Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 56 of 56
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by jaytoc View Post
    I submit that if/where Duke is ranked in a poll any time up to early April is essentially meaningless.
    This is just simply untrue. When necessary, the tournament selection committee will many times take rankings into account.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by SilkyJ View Post
    haha, yea they did. Don't get me wrong, I'm actually very bullish on butler this year, especially come tourney time, but I think head to head we are definitely better, and considering the quality wins we just put up, I don't see how you can rank them ahead of us. of course, its very subjective right now, and we're dealing with a small sample size, so really neither one of us is right or wrong...we just have our opinions.
    Oh yeah, it's definately a personal call right now. If we were to go completely by current resumes, Duke would be ahead because of Maui, but for me it's too early in the season to omit preseason perceptions from rankings, so I give Butler the nod for now because they were one of the 15 best teams in the country last year.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia

    Haven't convinced me

    Feldspar, I think you'll agree that if the team takes care of regular season wins, ACC championships, et al, the tournament selection committee will have no need to refer to poll rankings for seeding purposes, which I though was implicit in my post.

    But even were it not, I'll posit something more radical than my view that rankings don't matter in response to your comment: seedings don't matter either. Let me in your tournament and roll the ball out. The first team to win six in a row takes the brass ring. Don't whine about tough match ups, or unfair, rocky roads to the Final Four. Just win six in a row in March/April. Anyway, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

  4. Final Four second only to the National Championship

    I prefer reaching the Final Four than winning the ACC Championship. Both take four rounds to win but the former is comprised of national teams whereas the latter is conference teams only--getting to the Final Four (and thus winning the regional) seems like a better barometer for season success than winning the ACC Championship. Plus, reaching the Final Four feels more prestigious and definitely brings more national exposure.

  5. Oops, wrong subject title. I guess playing for the NC game is second only to winning the NC game. Getting to the FF would be third.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by jaytoc View Post
    Feldspar, I think you'll agree that if the team takes care of regular season wins, ACC championships, et al, the tournament selection committee will have no need to refer to poll rankings for seeding purposes, which I though was implicit in my post.
    Sure they would. What if Duke takes care of regular season wins, ACC Championship, etc, but Kentucky, or some other SEC team does the same? Or some other Pac-10 team? Or some other Big Televen team? Sometimes rankings come into play. Sometimes they don't, but I don't think we can accurately say that they never make any difference in the seeding process.

    But even were it not, I'll posit something more radical than my view that rankings don't matter in response to your comment: seedings don't matter either. Let me in your tournament and roll the ball out. The first team to win six in a row takes the brass ring. Don't whine about tough match ups, or unfair, rocky roads to the Final Four. Just win six in a row in March/April. Anyway, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
    Well then why do seeding anyway? If we're a #1 seed, why not just stick us against another #2 seed in the first round while a #2 seed battles it out with a #16 seed in the first round. You're saying you'd be okay with that?

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Dovetailing with what Feldspar said, the AP rankings have been a better predictor of seed than the RPI has, at least down through about the 5 seeds.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia

    In a word . . .

    Feldspar asks:

    "Well then why do seeding anyway? If we're a #1 seed, why not just stick us against another #2 seed in the first round while a #2 seed battles it out with a #16 seed in the first round. You're saying you'd be okay with that?"*

    Yes.

    Take 64 or 65 teams. Randomly bracket them off (flip coins, draw names from a hat) and play. Six wins, you're the tourney champs. It's not about fair, it's about fun.

    Oh, sure, we'd be deprived of all the talking heads' and bulletin board teeth nashers' endless, enlightening, annual complaints about the Committee's work, the conspiracy theorists' bitterness over the location or seeding of their favorites. But you could still worry about the relative merits of the regions, and think of the stories you'd tell your grandchildren after the (bad)luck of the draw required the Devils to fight their way to consecutive victories over UCLA, Memphis, Indiana, UConn, Kansas, and Carolina on the way to the 2008 Championship. And some day you might even get a long shot champion from a weak region. Now that's entertainment!

    I really don't have strong feelings about any of this. My initial point was merely that worrying about ratings, especially in November, is silly. To your point that ratings may affect seedings, sure, indirectly they may, although to believe the Committee it is strength of schedule, won-loss record, conference record, et al that have the most impact. You can worry about that stuff if you'd like. To me, the only things that matter about college bball are decided on the floor, as they should be, not in a reporter's brain or via computer.

    *Apology for inability to properly quote from prior post.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by jaytoc View Post
    Feldspar asks:

    "Well then why do seeding anyway? If we're a #1 seed, why not just stick us against another #2 seed in the first round while a #2 seed battles it out with a #16 seed in the first round. You're saying you'd be okay with that?"*

    Yes.

    Take 64 or 65 teams. Randomly bracket them off (flip coins, draw names from a hat) and play. Six wins, you're the tourney champs. It's not about fair, it's about fun.

    Oh, sure, we'd be deprived of all the talking heads' and bulletin board teeth nashers' endless, enlightening, annual complaints about the Committee's work, the conspiracy theorists' bitterness over the location or seeding of their favorites. But you could still worry about the relative merits of the regions, and think of the stories you'd tell your grandchildren after the (bad)luck of the draw required the Devils to fight their way to consecutive victories over UCLA, Memphis, Indiana, UConn, Kansas, and Carolina on the way to the 2008 Championship. And some day you might even get a long shot champion from a weak region. Now that's entertainment!

    I really don't have strong feelings about any of this. My initial point was merely that worrying about ratings, especially in November, is silly. To your point that ratings may affect seedings, sure, indirectly they may, although to believe the Committee it is strength of schedule, won-loss record, conference record, et al that have the most impact. You can worry about that stuff if you'd like. To me, the only things that matter about college bball are decided on the floor, as they should be, not in a reporter's brain or via computer.

    *Apology for inability to properly quote from prior post.
    Hear, hear and applause.

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by jaytoc View Post
    But even were it not, I'll posit something more radical than my view that rankings don't matter in response to your comment: seedings don't matter either.
    There's being radical and then there's being wrong. This is in the "wrong" category.

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wherever the wind blows and the leaves dance.

    Flying under the radar?

    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    it's irrelevant and, quite honestly, i think k would prefer to be ranked 20th right now and fly under the radar for as long as possible.
    That doesn't sound like Coach K to me. He has always embraced higher expectations and challenged his guys to be better. How can you strive to be the best if you're trying to slide by people? As a matter of fact, I think Coach K has been pretty vocal about liking this team this year, which seems like more praise than he usually doles out at this time of year.

  12. #52
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by jaytoc View Post
    seedings don't matter either.
    my bad
    Last edited by RepoMan; 11-27-2007 at 12:18 PM. Reason: i failed to read later posts. apologies
    "Just like you man. I got the shotgun, you got the briefcase." Omar Little

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    Dovetailing with what Feldspar said, the AP rankings have been a better predictor of seed than the RPI has, at least down through about the 5 seeds.
    I just want to repeat this statement as it is 100% true. Jerry Palm, who is essentially the guru of the RPI and the guy who really brought it to the masses with his CollegeRPI.com, has said as much in blogs and interviews on the subject.

    Now, I am sure some would say that this fact only means that rankings matter in March but do not matter in November and there is certainly some logic to that-- however it is much easier to be highly ranked in March if you started the season highly ranked in November. Teams who behind you in the rankings generally need you to lose for them to move ahead of you. What's more, a team that is highly ranked takes longer to fall out of the rankings.

    These statements are obvious but are worth considering when you poo-poo the value of being ranked #7 at this point in the season.

    --Jason "I won't be even a little surprised if Duke is ranked in the top 5 some time in the next month" Evans

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by RepoMan View Post
    "Never give an inch." Henry Stamper, Sometimes a Great Notion
    I really should not do this, but every time I see your sig it makes me think of:


    Harry Stamper: The United States Government just asked us to save the world. Anyone wanna say no?

    --Jason "can you say OFF-TOPIC!??!" Evans

  15. #55
    Boy, that is a funny picture!

  16. #56

    Polls and Seeding

    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    Dovetailing with what Feldspar said, the AP rankings have been a better predictor of seed than the RPI has, at least down through about the 5 seeds.
    While this is indeed true, it doesn't imply that the polls have anything to do in the selection committee process (while the polls are one of the pieces of information provided to the committees, they have generally indicated that they are not really used). It simply makes sense - both the AP voters and the selection committee are attempting to rank the best teams at the end of the conference tournaments, while the RPI is doing its own thing without the human interaction of either of those bodies.

Similar Threads

  1. A few rankings
    By Olympic Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-08-2008, 05:06 PM
  2. Football Rankings
    By Bob Green in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-10-2007, 09:33 PM
  3. MSoc No.2 in Preseason Rankings
    By burnspbesq in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-01-2007, 06:15 PM
  4. ESPN recruiting rankings
    By houstondukie in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-17-2007, 09:10 PM
  5. Recruiting Rankings
    By dcarp23 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-22-2007, 04:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •