AP Poll: Purdue up to 14
- Thread starter Purdue Grad in Texas
- Start date
I'm OK with that. It'd be great to somehow continue to be below the radar, but also get a 3 seed. Is that even possible? ha
RPI at #21
BPI - #9
KenPom - #11
Sorry, can't help myself!
BPI - #9
KenPom - #11
Sorry, can't help myself!
I'd like to think that, but we never get the respect in the seedings IMO. 3 is probably our max & that would take winning out & some luck. I'm guessing we will end up on the 4 line.
Where do you pull the RPI from? I see us at 19 on ESPN. Not sure if that is up-to-date though.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/rpi
I would like to think that for the next 20 years the winner (season) or at least one representative from the ACC and Big would ALWAYS be in the top 2-3 seeds. I don't know how I could rationally come up with anything else. I also can't imagine a scenario where those two conferences would ever have less than 6 teams in the tourney. If those things don't happen...just where do they grab the teams?
Purdue is 21, through yesterday's games....here's an up-to-date-link, TC.
http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-rpi
Iowa and Ohio State losing probably didn't help as some have mentioned.
I doubt they will ever be a 2 in the committee's mind ... there is not enough respect for the B1G that beating them moves us that far. And the RPI won't move because none of the B1G have high RPIs. It's OK. I think a 3, although a stretch with the committee, would be a LOT better than a 4 - and a 4 a LOT better than a 5. And the beat goes on ...
We did get respect in the seeding once, then we shit the bed against vcu. Remember we lost to Iowa and got pounded by a bad msu team in the first round of the BTT. I was shocked we got a 3 seed, and matched up against a very beatable 2 seed notre shame.
Sometimes it is better to be a "high" lower seed than a low "higher" seed.
There will be a LOT of pressure on Purdue to win early in the tournament, which I think will be our biggest hurdle (thanks in part to many on this board...). I'd rather get an early favorable match-up than a regionals potential matchup. I think if we do get going enough to make the regional rounds, we can match up with anyone and those games are never easy. I'd rather avoid the most treacherous upset teams though...
the "monkey" is the biggest item as you state. Whatever it is worth, I think Biggie is a monkey slayer this year and if the others have a decent game...this guy that "knows winning" will carry them over the finish line the first two games. Course that is dependent on an average game from the others...and at least an average game by the whistle blowers...
To me getting a 5 seed in the second game is a considerably tougher match up vs getting a 6 seed in the 2nd game. Getting a 3 seed over a 4 seed even if the worse 3 seed is a big deal. We can beat anybody, but you want to give yourself the best possible chance with the easiest games early on that you can.
Jump outside the top 20 teams or so and I'm not afraid of anybody. Inside the top 20 there are some poor matchups for us I'd prefer to avoid if at all possible.
I promise you If we win out we are a 3 seed, outside shot at a 2. Even with 1 loss we could get a 3 depending on when and to whom.
Others currently above the Boilers will lose, if a lot of losses then a 3 or even 2 seed (with winning out) is very possible.
not happening. RPI matters a lot. It's the default metric used. and right now it says we are 6th seed.
I don't think it will matter to the committee as much as you think. I will guarantee you that Purdue gets a #5 seed or better on Selection Sunday.
I agree. we get better than a 5th. But we are not going to over-perform our RPI by more than 1 or 2 seed. Forget all the rhetoric you hear, RPI is the default metric provided and it is the one primarily used . Justifying over-seeding by 3 for a non-blue blood program is going to be tough. Not happening.
I think the feeling is that if we won out, our RPI would rise some too therefore it wouldn't be necessary to over-seed us by 3 to get there.
you guys are missing my point. Let's say we win out and our RPI ends up ...
#5 - 8 (very unlikely given how weak B1G RPIs are): we should be seeded 2, but won't be shocked if we are underseeded to 3
#7 - 13 (more likely). We end up being correctly seeded or slightly underseeded at 3. We are not a blue blood or "sexy" team. We won't get a 2.
#13 - 20: We might get overseeded by 1 (or 2 at the max) mostly for being BIG champion. Most likely seed is still 3 or 4.
There's just almost no way to get to a 2 seed for Purdue as long as RPI remains the dominant metric used. And it is.
I read that at least by next season, the selection committee will use different metrics to determine seeding and the at-large teams. With that in mind, who's to say that the committee won't start using their different process earlier than scheduled (with that statement already being made public)?
I have seen a sample of the documents that get distributed to committee members. It's RPI, RPI W/L vs top 50, RPI w/L vs top 100. Officials are allowed to use any other metric. But the one sitting in front of them and every other member are RPI numbers. That's why its RPI that ends up correlating best with seeding. If you have to deviate significantly from RPI, you better be ready to defend it to others.
Ok, when Purdue wins out and isn't a 2 seed I'll come back and apologize for the blasphemy. Until then I stand by my opinion.
Like the enthusiasm but I am also in agreement that have absolutely no shot at being a #2. I actually think they have to win out to nail down a #3. I would expect to be a 4 seed come selection Sunday although would love a #3.
I agree that a 2 is far fetched. I think a 3 is possible though.
So teams ahead of PU losing still prevents them from a reasonable shot at a 2 seed if they win out?
The RPI argument is valid but stop with the blue blood nonsense.
There are other factors besides RPI. Winning out would add 6 road/neutral victories, 2-4 of which will be vs tourney teams (NW, UM, BTT semi, BTT final). 29-5 and both titles is an absolute lock for a 3 seed and a shot at 2 depending on what else happens.
We take care of business.........at least tie for the BIG Conf.............win the BIG Tourney..........we will at least be a lock for a 3 seed.......still a lot of games yet to be played for the teams ahead of us........anything can happen!
it's the world we live in. I didn't make the rules. Some people get more benefit of the doubt than others whether deserving or not. That's life. Purdue basketball is not of those I see getting benefit of doubt. The path to a 2 seed is very very slim. We will not get benefit of doubt if we are borderline. 3 seed seems most likely even if we win out.
I love when posters say we have no shot at a 2 seed. You don't actually know anything because the outcomes of our games as well as the other teams ahead of us are yet to be determined. Of course we don't move up if everbody wins but that isn't possible so to 100% dismiss the possibility of a 2 seed makes zero sense.
RPI may be a guideline as well towards seeding but it isn't the sole factor when seeding is made so to only take it into account is dismissing all other data supporting Purdue as a higher seed. There would never be a question about who gets in or not if RPI was the only thing used and there would never be any questions about which teams receive what seeds.
we are rpi 21 right now. that's an awful lots of team ahead of us that have to go bad in addition to us winning out for us to end up at RPI 3-6 which is what we will need to get a shot at a 2 seed. Not happening. especially with how weak the B1G rpi's are.
So you are saying only teams with a RPI of 3 to 6 can get 2 seeds? Please back up that statement with factual information going back multiple years
it isn't the only metric. You can use just about any other metric. But the way information is provided to the committee, RPI (flaws and all) inevitably ends up being the dominant metric. You can argue deviations from it and it does happen. But if Purdue wins out and ends up with RPI 10-13 (solid 3 seed), why should they get a 2 seed ahead of schools with better RPI's and more prominent national rep. I don't see it happening. It took the junior year of the baby boilers for us to garner enough national attention to be overseeded.
The best measure for what we are going to actually be seeded is to take what whatever seed you think we deserve and add 2 to it.
.
Losing a game you are favored in does not mean you were overseeded just like winning a game you weren't favored in means you were underseeded. Upsets happen. And somebody posted the information I was looking for and guess what it looks like 4 out of the last 5 years a 2 seed had a double digit RPI
