Beknighted's analysis is always a treat, though it is based prominently on brain-dead RPI, but no problem there since he is going off of historic data for setting probabilities rather than using it for determining team values. Also, historic RPI data is easy to find, unlike the the other rating indexes.
Beknighted sees things a little differently than Creme this year, as he did last year. Last year Creme was 100% correct, while Bek's categories had kind of a bad showing, as only 3 of his 5 Pretty Good Shots made it (which is a very bad result), 5 of 9 Reason to Hopes made it (which is around average), and 1 of 10 from the Sweating it Out list (and with 14 candidates from the first two categories, really none from this group should have made it). But again, he is just using historic patterns, and last year the committee broke a lot of patterns, especially as far as Bek is concerned, by including Oklahoma.
I'm guessing that Bek's PGS category will rebound for probably a 100% showing this year (all 6), and that that the rest of his categories will filter out with maybe another 100% (all 6) of the mid category, and then 1 or 2 left from the Little Chance category that includes Tulane.
A big difference between Creme and Bek is that Charlie has Arkansas in with its 6-10 conference record and Bek tosses them for that reason. Although I agree with Bek that it's a good reason, I agree more with Creme that after last year the Committee proved it is dropping longtime standards and they will find a reason to vote the Razorbacks in.
