ESPN releases conference BPI rankings

[Redbirdgrad]

I'm been observing for a while now (hence the name) and your hate for WSU is tremendous. I just wanted to point that out. But I'll still play along.

Are you really taking WSU's RPI from 1 single year and using it as the basis for your argument? How about a 5 year average of their RPI and what it has brought to the table? Since the RPI varies so often, why in the world would you take an RPI team from this week in time (when it varies from week to week) and make that the basis for your argument? Is it because an average RPI over the course of the years since Creighton left doesn't validate your argument? Terrible, terrible logic.

So how can you justify the Valley's 4-spot average drop since Creighton left? What has changed between them leaving and now? And why wouldn't it be reasonable to assume a similar drop would happen given the equal level of the two programs leaving? Again, you're either assuming WSU is replaced with a WSU/Creighton like team (which hasn't happened) or another team of the Valley is going to elevate to a WSU/Creighton type level (which also hasn't happened).

Your WSU hate train is causing you major bias in this argument because it would pain you greatly to think that them leaving this conference would cause the conference to drop in stature and in wins, even though that's exactly what would happen.

It's not my job to do the math for you. I didn't invent numbers, or math, but you see.... they've been around a long time and they work. The reason you take a snapshot right now, and not an average, is because we're talking about replacing Wichita next year. If you took Wichita out of the Valley, right now... how do you replace them and maintain their ranking... right now? You see, that's a snapshot question.. not an average.

Clearly Fever, this new persona has gotten you started on the wrong foot here.

[TheObserver]

Why couldn't you answer the question about the Valley dropping after Creighton left? I think you know why.

You and BirdsEyeView seem to have a crush on Fever/sauce/whatever the flavor is. It would be nice if that wasn't always a focal point to all of your squabbles here.

[Redbirdgrad]

Why couldn't you answer the question about the Valley dropping after Creighton left? I think you know why.

You and BirdsEyeView seem to have a crush on Fever/sauce/whatever the flavor is. It would be nice if that wasn't always a focal point to all of your squabbles here.

Because that isn't the question at hand. The question is what will happen if Wichita leaves. If you'd like to go research that data about Creighton, knock yourself out. The Wichita question has been answered.

Just because you don't like the answer that's backed by actual facts and data doesn't mean you can switch the question. But then again... that's a very saucy thing to do.

[TheObserver]

Why couldn't you answer the question about the Valley dropping after Creighton left? I think you know why.

You and BirdsEyeView seem to have a crush on Fever/sauce/whatever the flavor is. It would be nice if that wasn't always a focal point to all of your squabbles here.

Because that isn't the question at hand. The question is what will happen if Wichita leaves. If you'd like to go research that data about Creighton, knock yourself out. The Wichita question has been answered.

Just because you don't like the answer that's backed by actual facts and data doesn't mean you can switch the question. But then again... that's a very saucy thing to do.

What facts and data have you used to support your hypothesis that the Valley is improving and that a team with an average RPI somewhere north of 20 wouldn't cause for a substantial drop in standing in terms of RPI? I must've missed it.

[Redbirdgrad]

Why couldn't you answer the question about the Valley dropping after Creighton left? I think you know why.

You and BirdsEyeView seem to have a crush on Fever/sauce/whatever the flavor is. It would be nice if that wasn't always a focal point to all of your squabbles here.

Because that isn't the question at hand. The question is what will happen if Wichita leaves. If you'd like to go research that data about Creighton, knock yourself out. The Wichita question has been answered.

Just because you don't like the answer that's backed by actual facts and data doesn't mean you can switch the question. But then again... that's a very saucy thing to do.

What facts and data have you used to support your hypothesis that the Valley is improving and that a team with an average RPI somewhere north of 20 wouldn't cause for a substantial drop in standing in terms of RPI? I must've missed it.

I think you meant to type "actual" but it came back as "average". Your actual RPI and RPI rating are what's on the table.

When you rejoin the topic at hand, I'll be waiting. But your moving targets are impossible to discuss, so I'll be more patient with this screen name. I've presented you actual data, and you're now refusing numbers. What's next... the alphabet doesn't work for you either? Let me know when you're ready to proceed.

