How do you know your improving????

[Patch]

Year - Conference RPI - UA RPI

2002 - 29 - 299

 

2003 - 25 - 294

 

2004 - 27 - 309

 

2005 - 18 - 224

 

The league is much better, now - a true Mid Major Conference ranked 18th out of 32. In the past 3 years it was really a Low DI Conference ranked in the bottom 1/4 of all DI conferences, and we are currently in 4th place in the 10 team conference.

 

We still would like to keep improving but it feels good to be in the middle of the pack in a true Mid Major Conference alot better than being at the bottom of a Low Major Conference.

[DaneFan2k3]

The RPI is a funny thing. Teams get better, the conference RPI gets better, then the teams all get better because the people they are playing have higher RPIs ... When a couple teams are down, the league is down, dragging everyone down. When a couple teams, like UAlbany, start to earn some wins, they bring the league RPI up, everyone else's RPI up, and then wins move you more.

 

It's certainly in-exact. I know that the NCAA has been looking at considering the Sagarin ratings as a part of the Tournament formula.

[Patch]

DF2k3

 

I totally agree with you it's inexact but it does give you some idea, a better league plays better competition and in the case of the AE most teams have improved their RPI.

 

In UA's and the AE's cases I think the RPI is somewhat significant especially if want something other than Ws & L's which is enough in UA's case.

 

5-23 to an early 8-7 says alot by itself.

[Dane Pound]

I'm guessing Patch's RPI numbers are from Sunday and they updated them this morning. It's now 197. Sagarain is 182 and Pomeroy is 176.

[DaneFan2k3]

The RPI is flawed, not fatally, but it's pretty bad this time of year.

 

No one can convince me that the West Coast Conference is really # 7 overall, and that Missouri Valley is #8...

 

...both ahead of Conference USA which has # 13/18 Cincinnati and # 19/19 Louisville in the top 25, plus # 26/22 Marquette ("receiving votes" in coaches), #34/48 UAB (RV) and NR/44 Charlotte (RV).

 

Those two conferences in particular are getting big credit for playing tough non-conference schedules. Which is fine, except if you don't win the games then it's like giving an A for Effort, which I'm not a big fan of. Maybe a B for effort, downgrade the impact of losing to a higher-rated RPI team.

-----------

 

One of the most amazing part of looking at the RPI, though, is the dramatic illustration of how much better the top conferences are (top-to-bottom) than the so-called mid-majors.

 

Conferences 13 through 32, including the Sun Belt, America East and Atlantic 10, all have overall composite losing records (the Colonial being the exception at one game over .500).

 

So basically the top 12 conferences are so dominant that they have trumped the bottom 19.

[Patch]

DF2k3

 

Very interesting post which I pretty much agree with especially if you choose to look from the TOP - DOWN.

 

From my perspective I was looking at UA and the AE but moreso the DANES from the bottom up.

 

At 309 we were one of the worst of the lowest we were the muck at the bottom of the pond.

 

While the RPI is not the greatest and improvement of RPI #s from 309 to 197 is significant.

[DaneFan2k3]

I agree. It's just funny how it works - you get better, which makes your opponents' RPI go up, so then next time you play them you are essentially being rewarded again for ... being better.

[Patch]

RPI Update

 

2004 - 309

 

2005 - 189

 

Things are getting interesting, I think we can finally say that we are a competitive DI team for really the first time.

 

Lets hope we keep improving this season.