ESPN Crew is Unlistenable

[wgdsr]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

they had no idea the committee was going to change their and only their rpi wins into "tourney team or not"?

they need better foresight.

[ICGrad]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

But it didn't, and it didn't backfire on Duke, either. Straight-RPI, both would have made the tourney.

I should add, for all of those pulling their hair out at ND's omission: ND's resume looks eerily similar to JHU's in 2019. Tough schedule, lose to all the good teams, beat one good team...twice. Hopkins rode that junk to bids for most of the last decade.

[wgdsr]

the changing of annual priorities isn't new and that's bad enough. the fabrication of what and for whom to use them is new.

Not new.

I think it was 2012 when committee chair Tony Seaman said Denver was helped by their strong out-of-conference record, which is absolutely not a criterion. I think it was Penn State that got left out that year.

I will repeat my mantra: without a quantifiable formula, this will happen every year.

AFAIK there is no agitation for change among the coaches, which is what it would take to make a change.

oh, i agree bringing in new criterion every year, that's not even on the books, happens. and can certainly be and has been unevenly applied.

i'm talking about actually changing how they evaluated every other team's ws and ls... and then bagged that for nd and tosu for "tourney team". actually eliminating a criterion for a fabricated one. crazy. and ftr, i've seen it repeated -- "didn't beat a tourney team" -- now dozens or hundreds of times.

meanwhile, uva didn't beat one. neither did rutgers or tosu unless harvard and tosu are dropped in at the bubble. and duke beat 5?

we're in agreement. every year. and haven't heard a word from coaches, maybe i missed it.

[Wheels]

It backfired on ND this season.

All the Irish had to do was win a game against one of the Top 5 RPI teams they played. Or just have beaten OSU in their head-to-head.

I think most agree that wins and losses should be the most important category. The issue becomes differentiating between various wins and losses. Tweaking RPI will still lead to the problem where scheduling is a large determinant as opposed to results of playing. Score differentials are important for determining the best teams, and therefore the best wins.

I would still use strength of record (actual wins and losses) to determine which teams get bids, but the quality of those wins and losses needs to be based on something more than RPI, which didn't work in a 40-game basketball season.

Otherwise, how do you improve on RPI?

The RPI is an amped up strength-of-schedule (SOS) metric. A team's win percent only counts for 25% of the formula. The rest is based on opponents' and opponents opponents' record. Perhaps the 25-50-25 percentage weightings could be re-calibrated so that the team's winning percent carried more weight.

Or just use the NCAA's SOS metric as a data point to contextualize any team's wins or losses. It seems the RPI is a de facto attempt at that, but past committees have solely used it as an inclusion-exclusion criterion. When this year's committee didn't do that, it caused an uproar.

When IL or Patrick Stevens release their bracketologies, they include the T5, T10, T15, T20 wins columns and a bad losses column along with the RPI and SOS metrics. It seems, in retrospect, that the selection committees paid more attention to the "Top" win and "bad" losses columns when making their decision. I don't think that's particularly bad. It actually makes quite a bit of sense.

The issue is that previous committees didn't seem to do that over the past couple of years, and now everyone is freaked out because of it.

[wgdsr]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

But it didn't, and it didn't backfire on Duke, either. Straight-RPI, both would have made the tourney.

I should add, for all of those pulling their hair out at ND's omission: ND's resume looks eerily similar to JHU's in 2019. Tough schedule, lose to all the good teams, beat one good team...twice. Hopkins rode that junk to bids for most of the last decade.

and yet notre dame's wins were better than 3 at large selections. that makes them entirely dissimilar to 2019 jhu. they are 2019 cornell if you back out nd's better rpi.

[wgdsr]

It backfired on ND this season.

All the Irish had to do was win a game against one of the Top 5 RPI teams they played. Or just have beaten OSU in their head-to-head.
so just beat the #1 or #2 team in the country? anyone else on the bubble do that?

I think most agree that wins and losses should be the most important category. The issue becomes differentiating between various wins and losses. Tweaking RPI will still lead to the problem where scheduling is a large determinant as opposed to results of playing. Score differentials are important for determining the best teams, and therefore the best wins.

I would still use strength of record (actual wins and losses) to determine which teams get bids, but the quality of those wins and losses needs to be based on something more than RPI, which didn't work in a 40-game basketball season.

Otherwise, how do you improve on RPI?

