Highest since before Ohio State.
Predicting 4th place in Big East at 10-8.
95 in the RPI right now
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 15, 2013, 09:52:34 AM
95 in the RPI right now
That will go up again with New Mexico this Saturday.
What is our highest ever non-confernece RPI? Anyone know? Is this it?
Quote from: MUDPT on December 15, 2013, 09:28:18 AM
Highest since before Ohio State.
Predicting 4th place in Big East at 10-8.
[/quote
10-8 will mean NIT.
Quote from: bilsu on December 15, 2013, 10:14:23 AM
10-8 will mean NIT.
It will, but it will also mean no improvement over the team's average performance over these first 10 games. I'd bet against that from a Buzz coached team.
Quote from: Heisenberg on December 15, 2013, 10:02:04 AM
That will go up again with New Mexico this Saturday.
What is our highest ever non-confernece RPI? Anyone know? Is this it?
Are you talking about SoS?
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology
Lunardi has MU as one of the last teams in. 12/16/13 version.
Road trip to Dayton!
Truthfully, I think we now begin the long, slow climb back up. I wouldn't be shocked to see us make it all the way back into the Top 25 at some point.
Quote from: jsglow on December 16, 2013, 01:09:31 PM
Road trip to Dayton!
Truthfully, I think we now begin the long, slow climb back up. I wouldn't be shocked to see us make it all the way back into the Top 25 at some point.
This is what I'm thinking. I'm almost expecting it.
Quote from: jsglow on December 16, 2013, 01:09:31 PM
Road trip to Dayton!
Truthfully, I think we now begin the long, slow climb back up. I wouldn't be shocked to see us make it all the way back into the Top 25 at some point.
Did we drop out of the top 25 last year?
Yes, I believe we did. I don't think we started in the Top 25 and I'm fairly certain we were out at this point in the season.
Quote from: jsglow on December 16, 2013, 01:09:31 PM
Road trip to Dayton!
Truthfully, I think we now begin the long, slow climb back up. I wouldn't be shocked to see us make it all the way back into the Top 25 at some point.
My thoughts exactly.
Lunardi's RPI shows Marq at 85......those guys in Madison are at 1
Quote from: Skatastrophy on December 16, 2013, 11:15:40 AM
Are you talking about SoS?
Yes braincramp ...thanks
What is our nonconference SoS and is it the highest ever?
I really see us as one of those teams that starts slow, and clicks in conference season. I think we end up being a dangerous 6 or 7 seed that teams don't want to face. I just feel like we are close to breaking through, just need that first quality win (although you could argue GW).
I think there's a good team there, just taking a little longer to develop than the last few years.
I doubt our SOS goes up any since wee have Ball State and Samford along with the New Mexico game.
Our buy games were really bad this year.........
Quote from: muwarrior97 on December 16, 2013, 02:47:34 PM
Lunardi's RPI shows Marq at 85......those guys in Madison are at 1
The RPI I use has MU now at 90....those guys in Madison at 3
Quote from: MuMark on December 16, 2013, 08:15:19 PM
I doubt our SOS goes up any since wee have Ball State and Samford along with the New Mexico game.
Our buy games were really bad this year.........
Agree, our expected Out of Conference SOS when all is said and done is 98
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 16, 2013, 11:33:31 PM
Agree, our expected Out of Conference SOS when all is said and done is 98
I seem to remember our non-conference SoS in recent years being much worse than 98. Am I wrong?
Quote from: Heisenberg on December 17, 2013, 05:51:34 AM
I seem to remember our non-conference SoS in recent years being much worse than 98. Am I wrong?
Here you go...2013 non-con SOS was taken prior to the IUPUI game
SOS Rank RPI Rank Record
2013: .5656 61 .558 85 5-4
2012: .4981 156 .4890 187 9-4
2011: .5022 198 .5684 64 9-3
2010: .4885 149 .5825 50 11-2
2009: .5031 132 .5974 35 10-1
Quote from: mu03eng on December 17, 2013, 08:01:57 AM
Here you go...2013 non-con SOS was taken prior to the IUPUI game
SOS Rank RPI Rank Record
2013: .5656 61 .558 85 5-4
2012: .4981 156 .4890 187 9-4
2011: .5022 198 .5684 64 9-3
2010: .4885 149 .5825 50 11-2
2009: .5031 132 .5974 35 10-1
Of course, losing the Ohio State game to condensation last year affected our SoS.
