|
Post by valporun on Jan 6, 2011 12:31:09 GMT -5
Interesting conversation. Don't accept a 2-for-1 with St. Louis. There's no reason to do that with A-10 schools. As for C-USA members, I think they're too busy trying to find the next Maryville (Mo.) to schedule. I know there's been some criticism of aspects of the Valpo schedule, but take a look at what was necessary in order for Tulane to get off to a 12-3 start (Outside of Georgetown and VCU, you'll find of litany of schools of which you've barely ever heard): vs. Loyola (N.O.) at Maryland-Eastern Shore vs. Centenary vs. Maryville (St. Louis) at Nicholls State (L) vs. Alabama State vs. Louisiana at New Orleans vs. Auburn-Montgomery at Southern vs. Lamar vs. Texas-Pan American vs. Rice In short, the Green Wave doesn't want you or any legitimate competition. For the most part, aside from a "buy" game here or there, they simply want wins to pad their record. dylan, it's funny you say that we've never heard of Centenary, when they were a Mid-Con member for the last few years of our existence in the league. We knew Centenary was a bad team, but with all the conference mess the Mid-Con had, they were desperate for a 9th team. I also believe we play Maryland-Eastern Shore a couple of seasons back in a tournament? Some of the others aren't worth the time to schedule, and St. Louis might be a good game after playing a Kansas, Texas, Missouri, or another team that is along the flight path back to Valpo from somewhere in the Pacific or Mountain time zone, even if for some reason we played in the Anaheim 76 Classic or had an invite to the Diamondhead Classic at Hawaii, but it isn't a game we should regularly schedule.
|
|
|
Post by vu72 on Jan 6, 2011 19:44:35 GMT -5
I just watched the highlights of the Butler-Milwaukee game on the Horizon League site. There is one shot where Kaylon Williams, who recorded a triple double in the game, absolutely embarasses Matt Howard. They are one-on-one and Williams dribbles between his legs then steps back and drills a 3. It was classic playground stuff. I suspect Matt won't forget that one.
|
|
|
Post by jerome1 on Jan 6, 2011 22:59:52 GMT -5
Interesting conversation. Don't accept a 2-for-1 with St. Louis. There's no reason to do that with A-10 schools. As for C-USA members, I think they're too busy trying to find the next Maryville (Mo.) to schedule. I know there's been some criticism of aspects of the Valpo schedule, but take a look at what was necessary in order for Tulane to get off to a 12-3 start (Outside of Georgetown and VCU, you'll find of litany of schools of which you've barely ever heard): vs. Loyola (N.O.) at Maryland-Eastern Shore vs. Centenary vs. Maryville (St. Louis) at Nicholls State (L) vs. Alabama State vs. Louisiana at New Orleans vs. Auburn-Montgomery at Southern vs. Lamar vs. Texas-Pan American vs. Rice In short, the Green Wave doesn't want you or any legitimate competition. For the most part, aside from a "buy" game here or there, they simply want wins to pad their record. In case you were wondering Louisiana is Louisiana-Lafayette not LSU. Tulane beat them 63-52 at New Orleans on 12/4/2010. As far as St. Louis goes it is a huge Valpo alumni grounds mostly due to the Lutheran connection. St. Louis is the home to the International headquarters of the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod (I-44 & Kirkwood Rd/Lindbergh Blvd, next to Vianney HS). An example of the thriving alumni group in St. Louis is the VYASL (Valpo Young Alumni in St. Louis). Here is their Facebook page: www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=249789735607&v=wall
|
|
|
Post by agibson on Jan 7, 2011 5:10:21 GMT -5
St. Louis might be a good game after playing a Kansas, Texas, Missouri, or another team that is along the flight path back to Valpo from somewhere in the Pacific or Mountain time zone, even if for some reason we played in the Anaheim 76 Classic or had an invite to the Diamondhead Classic at Hawaii, but it isn't a game we should regularly schedule. I don't follow the A10, but the idea of playing SLU seems like a pretty good one. Looking at Pomeroy's stats, most years they'd be a middle-of-the-pack or top-half Horizon League team. Not sure if they'd give us a 1-1, I think the A10 may not like to think of themselves as mid-major. They have played at Missouri State (MVC) and at Portland (WCC) this year.
|
|
|
Post by agibson on Jan 7, 2011 5:35:02 GMT -5
As for C-USA members, I think they're too busy trying to find the next Maryville (Mo.) to schedule. What was the headline recently out of the CUSA? "All teams over 0.500", something like that? Not sure if it was a press release, or a piece of hagiographic journalism. But, that result's not exactly because of the top-to-bottom excellence of the league...
|
|
|
Post by dylanrocks on Jan 7, 2011 10:31:46 GMT -5
"Most years, they'd be a middle-of-the-pack Horizon League team." "The A-10 may not like to think of (itself) as a mid-major (league)." Couldn't have said it any better myself, agibson. As for the Ragin' Cajuns, I always acknowledge the designation that each program across the country prefers, especially in light of Milwaukee's own struggles in establishing a brand. As for Centenary, not even you folks would recognize the lowly Gentlemen, as they're in the midst of re-classifying to Division 3 and so are barely distinguishable as a D-1 program.
