Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Paesano, post: 2004977, member: 5631"] Nope. Not muddleheaded. You are dishonest. I did not bring up RPI first, you did. At least go back and re-read the thread before posting garbage. Or, are you, again, making a dishonest statement? Go ahead, keep spinning yourself into the ground. You keep posting RPI data from after the post season. I posted a link to a USA Today article from March 7th. You know, from before the AAC tournament and from after the regular season. Yeah, I saw your point about people calculating the RPI differently. I don't disagree. So, ok, how about the RPI from the NCAAs own website: [URL='https://web.archive.org/web/20160308170041/http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-rpi']DI Men's College Basketball Rankings - NCAA Men's Basketball RPI | NCAA.com[/URL] Now, I know you will pull the predictable diversion tactic by focusing on the discrepancy in Tulsa's rating from this site to the USA Today article. But do you see UConn's rating? 57? They were NOT a lock going into the AAC tournament. They were on the bubble. That is all I have ever said. You tried, and failed, to use misleading RPI data from the wrong point in time to argue they were a lock. You were wrong and then you went full dishonest to try and slither your way out of it. Oh and, newsflash for you, the "consensus" opinion on a biased message board can be wrong. It was. [/QUOTE]