ESPN releases conference BPI rankings

[TheObserver]

LOL... no. Just... no. WOW

Sound reasoning but could you elaborate a little bit more?

[Redbirdgrad]

LOL... no. Just... no. WOW

Sound reasoning but could you elaborate a little bit more?

You're the one making the significant claim to change from the status quo.

Show your work.

The one making the claim is the one that needs to elaborate.

[TheObserver]

LOL... no. Just... no. WOW

Sound reasoning but could you elaborate a little bit more?

You're the one making the significant claim to change from the status quo.

Show your work.

The one making the claim is the one that needs to elaborate.

Considering that WSU leaving would be a major change from the status quo, I just put two and two together. And your counter was simply a wow.

[BirdsEyeView]

LOL... no. Just... no. WOW

Sound reasoning but could you elaborate a little bit more?

Your assumption is that the Valley teams stay flat, while also losing WSU to the AAC.

No way that happens. Programs will improve. Plus, who knows who the. Valley adds.

WSU was not good from 1988-2005. Not like you have been historically great, just to some bandwagon fans.

Welcome to the board by the way. Hope you aren't SpecialSauce with yet another screen name

[Redbirdgrad]

Considering that WSU leaving would be a major change from the status quo, I just put two and two together. And your counter was simply a wow.

Yes, 2 and 2 together does equal a dip. I agree with that notion. But 16? Where did you pull that number out of? That's what I"m curious about...

[TheObserver]

LOL... no. Just... no. WOW

Sound reasoning but could you elaborate a little bit more?

Your assumption is that the Valley teams stay flat, while also losing WSU to the AAC.

No way that happens. Programs will improve. Plus, who knows who the. Valley adds.

WSU was not good from 1988-2005. Not like you have been historically great, just to some bandwagon fans.

Welcome to the board by the way. Hope you aren't SpecialSauce with yet another screen name

Unless you can provide me with some historical evidence that teams in the Valley are improving consistently to the point where WSU leaving wouldn't hurt the conference, I don't know why you are just assuming that they would. You're getting bent out of shape because of my reasoning, when you're only counter is taking the opposite stance without providing any evidence, even though the short history of teams exodusing this conference is not on your side.

So your counter is that programs will improve. Ok, is that happening? Are they improving to the level of a WSU? And then you're assuming that the Valley adds somebody of equal footing as WSU, much like they did with Loyola when Creighton left? Ok

Historically great? I don't know. They have a pretty good history before 1988 as well. There's a run of NCAA Tournaments in there, a Final Four and an Elite Eight, as well as some pretty decent NBA players. I don't really know what that has to do with anything though?

Thanks for the welcome. It seems like two Redbird fans are always dominating the conversation so I thought I'd try to balance out the board against their constant overrun of the place.

[TheObserver]

Considering that WSU leaving would be a major change from the status quo, I just put two and two together. And your counter was simply a wow.

Yes, 2 and 2 together does equal a dip. I agree with that notion. But 16? Where did you pull that number out of? That's what I"m curious about...

Creighton and WSU were pretty similar in stature. Creighton left and the conference dropped 4 spots in the pecking order, despite WSU having high RPI's. I'm assuming that if WSU leaves, a similar drop would likely take place, unless you think either a.) the conference will replace them with a team like Gonzaga or b.) a team from the Valley is going to emerge to the level of a WSU, which it has yet to demonstrate.

[Redbirdgrad]

Considering that WSU leaving would be a major change from the status quo, I just put two and two together. And your counter was simply a wow.

Yes, 2 and 2 together does equal a dip. I agree with that notion. But 16? Where did you pull that number out of? That's what I"m curious about...

Creighton and WSU were pretty similar in stature. Creighton left and the conference dropped 4 spots in the pecking order, despite WSU having high RPI's. I'm assuming that if WSU leaves, a similar drop would likely take place, unless you think either a.) the conference will replace them with a team like Gonzaga or b.) a team from the Valley is going to emerge to the level of a WSU, which it has yet to demonstrate.

And this is where I can tell you have no clue how the RPI operates. I'm thinking this is ShockerFever in disguise, and if so, congrats on having me go back on the 2 weeks. Clever(ish). If not, I'm sorry to loop you in with someone of that nature.

Currently, Wichita State has an RPI of 82 and a SOS of 192 and more importantly a RATING of .5589. Will that improve? Most likely yes. How much is yet to be determined, so let's work off of the data we know for a minute.

If we were to replace Wichita State with the average (actually median) team in Division 1... that's San Jose State with a .4948. For comparison's sake, Loyola (our replacement for Creighton) is a .5262. So it's doable to think we can get someone above .4948. But let's just say we get San Jose State. That means for the Valley as a whole to not move a single spot on the conference rankings we have to improve by the difference between .5589 and .4948 that we "lost" from Wichita. That's .0641. Who among us can improve .0641? Northern Iowa is currently .5044. If they were to improve their RPI into the 70's or 80's (like Wichita is now), that's getting everything back we're currently giving up with "losing" Wichita. Even if they don't make that jump, let's say they get .03 back next year... can a couple other Valley teams make a small improvement? Maybe a Bradley who's doing better, or someone else? Most likely. The Valley is down this year.

So while losing Wichita will hurt (losing any good team will), dropping from 12 to 16 is a ridiculous statement not backed up historically or by using any data points at all.

We can project forward all you want too... but I'm using today's numbers which is all you can truly go by. Most likely the number we have to get back isn't .0641, it's probably closer to .10. This is why I think we'll see a small decline, but not as much as Shocker fans will lead you to believe. The Valley doesn't live and die by them.

[redbird alum 2004]

So WSU couldn't take care of business in the non con and the valley is to blame? I don't blame the valley for ISU not winning their non con game, I blame ISU. The only big win was from InSU. So how does as WSU team with no big win and a crappy sos improve the AAC that much? Don't be mad at the valley shocker fans. You guys have a good young team. Next year you should be better in the non con and I am thinking the rest of the valley will as well.

[TheObserver]

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.