results and returning players and are horrible measures of the current season's results.

I'm sure it's been pointed out in this thread before now---but you have NO CLUE about how the RPI & SOS are calculated. Prior seasons have NOTHING to do with it.

You are right it was pointed out and admitted 2 pages ago.

Does this mean you don't have a clue as to what is currently being discussed in the thread?

It means I'm not gonna waste time debating RPI & SOS with someone who doesn't know what they are.

[0311E5H]

Man this is crazy!

Some of you don't even understand the difference between objective and subjective.

I can litterally come up with a formula that when evenly applied to all participants can and will give the results I want. I can accomplish this by applying more weight to one set of data over another.

Both the RPI and SOS measures do exactly that! The second that happens, the process is no longer objective because data are weighted in such a manner as to insure outcomes within certain parameters.

It is exactly like using a computer. The computer does only what it is told to do by its operator. RPI and SOS can and are tweaked to skew results. This isn't a bad thing necessarily, but it isn't as OBJECTIVE as many of you obviously believe it to be.

Dude this isn't a hard concept.  An equation that is used for all teams is objective.  What the committe decides to do after those results is subjective. 

It isn't objective is the point. It is weighted. It can't be both weighted and objective.

In this case, it is weighted in favor of the 4th place and lower teams in BCS type conferences.

This is really getting out of hand here.  Is the selection flawed?  Of course, but so will any selection system of 100+ teams.  I can tell you without a doubt, that RPI and SOS is OBJECTIVE.  Any numerical data that is calculated using a formula is objective.  Even if it is weighted, as long as it is weighted using a formula then it is objective. Any test, data, or information that is definitive in nature/criteria is objective.  Now an example of something subjective would be an opinion or something not confirmed by data.  An example of subjective data is a coaches poll, an example of objective data is the final electorial college voting count.

[Biggus Piggus]

Mike DeCourcy has a nice discussion on the Sporting News site today about what is a mid-major, and he of course completely disagrees with Jamie's POV.  The conference doesn't determine what's a mid-major.  Schools that have bigtime basketball platforms are not mid-majors.  By Jamie's definition UNLV was a mid-major in Tark's time, and of course that's a farcical notion.  Teams that rule college basketball for a time by definition cannot be mid-major.

[Biggus Piggus]

Quoting another site:

"The Louisville Cardinals nearly lost the 1980 NCAA Basketball Championship against UCLA. Hours before the deciding game, Cardinals star forward Wiley Brown, who cut off his thumb with a knife at the age of four, realized that he had forgotten his artificial thumb on the breakfast table at the team's hotel. A team trainer found it in the garbage, and the Cardinals narrowly won the national championship."

[jamie72921]

Mike DeCourcy has a nice discussion on the Sporting News site today about what is a mid-major, and he of course completely disagrees with Jamie's POV.  The conference doesn't determine what's a mid-major.  Schools that have bigtime basketball platforms are not mid-majors.  By Jamie's definition UNLV was a mid-major in Tark's time, and of course that's a farcical notion.  Teams that rule college basketball for a time by definition cannot be mid-major.

UNLV was a mid major. To pretend they weren't is farcical.

If you have a good team you aren't mid major? Tark only won one National championship. That is hardly ruling the world of Ncaa basketball by any standard.

I guess if you use your definition, then you can't be considered a non mid major team IF YOU DON'T EVER RULE THE SPORT YOU PLAY IN.

By that definition, Miss St, Ole Miss, Auburn, Vanderbilt, LSU, Georgia, and Alabama are mid majors!

Even if you wish to use the big time platform,then you would have to say that Georgetown was a mid major until they moved their games to Landover, because Patrick Ewing played his freshman year in a gym that wasn't as big as the Greenwood High School gym.

UNLV, UTEP, Utah etc are now top tier because they won a national championship at one time. Makes a lot of sense.

Not!

[jamie72921]

That is the same thing that all teams used to have to do.

Funny thing too, when all teams had to win their conference tournaments to compete for the national championship, mid majors and smaller programs that weren't supposed to be able to compete, won quite a few of them.

Name them.

Cinncinnati, Utah, Texas Weslyan, University of San Francisco, Providence, New York University.

That is just off the top of my head. Some of those mentioned won it multiple times during that period.