|
Post by Commissioner on Nov 22, 2014 9:11:11 GMT -5
Horizon league, 8 days into the season, is 5-17 against D-I opponents, and ranked 19th in RPI. The conference's overall W-L is a bit more impressive, thanks to 7 wins that Horizon teams have earned over non-Division I competition. But those games don't count for RPI purposes. The conference RPI ranking doesn't mean much this early, but not that by the end of the month we'll be pretty much a quarter of the way through the season. The dismal W-L, if it continues, is going to make it difficult for teams to boost their RPI during conference play. We desperately need to start winning some games, or we are looking at a #15 seed come March.
Also, note that after this season, the League loses 5 shares of NCAA tournament payouts (from Butler's Final Four run in 2010). If we get just bid (which could be a given before conference season even starts) and lose in the first round, we would lose a net of 4 shares. That's a fair amount of loot for our teams to lose. Then next year we lose another 5 shares from Butler's 2011 run to the Final Four.
The Horizon essentially did nothing to capitalize on Butler's two runs, and the fruits of those efforts will pretty much be squandered for good in another 18 months.
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Nov 28, 2014 21:32:40 GMT -5
RPI doesn't mean anything much this early in the year, but it is still kinda fun to see that Green Bay is currently the #1 ranked RPI in the country. Green Bay's four D-I opponents so far are 14-2 in games against other teams.
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Dec 13, 2014 8:50:21 GMT -5
An interesting example of scheduling philosophies and RPI is taking place this year. The MAC and the Horizon have, of course, substantial geographic overlap, and both conferences (with the Valpo and Detroit exceptions in the Horizon) consist of large, second-tier state universities. The two conferences play each other quite a bit every season. In recent years the Horizon has outshone the MAC in NCAA performance, # of players drafted, head-to-head competition, and conference RPI. Last year, however, for the first time in several years, the MAC won on both the latter two criteria. In ranking ahead of the Horizon in conference RPI, the MAC went 72-59 in non-conference play, to the Horizon's 51-60.
This year, the Horizon currently ranks #12 in conference RPI, the MAC #13. The MAC is 46-31 so far, for a .597 winning percentage. The Horizon is just 34-37, for a .479 winning percentage. But the Horizon has played a much tougher non-con schedule. The Horizon's out of conference schedule rank is #11, versus the MAC's #26. And the Horizon's expected final out-of-conference rank, when all the games have been played, is expected to be #5, while the MAC's is the worst in the nation - #32. Yet at the end of the year, the MAC is predicted to pass the Horizon in conference RPI, finishing 10th while the Horizon finishes 15th.
How does this work? Casual fans are frequently told (or somewhere get the impression) that RPI is all about strength of schedule. Well, yes and no. The obvious is that you get the best RPI by winning against a tough schedule, and the worst by losing against a weak schedule. In between are various combinations of winning percentage and difficulty of schedule. But note that conference games count in conference RPI. So take two schools - Oakland from the Horizon and Central Michigan from the MAC. CMU has played Youngstown State, Maine, Arkansas Pine Bluf, SIU-Edwardsville, Grand Canyon, and Bradley, mostly at home, going 5-1 (like the NCAA, we'll leave out games against non-DI teams). Add in their remaining D-I games with Northwestern and McNeese State, and their final out-of-conference schedule strength is projected to be 348th of 351 D-I schools, and if they split those final two, they'll finish 6-2 non-con. Oakland has played Iowa State, Georgia State, Toledo, Eastern Michigan, Western Michigan, Morehead State, Western Carolina, and Chicago State, going 3-5. They are about to embark on a 5 game road swing inclduing Clemson, Michigan State, Arizona, Pittsburgh and Maryland. They are likely to end up 3-10, maybe 4-9 if they pull an upset somewhere. Their projected non-con SOS is 51st.
But then comes conference season. Every time a MAC team plays CMU, they will add in a team with a 6-2 non-con mark. Every time a Horizon team plays Oakland, they will add into their RPI a team with a 3-10 non-con mark. And how is RPI calculated? It's basically 25% your own W-L percentage, 50% your opponents W-L percentage, and 25% your opponents-opponents W-L percentage. So the biggest component is your opponents W-L. And there, which is better: 6-2? or 3-10? Duh. And we're seeing this up and down the two leagues - MAC teams are padding their W-L with creampuffs, and the Horizon is playing a tougher schedule non-con but is below .500. And since both the MAC and the Horizon will have, by definition, a .500 W-L percentage in conference play, MAC teams are getting the benefit of recycling all these cheap non-con wins into their RPI over and over throughout conference play. Hence as conference play begins the MAC will steadily gain on the Horizon in conference RPI. And their strong direct W-L percentage is already nearly enough to offset their lower SOS rating even before that happens.
Of course, there are other factors. By playing a tougher non-con schedule, Green Bay is more likely to get an at-large bid, if it doesn't win the conference, than a similarly situated MAC regular season champion. But that's because they won enough of those games - had they lost them, their non-con SOS wouldn't help them anyway. And of course there can be many other advantages to a tough non-con schedule, including national exposure, enticement for recruits, fan satisfaction, etc. Of course, there are also advantages that way to just winning a lot of games.
A few thoughts as fans urge the Horizon to "schedule up."
|
|