RPI Ratings for Conferences through 11/28

[tzznandrew]

RPI update through games of 12-02:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/conference

Conference RPI
Rank Non-ConferenceWL RPI
1 Big 12 Conference 55-15 0.6067
2 Big Ten Conference 71-16 0.5890
3 Big East Conference 50-22 0.5766
4 Pacific 12 Conference 66-19 0.5610
5 Atlantic 10 Conference 60-26 0.5590
6 American Athletic Conference 50-17 0.5569
7 Atlantic Coast Conference 79-28 0.5537
8 Missouri Valley Conference 36-26 0.5486
9 Southeastern Conference 66-26 0.5459

The AAC is ahead of the ACC and the SEC. It's doing creditably. Why should marginal differences in RPI drive conference alignment decisions? If a low conference RPI doesn't hurt the North Carolina, Duke, Syracuse, Kentucky, or Florida, why should it hurt UConn?

Nelson's RPI from Friday:

1) Big 12 - .6096
2) Big Ten - .5972
3) Big East - .5923
4) Pac 12 - .5735
5) Atlantic 10 - .5561
6) Missouri Valley - .5452
7) ACC - .5444
8) West Coast - .5403
9) American Athletic - .5359
10) SEC - .5337
11) Horizon -.5287
12) MWC - 5211

The American jumped 3 spots in 5 days. If that doesn't explain to people why knowledgeable were calling BS on using these rankings as anything, I don't know what will.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

Nelson's RPI from Friday:


The American jumped 3 spots in 5 days. If that doesn't explain to people why knowledgeable were calling BS on using these rankings as anything, I don't know what will.

ding ding ding, winner! as was pointed out before, the RPI is an accumulated results-based system, and there are not enough results as of this point in the season to give an accurate picture of how the conferences compare to one another, and prevent exaggerated statistical fluctuations. In reality, you shouldn't look at RPI numbers until February 1 when OOC is done and there are some conference games under the belt, but at the very least, give it until the first week of January for all OOC games and tournaments to be completed. Looking at it on December 1, or at Thanksgiving is absolutely foolish.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The American jumped a bunch of spots in a large part because of UConn. Add UConn to any league, and that league's RPI will look better.

 

[tzznandrew]

The American jumped a bunch of spots in a large part because of UConn. Add UConn to any league, and that league's RPI will look better.

It had nothing to do with Memphis beating Oklahoma State? That is clearly a better win than any we have...

Sometimes you are just so desperate to be right...

 

[itgoeslike]

The American's RPI is being weighted down by Louisville's rating of well over 100—some RPI's had them over 200 last week. The point is that you can't put too much stock into RPI's this early in the season (the lone exception being UCONN's top 5 rating, of course). Even in March, RPI's should be balanced with other metrics.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The American's RPI is being weighted down by Louisville's rating of well over 100—some RPI's had them over 200 last week. The point is that you can't put too much stock into RPI's this early in the season (the lone exception being UCONN's top 5 rating, of course). Even in March, RPI's should be balanced with other metrics.

The NBE and AAC are not remotely comparable. UCF is probably the 6th or 7th best team in the AAC this season and they just lost to Florida Atlantic by 11. The only reason the AAC's RPI is even at its current level is because of UConn.

AAC schools have played 71 games this season. Are you arguing that number of games is not statistically significant? Do you realize that the non-conference schedule is over halfway finished?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

1. I defy you to point out in any of my posts where I even intimate remaining status quo...

2. Is willingly reducing athletic status to mid-major (divest football to FCS and beg to join the Newly aligned Big East does exactly that) your idea of advancing the department as a whole?

3. Do not pontificate. Answer "Yes" or "No" to the following:
3a. Does adding 165 new faculty as a part of, "one of the most ambitious plans of its type in U.S. higher education," indicate status quo?
3b. Does hiring Joshua Newton indicate status quo?
3c. Does the UConn Foundation purchasing a $600,000 house for the sole and expressed purpose of fund raising and increasing the endowment indicate status quo?
3d. Does building a state-of-the-art basketball training facility indicate status quo?
3e. Does authorizing the Athletic Director to spend $multiple millions for a new qualified dynamic football coach indicate status quo?

If you answer Yes to any of these then I guess I do want the status quo, but you cannot answer Yes, because it just ain't factually correct. You can't even give me a "yeah, but," on the academic goals because a big piece to achieving athletic goals is success on the academic side.

The reality is that this is only a sample of what we know about. The truth is there are a million moving parts going on behind the scenes that we are not even aware, and the culmination of those moving parts is the attainment of AAU status and an invite to the most lucrative athletic conference in the country. It's amazing, Nelson. For someone who is so liberal and progressive in the Cesspool, you are the most staunch conservative (bordering on regressive) here.

2) The AAC is a southern mid-major conference.

3) This is a strawman argument to get me to start trashing UConn. You know I am smarter than that.

I am a big fan of the academics, and I expect UConn to be well into the Top 20 of public universities by the time my kids are ready to go.

But if the academics mattered so much over the athletics, UConn would have been invited to the ACC before Louisville and Big 10 before Nebraska. Didn't work out that way though, and look at the league we are in now. ECU? Houston? UCF? I am all for universities with different missions, but it is a little difficult for UConn to get snooty on this particular topic.

The biggest problem with our current conference affiliation is revenue. The gap between the haves and have nots used to be a few million dollars a year. Now it is $20MM a year. We can not compete on this basis for any length of time. We need to get our revenue up IMMEDIATELY. Do anything to fix this.

The competition and fan interest of our conference mates is the second problem. From a football standpoint, this is about as good as we can do outside the Top 5. From a basketball standpoint, it is a handful of good programs surrounded by a bad, bad league.

I question the commitment of UConn to dealing with this problem when you look at the additions. I understand ECU, but Tulane and Tulsa were just flat out stupid additions. UConn needed local rivals and another basketball program. UMass should have been in the mix. UConn seems to just be letting stupid decision pile on stupid decision.

 

[Adios]

nelson, please send your kids elsewhere. Thank you.

 

[uconnbill]

Still wondering why nelson post here as he thinks the aac is garbage and that uconn should go independent and drop football. How can anyone take him seriously.

 

[itgoeslike]

The NBE and AAC are not remotely comparable. UCF is probably the 6th or 7th best team in the AAC this season and they just lost to Florida Atlantic by 11. The only reason the AAC's RPI is even at its current level is because of UConn.

AAC schools have played 71 games this season. Are you arguing that number of games is not statistically significant? Do you realize that the non-conference schedule is over halfway finished?

1. You missed the main point completely. Being in the AAC enables UCONN to continue to develop the football program, which is a key factor in CR. Being in the NBE means we've thrown in the towel. Furthermore, at this point, why would we walk away from a financial payout that is substantially greater than the payout of any team in the NBE? There is no reason to consider another mid major conference, including the NBE, for at least 4-5 years.

2. The BE may ultimately be slightly better, but in the context of CR, it's somewhat irrelevant. Both leagues will be ranked 4, 5 or 6 at the end of every year. The NBE will be impacted with more parity resulting in members no longer having the benefit of 25 win seasons. And if FS flops, they could find themselves off the radar. Whereas every team in the AAC (aside from UCONN, UC and USF) just upgraded their schedules, recruiting and visibility. What that translates to, I don't know, but it is a net positive.

3. Do you really think adding Creighton, Xavier and Butler compensates for losing UConn, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, and Notre Dame? It's simply not the same league, and it will impact Georgetown, Marquette and Villanova to some degree. Do I really care that Depaul and Seton Hall might be slightly better than or UCF and Tulane? No, not too much. And don't underestimate UCF, they were improving their program before they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

4. Yes. I am arguing that drawing conclusions using November RPIs are flawed. Based upon the data you must believe that Depaul is substantially better than Louisville. If you believe in the data, you should take a side trip to Vegas. I would be interested to hear how that turned out.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

1. You missed the main point completely. Being in the AAC enables UCONN to continue to develop the football program, which is a key factor in CR. Being in the NBE means we've thrown in the towel. Furthermore, at this point, why would we walk away from a financial payout that is substantially greater than the payout of any team in the NBE? There is no reason to consider another mid major conference, including the NBE, for at least 4-5 years.

2. The BE may ultimately be slightly better, but in the context of CR, it's somewhat irrelevant. Both leagues will be ranked 4, 5 or 6 at the end of every year. The NBE will be impacted with more parity resulting in members no longer having the benefit of 25 win seasons. And if FS flops, they could find themselves off the radar. Whereas every team in the AAC (aside from UCONN, UC and USF) just upgraded their schedules, recruiting and visibility. What that translates to, I don't know, but it is a net positive.

3. Do you really think adding Creighton, Xavier and Butler compensates for losing UConn, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, and Notre Dame? It's simply not the same league, and it will impact Georgetown, Marquette and Villanova to some degree. Do I really care that Depaul and Seton Hall might be slightly better than or UCF and Tulane? No, not too much. And don't underestimate UCF, they were improving their program before they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

4. Yes. I am arguing that drawing conclusions using November RPIs are flawed. Based upon the data you must believe that Depaul is substantially better than Louisville. If you believe in the data, you should take a side trip to Vegas. I would be interested to hear how that turned out.

1) I get the exit fees. That doesn't justify joining a Southern mid-major conference.