Dropped to 97, just ahead of DePaul and New Orleans
Saturday is gigantic to put it mildly.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 18, 2013, 09:15:33 AM
Dropped to 97, just ahead of DePaul and New Orleans
Saturday is gigantic to put it mildly.
Wait, really? You must be referring to SOS, right? No way Pomeroy drops us from 38 to 97 after a pasting. I would look myself, but don't have the subscription.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on December 18, 2013, 09:31:47 AM
Wait, really? You must be referring to SOS, right? No way Pomeroy drops us from 38 to 97 after a pasting. I would look myself, but don't have the subscription.
You're right, that is RPI. Pomeroy has us up to 35. A team like Ball State is going to be a RPI drag no matter how bad you beat them.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 18, 2013, 09:33:55 AM
You're right, that is RPI. Pomeroy has us up to 35. A team like Ball State is going to be a RPI drag no matter how bad you beat them.
Ahh, RPI makes sense. Chicos didn't specify, so I was jc. Thanks.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 18, 2013, 09:15:33 AM
Dropped to 97, just ahead of DePaul and New Orleans
Saturday is gigantic to put it mildly.
If a neutral site win is "gigantic," how would you describe Dec 31, Jan 9, or any of MU's remaining road games for that matter?
MU's RPI is going to get the benefit of UNM and their opponent's regardless of whether they win or lose.
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on December 18, 2013, 09:41:19 AM
Ahh, RPI makes sense. Chicos didn't specify, so I was jc. Thanks.
Yes, my reference was RPI. I like Pomeroy, but I stick to the rating service I know for sure the NCAA uses and officially acknowledges. (Yes, I know in the past they have said they sometimes look at other sources, but the only one that they actually mention by name is the RPI)
Quote from: Benny B on December 18, 2013, 09:51:17 AM
If a neutral site win is "gigantic," how would you describe Dec 31, Jan 9, or any of MU's remaining road games for that matter?
MU's RPI is going to get the benefit of UNM and their opponent's regardless of whether they win or lose.
It's gigantic because it is out of conference.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 18, 2013, 09:59:22 AM
Yes, my reference was RPI. I like Pomeroy, but I stick to the rating service I know for sure the NCAA uses and officially acknowledges. (Yes, I know in the past they have said they sometimes look at other sources, but the only one that they actually mention by name is the RPI)
Current projected RPI = 47
This is based on a projected record of 19-12. I'll bet barring any significant injury that it's in the 30's or better on selection Sunday.
Quote from: Jajuannaman on December 18, 2013, 10:38:19 AM
Current projected RPI = 47
This is based on a projected record of 19-12. I'll bet barring any significant injury that it's in the 30's or better on selection Sunday.
Agreed. Especially if they can get a couple solid road scalps in conference play.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 18, 2013, 09:15:33 AM
Dropped to 97, just ahead of DePaul and New Orleans
Saturday is gigantic to put it mildly.
Which, for the umpteenth time proves how completely worthless RPI is in general, but even more so at this point of the season.
Quote from: MUfan12 on December 18, 2013, 10:42:11 AM
Agreed. Especially if they can get a couple solid road scalps in conference play.
I guess it depends on the source RPI. The one I use, has our projected RPI at 53.6 with a 19-12 record.
It gives us a 57% probability to beat New Mexico.
Here are the current probabilities for our final record. I guess the good news is that they don't think we can finish any worse than 12 wins. ;)
Final Record Expected RPI Probability
26-5 8.0 0.02%
25-6 11.6 0.24%
24-7 16.6 0.87%
23-8 22.1 3.40%
22-9 28.4 8.10%
21-10 35.5 14.27%
20-11 44.4 18.62%
19-12 54.2 19.69%
18-13 65.2 16.55%
17-14 77.3 10.57%
16-15 90.2 5.08%
15-16 102.9 1.80%
14-17 117.7 0.63%
13-18 135.4 0.11%
12-19 154.5 0.04%
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 18, 2013, 10:48:26 AM
Which, for the umpteenth time proves how completely worthless RPI is in general, but even more so at this point of the season.
