Is Nova in a P5? | Page 4 | The Boneyard

Is Nova in a P5?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The NBE is riding an RPI bubble that may very well burst. The stars have aligned for them via this bogus metric. Sure, they have a few good teams and had a nice run as a conference at the front end of the season, but I can't rationalize some of the inflated seedings. Here's an example. Xavier with 11 losses (which will grow to 13 after playing Nova and in the NBE Championship) has four losses to teams with an RPI greater than 100. By comparison, UConn has only one loss to a team with an RPI over 100—Houston. All UConn's other losses were to teams with an 80 or better RPI. Xavier may not even get to .500 in the NBE. Their biggest wins were against Georgetown as well as Providence and Butler at home. Their next biggest RPI win was against Stephen F. Austin.

Lunardi has Xavier as a 7 seed and climbing. Maybe they are worthy of an NCAA bid, but a 7 seed? Nova aside, many of these NBE teams are advantaged in terms of their seeding. We'll see how it all works out.
 
itgoeslike said:
The NBE is riding an RPI bubble that may very well burst. The stars have aligned for them via this bogus metric. Sure, they have a few good teams and had a nice run as a conference at the front end of the season, but I can't rationalize some of the inflated seedings. Here's an example. Xavier with 11 losses (which will grow to 13 after playing Nova and in the NBE Championship) has four losses to teams with an RPI greater than 100. By comparison, UConn has only one loss to a team with an RPI over 100—Houston. All UConn's other losses were to teams with an 80 or better RPI. Xavier may not even get to .500 in the NBE. Their biggest wins were against Georgetown as well as Providence and Butler at home. Their next biggest RPI win was against Stephen F. Austin.

Lunardi has Xavier as a 7 seed and climbing. Maybe they are worthy of an NCAA bid, but a 7 seed? Nova aside, many of these NBE teams are advantaged in terms of their seeding. We'll see how it all works out.
Expand ...
Yup Butler has 1 top 100 win in the OOC and Lunardi has them as a 6 seed.
 
Jerry1714 said:
Yup Butler has 1 top 100 win in the OOC and Lunardi has them as a 6 seed.
Expand ...

It's mind boggling. According to Lunardi, Temple who beat Kansas (#2 RPI) with fewer bad losses is on the bubble. Cincy who beat 5 teams in the RPI top 50 (including OOC games), and has fewer bad losses, is on the bubble. Tulsa is currently on the outside looking in. I kind of expected the AAC to be on the ass end of things, but I'm just amazed at the seeding of some these very average NBE teams. I think Lunardi may get this bracket wrong. Then again, maybe the committee has some nasty 9/10/11 pairings waiting for these "favored" teams.
 
The Ohio Valley was able to game the RPI system a few years ago in this manner and look great on paper merely by not playing teams with RPI's over 200. A bunch of average teams whose best wins were against each other.
 
Not to pick on Xavier, but their Non-Conference RPI is very high 29. But, they played no one higher than Cincy's RPI of 52. I guess this rigorous schedule paid dividends? Here's who they played OOC:

- Cincy (52)
- Stephen F. Austin (64)
- UTEP (61)
- Murray State (74)
- Alabama (78)
- Long Beach State (103)
- Florida Gulf Coast (108)
- Auburn (136)
- San Diego (173) (Not SDSU)
- Northern Arizona (188)
- Missouri (200)
- IUPUI (248)

#7 Seed and climbing. . ?

http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rpi/_/teamId/2752
 
.-.
Jerry1714 said:
He meant to Nova, if you are going to troll please try to keep up.
Expand ...

