(12-04-2013 02:33 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 06:00 PM)Dracorex Wrote:  http://realtimerpi.com/2012-2013/rpi_219_Men.html

this shows ECU's RPI to end the season at 104. Charlotte at 68

Warren Nolan which uses tournaments in its RPI listings are first |Real Time is second
Savannah st 168 |166
Rider 139 | 146
Loyola- Maryland 98 | 99
Evansville 90 | 106
Weber St 78 | 85

ECU 67|104
Charlotte 81|68

Charlotte dropped 13 spots just by losing in the first round of the NIT where as ECU gained 37 by winning the CIT


Florida Gulf Coast the team that went to the sweet 16 last year ended the season according to Warren Nolan at 73. Pre tourney run they were at 93. According to SJ logic ECU had a better season than FGCU

Let's take FGCU in your example. That 73 post tourny ranking is a more accurate grading and representations of their entire season than an RPI that doesn't include the 3 weeks of postseason and had them 93 is it not? I mean their season graded out significantly higher after those wins than before. Which is the point of it being better than the exact same formula without the entire season.

The RPI puts no weight on when the games were played or where. Games are games as far as it's concerned and that's about as unbias a look at them as you can get. It doesn't care if you won most of the games in early and collapsed down the streach like UNCC and lost to a worse team in the NIT than several we beat in the CIT. It doesn't care if you actually got better as the season went on like other teams. If just looks at the entire body of work and grades it out.

You can dig into FGCU entire resume and there is a reason they were a very low 15 seed that wouldn't have made it to the NCAA with out an auto bid. The selection committee sure gave them no respect either for the rest of their season because they did very little to deserve it minus a few games. They didn't even win their 26 ranked conference and would have been in the CIT if they lost a game in their tourny. I guess an autobid and timely upsets stop the show though.

These formulas are written to grade out seasons and compare(pomory, rpi, Sagarin) , it's just funny to me they said ECU's had the better season than UNCC's for the 3rd year in a row. It's not even just one, but several different. You don't like it take it up with them.

Okay, okay I give. Your RPI/Pomeroy/Sagarin rankings prove it. You are smarter than all of us, and ECU is better than any of us. I was bringing a knife to a gun fight with you and your list of rankings. All I have is the results of how ECU did against schools that went to the NIT/NCAA, but what value could head-to-head game results actually have?

Charlotte NIT L
UNC-CH NCAA L
UMASS NIT L
Norfolk State NIT W
Memphis NCAA L
Southern Miss NIT L

(12-04-2013 02:33 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  Let's take FGCU in your example. That 73 post tourny ranking is a more accurate grading and representations of their entire season than an RPI that doesn't include the 3 weeks of postseason and had them 93 is it not? I mean their season graded out significantly higher after those wins than before. Which is the point of it being better than the exact same formula without the entire season.

The RPI puts no weight on when the games were played or where. Games are games as far as it's concerned and that's about as unbias a look at them as you can get. It doesn't care if you won most of the games in early and collapsed down the streach like UNCC and lost to a worse team in the NIT than several we beat in the CIT. It doesn't care if you actually got better as the season went on like other teams. If just looks at the entire body of work and grades it out.

You can dig into FGCU entire resume and there is a reason they were a very low 15 seed that wouldn't have made it to the NCAA with out an auto bid. The selection committee sure gave them no respect either for the rest of their season because they did very little to deserve it minus a few games. They didn't even win their 26 ranked conference and would have been in the CIT if they lost a game in their tourny. I guess an autobid and timely upsets stop the show though.

I don't know about anyone else but I would have taken FGCU's season last year over UAB's, ECU's, and everyone else in CUSA. No one will remember FGCU's RPI in 2 or 3 years but they will always have that banner in their gym. A sweet 16 means more to me than any NIT/CBIT tourney championship. If you look at nothing but RPI, then ECU would have had a better season than FGCU. RPI is a numerical and statistical analysis method and numbers can be manipulated by certain inputs. Winning 14/26 games versus 19/31 is a huge difference in 25% of the RPI calculations. ECU went from winning 50% of its games to winning 60% just by playing in that third rate tournament. That is why you guys jumped 40 spots.