The RPI is an amped up strength-of-schedule (SOS) metric. A team's win percent only counts for 25% of the formula. The rest is based on opponents' and opponents opponents' record. Perhaps the 25-50-25 percentage weightings could be re-calibrated so that the team's winning percent carried more weight.

Or just use the NCAA's SOS metric as a data point to contextualize any team's wins or losses. It seems the RPI is a de facto attempt at that, but past committees have solely used it as an inclusion-exclusion criterion. When this year's committee didn't do that, it caused an uproar.

When IL or Patrick Stevens release their bracketologies, they include the T5, T10, T15, T20 wins columns and a bad losses column along with the RPI and SOS metrics. It seems, in retrospect, that the selection committees paid more attention to the "Top" win and "bad" losses columns when making their decision. I don't think that's particularly bad. It actually makes quite a bit of sense.

The issue is that previous committees didn't seem to do that over the past couple of years, and now everyone is freaked out because of it.

if you believe that they followed top wins and bad losses, explain tosu over notre dame. is everyone aware rutgers' best wins were over #15 ohio state?

[Typical Lax Dad]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

they had no idea the committee was going to change their and only their rpi wins into "tourney team or not"?

they need better foresight.

12 games and not beating a good team came back to bite them in the ass.

[Typical Lax Dad]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

But it didn't, and it didn't backfire on Duke, either. Straight-RPI, both would have made the tourney.

I should add, for all of those pulling their hair out at ND's omission: ND's resume looks eerily similar to JHU's in 2019. Tough schedule, lose to all the good teams, beat one good team...twice. Hopkins rode that junk to bids for most of the last decade.

Again show me where the committee has said in the past, “we only rely on RPI” ….not that “RPI is how it shook out”, but we only rely on it. It should be easy since it has been well established. I will admit that I am wrong.

[Typical Lax Dad]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

But it didn't, and it didn't backfire on Duke, either. Straight-RPI, both would have made the tourney.

I should add, for all of those pulling their hair out at ND's omission: ND's resume looks eerily similar to JHU's in 2019. Tough schedule, lose to all the good teams, beat one good team...twice. Hopkins rode that junk to bids for most of the last decade.

and yet notre dame's wins were better than 3 at large selections. that makes them entirely dissimilar to 2019 jhu. they are 2019 cornell if you back out nd's better rpi.

Didn’t pass the smell test.

[wgdsr]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

they had no idea the committee was going to change their and only their rpi wins into "tourney team or not"?

they need better foresight.

12 games and not beating a good team came back to bite them in the ass.

haha. imma guess if princeton beat a #7 team twice, you wouldn't post that. maybe you would, but it wouldn't change the "rules" of a good team.

12 games. hoo played a more difficult trio ooc than notre dame? p'ton definitely. maryland maybe as they can't play themselves. g'town? anyone else? that's only one at large. so more patsies for the irish?

[wgdsr]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

But it didn't, and it didn't backfire on Duke, either. Straight-RPI, both would have made the tourney.

I should add, for all of those pulling their hair out at ND's omission: ND's resume looks eerily similar to JHU's in 2019. Tough schedule, lose to all the good teams, beat one good team...twice. Hopkins rode that junk to bids for most of the last decade.

and yet notre dame's wins were better than 3 at large selections. that makes them entirely dissimilar to 2019 jhu. they are 2019 cornell if you back out nd's better rpi.

Didn’t pass the smell test.

they rely on fans and coaches to nod their heads in agreement for their convoluted messaging.
we'll all be back in 2023.

[Typical Lax Dad]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

But it didn't, and it didn't backfire on Duke, either. Straight-RPI, both would have made the tourney.

I should add, for all of those pulling their hair out at ND's omission: ND's resume looks eerily similar to JHU's in 2019. Tough schedule, lose to all the good teams, beat one good team...twice. Hopkins rode that junk to bids for most of the last decade.

and yet notre dame's wins were better than 3 at large selections. that makes them entirely dissimilar to 2019 jhu. they are 2019 cornell if you back out nd's better rpi.

Didn’t pass the smell test.

they rely on fans and coaches to nod their heads in agreement for their convoluted messaging.
we'll all be back in 2023.

I don’t care about messaging. Where was it stated that “RPI IS THE ONLY METRIC”. Should be easy to find. Not “when looking at it, the teams that got it had the highest RPIs”.

[Typical Lax Dad]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

they had no idea the committee was going to change their and only their rpi wins into "tourney team or not"?

they need better foresight.

