Who is Charlie Creme?

[Carnac]

Just a quick comment, when you are posting on a website its really hard to "forget the words." Its the medium in which you work.

OK, I done here. I've made my point as best I can. It's one I'm not backing away from. Some will agree, most won't. I can live with that. I understand that whenever I or anyone else posts a comment, it is subject to scrutiny. I'm OK when others do that, and don't agree. Let's move on. This has become a dead horse.

 

[DefenseBB]

Not a fair question. That would never happen. I understand that many will not agree with my take on this. It's MY opinion. This is one I can't be moved off of. It's not just when UConn wins. It's for ANY team that wins the NC. Just like in most sports, when a team wins the championship, they are usually picked by the Las Vegas odds makers as odds on favorites to win it again the next year in the initial odds rankings for he next year. Would putting the previous year's champion at #1 to begin the next season invalidate his poll? I don't think so. As we all know, pre-season ranking mean absolutely nothing.

I love a man of conviction! I will also make sure that a supply ship drops food, water and magazines off on your little island.

I too have my moments of isolation on ideas so don't feel too defensive, after, all that said my meme. I also preferred your old Carson turbin photo as that was Carnac...

 

[Vowelguy]

Like many people in other professions , Creme has spent a lot of time studying and learning. Studying the brackets year after year, talking to the committee, participating in NCAA media bracjetology events where they explain the system in minute detail. Could others do it ? Sure, if they put in the effort. But the essence of the question here seems to be that any one could be put in his job tomorrow and do just as well. That is not true and is unfair.

 

[chrissaran]

If Geno thought they would lose a few games, then no one saw this coming. He has said it many times during the year. He schedule tough opponents to show this team it wouldn't be easy, and yet they defied everyone's expectations - everyone's.

 

[Husky pride]

Not totally sure what the big problem is here. He ( Carnac) simply offered an opinion that , under normal circumstances, a team that's won the national championship before should be picked to win it again....especially, in his opinion, by someone like Charlie who purports to be an expert analyst in such matters.
Carnac may have overextended by including the wording "regardless of who comes or goes". Obviously, if a team is depleted and starts with basically a number of "unprovens" it can't reasonably be chosen to be picked #1. We all know that was not the case with UConn

 

[chrissaran]

Carnac, did you predict UConn would be 32-0? Did you predict Baylor losing to West Virginia? Did you predict Ohio St losing to Purdue? How many upsets have you predicted this year? It's not so easy to pick games. What he saw with ND was an excellent coach, a senior point guard running the team and lots of talent. I didn't hear anyone in Storrs complaining. I have a feeling Geno preferred it that way. It took the pressure offthe team early in the season when they faced a grueling schedule. Geno would disagree with you. He has said many times that we're not defending anything. No one's going to take last year's trophy away. You start every year new. Just maybe not being ranked number 1 has had this team playing with a chip on their shoulder.

 

[Adesmar123]

Not totally sure what the big problem is here. He ( Carnac) simply offered an opinion that , under normal circumstances, a team that's won the national championship before should be picked to win it again....especially, in his opinion, by someone like Charlie who purports to be an expert analyst in such matters.
Carnac may have overextended by including the wording "regardless of who comes or goes". Obviously, if a team is depleted and starts with basically a number of "unprovens" it can't reasonably be chosen to be picked #1. We all know that was not the case with UConn

Ay, there's the rub. What he said was " If a team (any team) wins the NC, they should be ranked #1 in the following year's pre-season poll out of respect, regardless of who leaves or comes. " By the way those are his boldings not mine.

I don's see anything about normal circumstances.

I could probably agree with his concept. But not with what he posted. Are we to agree or disagree with what he is thinking, or what he writes?

 

[HardHatGuy#2]

Respectfully

That is how I disagreed.

 

[Adesmar123]

That is how I disagreed.

Ditto here...

 

[PhillyCoach]

No, I was trying to find the line in the sand at which you would agree that you were wrong. Then we could see if we could move that line to a more sensible place. But it turns out that you're one who will never admit that they were wrong. I get it now.