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Jan 7, 2011 17:59:19 GMT -5
"Most years, they'd be a middle-of-the-pack Horizon League team." "The A-10 may not like to think of (itself) as a mid-major (league)." Couldn't have said it any better myself, agibson. As for the Ragin' Cajuns, I always acknowledge the designation that each program across the country prefers, especially in light of Milwaukee's own struggles in establishing a brand. As for Centenary, not even you folks would recognize the lowly Gentlemen, as they're in the midst of re-classifying to Division 3 and so are barely distinguishable as a D-1 program. Except for 1 year of Andrew J. Wieczniewski (sp?), they were a complete nothing from the start. Mind you, that one year they were a 3 seed in KC and promptly got bounced in the opening round by Chicago State.
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Jan 7, 2011 18:00:38 GMT -5
St. Louis might be a good game after playing a Kansas, Texas, Missouri, or another team that is along the flight path back to Valpo from somewhere in the Pacific or Mountain time zone, even if for some reason we played in the Anaheim 76 Classic or had an invite to the Diamondhead Classic at Hawaii, but it isn't a game we should regularly schedule. I don't follow the A10, but the idea of playing SLU seems like a pretty good one. Looking at Pomeroy's stats, most years they'd be a middle-of-the-pack or top-half Horizon League team. Not sure if they'd give us a 1-1, I think the A10 may not like to think of themselves as mid-major. They have played at Missouri State (MVC) and at Portland (WCC) this year. If it's not a 1-for-1, tell 'em to forget it. I don't care what the A10 thinks of itself, SLU is not good enough to rate that kind of respect.
|
|
|
Post by agibson on Jan 9, 2011 16:58:05 GMT -5
With the Horizon League non-conference schedule finished until the Bracketbuster (can we go six of eight?), why not jot down our current RPI situation. I'm taking the numbers from WarrenNolan.com which seems to update quickly. I won't copy out the whole list, but Valpo's #56 after beating CSU. Three Horizon League teams in the top 60, not bad! (Butler 26, CSU 29). The Horizon League has slipped down to 11th, now falling below CUSA and the CAA.
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Jan 9, 2011 20:36:38 GMT -5
Do you know how NPI is calculated and what it's value is? I couldn't find any glossary at the site. It has us rated much lower than RPI.
|
|
|
Post by agibson on Jan 10, 2011 5:06:13 GMT -5
Do you know how NPI is calculated and what it's value is? I couldn't find any glossary at the site. It has us rated much lower than RPI. Interesting. No, I can't find any description either. Google gets this much "a ranking of teams based on their win percentage and strength of" before trailing off. I emailed Warren with a correction and asked about this - we'll see if he responds. But, yeah, I'm not surprised NPI is lower than RPI. I think this season our computer ratings have generally been lower than RPI - which may be reasonable (remember when our RPI was ridiculous there for a while? what was it? top 25?). Against an RPI of 58 Nolan's power index has us at 92, as you noted. We've been creeping up the Pomeroy rankings, now at 103 - finally beating Loyola, but still behind Wright State. Sagarin's got us at 84, with sub-rankings of 70 and 98. But, it's no longer universally true. Whelliston's BBState rankings are the exception. He's got us at RPI 70, BBState 67. (Maybe his calculations haven't updated with yesterday's results?) Good for 18th among "small conference" teams.
|
|
|
Post by agibson on Jan 12, 2011 4:36:00 GMT -5
Do you know how NPI is calculated and what it's value is? I couldn't find any glossary at the site. It has us rated much lower than RPI. Interesting. No, I can't find any description either. Google gets this much "a ranking of teams based on their win percentage and strength of" before trailing off. I emailed Warren with a correction and asked about this - we'll see if he responds. "I will be adding a description of the NPI to the site shortly. The quick answer is the NPI is similar to the RPI, but it takes into account margin of victory."
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Jan 12, 2011 9:36:56 GMT -5
Interesting. No, I can't find any description either. Google gets this much "a ranking of teams based on their win percentage and strength of" before trailing off. I emailed Warren with a correction and asked about this - we'll see if he responds. "I will be adding a description of the NPI to the site shortly. The quick answer is the NPI is similar to the RPI, but it takes into account margin of victory." Thanks, agibson! I'll look for it.
|
|
|
Post by agibson on Jan 12, 2011 10:41:21 GMT -5
(In case it wasn't clear there, I was quoting Warren Nolan's email to me.)
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Jan 13, 2011 8:50:22 GMT -5
(In case it wasn't clear there, I was quoting Warren Nolan's email to me.) Hence the quotation marks, yeah, it was clear
|
|