This point in the year, yes. Completely worthless in general....the NCAA selection committee...for the umpteenth time, begs to differ.
http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/26283066/34887185
Some guy named Brent Williams doesn't find it worthless ""If you study the numbers of coach (Thad) Matta during his time at Ohio State,
you can say anytime you can play them it's probably going to help you as far as your RPI is concerned," Williams said. "I think they've won 72 percent of their Big Ten games, 77 percent of his games as a head coach." He seems to pay attention to it, even before the season starts.
http://www.foxsportswisconsin.com/collegebasketball/marquette-golden-eagles/story/Buzz-Williams-wants-to-see-what-his-Gold?blockID=962141
RPI Rating as of December 18,
2010: 175 (were 64 after BET, made Sweet 16)
2012: 89 (were 130 after the UWGB loss the next day, ended up at 12 on selection Sunday, made elite 8)
In short, RPI rating as of December 18 is meaningless. We were in the 100's at similar times in two of the last three years with much consternation on this board to go along with it. We ended up going to the S16 & E8. We will be in the 30s or better and safely in on selection Sunday, of that I am confident.
Quote from: Jajuannaman on December 18, 2013, 11:09:03 AM
RPI Rating as of December 18,
2010: 175 (were 64 after BET, made Sweet 16)
2012: 89 (were 130 after the UWGB loss the next day, ended up at 12 on selection Sunday, made elite 8)
In short, RPI rating as of December 18 is meaningless. We were in the 100's at similar times in two of the last three years with much consternation on this board to go along with it. We ended up going to the S16 & E8. We will be in the 30s or better and safely in on selection Sunday, of that I am confident.
So when do we play UConn, UL, Syracuse, and Pitt this year?
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 18, 2013, 10:49:43 AM
Final Record Expected RPI Probability
26-5 8.0 0.02%
(http://static.cdn-seekingalpha.com/uploads/2012/10/17/saupload_lloyd-300x300.jpg)
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 18, 2013, 10:55:57 AM
This point in the year, yes. Completely worthless in general....the NCAA selection committee...for the umpteenth time, begs to differ.
They are worthless, when compared with multiple other rating systems, in determining a team's true strength. That doesn't mean the NCAA selection committee doesn't consider them - just not as much as in the past. Old habits, good and bad, die hard.
Apparently RPI was so meaningless in general, that it impacted us in leaving the old Big East....remember this
"I was not pleased that we issued an invitation to Tulane without any diligence to what effect that would have on our basketball product, the draw on our RPI and other such things. I was disappointed that I wasn't able to participate as a member of the conference in the deliberation that went into adding that. There might be well articulated and very deep reasons why you would do it otherwise. But dog-gone-it, I'm not concerned about that. I'm concerned about making sure that Marquette is in a position that it can take advantage of the great investment it's made in being successful in basketball."
;)
Quote from: Atticus on December 18, 2013, 11:13:25 AM
So when do we play UConn, UL, Syracuse, and Pitt this year?
Beat New Mexico, go 12-6 in conference (7-2 at home, 5-4 on the road), and our RPI will be in the 30s or better. Without UConn, UL, Syracuse or Pitt. As I said, and as those seasons suggest, an RPI rating of 97 on December 18 is meaningless.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 18, 2013, 11:29:44 AM
Apparently RPI was so meaningless in general, that it impacted us in leaving the old Big East....remember this
"I was not pleased that we issued an invitation to Tulane without any diligence to what effect that would have on our basketball product, the draw on our RPI and other such things. I was disappointed that I wasn't able to participate as a member of the conference in the deliberation that went into adding that. There might be well articulated and very deep reasons why you would do it otherwise. But dog-gone-it, I'm not concerned about that. I'm concerned about making sure that Marquette is in a position that it can take advantage of the great investment it's made in being successful in basketball."
;)
For the third, and hopefully final time - worthless, not meaningless. There are many rating services who do a much better job analyzing the relative strengths of teams. Ergo, RPI is worthless as a true measuring stick. The NCAA still uses RPI (though to a lesser and lesser extent as they are dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century) so, while worthless as a true measure, it remains at least somewhat meaningful.
Quote from: Jajuannaman on December 18, 2013, 11:50:26 AM
Beat New Mexico, go 12-6 in conference (7-2 at home, 5-4 on the road), and our RPI will be in the 30s or better. Without UConn, UL, Syracuse or Pitt. As I said, and as those seasons suggest, an RPI rating of 97 on December 18 is meaningless.
