Ultimate College Softball
Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 3      Prev   1   2   3   Next
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 16,392
Reply with quote  #31 

Obvious that the jamokes at the NCAA hired someone just dim enough to not be able to put out the team sheets with the rest of it.

Not that hard, can it be?

HenryLouisAaron

Registered:
Posts: 2,166
Reply with quote  #32 
Just off the top of my head - here are two problems I see with the current RPI rankings... 

1. RPI is telling us that the FOUR best teams in college softball are ALL in the PAC-12.

If Oregon, Washington, UCLA and Arizona State finish 1, 2, 3 & 4 in the WCWS... 
I will eat my hat.

And I don't even own a hat... 
so I will have to go out and buy one - just to eat it.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2. RPI is telling us that if Michigan played in the SEC... they would be in 13th place among those teams... 
I seriously doubt that would hold up - in reality.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

RPI is not some sort of magical perfect system.
It does a pretty good job... but it ain't perfect. 
AleDawg

Registered:
Posts: 577
Reply with quote  #33 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryLouisAaron
Just off the top of my head - here are two problems I see with the current RPI rankings... 

1. RPI is telling us that the FOUR best teams in college softball are ALL in the PAC-12.

If Oregon, Washington, UCLA and Arizona State finish 1, 2, 3 & 4 in the WCWS... 
I will eat my hat.

And I don't even own a hat... 
so I will have to go out and buy one - just to eat it.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2. RPI is telling us that if Michigan played in the SEC... they would be in 13th place among those teams... 
I seriously doubt that would hold up - in reality.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

RPI is not some sort of magical perfect system.
It does a pretty good job... but it ain't perfect. 



The RPI is in no way predictive.

If these are your problems, then there is no problem because the RPI "says" nothing. You are inferring the output incorrectly.
Mark46

Registered:
Posts: 727
Reply with quote  #34 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryLouisAaron
Just off the top of my head - here are two problems I see with the current RPI rankings... 

1. RPI is telling us that the FOUR best teams in college softball are ALL in the PAC-12.

If Oregon, Washington, UCLA and Arizona State finish 1, 2, 3 & 4 in the WCWS... 
I will eat my hat.

And I don't even own a hat... 
so I will have to go out and buy one - just to eat it.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2. RPI is telling us that if Michigan played in the SEC... they would be in 13th place among those teams... 
I seriously doubt that would hold up - in reality.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

RPI is not some sort of magical perfect system.
It does a pretty good job... but it ain't perfect. 

It doesn't even do a pretty good job. Garbage in, garbage out.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 16,392
Reply with quote  #35 

It does a mighty fine job.

But, sometimes the committee needs to give the sauce one more stir on selection day.

HenryLouisAaron

Registered:
Posts: 2,166
Reply with quote  #36 
<< The RPI is in no way predictive. 
If these are your problems, then there is no problem because the RPI "says" nothing. You are inferring the output incorrectly. >> (AD)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

The RPI system is used by the committee (as their primary statistical source) to determine the seeding (ranking) of the teams for the post season tournament.

RPI tells us that the best four teams in the country are ALL from the PAC-12.
My question to you - is this:  Do YOU believe those four teams ARE the top four teams in the country (as of today)..?

And... Do YOU believe that Michigan would be the 13th best team in the SEC..?

Because that IS what RPI is telling us.
cjs4585

Registered:
Posts: 844
Reply with quote  #37 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AleDawg
The RPI is in no way predictive. If these are your problems, then there is no problem because the RPI "says" nothing. You are inferring the output incorrectly.


Not only is it not predictive it's not meant as a measure of which teams are the "best" at all. It's not saying that the 4 best teams in the country are the 1-4 rpi and it's not saying that will be the finish order in the WCWS. Seriously, this has all been discussed. It's not a poll, it's math. 

The committee uses RPI as a starting point to seed teams because it is a measure of how well a given team has done against a particular strength of schedule. To that they add, head to head matchups, top 10 and top 25 wins (to prevent gaming by playing a lot of mediocre high w/l pct teams), and "bad losses". They also add things like recent w/l and recent injury (there are actually like 7 or 8 things. The committee posted them on a website last year but I can't find them now). They take all that stuff and build a resume and argue it out amongst the committee members. I know someone who was on the committee for a few years and she said there were very intense debates and I took from that, it's likely that if you don't have a conference representative on the committee (the pac does not this year), that you are at a disadvantage.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 16,392
Reply with quote  #38 
The answer in both cases could very well be yes. And could be no.

Michigan's offense is pretty low-grade. And the pitching staffs on those Pac teams are pretty stout.