If someone has a "concept" that a NC team should be #1 until they are beaten----why is that concept wrong? Why would someone move his line in the sand so YOU could consider him wrong? Sounds more like you just want to prove to yourself that you are right and someone else is wrong. That's my interpretation. From my perspective. From my experience.

 

[Carnac]

With all due respect, I think we are disagreeing with your wording.

" If a team (any team) wins the NC, they should be ranked #1 in the following year's pre-season poll out of respect, regardless of who leaves or comes."

The general concept I think we can agree or disagree upon. But when you throw in those qualifiers, it becomes much more difficult to find common ground.

Last note: I referenced the qualifier "regardless of who comes or goes", simply because so much was made of UConn losing the BIG 3, and was the basis of Creme ranking UConn at #4. He made that perfectly clear in his narrative:
4. Connecticut
"Another new era begins in Storrs. Gone are the most accomplished players in UConn history. Breanna Stewart, Moriah Jefferson and Morgan Tuck delivered four national titles and a 151-5 record. This now becomes the team of Kia Nurse, Gabby Williams, Katie Lou Samuelson and Napheesa Collier. That core is talented enough to get back to the Final Four, especially because Geno Auriemma is still on the bench. Replacing Jefferson with highly regarded freshman point guard Crystal Dangerfield will the top storyline to watch".

That was his qualifier, not mine. I try to choose my words carefully. In case I either have to eat them, or defend them.

 

[Adesmar123]

.

Last note: I referenced the qualifier "regardless of who comes or goes", simply because so much was made of UConn losing the BIG 3, and was the basis of Creme ranking UConn at #4. He made that perfectly clear in his narrative:

That was his qualifier, not mine. I try to choose my words carefully. In case I either have to eat them, or defend them.

Ok..but it sure looked like you said it.

 

[1-of-the-6]

Not totally sure what the big problem is here. He ( Carnac) simply offered an opinion that , under normal circumstances, a team that's won the national championship before should be picked to win it again....especially, in his opinion, by someone like Charlie who purports to be an expert analyst in such matters.
Carnac may have overextended by including the wording "regardless of who comes or goes". Obviously, if a team is depleted and starts with basically a number of "unprovens" it can't reasonably be chosen to be picked #1. We all know that was not the case with UConn

You've tempered his words, so much so in fact, that had he made the case as you have, there would never have been anyone disputing his opinion. What he said was that ANY team that won the NC should be rated #1 in next season's opening poll. There was no "under normal circumstances" caveat, and in that lies the difference.

 

[Monte]

If you agree or disagree with Creme, you have to admit(I hate to use this phrase), he is: "Good for the game." This discussion would not be taking place right now if there was no Charlie.
I like to look over his weekly predictions, especially right now, when there is a lull in the activity on the court.
I feel, that the fewer discussions which take place, the less fan interest there would be.
Ponder this: WHAT IF THERE WAS NO BONEYARD???
Read, discuss, and enjoy, but don't take things so seriously.

 

[pacific 44]

Easy to tell there's a long layoff between games when the most easy-going guy on this forum is catching heck from multiple sources.lol

 

[Icebear]

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/16/...f-bracketology-filling-in-all-the-blanks.html

Long story short: pharmaceutical sales rep living in Las Vegas obsessed with college BB; ESPN hired him around 2005 to project the NCCA women's field after his friend declined the job. He's still a pharmaceutical sales rep. No mention of what he needed to do to win the license to be a bracketologist or if that specialized skill helps him with his pharmaceutical sales.

Interesting, I have frequently thought he is on drugs.

 

[BigBird]

Guys, what are we arguing about here? You think Creme is credible and you put stock in his brackets and polls, and I don't. We can all get along. Do I have to follow the crowd (or conventional wisdom) to be thought reasonable? I'm NOT a follower. Creme's pre-season poll struck a cord with me, and I didn't like it, and still don't. That's my personal prerogative. Many others had no problem with it. I have not attacked anyone that agreed with his poll. I may offer my take, but that's it. We can agree to disagree.

We CANNOT agree to disagree. It is un-American! We have turned a corner in our fair land, a change that makes it far easier to identify our enemies and those who would undermine our sense of righteousness. Our enemies, the vile miscreants, are those whose views are not the same as mine! Bayonets! Charge!