"We wouldn't have lost to anyone by 28". Yes, "anyone" = Nova. Thanks for clarifying Jerry. Please try to keep up.
 
itgoeslike said:
The NBE is riding an RPI bubble that may very well burst. The stars have aligned for them via this bogus metric. Sure, they have a few good teams and had a nice run as a conference at the front end of the season, but I can't rationalize some of the inflated seedings. Here's an example. Xavier with 11 losses (which will grow to 13 after playing Nova and in the NBE Championship) has four losses to teams with an RPI greater than 100. By comparison, UConn has only one loss to a team with an RPI over 100—Houston. All UConn's other losses were to teams with an 80 or better RPI. Xavier may not even get to .500 in the NBE. Their biggest wins were against Georgetown as well as Providence and Butler at home. Their next biggest RPI win was against Stephen F. Austin.

Lunardi has Xavier as a 7 seed and climbing. Maybe they are worthy of an NCAA bid, but a 7 seed? Nova aside, many of these NBE teams are advantaged in terms of their seeding. We'll see how it all works out.
Expand ...

I'm not sure where the confusion lies. The Big East performed well OOC, therefore, their teams get seeded higher. The AAC performed horribly OOC, their teams get seeded lower. Let's compare UConn's resume to Xavier's:

UConn:
0-3 vs. top 25
2-6 vs. top 50
4-10 vs. top 100
1 loss to sub-150 team

Xavier:
4-3 vs. top 25
4-5 vs. top 50
9-7 vs. top 100
1 loss to sub-150 team

The Big East is a strong conference by any metric you want to use. Some of their teams are underwhelming, sure. But look at a school like Ohio State and ask yourself who they've beaten. Look at Louisville. North Carolina. You can poke holes in a lot of resumes.
 
champs99and04 said:
I'm not sure where the confusion lies. The Big East performed well OOC, therefore, their teams get seeded higher. The AAC performed horribly OOC, their teams get seeded lower. Let's compare UConn's resume to Xavier's:

UConn:
0-3 vs. top 25
2-6 vs. top 50
4-10 vs. top 100
1 loss to sub-150 team

Xavier:
4-3 vs. top 25
4-5 vs. top 50
9-7 vs. top 100
1 loss to sub-150 team

The Big East is a strong conference by any metric you want to use. Some of their teams are underwhelming, sure. But look at a school like Ohio State and ask yourself who they've beaten. Look at Louisville. North Carolina. You can poke holes in a lot of resumes.
Expand ...
Those good RPI wins came against other BE teams, look at Xavier out of conference, 1-3 against the only decent teams they played.

That is his point.
 
Jerry1714 said:
Those good RPI wins came against other BE teams, look at Xavier out of conference, 1-3 against the only decent teams they played.

That is his point.
Expand ...

That's fine, all I'm saying is that there are plenty of other teams seeded similarly that are in the same boat, Ohio State being one of them. Their best OOC win came against Marquette and they're an eight seed. We can admit Xavier is not that good while also acknowledging that there aren't many teams to place ahead of him. If UConn took care of the teams they were supposed to, somebody on another message board would be wondering why a team whose best wins are over Cincinnati and Dayton is in the dance.
 
champs99and04 said:
That's fine, all I'm saying is that there are plenty of other teams seeded similarly that are in the same boat, Ohio State being one of them. Their best OOC win came against Marquette and they're an eight seed. We can admit Xavier is not that good while also acknowledging that there aren't many teams to place ahead of him. If UConn took care of the teams they were supposed to, somebody on another message board would be wondering why a team whose best wins are over Cincinnati and Dayton is in the dance.
Expand ...
I think Ohio St is a lot closer to the bubble then Lunardi has them (their best win OOC is actually High Point)

But yes I agree there are ton of beyond mediocre resumes out there that will be in the dance, like Oregon.
 
.-.
itgoeslike said:
This sentiment is pervasive among the P5 (fueled by the media), which showers instant credit to programs that haven't won squat for decades. To have to endure it from fans from a conference that is a shell of its former self is almost unbearable.
Expand ...

I don't think its a shell of its former self. it may actually be a pretty good league and close to how the Big East right before the split. But ofcourse... we have to give it time to find out... because you can't judge based on one year outcomes.