[BirdsEyeView]

Why couldn't you answer the question about the Valley dropping after Creighton left? I think you know why.

You and BirdsEyeView seem to have a crush on Fever/sauce/whatever the flavor is. It would be nice if that wasn't always a focal point to all of your squabbles here.

I'm just making an observation of The Observer's posting habits. They match pretty closely with saucy...who coincidentally seems to have gone awol on here.

That's all. I truly hope you are not him, but I have my doubts.

As far as this topic, you are looking for historical data points to show what happens to a conference rpi when an alpha leaves. Redbirdgrad is showing you how small improvements from multiple conference members can easily make up the difference.

Everything is based on assumptions when predicting future rpi for the conference. A metric standard that appears to be having less value anyways from the selection committee.

Finally, isn't this topic about conference bpi, not rpi??

[TheObserver]

In terms of RPI, Creighton = WSU

Creighton leaves = Conference RPI avg. drops from 8 to 12

WSU leaves = Conference RPI avg. drops from 12 to 16

And this doesn't even take into consideration that the conference still dropped even when WSU actually elevated their game. So, not only does the Valley have to replace WSU with an equal to maintain an even RPI standing, but another current team would need to step up and produce a similar WSU/Creighton type RPI.

And there's your basic math. Even for those challenged in central Illinois.

[Redbirdgrad]

I can't help you man. I really can't. Your lack of understanding of basic concepts prevents you from getting any further in a conversation than "my school is important and WAY better than your school"... "we're the bestest!!!"

I feel really bad for you as a person. What... 3 screen names now and you're still fighting with people on your own board? You REALLY need to take a look at yourself in the mirror man. Something is actually wrong with you. I hope you fix it. And with that, the 2 weeks resumes.

[TheObserver]

When actual basketball is being discussed here, you continue to diverge topics into personal hatefests. No wonder this site gets a bad reputation. The constant pollution of this board makes it hard to see much of anything.

And when questions are posed to you that put you in a corner, instead of continuing the discussion, your ego is too large to admit defeat. That's the biggest flaw of yours: you can't lose an argument.

So instead, you bow out and deflect.

[Rambler63]

So how can you justify the Valley's 4-spot average drop since Creighton left? What has changed between them leaving and now? And why wouldn't it be reasonable to assume a similar drop would happen given the equal level of the two programs leaving? Again, you're either assuming WSU is replaced with a WSU/Creighton like team (which hasn't happened) or another team of the Valley is going to elevate to a WSU/Creighton type level (which also hasn't happened).

In 2012-13, Creighton's last year, the Valley was 8th. And this year the Valley is 12th. What has happened since?

1. The American Athletic Conference was created in 2013. It has occupied a place in the top 8 most years, so that accounts for one place that you describe.
2. The spots between 9th and 13th have fluctuated quite a bit, with the MVC, West Coast, Mid American, Mountain West all in or near that grouping. Depending on the year, the Summit, Colonial, and Sun Belt all making appearances in that range.
3. The MVC was 9th the year WSU and UNI made the NCAA, ISUr made the NIT, Loyola won the CBI, and Evansville won the CIT. That was less than two full years ago.
4. Things fluctuate. The Mountain West was 3rd in conference strength and the SEC was 9th (just behind the MVC) in 2012-13. Today the SEC is 5th and the Mountain West 10th. In 2014-15, the Mountain West was 13th.
5. Scheduling misjudgments and errors happen. If WSU plays only one MEAC team, if Long Beach State had two more points to beat Florida Gulf Coast, and if WSU beats Michigan State, the Shockers are probably a top 40 RPI team right now. If Drake started the season with Jeff Rutter instead of Giacoletti, maybe they're 50 spots better in the RPI and the MVC has no teams worse than 250 (which can't be said by the AAC, A10, Pac 12, or SEC).

These complaints seem like a deliberate mischaracterization. If you have no confidence in your fellow conference members, just say so. Don't cherry pick numbers to make it look like the sky is falling and no one has any agency to change it. And if you're going to claim this conference is a hopeless case compared to the awesome Mountain West or American, for instance, say why you think you would trust Tulane, South Florida, Air Force, San Jose State, and East Carolina to protect your men's basketball RPI in all the ways that Bradley, Missouri State, Loyola, and Drake let you down.