 

[Carnac]

.


Ok..but it sure looked like you said it.

Stop for a moment and look at what you're doing. You're criticizing me for criticizing him for the same reasons. Your reasons make sense to you, just like mine make sense to me.
You reasons make sense to you, and that's enough for you. I disagreed with the formula/criteria he used to formulate his rankings. It turned out he was wrong. Nothing anyone can say or do will change that. I haven't let it go yet.

I will never get mad at someone because they don't see the things I do, the way I do. Agree or not, perception differs from person to person. That would be like getting mad or frustrated at someone because they don't have a sense of direction, and you do. And you just can't understand why they can't tell one direction from another like you can. You can see it, why can't they? I know you know we all don't think alike.

 

[Carnac]

We CANNOT agree to disagree. It is un-American! We have turned a corner in our fair land, a change that makes it far easier to identify our enemies and those who would undermine our sense of righteousness. Our enemies, the vile miscreants, are those whose views are not the same as mine! Bayonets! Charge!

Et tu Brute? I thought we were boys. When it rains, it pours. And I thought this was a safe and friendly place were folks could come a share their thoughts and opinions without fear of attack and reprisal.

 

[Adesmar123]

Stop for a moment and look at what you're doing. You're criticizing me for criticizing him for the same reasons. Your reasons make sense to you, just like mine make sense to me.
You reasons make sense to you, and that's enough for you. I disagreed with the formula/criteria he used to formulate his rankings. It turned out he was wrong. Nothing anyone can say or do will change that. I haven't let it go yet.

I will never get mad at someone because they don't see the things I do, the way I do. Agree or not, perception differs from person to person. That would be like getting mad or frustrated at someone because they don't have a sense of direction, and you do. And you just can't understand why they can't tell one direction from another like you can. You can see it, why can't they? I know you know we all don't think alike.

Carnac I think you really misunderstand the direction of a lot off this thread. A lot of people (including me) pretty much agree with your thoughts "in concept". But I think your original posting didn't express the concept that was in your head. You wrote something that was different than that concept. "Regardless of who comes and goes" is a pretty strong qualifier and has the ability to completely change someone's thoughts on the idea expressed.

I am not criticizing you for your thoughts. I wouldn't do that. I might point out that, as you expressed yourself originally, its hard to agree with you. Please reread your original posting and think about qualifier "regardless of who leaves or comes". I know that there weren't any unexpected roster changes. But that expression says that no matter who leaves or comes onto the team roster the National Champion should be #1 preseason. I know you say it won't happen, but should the top ten roster players leave the following year, should the team be preseason #1?

With no disrespect that is why I was having a such a problem agreeing with the wording and not the concept.

 

[Vowelguy]

So I presume preseason #2 should be last year's runnerup?

 

[Adesmar123]

So I presume preseason #2 should be last year's runnerup?

Bad bad boy!

 

[Carnac]

Carnac I think you really misunderstand the direction of a lot off this thread. A lot of people (including me) pretty much agree with your thoughts "in concept". But I think your original posting didn't express the concept that was in your head. You wrote something that was different than that concept. "Regardless of who comes and goes" is a pretty strong qualifier and has the ability to completely change someone's thoughts on the idea expressed.

I am not criticizing you for your thoughts. I wouldn't do that. I might point out that, as you expressed yourself originally, its hard to agree with you. Please reread your original posting and think about qualifier "regardless of who leaves or comes". I know that there weren't any unexpected roster changes. But that expression says that no matter who leaves or comes onto the team roster the National Champion should be #1 preseason. I know you say it won't happen, but should the top ten roster players leave the following year, should the team be preseason #1?

With no disrespect that is why I was having a such a problem agreeing with the wording and not the concept.

Again, I used Creme's Notre Dame" of who was coming in qualifier as the "comes" in my comes and goes comment:

1. Notre Dame
With Connecticut likely taking a step back, this might finally be Notre Dame's time to climb to the top of the mountain. In forward Brianna Turner and point guard Lindsay Allen, the Irish have arguably the country's two best players at those positions. Marina Mabrey and Arike Ogunbowale are versatile scorers who should be even better as sophomores with more minutes. Coach Muffet McGraw also welcomes forward Erin Boley and guard Jackie Young, two top-15 rated freshmen whose games appear perfectly suited to the Irish system.

Very seldom does a championship winning team's roster incur a major makeover, usually 1-3 players. So all of these scenarios that I'm being given about whole teams graduating, and coaches retiring is folly. Championship teams usually replace quality with quality. Not scrub for quality. That's why I said no matter who comes or goes. Just because you win it all last year does not mean you are going to do so, or be able to maintain a top 15 ranking. Honestly, when I post a comment, I don't do so hoping to get a lot of likes or positive feedback. I do so to express a thought or opinion based on a perception that another poster maybe did not know, or had not considered.

I read comments here all the time that I don't feel the need to respond to. I don't have the time or inclination to do so, no matter how far off base I think their comments may be. I'm not going to change that poster's mind, or his/her position. I also know they could give a tinker's da** about my opinion. If they are way out in left field with their thoughts/opinions, It's not my duty or obligation to try and reel them back in. There are only two people whose opinion I care about, God's and my wife. The reasons why should be obvious. I've tried to explain my reasoning as best I could. It's really not that big a deal. I don't put a lot of stock or value in Charlie Creme's work. That's my opinion and my prerogative. It's not required that anyone else agree with me. If you or anyone else like Creme's brackets and rankings, cool. But please don't feel obligated to pee in my kool-aid because I don't. for whatever those reasons maybe. That's all we're talking about here. Perception. And as I'm sure you know, perception is always relative.

 

[Carnac]

So I presume preseason #2 should be last year's runnerup?

Vowelguy, we're done.

 

[Adesmar123]

Again, I used Creme's Notre Dame" of who was coming in qualifier as the "comes" in my comes and goes comment:

Again, I did not see any mention of that not being your qualifier in your original post. So I took it as your qualifier. If you use someone else's wording and don't mean it as yours, its good to say that.

 

[BigBird]

Et tu Brute? I thought we were boys. When it rains, it pours. And I thought this was a safe and friendly place were folks could come a share their thoughts and opinions without fear of attack and reprisal.

C'mon now. Did I need to add a smiley? No worries. We boys. Rock on, mighty soothsayer, rock on!

 

[divots]

.......Who's up next???

 

[CTyankee]

Charlie Creme is a licensed bracketologist.

Hahahha... Excellent... And he has a degree in Bracketology from the University of Phoenix

 

[mntncougar]

Regardless of the other issues involved in this argument, there is an overriding one for me that has not even been mentioned.
All college sports are influenced by one thing above all others. With occasional exceptions, all team rosters turn over 100% every 4 years. Of course it is year by year, not all at once, so there is a progression rather than a revolution in the make-up of each team. But that's what makes it interesting and avoids all of the greed and corruption that influences the domination of professional leagues. (I no longer have more than a passing interest in any professional sport).
So, I consider the fact that each year's team is different to at least some degree is the primary CHARM of college sports. Yes, you know who's coming back, so you can form an opinion of what is likely to be the quality and character of each new year's team, but there are almost always surprises galore, both good and bad (example A#1: UCONN!).
But given the above, the argument that last years champion should always be given the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise is ridiculous. Because every year's team is a NEW team, which will have to stand on it's own and apart from the previous year. And when the single season is done, the next year's team will once again be unique.

 

[mntncougar]

I don't want my argument to sound like I'm a UConn homer. That's why I said "any team". Be it UConn or an other team. Give them their respect. If they are not a #1 team, then move them down after the season begins, and they lose games. Are you not the reigning champion until someone beats or dethrones you? Or are you the champion as long as Charlie Creme thinks you are? Forget the words, embrace the concept. You're #1 until someone beats you!!! All I'm saying is it should carry over to the beginning of the next season. It's that simple.

It sounds like you are saying then that the ranking given before the start of the season is only valid until the the first game is played. If you want to accept it on that basis, I guess it's true. But so what? It is totally meaningless.