If we look at the RPIs we can see that the Big East this year is pretty similar to the old Big East. Right now the Big East has a .5773 RPI (good enought for #2) and .7560 non-conference winning percentage... (this will either go down or up depending on how well they do in the NCAAs which is the big question right now and I can't wait to find out!)... for comparison.... the 2012-13 Big East had a 0.5744 RPI (after the NCAAs) and a .8162 Winning Percentage (meaning that the league used to schedule bad teams before).... But ofcourse that year the Big East had the National Champion so it obviously it was a beast.... This year, we have to wait to find out! Numbers are meaningless without the big time results

Until then... The Big East hasn't lost a beat
 
what's Nova? something like 8-1 vs the RPI top 50, isn't that incredible?

who's their best victory? Butler? Georgetown? VCU? PC?

seriously, I call this a classic example of why the RPI is a joke



PS: let's just say the NBE is not the BEAST
 
champs99and04 said:
I'm not sure where the confusion lies. The Big East performed well OOC, therefore, their teams get seeded higher. The AAC performed horribly OOC, their teams get seeded lower. Let's compare UConn's resume to Xavier's:

UConn:
0-3 vs. top 25
2-6 vs. top 50
4-10 vs. top 100
1 loss to sub-150 team

Xavier:
4-3 vs. top 25
4-5 vs. top 50
9-7 vs. top 100
1 loss to sub-150 team

The Big East is a strong conference by any metric you want to use. Some of their teams are underwhelming, sure. But look at a school like Ohio State and ask yourself who they've beaten. Look at Louisville. North Carolina. You can poke holes in a lot of resumes.
Expand ...

I think you're confused. I wasn't comparing UConn to Xavier. UConn, unfortunately, is nowhere near the bubble, at least for now. I was using UConn and other resumés to illustrate that Xavier hasn't accomplished much and has bad losses, yet is seeded substantially higher than like teams, from many conferences. Additionally, I stated in my post that the NBE had a good run at the front end of the season and has a few legitimate teams. Having said that, Xavier has been aided greatly by early season wins by teams not named Xavier. Xavier is a sub par 9-4 against teams that have an RPI of 100 or higher, whereas Temple is 14-2 and Tulsa is 16-1. Again, I'm not saying Temple or Tulsa are better than Xavier, but rather that the latter's seeding is disproportionately high. I mean, Tulsa isn't even in the tourney according to Lunardi. Lastly, I get how these things are calculated (inside and out), I am simply making the point that, aside from 3-4 teams, the seeding for the laggards in the NBE are set artificially high. Apparently you think they are on the money.
 
ecasadoSBU said:
I don't think its a shell of its former self. it may actually be a pretty good league and close to how the Big East right before the split. But ofcourse... we have to give it time to find out... because you can't judge based on one year outcomes.

If we look at the RPIs we can see that the Big East this year is pretty similar to the old Big East. Right now the Big East has a .5773 RPI (good enought for #2) and .7560 non-conference winning percentage... (this will either go down or up depending on how well they do in the NCAAs which is the big question right now and I can't wait to find out!)... for comparison.... the 2012-13 Big East had a 0.5744 RPI (after the NCAAs) and a .8162 Winning Percentage (meaning that the league used to schedule bad teams before).... But ofcourse that year the Big East had the National Champion so it obviously it was a beast.... This year, we have to wait to find out! Numbers are meaningless without the big time results

Until then... The Big East hasn't lost a beat
Expand ...
o sweet 16 teams despite having a 2 and 3 seed last year, 2-4 overall in the tournament.

also fell on its face in the NIT.

yup sure has not lost a beat.

troll harder
 
ecasadoSBU said:
I don't think its a shell of its former self. it may actually be a pretty good league and close to how the Big East right before the split. But ofcourse... we have to give it time to find out... because you can't judge based on one year outcomes.