Each home win counts as .6 of a win, each away game counts as 1.4 wins, and each neutral site counts as 1 win in the Win Percentage part of the RPI calculation which changed in 2004. That is where you are wrong about your understanding of RPI. winning 5 neutral site games weighs more heavily than winning 8 home games.


The tournament selection committees, which generally know more about basketball than any fan, selected UNCC in the NIT and not ECU. That pretty much means they had the better season even if a post season RPI says otherwise. UNCC's body of work was better when it mattered, that is before the tourney.

(12-04-2013 12:02 PM)Dracorex Wrote:  I don't know about anyone else but I would have taken FGCU's season last year over UAB's, ECU's, and everyone else in CUSA. No one will remember FGCU's RPI in 2 or 3 years but they will always have that banner in their gym. A sweet 16 means more to me than any NIT/CBIT tourney championship. If you look at nothing but RPI, then ECU would have had a better season than FGCU. RPI is a numerical and statistical analysis method and numbers can be manipulated by certain inputs. Winning 14/26 games versus 19/31 is a huge difference in 25% of the RPI calculations. ECU went from winning 50% of its games to winning 60% just by playing in that third rate tournament. That is why you guys jumped 40 spots.

Each home win counts as .6 of a win, each away game counts as 1.4 wins, and each neutral site counts as 1 win in the Win Percentage part of the RPI calculation which changed in 2004. That is where you are wrong about your understanding of RPI. winning 5 neutral site games weighs more heavily than winning 8 home games.


The tournament selection committees, which generally know more about basketball than any fan, selected UNCC in the NIT and not ECU. That pretty much means they had the better season even if a post season RPI says otherwise. UNCC's body of work was better when it mattered, that is before the tourney.

Hey Dracorex, as a new guy around here, I don't know if you've been told previously, so sorry if so. But Charlotte fans definitely prefer "Charlotte" to UNCC for the sports teams (and Charlotte is the proper name), mainly because we're tired of getting mistaken for all the other UNC's, including the cheaters in Chapel Hill.

I assume SJ is using it to irritate Charlotte fans. I feel bad for all the good ECU fans on these boards, and I'd guess that Charlotte and ECU fans would pull for each other quite a bit more if not for SJ relentlessly poisoning the well here and on other teams' boards.

(12-04-2013 12:14 PM)9erken Wrote:  Hey Dracorex, as a new guy around here, I don't know if you've been told previously, so sorry if so. But Charlotte fans definitely prefer "Charlotte" to UNCC for the sports teams (and Charlotte is the proper name), mainly because we're tired of getting mistaken for all the other UNC's, including the cheaters in Chapel Hill.

I assume SJ is using it to irritate Charlotte fans. I feel bad for all the good ECU fans on these boards, and I'd guess that Charlotte and ECU fans would pull for each other quite a bit more if not for SJ relentlessly poisoning the well here and on other teams' boards.

I was just typing and didn't think about it. My apologies.

I kind of wish UAB would have went the same route and referred to ourselves as the Birmingham Blazers rather than UAB but I think our brand is now defined too much to change it.

What I have never understood is how easy Charlotte got that done. UAB has tried for decades to get media members to refer to UAB and not Alabama-Birmingham (which is not our name).

Charlotte decides that their athletic teams should be called Charlotte instead of UNCC or North Carolina - Charlotte, which they used for years.

And the media says "ok, you're Charlotte"

(12-04-2013 12:37 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  What I have never understood is how easy Charlotte got that done. UAB has tried for decades to get media members to refer to UAB and not Alabama-Birmingham (which is not our name).

Charlotte decides that their athletic teams should be called Charlotte instead of UNCC or North Carolina - Charlotte, which they used for years.

And the media says "ok, you're Charlotte"

Not all media. Some still refuse to call us Charlotte, at least I think they still do. Anway, it is considerably easier to change just the name of the sports teams as that's just marketing. It will take a Hurculean task larger than starting football to actually change the name of the entire University.

(12-04-2013 12:37 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  What I have never understood is how easy Charlotte got that done. UAB has tried for decades to get media members to refer to UAB and not Alabama-Birmingham (which is not our name).

Charlotte decides that their athletic teams should be called Charlotte instead of UNCC or North Carolina - Charlotte, which they used for years.

And the media says "ok, you're Charlotte"

It's easier to associate the name "Charlotte" with UNCC when the Bobcats are so god-awful.