But, with Michigan, you get at something I believe should exist.... an Ace RPI. RPI of team's games when the pitcher with the most innings pitches


HenryLouisAaron

Registered:
Posts: 2,166
Reply with quote  #39 
<< It's not saying that the 4 best teams in the country are the 1-4 rpi and it's not saying that will be the finish order in the WCWS. Seriously, this has all been discussed. It's not a poll, it's math. >> (cjs4585)

And... 
the MATH is telling us that the best FOUR teams in the country (based on its formula) are ALL in the same conference - the PAC-12.

And... 
the MATH is telling us that Michigan would be the 13th best team in the SEC.

Were my comments really not that clear..?
The RPI (the math) is telling us these things. 

Do you disagree with that statement..?
scrybe

Registered:
Posts: 1,471
Reply with quote  #40 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjs4585


Not only is it not predictive it's not meant as a measure of which teams are the "best" at all. It's not saying that the 4 best teams in the country are the 1-4 rpi and it's not saying that will be the finish order in the WCWS. Seriously, this has all been discussed. It's not a poll, it's math. 

The committee uses RPI as a starting point to seed teams because it is a measure of how well a given team has done against a particular strength of schedule. To that they add, head to head matchups, top 10 and top 25 wins (to prevent gaming by playing a lot of mediocre high w/l pct teams), and "bad losses". They also add things like recent w/l and recent injury (there are actually like 7 or 8 things. The committee posted them on a website last year but I can't find them now). They take all that stuff and build a resume and argue it out amongst the committee members. I know someone who was on the committee for a few years and she said there were very intense debates and I took from that, it's likely that if you don't have a conference representative on the committee (the pac does not this year), that you are at a disadvantage.


You can kid a kidder, but you just can't bull$hit an old bull$hitter. So take that crap outta here.
Wichita_Mustangs

Registered:
Posts: 98
Reply with quote  #41 
I would say with no hesitation....that the top 4 teams in the pac THIS YEAR....would be in top 5 in the standings in the SEC this year......wouldn't have said that last year.

The top half of the pac is better than top half of SEC this year....and bottom half of SEC is way better than the bottom half of the pac....JMO
leip822

Registered:
Posts: 471
Reply with quote  #42 
No poll or mathmatical equation is correct unless OU is #1 and 100,000 points ahead of the next best. Obviously.
__________________
sl
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 16,392
Reply with quote  #43 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wichita_Mustangs
I would say with no hesitation....that the top 4 teams in the pac THIS YEAR....would be in top 5 in the standings in the SEC this year......wouldn't have said that last year. The top half of the pac is better than top half of SEC this year....and bottom half of SEC is way better than the bottom half of the pac....JMO
What he said
cjs4585

Registered:
Posts: 844
Reply with quote  #44 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryLouisAaron
<< It's not saying that the 4 best teams in the country are the 1-4 rpi and it's not saying that will be the finish order in the WCWS. Seriously, this has all been discussed. It's not a poll, it's math. >> (cjs4585)

And... 
the MATH is telling us that the best FOUR teams in the country (based on its formula) are ALL in the same conference - the PAC-12.

And... 
the MATH is telling us that Michigan would be the 13th best team in the SEC.

Were my comments really not that clear..?
The RPI (the math) is telling us these things. 

Do you disagree with that statement..?


No it's not. The RPI will never tell anyone who the best 4 teams or best any teams are in the country. That is not what it does.  It helps in quantifying the difference (if there is one) between say a 35-7 team against a really hard schedule vs a 35-2 team against a mediocre schedule. It is not saying which of those two teams is better or who would win a head to head series.
cjs4585

Registered:
Posts: 844
Reply with quote  #45 
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrybe
You can kid a kidder, but you just can't bull$hit an old bull$hitter. So take that crap outta here.


You people crack me up, man. Freaking delusional. 
MOJOERASER

Registered:
Posts: 374
Reply with quote  #46 
When a 16-17 loss team is within in 5 spots or a two time national champion who has lost two games total............you know rpi is fudged
1janiedough

Registered:
Posts: 3,930
Reply with quote  #47 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wichita_Mustangs
I would say with no hesitation....that the top 4 teams in the pac THIS YEAR....would be in top 5 in the standings in the SEC this year......wouldn't have said that last year.

The top half of the pac is better than top half of SEC this year....and bottom half of SEC is way better than the bottom half of the pac....JMO


Like the sec is the measuring stick of conference greatness. You got it backwards, babe.
BlueSky

Registered:
Posts: 884
Reply with quote  #48 
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrybe
You can kid a kidder, but you just can't bull$hit an old bull$hitter. So take that crap outta here.


s cry be, WTF? You're an admitted bs'er. Mebbe you are too old (I am old too). Mebbe you just bs too much.Get a reality check dude(ess).

