Apparently the formula really liked our overtime victory on the road. I was sure that, win or lose, just playing PSU would make us drop a bit. Pleasantly surprised by the RPI for once. (Can't believe I just wrote those words)
#16 in the RPI!!!
- Thread starter 3AmigosBigDogBabyBoilersBiggie
- Start date
SMU and Xavier dropped. We jumped over Maryland and UCLA.
PSU is better than a lot of people realize, at least when it comes to the RPI. They came into last night's game around 70 (depending on whose RPI you use) and probably two heart-breaking losses vs. Indiana away from being in the NCAA bubble discussion.
That's the good thing about the B1G this year. It's a steaming pile of mediocrity according to the RPI, but there aren't many chances to take a really bad loss in conference. There are only two sub-100 teams, and nobody is below 153. Iowa has bobbed in and out of the top 100 for the past month and might finish the season on the happy side, but Indiana will probably sink below 100 soon.
#15-#18 are separated by an eyelash. Probably the difference between a single opponent like Georgia St winning or losing. I posted my "what affects RPI" thread last week. This is exactly why. We do not control our own destiny (for seeding). With RPI being the favored committee metric and the one least favoring Purdue, we need every break possible. Being #15 in RPI and top 12 in other metrics, the committee could consider us for a 3 seed. #18 in RPI not a chance.
Last edited:
Interestingly enough, since Illinois has finally had a bit of a light bulb turn on, there's a chance they could win out and jump into the RPI top 50. In a perfect world, Illinois wins out, Michigan State beats Wisconsin, and Iowa wins @ Maryland and home vs. PSU to allow them to jump back into the top 100 (all based upon the assumption that Purdue wins out also). The only thing I am trying to figure is whether we want IU to stay in the top 100 or not. While it would be nice to keep those top 100 wins, giving North Carolina and Kansas a bad loss might be worth it too.
We aren't catching UNC or KU in the seedings regardless
Kansas, no.
UNC, not likely.........buuuuuuuuuuut
UNC has a pretty difficult schedule left: Louisville, @Pitt, @Virginia, Duke. It's not totally inconceivable that they could drop 3 out of those 4. It's very possible that NC State could drop out of the top 100 soon and eliminate 2 top 100 wins for them. Couple that with IU being a sub 100 loss and maybe GT losing out and becoming a sub-100 loss. Monmouth and Tennessee are also barely in the top 50, let's say they lose a couple of games and get knocked into the 51 to 100 range. They would end up being 23-8 going 7-6 against top 50, 14-6 against top 100, and two sub-100 losses.
Compare that to Purdue if they win out and somehow Iowa gets back in the top 100, Illinois gets back into top 50 and Michigan pulls out a top 50: Purdue would be 26-5, going 8-3 against the top 50, 14-5 against the top 100, and zero sub-100 losses.
Immensely unlikely, but not impossible.
Then again, if IU stays top 100, I guess that would mean we would be 16-5 vs. top 100 to UNC being 14-6 and only one sub-100 loss.
I think 27 wins is the number that gets purdue a 3 if it comes with at least a share of the regular season title. That will leave it with a high enough RPI too.
I was just going to post something about Illinois. That team was left for dead a couple weeks ago, but they're now 16-12 (6-9) with a favorable remaining schedule (@Nebraska, MSU, @Rutgers). So, a 19-12 (9-9) finish to the regular season looks possible.
Their resume is paper thin, even under the best of circumstances. And this year's B1G is not the best of circumstances.
RPI: 59
BPI: 69
Pomeroy: 66
Vs. RPI top 25: 0-6
Vs. RPI top 50: 3-7
Vs. RPI top 100: 7-12
Vs. RPI 100+: 8-0
Best wins: VCU, Northwestern (2)
Worst losses: PSU (2), Indiana
Like I say, that's really, really thin --- and there are no more "big wins" to be had in the regular season. But, if they win out and make some noise in D.C.?
Call me a pessimist, but from history it seems we always get a seed 1 or 2 positions lower than one would think... We're looking at a 4 seed if we do well & a 5 or 6 seed if we drop some games to lesser opponents. Only chance I see for 3 seed is win out completely, and even then it seems possible we get screwed as usual.
That might work.....but I don't see a 27-7 Purdue as a 3-seed if the BTT loss is a big upset. Also, I don't expect Wisconsin to drop another game in the regular season. Hope I'm wrong.
Win out including BTT and we will get a 3. That's 29 wins. Otherwise it is shaky and IMO requires teams currently ahead of us like Duke, UCLA, West Virginia, Florida, FSU, and Butler losing AT LEAST twice more. The reason why is they will all play games against top 10 teams, where a loss will not hurt and a signature win will offset an unexpected loss. Purdue will have no such opportunity to improve its stock much and any loss will hurt.
It is stupid, out-dated, and (intrinsically) meaningless.
But as long as the committee is using it for purposes of NCAA seeding it is important. These positions are not contradictory.
FDB,
That very point came up in one of the discussions I heard recently....no really highly ranked teams ahead.....good teams.....good challenges......possible losses......but nothing that could cause a big positive impact like beating a North Carolina, Baylor, Duke, Louisville, Villanova, etc. That is one intriguing aspect of the Bilas idea (setting aside the practicality issues).
OTOH, the Big Ten has been helped before down the stretch when it had multiple teams highly ranked.
butler is not ahead of us anymore for seeding.. they were a 4 when they were released last, and they have since lost while we have kept winning. We are safely a 4 right now if they bracket was released today. To get a 3, we likely have to win our last 3 regular season games, and make the big ten championship game, possibly even having to win it
Most of the current projections have both Purdue and Butler as 4 seeds with no explanation of order. Butler has better RPI (13 vs. 15), more top 25 wins (4-2 vs. 3-3), top 50 wins (7-2 vs. 6-3), and top 100 wins (15-4 vs. 12-4). I'm not going to assume we have gained the advantage. Obviously the taller order is going to be passing the others listed.
I would argue they have worse RPI losses (which they have one more, too)
Purdue:
2,3,23,73,108
Butler:
21,21,62,68,123,221
Committee in the past hasn't put as much stock into "bad losses" as "quality wins". Other than the impact on overall record and RPI. We'll see. Like I said both are right now considered 4's, so they are at worst within close range. With Nova and Xavier coming up, even a split will probably not drop their RPI.
If Purdue is good, tough, and resilient enough to win out (including the B1G Tourney), I guarantee that they will, at the least, be a #3 seed for the NCAA Tourney.
. Could it be related to PSU's 4 wins over ranked teams (assuming those were all this season)? I'm not a big RPI follower so I'm just curious.
Last edited:
I think it's important to us because the committee uses it. It's validity is still in question.
Similar threads
