Delaware holds at #2 in RPI

[Vowelguy]

Despite last night's loss, Blue Hens hold at #2. While they'll no doubt drop as they get in to the conference schedule, I'm surprised to see them even this high at this point. They may very well end up with a #5 seed or so.

 

[JoePgh]

Can you provide a link to the RPI listings?

 

[Vowelguy]

http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_Women.html

 

[Ruffian75]

The Hens will be in the high teens in rpi and over 20 in SOS (presently 5) by the end of January even if they don't lose another game.

 

[alexrgct]

Not only will their conference schedule hurt them, but their previous opponents' conference schedules will hurt them. Wake, Providence, Nova, etc., will nose-dive in conference play. Penn State just dropped another game, for that matter.

 

[Ruffian75]

I don't see the Blue Hens losing another game. They are much better than last year. The biggest Hen seems to have finally decided to play ball this year. I see them as a 4 seed.

Another interesting thing with rpi and sos. Who would get a #1 seed if Stanford runs the table and finishes 32-1 after the conference tourney and MD has a 31-2 record at that point? Stanford does not play another ranked team and only played three all season (one being a typical underachieving Texas team). Maryland has played one top 25 to date but should they get to a title game in the ACC tourney and exit with one or two losses, they will have played 9 (assuming UNC doesn't fall on their face). Much better resume for the Terps

 

[speedoo]

I don't see the Blue Hens losing another game. They are much better than last year. The biggest Hen seems to have finally decided to play ball this year. I see them as a 4 seed.

Another interesting thing with rpi and sos. Who would get a #1 seed if Stanford runs the table and finishes 32-1 after the conference tourney and MD has a 31-2 record at that point? Stanford does not play another ranked team and only played three all season (one being a typical underachieving Texas team). Maryland has played one top 25 to date but should they get to a title game in the ACC tourney and exit with one or two losses, they will have played 9 (assuming UNC doesn't fall on their face). Much better resume for the Terps

No question that MD will finish the regular and conference tourney season with many more games vs. Top teams and if they manage only 1 or 2 losses, will be more deserving of a #1 seed IMO. But they have not played those games yet and Duke, Miami, and perhaps UNC will be tough for them especially on the road. 3 to 4 losses in those 6 games is not at all unthinkable.

Right now it's early but MD and Stanford out west as the top 2 seeds is looking likely.

 

[Phil]

I don't see the Blue Hens losing another game. They are much better than last year. The biggest Hen seems to have finally decided to play ball this year. I see them as a 4 seed.

Another interesting thing with rpi and sos. Who would get a #1 seed if Stanford runs the table and finishes 32-1 after the conference tourney and MD has a 31-2 record at that point? Stanford does not play another ranked team and only played three all season (one being a typical underachieving Texas team). Maryland has played one top 25 to date but should they get to a title game in the ACC tourney and exit with one or two losses, they will have played 9 (assuming UNC doesn't fall on their face). Much better resume for the Terps

Good Point. Looks like MD will end up with a far tougher schedule, and may not lose a game. Even with a loss, they may well be more deserving of a one seed.

 

[Vowelguy]

Right now it's early but MD and Stanford out west as the top 2 seeds is looking likely.

Not according to the Women's seeding rules.

If the committee ranks Maryland as #4 and Stanford as #5, then yes, they'd be the top two seeds in Fresno. However ...

If committee ranks Stanford as #4 then it is #1 seed out West. If Maryland is #5, it ends up as a #2 in the site closest to home ... Raleigh (300 miles). Or possibly Kingston (400 miles). But definitely not Fresno.

 

[Phil]

Right now it's early but MD and Stanford out west as the top 2 seeds is looking likely.

I could see MD in Raleigh, maybe as a 1, or as a very strong 2

 

[Phil]

Meanwhile OSU is undefeated, and who do they have left who can beat them? OK, silly question, they could lose to a couple teams, but they could run the table.

 

[Vowelguy]

Point probably moot. The Terps ACC schedule includes two games with all the teams in the top half of the conference (Duke, Miami, VA, NC, GaT) , and only 1 against the bottom feeders like Clemson, BC, VT. Don't think they're that head and shoulders ahead of everyone else that they could sweep.

 

[Frodo]

The RPI is, and has been for many years, a really poor model for ranking teams. I'd be willing to bet that the only reason the NCAA continues to use it is because it's been around for so long. Jeff Sagarin's computer models are far more accurate when it comes to ranking the relative strengths of teams. I'd really like to see the selection committee move to seedings based upon Sagarin...

http://www.rpiratings.com/womrate.php]Sagarin

 

[Phil]

Speaking of undefeated, Wisconsin Green Bay is undefeated, and their toughest remaining opponent is Illinois-Chicago, whom they just beat by 17. if they run the table, they won't get a 1 seed, but their seeding will be interesting.

 

[Vowelguy]

Meanwhile OSU is undefeated, and who do they have left who can beat them? OK, silly question, they could lose to a couple teams, but they could run the table.

Same comment I made about MD. Seems highly doubtful that they're that much better than the rest of the conference.

Though they do have a favorable schedule with 2 games against Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, & Minnesota.

 

[Vowelguy]

The RPI is, and has been for many years, a really poor model for ranking teams. I'd be willing to bet that the only reason the NCAA continues to use it is because it's been around for so long. Jeff Sagarin's computer models are far more accurate when it comes to ranking the relative strengths of teams. I'd really like to see the selection committee move to seedings based upon Sagarin...

http://www.rpiratings.com/womrate.php]Sagarin

The RPI is a problem if you treat it as a power rating - but there's no evidence that the committee does.

The NCAA wanted a way to measure teams that accounts for Wins/Losses, strength of opponentd, and NOT margin of victory. The RPI fills that criteria.

 

[stamfordhusky]

The RPI is, and has been for many years, a really poor model for ranking teams. I'd be willing to bet that the only reason the NCAA continues to use it is because it's been around for so long. Jeff Sagarin's computer models are far more accurate when it comes to ranking the relative strengths of teams. I'd really like to see the selection committee move to seedings based upon Sagarin...
http://www.rpiratings.com/womrate.php]Sagarin

Yes, the Sagarin rankings are FAR better than the RPI. However there is zero chance the NCAA would ever switch. The reason is that they will never use a system that rewards teams for running up the score. If Sagarin's rankings counted for tournament selection, you'd have some teams pressing and shooting threes in the final minute of a game that was already decided and you'd rarely see a team go deep into their bench - even in the final minutes of an easy win. Not only would this create situations of questionable sportsmanship, but you'd also probably see a few fights when teams get frustrated by their opponent running up the score.

BTW, Sagarin rankings have been around about as long as the RPI and longer than the current version. It was created by the NCAA because they wanted a system that only uses wins and losses - not margin of victory. In the RPI, a 40-point win and a 1-point win are the same. And a 60-point loss may be better than a 60-point win - depending on the record of the opponent. This is similar to the BCS rankings - where the NCAA made all computer models drop margin of victory as an input in the algorithms.

 

[Ruffian75]

Not according to the Women's seeding rules.

If the committee ranks Maryland as #4 and Stanford as #5, then yes, they'd be the top two seeds in Fresno. However ...

If committee ranks Stanford as #4 then it is #1 seed out West. If Maryland is #5, it ends up as a #2 in the site closest to home ... Raleigh (300 miles). Or possibly Kingston (400 miles). But definitely not Fresno.

Do you really believe anything those idiots say? Mileage doesn't matter....

Trenton '09..#1 UConn 150 miles, #2 A & M 1600 miles, #3 FSU 1000 miles, #4 Cal 2800 miles, #5 Virginia 300 miles, #6 Arizona State 2500 miles Take into consideration that 2/3 of the teams in the dance are east of the Mississippi which ius about 900 miles from Trenton and that east regional had three in the top six from over 1500 miles away.

 

[Icebear]

Do you really believe anything those idiots say? Mileage doesn't matter....

Trenton '09..#1 UConn 150 miles, #2 A & M 1600 miles, #3 FSU 1000 miles, #4 Cal 2800 miles, #5 Virginia 300 miles, #6 Arizona State 2500 miles Take into consideration that 2/3 of the teams in the dance are east of the Mississippi and that east regional had three in the top six from over 1500 miles away.

I believe mileage was announced as a significant consideration beginning in 2010 for the last two seasons.

 

[Vowelguy]

Do you really believe anything those idiots say? Mileage doesn't matter....

Trenton '09..#1 UConn 150 miles, #2 A & M 1600 miles, #3 FSU 1000 miles, #4 Cal 2800 miles, #5 Virginia 300 miles, #6 Arizona State 2500 miles Take into consideration that 2/3 of the teams in the dance are east of the Mississippi which ius about 900 miles from Trenton and that east regional had three in the top six from over 1500 miles away.

In 2009, the other #2 seeds were Stanford, Auburn, Baylor, and TAMU, with the sites at Berkeley, Raleigh, Okla City, and Trenton.

Stanford to Berkeley.
Auburn as the #5 or #6 overall, sends them to Okla City.
Baylor higher than TAMU sends the Bears to Raleigh and the Aggies to Trenton.

As you move further down the seeds, other factors come into play besides just geography.

 

[Ruffian75]

As I said vowel guy.....don't believe a word the "committee" says

 

[Vowelguy]

I believe mileage was announced as a significant consideration beginning in 2010 for the last two seasons.

2006
That was the year that the top #2 seed (Tenn) got stuck playing the top #1 seed (UNC) in Ohio.
Everyone thought they would get the weakest #1 seed (Ohio St) out West. Instead, Maryland got that assignment and went on to win it all.

 

[Phil]

The RPI is, and has been for many years, a really poor model for ranking teams. I'd be willing to bet that the only reason the NCAA continues to use it is because it's been around for so long. Jeff Sagarin's computer models are far more accurate when it comes to ranking the relative strengths of teams. I'd really like to see the selection committee move to seedings based upon Sagarin...

http://www.rpiratings.com/womrate.php]Sagarin

One of the flaws of the RPI system (and strength of Sagarin) is that it ignores margin of victory, but this is precisely why the committee likes it (IIRC). If their measure included margin of victory, teams would have an incentive to run up the score, and they don't want to encourage that.

 

[Icebear]

One of the flaws of the RPI system (and strength of Sagarin) is that it ignores margin of victory, but this is precisely why the committee likes it (IIRC). If their measure included margin of victory, teams would have an incentive to run up the score, and they don't want to encourage that.

Exactly and for the college game I think that is a reasonable choice.