2) The BE is not slightly better than the AAC, it is a lot better. Does anything Fox does ever flop? There is little indication that the AAC has actually upgraded recruiting, while most of the BE is having a big recruiting year. More likely, the former Big East teams like Pitt, WVU and Syracuse are going to feel the pain of not having easy access to New York any more, and the Big East schools will be the beneficiaries.

3) Show me a single shred of data that says that the BE is only "slightly" better than the AAC (less Louisville and UConn).

4) I never said there was enough data to compare individual schools, I only said there was enough data to compare conferences. You don't even understand this well enough to know the difference between these two arguments.

 

[tzznandrew]

4) I never said there was enough data to compare individual schools, I only said there was enough data to compare conferences.

So the A10 and AAC are better than the ACC?

 

[pepband99]

4) I never said there was enough data to compare individual schools, I only said there was enough data to compare conferences. You don't even understand this well enough to know the difference between these two arguments.

...and by jumping *3* spots based on one or 2 games, which you've essentially admitted to, you've been proven wrong (again). Stop trying to change the subject because you've flopped.

Please go root for PC if you like the aspects of a mid-major conference with irrelevant/nonexistent football.

 

[billybud]

Football...football...football

CR is about football.

Basketball does attract viewers and interest, particularly in March. But, in the ACC anyway, it has been stated that football brings in about 80% of the moola in the media contract.

 

[itgoeslike]

1) I get the exit fees. That doesn't justify joining a Southern mid-major conference.

>You keep mentioning that revenue is really important, until it's not?

2) The BE is not slightly better than the AAC, it is a lot better. Does anything Fox does ever flop? There is little indication that the AAC has actually upgraded recruiting, while most of the BE is having a big recruiting year. More likely, the former Big East teams like Pitt, WVU and Syracuse are going to feel the pain of not having easy access to New York any more, and the Big East schools will be the beneficiaries.

>Who cares? Currently, there are 5 conferences (only 2-3 plausible) that warrant paying a sizable exit fee. The NBE conference is not one of them. There may come a time where UConn is forced to join the NBE or other mid major, but I am hoping it never comes to that. UConn and its fans need to replicate our college athletes and keep pushing, no matter what.

3) Show me a single shred of data that says that the BE is only "slightly" better than the AAC (less Louisville and UConn).

>You can't take out UCONN. We are comparing the conferences as they are, and with UConn the gap closes. You haven't even mentioned Rutgers impact on the RPI. I am not suggesting the AAC is better that the NBE, but you really haven't showed any credible evidence to date. That evidence may come, but again, in the grand scheme of things, it's all somewhat irrelevant, for now.

4) I never said there was enough data to compare individual schools, I only said there was enough data to compare conferences. You don't even understand this well enough to know the difference between these two arguments.

> The conference ratings are predicated on the team ratings. Apparently, I understand it a lot better than you do.

 

[Husky25]

2) The AAC is a southern mid-major conference.

3) This is a strawman argument to get me to start trashing UConn. You know I am smarter than that.

I am a big fan of the academics, and I expect UConn to be well into the Top 20 of public universities by the time my kids are ready to go.

But if the academics mattered so much over the athletics, UConn would have been invited to the ACC before Louisville and Big 10 before Nebraska. Didn't work out that way though, and look at the league we are in now. ECU? Houston? UCF? I am all for universities with different missions, but it is a little difficult for UConn to get snooty on this particular topic.

The biggest problem with our current conference affiliation is revenue. The gap between the haves and have nots used to be a few million dollars a year. Now it is $20MM a year. We can not compete on this basis for any length of time. We need to get our revenue up IMMEDIATELY. Do anything to fix this.

The competition and fan interest of our conference mates is the second problem. From a football standpoint, this is about as good as we can do outside the Top 5. From a basketball standpoint, it is a handful of good programs surrounded by a bad, bad league.

I question the commitment of UConn to dealing with this problem when you look at the additions. I understand ECU, but Tulane and Tulsa were just flat out stupid additions. UConn needed local rivals and another basketball program. UMass should have been in the mix. UConn seems to just be letting stupid decision pile on stupid decision.

3) is not a strawman. You replied to my post stating unequivocally that, "Anyone who thinks staying with the status quo gives UConn its best chance to get into the Big 10 is not thinking long term." I defy you to state how any of those 5 + the motions going on behind the curtain is maintaining status quo. You can't. The straw man is a figment of your imagination (Funny how you do in fact trash UConn when you state "I question the commitment of UConn to dealing [sic] with this problem when you look at the additions...UConn seems to just be letting stupid decision pile on stupid decision.")

Oh, and when Nebraska was invited to the Big Ten, the possibility wasn't even on UConn's radar. Considering the ACC's shenanigans over the last few years, UConn's goals and priorities have changed. But I guess to you, that is another example of maintaining the status quo.