Yes, the RPI is meaningless this time of year if the conference membership was the same as it was in 2012 and 2010. Do you think the conference will get roughly the same number of teams into the tournament this year as it did those two previous years?
Quote from: Atticus on December 18, 2013, 12:09:30 PM
Yes, the RPI is meaningless this time of year if the conference membership was the same as it was in 2012 and 2010. Do you think the conference will get roughly the same number of teams into the tournament this year as it did those two previous years?
That has absolutely nothing to do with my point. With a record of 19-12 losing to New Mexico and going 11-7 in conference, MU is projected to finish the regular season ranked 47 in the RPI. Beat New Mexico and go 12-6, and we're in the 30s & safely in the tournament no question. Regardless of whether or not UConn, Louisville, Pitt, or Syracuse are in the conference or how many other Big East teams make it, and regardless of the current 97 rank.
Quote from: Atticus on December 18, 2013, 11:13:25 AM
So when do we play UConn, UL, Syracuse, and Pitt this year?
Which is why they scheduled Ohio State, at Arizona State, the Wooden Classic, at Wisconsin, and New Mexico.
Quote from: Atticus on December 18, 2013, 11:13:25 AM
So when do we play UConn, UL, Syracuse, and Pitt this year?
True it hurts not having to play UL, Syracuse, ND and Pitt but we also don't have to play Rutgers and South Florida who didn't help our RPI.
Butler, Xavier and Creighton are the replacements and they are decent programs with good RPIs. Plus we get Villanova, Creighton, Butler, Georgetown and Xavier at least twice this year with home and home games and maybe some of them three times so its not as bad as it seems either.
Quote from: Atticus on December 18, 2013, 12:09:30 PM
Yes, the RPI is meaningless this time of year if the conference membership was the same as it was in 2012 and 2010. Do you think the conference will get roughly the same number of teams into the tournament this year as it did those two previous years?
The percntage of teams will be similar.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 18, 2013, 09:59:47 AM
It's gigantic because it is out of conference.
It isn't any more "gigantic" than the wins against CSU-Fullerton or GW.
Granted, every win helps... but as far as RPI is concerned, half of the games on the schedule are more "gigantic" than a neutral court game against UNM.
I'd rather lose to UNM on a neutral court than lose at home to anyone.
Quote from: MUfan12 on December 18, 2013, 01:19:04 PM
Which is why they scheduled Ohio State, at Arizona State, the Wooden Classic, at Wisconsin, and New Mexico.
Fixed.
Quote from: Benny B on December 18, 2013, 02:44:58 PM
It isn't any more "gigantic" than the wins against CSU-Fullerton or GW.
Granted, every win helps... but as far as RPI is concerned, half of the games on the schedule are more "gigantic" than a neutral court game against UNM.
I'd rather lose to UNM on a neutral court than lose at home to anyone.
You are correct....I'm saying this is a gigantic win in terms of optics and perception. I absolutely agree with you that losing on a neutral court is better than losing at home. I'm more concerned about just getting a quality win of any kind. Getting one away from home, even if neutral court, also helps greatly not only optically but from a RPI perspective. Thus the terminology I used.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 18, 2013, 11:17:46 AM
They are worthless, when compared with multiple other rating systems, in determining a team's true strength. That doesn't mean the NCAA selection committee doesn't consider them - just not as much as in the past. Old habits, good and bad, die hard.
It doesn't appear to be the case from I'm reading or what I hear from a friend who is still a commissioner of a strong mid major conference and was the chair of the selection committee in the past.
It's used. In some committees, it is used more and in others, used less. It is created by the NCAA, so they have a vested interest in it. This is also why when you see CBS put up the teams that got in (got to 5:07 mark of video), or going through their resumes, they almost always use RPI with their record and SOS. It's a constant, they aren't using any other rating systems to portray them. Doesn't mean they aren't using them, but the one rating system they choose to come public with is the RPI.
Don't get me wrong, I think there are better systems out there, but I'm using RPI because the NCAA uses it.
https://www.youtube.com/v/O06ywRxnaeY
I'd also share this Josh Pastner take on RPI
https://www.youtube.com/v/CWhcA2qZfC8
We dropped to 109 in the RPI. That was a game the RPI thought we were going to win.
Predicted RPI now at 64 for the year.
It is predicting only a 30% chance to beat Creighton in the opener, so if we get that one, we can begin to make a dent and climb back up.