If we look at the RPIs we can see that the Big East this year is pretty similar to the old Big East. Right now the Big East has a .5773 RPI (good enought for #2) and .7560 non-conference winning percentage... (this will either go down or up depending on how well they do in the NCAAs which is the big question right now and I can't wait to find out!)... for comparison.... the 2012-13 Big East had a 0.5744 RPI (after the NCAAs) and a .8162 Winning Percentage (meaning that the league used to schedule bad teams before).... But ofcourse that year the Big East had the National Champion so it obviously it was a beast.... This year, we have to wait to find out! Numbers are meaningless without the big time results

Until then... The Big East hasn't lost a beat
Expand ...

The NBE was not impressive last year. In fact, the AAC performed better. This year, the NBE is much better league, but many of their wins came at the front end of the season. It will be interesting to see how they perform in March.
 
ecasadoSBU said:
I don't think its a shell of its former self. it may actually be a pretty good league and close to how the Big East right before the split.
Expand ...

You really are comical when it comes to this conference. Of the last 15 Big East tournaments held before the breakup, 2 were won by teams currently in the Big East, and 13 were won by teams no longer in the Big East. It's not even in the same universe as it once was. Providence won the Big East tournament last year.

Providence.
 
.-.
itgoeslike said:
I think you're confused. I wasn't comparing UConn to Xavier. UConn, unfortunately, is nowhere near the bubble, at least for now. I was using UConn and other resumés to illustrate that Xavier hasn't accomplished much and has bad losses, yet is seeded substantially higher than like teams, from many conferences. Additionally, I stated in my post that the NBE had a good run at the front end of the season and has a few legitimate teams. Having said that, Xavier has been aided greatly by early season wins by teams not named Xavier. Xavier is a sub par 9-4 against teams that have an RPI of 100 or higher, whereas Temple is 14-2 and Tulsa is 16-1. Again, I'm not saying Temple or Tulsa are better than Xavier, but rather that the latter's seeding is disproportionately high. I mean, Tulsa isn't even in the tourney according to Lunardi. Lastly, I get how these things are calculated (inside and out), I am simply making the point that, aside from 3-4 teams, the seeding for the laggards in the NBE are set artificially high. Apparently you think they are on the money.
Expand ...

OK, fair post. Regarding the bold, though, that could be said of virtually every team in a power conference. UNC benefitted greatly from early season wins by teams not named UNC, Ohio State the same, etc. Xavier's big wins aren't less impressive, at least in my mind, because they were against Big East opponents.

You've sold me that Xavier may be over-seeded. Looking at their resume, I think they're closer to a ten than a seven. Everybody else, though, seems aptly seeded. There's Villanova, and then two six seeds (Butler and Georgetown), two seven seeds (Providence and Xavier), and one ten seed (St. Johns). That distribution is indicative of a conference with one really good teams, a couple other top 25 type squads, and then another one or two top 50/tournament teams. I'd say that's a fair characterization of the Big East as currently constituted.
 
shakes65 said:
If I had my druthers, I would be in the BE for hoops all the way around, and maybe everything except football. The rivalries are there, not in the absurdity of a league where half of the teams play in front of crowds that look like D3 houses. And I don't see ECU, Houston, Tulane, UCF, etc getting much better. Only Houston has any kind of history in hoops. Imagine going to Greenville tonight and playing not UNC, not NC State, the Dookies, or Wake Forest, but a school which has less basketball tradition than UNC-Wilmington, UNC- Asheville, UNC-Charlotte and UNC-Greensboro in a basketball crazy state. I guess there is at least a chance for a decent crowd in Greenville.

What I would do to watch us go up against Villanova, Georgetown, the Johnnies, and PC. Even Seton Hall looks good now. Even the newbies are OK. I would even get psyched to go to the away games when I could. Great crowds, palpable but controlled animosity, wonderful college hoops atmosphere, noisy venues, Bill Raftery on the call. The BET in the Garden. Does it get better than that?

I did not know we were spoiled, until we found ourselves in this mess. How do we get all this back?
Expand ...

By developing a consistent Top 25 football program.
 
champs99and04 said:
OK, fair post. Regarding the bold, though, that could be said of virtually every team in a power conference. UNC benefitted greatly from early season wins by teams not named UNC, Ohio State the same, etc. Xavier's big wins aren't less impressive, at least in my mind, because they were against Big East opponents.

