Agree completely, just discussing this snapshot of time. Question.....What should happen to PC if they play PN to a one-point overtime loss, does that mean they should drop 8-10 spots in the seeding or does it mean them and PN are a couple of the top teams in Columbus?
It may have been a yes/no question for a Cent District D1 coach. But I am not one so it was not something I could answer with accuracy.
Depends on what the other 8 teams in the top 10 do as well over that time. It's not so much of a "should" as it is a "will". Should implies opinion. A computer ranking doesn't care about my opinion. BUT if you're actually asking my opinion, I stick with what I already said. It depends on what the other teams ahead of PC have done. At the end of the day, you can't keep losing games, regardless of the competition, and expect to gain ranking.
That’s a huge difference for Pick Central. That could be the difference between a bye and a top seed versus middle of the pack. I think in this case I would prefer a coaches vote. The coaches likely have seen all the teams maybe played all the teams so they should know the top teams,as long as politics is left out that should be fairest.
Fair, if you are coaching does your respect level (and thus how you think they compare to other teams you might seed/play in the tournament) increase or decrease in said situation?
270Hoops is not a coaches vote and the Central district seed over 40 teams and coaches have admitted they may only know about half those teams at best during voting.
Some people seem to forget that this formula for each team is 65% the opponents played. I do think the out of state teams throw a small wrench into the system but it is consistent.
When you have a good team (Preble Shawnee) playing in a conference where the bottom half are not competitive whatsoever, and have bad losses to bad teams, you will get penalized with the criteria used in the Martin RPI. That huge gulf between your talent and your opponents talent serves as a penalty to your overall RPI due to the fact that even though you could beat them by 80 points, they are 4-12 and have lost half their games to other weak opponents. Opponents win percentage and opponents opponents win percentage are terrible in that scenerio, leaving you with a poor RPI.
This is kind of true, and adds to the reason for scheduling good talent rewards a team in many ways for teams that know they may have a chance at being good..
So in your example, Dixie plays a bad team that also plays all bad teams?
I think they are making your point that scheduling good teams is what is best. Wins matter but even in a loss against good competition you get credited in 65% of the formula.
When I talk about a team's sos (PC and Taft) you tell me they have to win
They have to win to get credit for a win. You want them to get credit for a loss. They already get credit for playing a good team. I assume you know this but a team's winning percentage is based on their wins.
We agree there has not been a perfect answer.
A singular flawed human may not be able to make an accurate ranking, a group of flawed humans with equal vote can make an accurate ranking and SWOH over the last 20 years is evidence of that.
Yes.
Agree. If this ends up going statewide teams will realize that they can't keep going 20-2 against an awful schedule. I realize that if a team is playing all their league teams twice that they don't have as much leeway with playing good non-conference teams as some others do, but you need to get at least a couple.
In your opinion, but there are coaches and ADs in SWO that have complained over the years of being misplaced in those rankings. But everyone gets in and the games decide themselves.
That is fair, but I would love to hear specifics of those complaints. I have never seen a state title contender seeded 10th in a coaches sectional seed meeting. The coaches vote definitely has avoided the material/non-sensical rankings that the RPI shows.
I feel you are seeing it as a #1 seed vote or rank while all coaches involved feel they have a place where they feel their team should be. A coach who gets a 8th seed because of coaches but feels he should be 4th will be upset. And so one.
I'm not worried about #8 vs #10 in either system, or #1 vs #3 for that matter. I am only concerned with #1 being #10 or #1 being #49. If RPI had Taft 6th in Ohio last year we probably don't have this thread going. The RPI system was so materially incorrect in the ranking of the best team in Ohio, which immediately casts doubt on the system as a whole. And the same issues are popping up with each update.
We have been thru this before, you may not care but you also. Do not get a vote. The coaches that were miss voted to #8 or #10 when they felt they earned #4 or #5 because of other coaches do care. And now they may have a method to remove those flawed coaches. The RPI treats everyone the same, it’s not personal.