__________________
 
1janiedough

Registered:
Posts: 3,930
Reply with quote  #49 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MOJOERASER
When a 16-17 loss team is within in 5 spots or a two time national champion who has lost two games total............you know rpi is fudged


You are just not that smart. Lmao at fudged.
leip822

Registered:
Posts: 471
Reply with quote  #50 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MOJOERASER
When a 16-17 loss team is within in 5 spots or a two time national champion who has lost two games total............you know rpi is fudged

You know they don’t factor in past championships, right? UCLA would always be #1 in that scenario.

__________________
sl
Wichita_Mustangs

Registered:
Posts: 98
Reply with quote  #51 
I don't think I was using the pac or the sec as the measuring stick....I was just using the 2 conf. In comparison.

However, the last 6 years there hasn't been a Pac National champion....3 sec and 3 Big 12...but before that....6 straight pac teams....I would say that the last 12 years are a pretty good measuring stick.....that's about when softball was noticed by the rest of the country....agree?

Both great conferences....
scrybe

Registered:
Posts: 1,471
Reply with quote  #52 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1janiedough


You are just not that smart. Lmao at fudged.


You can always spot a SEC fan by the way they resort to insulting other posters when they are challenged with truth.

Sorry, Janie. Wasn't replying to your post.
cjs4585

Registered:
Posts: 844
Reply with quote  #53 
Having a previous national championship has nothing to do with it. If OK didn't play what's currently only the 34th toughest schedule, you wouldn't have to worry about the team with the 2nd toughest schedule being so close when they've lost 17 games. The idea that rpi is fudged or whatever is ridiculous.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 16,392
Reply with quote  #54 
Yep, playing mediocre teams who themselves play mediocre teams will get you a 34
HenryLouisAaron

Registered:
Posts: 2,166
Reply with quote  #55 
<< The RPI will never tell anyone who the best 4 teams or best any teams are in the country. That is not what it does.  It helps in quantifying the difference (if there is one) between say a 35-7 team against a really hard schedule vs a 35-2 team against a mediocre schedule. It is not saying which of those two teams is better or who would win a head to head series. >> (cjs4585)


Yes... that (what I highlighted above) is what RPI does.
And in doing that (by the use of it's mathematical formula) it is trying to show us fans of the game... 
which teams are the best (based on who they have played - who they have beaten - and to whom they have lost).

Why do you think the softball fans - check out what the weekly RPI rankings are..?
Why do you think people list the potential match ups for the final 16 teams...  BASED entirely on the RPI rankings..?

Because it is generally regarded by many knowledgeable softball fans (and coaches & sports writers, etc.) as the current one BEST measure of where the teams stand.

So you can say all you want, that it is NOT telling you any such thing...
But you know exactly what I mean. And you most likely agree with I am saying.

Chester45

Registered:
Posts: 130
Reply with quote  #56 
With the week Florida had they actually raised their RPI. That’s a joke. Left turn has probably bought a bottle of champagne with the number 1 RPI spot. Those quality losses going a long way. Ofcourse quality losses have a different outcome in OkC
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 16,392
Reply with quote  #57 
Florida swept the 10 team, beat the 16 team and lost to the 7 team.

That is four top 10 games during the week, and a 4-1 record.

Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs
AleDawg

Registered:
Posts: 577
Reply with quote  #58 
Henry, you grossly misunderstand the RPI.

As an aside, a somewhat familiar couple of games in Seattle. Does this mean Cal can matchup with the top teams? Let's hope they don't get "raped" by the committee.😉
sMurph

Registered:
Posts: 548
Reply with quote  #59 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nstinson
and the RPI means what exactly? :-p It's as much of a joke as any other rankings system used in college sports.



Laugh. Out. Loud.  For virtually every year in history, what RPI means is that is how the Committee seeds the teams, with only minor variations. 
sMurph

Registered:
Posts: 548
Reply with quote  #60 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chester45
With the week Florida had they actually raised their RPI. That’s a joke. Left turn has probably bought a bottle of champagne with the number 1 RPI spot. Those quality losses going a long way. Ofcourse quality losses have a different outcome in OkC




What is shown almost every year is that the teams that make it to OKC are mostly the teams who had a top 8 RPI, and the teams that make it the championship series were top 4 or 5 in the RPI. It has proven for many years to be as predictive as anything. 
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.