You've sold me that Xavier may be over-seeded. Looking at their resume, I think they're closer to a ten than a seven. Everybody else, though, seems aptly seeded. There's Villanova, and then two six seeds (Butler and Georgetown), two seven seeds (Providence and Xavier), and one ten seed (St. Johns). That distribution is indicative of a conference with one really good teams, a couple other top 25 type squads, and then another one or two top 50/tournament teams. I'd say that's a fair characterization of the Big East as currently constituted.
Expand ...

Yes, that was my point, that Xavier is closer to a 10 seed than a seven. The suggestion that there is as few as 16 teams that separate Nova and Xavier just doesn't seem right. Again, I wasn't saying they didn't deserve a spot in the tourney, but rather, the seeding of the lower end NBE seems to be high. Butler is probably a 7, Providence a 9, Xavier a 10 and St. Johns an 11. If Xavier goes 8-10 in the NBE with 14 losses it is really tough to see how they get in. But when they are sitting at a 7 seed, I don't see how they drop out. Of course, now that I spent this much time beating a dead horse, they go on to beat Nova and win the NBE championship. . .
 
First, the RPI is a joke and has always been a joke. Pomeroy isn't much better. The committee should use Sagarin or Greenfield but they are too stupid to understand why. The RPI is only relevant because the NCAA dopes use it. Otherwise, it is nothing more than a first grade math problem.

Second, if Nova is in a weaker or, at best, equivalent conference, how are they out recruiting us? I thought it was all about the conference.
 
Paesano said:
First, the RPI is a joke and has always been a joke. Pomeroy isn't much better. The committee should use Sagarin or Greenfield but they are too stupid to understand why. The RPI is only relevant because the NCAA dopes use it. Otherwise, it is nothing more than a first grade math problem.

Second, if Nova is in a weaker or, at best, equivalent conference, how are they out recruiting us? I thought it was all about the conference.
Expand ...
Name brand. Yes, we are the actually heir to the Big East. But they have the name. A lot easier to recruit to a conference called the "Big East" rather than the "American." Secondly, all the Big East teams are basketball focused, have the fan support, and history of being a good program. They might not play on ESPN, but they wouldn't be playing in front of 27 people at Houston either. Wouldn't you rather play at Villanova, Seton Hall, or Marquette as opposed to Memphis, Tulsa, or Houston?
 
.-.
ecasadoSBU said:
Good job bringing old threads. Hindsight is 20/20...
Expand ...

That jerk! How dare he bring up your prior ridiculous homerism on this subject as a way to frame your current ridiculous homerism on this subject.

That thread was hillarious to read through, btw.
 
Paesano said:
First, the RPI is a joke and has always been a joke. Pomeroy isn't much better. The committee should use Sagarin or Greenfield but they are too stupid to understand why. The RPI is only relevant because the NCAA dopes use it. Otherwise, it is nothing more than a first grade math problem.

Second, if Nova is in a weaker or, at best, equivalent conference, how are they out recruiting us? I thought it was all about the conference.
Expand ...
How are they out recruiting us?

https://basketballrecruiting.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1675431
 
Villanova wins again RPI30 Xavier... they improve to 27-2...
St. John's beats Georgetown at the Garden... locking an NCAA bid
Xavier needs one more win after this loss to Nova to lock a 6th bid for the Big East

(3...2...1... Senseless Bashing starts)
 
ecasadoSBU said:
Villanova wins again RPI30 Xavier... they improve to 27-2...
St. John's beats Georgetown at the Garden... locking an NCAA bid
Xavier needs one more win after this loss to Nova to lock a 6th bid for the Big East

(3...2...1... Senseless Bashing starts)
Expand ...
internet-troll.jpg
 
Cuse should of beaten Nove this year, that tells me that they are average.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,151
Messages
4,554,925
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom