I just got this from a friend who comes here every so often but doesn't post:
"how the unnatural carnal knowledge does Mu have the 36th toughest SOS yet a team like Penn St is #6?
Penn St has played 21 teams in the rpi top 100 with an avg rank of 46
Marq has played 20 teams in the rpi top 100 with an avg rank of 31
Penn St's 10 toughest games feature 4 Top10 rpi teams (OSU/PU x2) with an avg rank of 20
Marq's 10 toughest games feature 5 Top10 rpi teams (ND x2) with an avg rank of 11.5
Penn St plays 9 ranked opp compared to Mu's 11.
Penn St. bottom 5 teams have an avg rank of 206 compared to Mus 297. Is the Bottom 5 really dragging Mu down that much?
the remaining teams with RPIs of >100 have the same 139 rating. I can't believe the bottom 5 affect the SoS that much. Seems faulty to me."
SOS is a "rank" number based on your opponents' winning percentage.
Suppose Penn State is .5559 and Marquette is .5557. One would look at that and say these two have played a similar SOS. But if there are 29 other teams that are .5558, then MU is going to be 30 spots behind Penn State in rank.
The difference between #6 and #36 only tells you where a team ranks compared to the other; it doesn't give you any idea of the relative difference between two team's schedules... which is the argument your buddy is trying to make.
And that is why SOS, like it's cousin RPI, can be very misleading metrics. Fortunately for MU, the committee is well aware of this fact.
I do believe those bottom 5 drag MU down.
They should quit scheduling so many cupcakes every year.
MU needs 16 home games a year for revenue purposes. The cupcakes are "buy games". They pay these teams to come to Milw. You take what you can get with buy games.
Now if you want to write the school a 300k check every year, then they can stop scheduling these games. Until then; it is what it is and this year happened to be and especially weak group of buy games.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on February 25, 2011, 03:08:14 AMMU needs 16 home games a year for revenue purposes. The cupcakes are "buy games". They pay these teams to come to Milw. You take what you can get with buy games.
Now if you want to write the school a 300k check every year, then they can stop scheduling these games. Until then; it is what it is and this year happened to be and especially weak group of buy games.
We have the second largest basketball budget in the NCAA. Are we really such paupers that we can't afford a few Horizon or MVC bottom-feeders at the BC? Only Duke spends more than we do. Seems like if all those other schools have the money to afford 175-250 ranked teams, we do too since our budget is bigger.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 25, 2011, 05:52:53 AM
We have the second largest basketball budget in the NCAA. Are we really such paupers that we can't afford a few Horizon or MVC bottom-feeders at the BC? Only Duke spends more than we do. Seems like if all those other schools have the money to afford 175-250 ranked teams, we do too since our budget is bigger.
The fact that you state "at the BC" shows that you don't get it. MU needs a number of home games every year. And they don't get much additional revenue by drawing more fans (better opponent) because those are the $9 seats that are left. You get revenue by having more games for $30 tickets to sell. Basketball funds everything at MU.
the problem with your question is that teams don't get to play Horizon or MVC teams at the BC without going to their place the next year - they need the revenue too. There are a certain number of teams that will let you pay them to come and play at your place without a return game. That is why it is called a "buy" game. Everybody needs to play these teams and there is competition for their services. UCONN played UMBC and Coppin St. this year.
There are a few teams that will not have to play as many "buy" games, those with football teams that fund their athletic budgets, but even Duke played Elon this year. Also, some marquee teams can set up neutral court games in a huge stadium and split the revenue but MU is not one of those. Note that Wisconsin (with their Big Ten football team) had 5 buy games this year and Marquette had 7 buy games.