12 games and not beating a good team came back to bite them in the ass.

haha. imma guess if princeton beat a #7 team twice, you wouldn't post that. maybe you would, but it wouldn't change the "rules" of a good team.

12 games. hoo played a more difficult trio ooc than notre dame? p'ton definitely. maryland maybe as they can't play themselves. g'town? anyone else? that's only one at large. so more patsies for the irish?

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/team/nd/2022

Quite a body of work.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Since you asked: in 2015 Princeton’s top 5 RPI wins were against 9,10,11,19,20….I thought they could have gotten a bid. A bad loss cost them. In 2022 ND’s top 5 RPI wins 7, 17, 30,45,62

They got hosed.

[wgdsr]

Since you asked: in 2015 Princeton’s top 5 RPI wins were against 9,10,11,19,20….I thought they could have gotten a bid. A bad loss cost them. In 2022 ND’s top 5 RPI wins 7, 17, 30,45,62

They got hosed.

you forgot a 7. they didn't have a "bad loss" vs comp's "bad loss".

[wgdsr]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

they had no idea the committee was going to change their and only their rpi wins into "tourney team or not"?

they need better foresight.

12 games and not beating a good team came back to bite them in the ass.

haha. imma guess if princeton beat a #7 team twice, you wouldn't post that. maybe you would, but it wouldn't change the "rules" of a good team.

12 games. hoo played a more difficult trio ooc than notre dame? p'ton definitely. maryland maybe as they can't play themselves. g'town? anyone else? that's only one at large. so more patsies for the irish?

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/team/nd/2022

Quite a body of work.

throw up tosu's, rutgers and uva just for giggles.

[Typical Lax Dad]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

they had no idea the committee was going to change their and only their rpi wins into "tourney team or not"?

they need better foresight.

12 games and not beating a good team came back to bite them in the ass.

haha. imma guess if princeton beat a #7 team twice, you wouldn't post that. maybe you would, but it wouldn't change the "rules" of a good team.

12 games. hoo played a more difficult trio ooc than notre dame? p'ton definitely. maryland maybe as they can't play themselves. g'town? anyone else? that's only one at large. so more patsies for the irish?

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/team/nd/2022

Quite a body of work.

throw up tosu's, rutgers and uva just for giggles.

I don’t hear them complaining. If they did, I would.

[drunkmonkey30]

When I asked how that translates to a #7 RPI (how can you be #7 when your highest win is over #9 and you have 3 losses to teams 20 or lower?) or when I suggest that their RPI was grossly inflated by games (not wins...games) against teams with good records, the answer I keep getting is that RPI can't be inflated, it's a formula, it's the maths, etc, etc...

You win the RPI game in the off season when you put your schedule together.

This, exactly.

It backfired on ND this season.

they had no idea the committee was going to change their and only their rpi wins into "tourney team or not"?

they need better foresight.

12 games and not beating a good team came back to bite them in the ass.

haha. imma guess if princeton beat a #7 team twice, you wouldn't post that. maybe you would, but it wouldn't change the "rules" of a good team.

12 games. hoo played a more difficult trio ooc than notre dame? p'ton definitely. maryland maybe as they can't play themselves. g'town? anyone else? that's only one at large. so more patsies for the irish?

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/team/nd/2022

Quite a body of work.

Wait a minute...their wins against Duke were by 1 and 2 goals. Thought those close wins didn't really count?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Since you asked: in 2015 Princeton’s top 5 RPI wins were against 9,10,11,19,20….I thought they could have gotten a bid. A bad loss cost them. In 2022 ND’s top 5 RPI wins 7, 17, 30,45,62

They got hosed.

you forgot a 7. they didn't have a "bad loss" vs comp's "bad loss".

I am not counting the same team twice. That’s an ACC scheme that didn’t work out this year. ND got robbed. You see the TEAM they beat!

[wgdsr]

Since you asked: in 2015 Princeton’s top 5 RPI wins were against 9,10,11,19,20….I thought they could have gotten a bid. A bad loss cost them. In 2022 ND’s top 5 RPI wins 7, 17, 30,45,62

They got hosed.

you forgot a 7. they didn't have a "bad loss" vs comp's "bad loss".

I am not counting the same team twice. That’s an ACC scheme that didn’t work out this year. ND got robbed. You see the TEAM they beat!

sounds like you could apply for a spot on the committee.