 

[itgoeslike]

2)
The biggest problem with our current conference affiliation is revenue. The gap between the haves and have nots used to be a few million dollars a year. Now it is $20MM a year. We can not compete on this basis for any length of time. We need to get our revenue up IMMEDIATELY. Do anything to fix this.

Apparently joining the NBE is your strategy. I would love to see your financial plan as to how that closes the gap.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The big east TV deal generates over 2x what the AAC makes from its TV deal.

 

[pepband99]

What does TV revenue have to do with RPI?

 

[itgoeslike]

The big east TV deal generates over 2x what the AAC makes from its TV deal.

UConn's payout including staggered NCAA tourney credits, past and future exit fees, TV deals, etc. is 2X NBE deal.

Check back with me in 2016 and I'll tell if it makes sense to join NBE. For the immediate future, whether we like it or not, the AAC is our best option, in part because it is our only viable option. I have faith that will change in the coming years.

 

[Husky68]

1. I defy you to point out in any of my posts where I even intimate remaining status quo...

2. Is willingly reducing athletic status to mid-major (divest football to FCS and beg to join the Newly aligned Big East does exactly that) your idea of advancing the department as a whole?

3. Do not pontificate. Answer "Yes" or "No" to the following:
3a. Does adding 165 new faculty as a part of, "one of the most ambitious plans of its type in U.S. higher education," indicate status quo?
3b. Does hiring Joshua Newton indicate status quo?
3c. Does the UConn Foundation purchasing a $600,000 house for the sole and expressed purpose of fund raising and increasing the endowment indicate status quo?
3d. Does building a state-of-the-art basketball training facility indicate status quo?
3e. Does authorizing the Athletic Director to spend $multiple millions for a new qualified dynamic football coach indicate status quo?

If you answer Yes to any of these then I guess I do want the status quo, but you cannot answer Yes, because it just ain't factually correct. You can't even give me a "yeah, but," on the academic goals because a big piece to achieving athletic goals is success on the academic side.

The reality is that this is only a sample of what we know about. The truth is there are a million moving parts going on behind the scenes that we are not even aware, and the culmination of those moving parts is the attainment of AAU status and an invite to the most lucrative athletic conference in the country. It's amazing, Nelson. For someone who is so liberal and progressive in the Cesspool, you are the most staunch conservative (bordering on regressive) here.

Got it wrong. His postings here are just what would expect from wacko liberal. When face adversity, cut and run.

 

[upstater]

Football...football...football

CR is about football.

Basketball does attract viewers and interest, particularly in March. But, in the ACC anyway, it has been stated that football brings in about 80% of the moola in the media contract.

As I'm looking at the ratings early in the season (and I never have before) I've been noticing that the marquee basketball games do better than the average football games. I've seen 1-2 million viewers for UConn bball, and last week a game did 2.4 million for someone (I'm not sure who it was, but I assume it was maybe Duke-Arizona). Many of these ratings are above the vast majority of college football games. The top ranked football teams however kill the top ranked bball. The top ranked bball will only do as well as, say, Oregon-Oregon State.

But still, this means that top basketball is as good as mediocre football when it comes to ratings.

So, while bball might only be 20% of the value, who is bringing that 20% to the game? I'd submit that Duke basketball makes you more money than NC State or Georgia Tech football.

Something to consider.

 

[upstater]

The big east TV deal generates over 2x what the AAC makes from its TV deal.

No, it doesn't.

 

[itgoeslike]

As I'm looking at the ratings early in the season (and I never have before) I've been noticing that the marquee basketball games do better than the average football games. I've seen 1-2 million viewers for UConn bball, and last week a game did 2.4 million for someone (I'm not sure who it was, but I assume it was maybe Duke-Arizona). Many of these ratings are above the vast majority of college football games. The top ranked football teams however kill the top ranked bball. The top ranked bball will only do as well as, say, Oregon-Oregon State.

But still, this means that top basketball is as good as mediocre football when it comes to ratings.

So, while bball might only be 20% of the value, who is bringing that 20% to the game? I'd submit that Duke basketball makes you more money than NC State or Georgia Tech football.

Something to consider.

You are correct about Duke (albeit an exception to the rule). The following article details revenue of basketball vs. football in the ACC.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsm...inancials-heavily-skewed-by-duke-unc-success/

 

[upstater]

You are correct about Duke (albeit an exception to the rule). The following article details revenue of basketball vs. football in the ACC.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsm...inancials-heavily-skewed-by-duke-unc-success/

But that's revenue, as opposed to TV money.

I did find it interesting that 32% of the ACC's income is from bball.

Even at UConn, however, where bball gets great TV ratings, the football revenue for the school is at least the equal to bball revenue.