(12-04-2013 02:01 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(12-03-2013 08:07 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  Can't you have the decency to just stop this rant and allow the Blazers to enjoy/celebrate their win over the Tar Heels? You're being either extremely self-centered and rude or retarded.

Read back again, they called me out by name and compared me to a crackhead first. A Memphis fan pointed it out to me in PM or I probably never see it. I even offered to leave once after. Multiple fans kept talking crap when I did. You can blame it on me all you want but they were the ones that called me out by name first, kept it going and injected ECU into the conversation and derailed it off UAB, Haase or this game. That's what I posted about when I first posted until they moved it. Again, look back, it's fact. That was UAB and UNCC fans that took it there.

I get blamed for everything around here by default it seems. I'm sure in your retarded world though they share no responsibility and are completely innocent in the derailing this thread. I mean after all that's why you are here to put your two cents in that has nothing much to do with the game as well except pile on the hate on me bandwagon and farther derail it.

The comparison to crackhead was in reference to your multiple and thus far inaccurate comments about Davis' departure/Haase's hire. It's up for debate as to how accurate that comparison is, but what's not up for debate is that Haase is working out better than Davis was.

As an aside, my retarded world is working out pretty well. I can go on any board around here and not be compared to a crackhead or the scores of other comparisons that you've picked up along the way.

I do apologize for referring to "retarded", that was out of character and I shouldn't have used that term.

I also apologize for further derailing a congratulatory thread that shouldn't have had any controversy.

(12-04-2013 01:50 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  The comparison to crackhead was in reference to your multiple and thus far inaccurate comments about Davis' departure/Haase's hire. It's up for debate as to how accurate that comparison is, but what's not up for debate is that Haase is working out better than Davis was.

Oh really? I didn't know Haase had made it to an NCAA tourney and won a CUSA title at this point like Davis did at UAB just before he was fired. What I saw last year was UAB actually perform worse in his first year than Davis had his last. A 30 spot drop in RPI rankings infact from Davis's last year.

Quote:As an aside, my retarded world is working out pretty well. I can go on any board around here and not be compared to a crackhead or the scores of other comparisons that you've picked up along the way.

It's narrow minded people like you just never bother to look back and jump to conclusions. I mean holy hell, I'm not allowed to have an opinion on Davis and think a coach that took a team with one NBA journyman and a bunch of nobodies to the friggen National Final and beat a loaded defending champ Duke along the way, or that just won a CUSA championship and took UAB to the NCAA's recently was a solid coach. I mean damn, obviously the guy that is 21-19 in his career is so clearly doing a better job let's go ahead and declare it.

Quote:I do apologize for referring to "retarded", that was out of character and I shouldn't have used that term.

I also apologize for further derailing a congratulatory thread that shouldn't have had any controversy.

You aren't hurting my feelings, I have little respect for your opinion anyway, and as far as derailing it they don't want to talk about the UNC game. I offered to leave again above and they still kept talking ****.

(12-04-2013 01:13 PM)demiveeman Wrote:  

(12-04-2013 12:37 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  What I have never understood is how easy Charlotte got that done. UAB has tried for decades to get media members to refer to UAB and not Alabama-Birmingham (which is not our name).

Charlotte decides that their athletic teams should be called Charlotte instead of UNCC or North Carolina - Charlotte, which they used for years.

And the media says "ok, you're Charlotte"

It's easier to associate the name "Charlotte" with UNCC when the Bobcats are so god-awful.

That was the reason one media outlet gave for refusing to call us Charlotte. Basically just told me that that news media outlet thought it's readership was retarded.

(12-04-2013 02:19 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  I offered to leave again above and they still kept talking ****.

Yet proving you can't be the bigger person and let it be. So in that regard, you're still just as ignorant as the person that you claim led you into helping derail this thread.

Have a good day Jonesing. I'm not cluttering up this thread any longer.

Isnt' trash talking oldtiger a ban able offense?

(12-04-2013 02:22 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-04-2013 01:13 PM)demiveeman Wrote:  

(12-04-2013 12:37 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  What I have never understood is how easy Charlotte got that done. UAB has tried for decades to get media members to refer to UAB and not Alabama-Birmingham (which is not our name).

Charlotte decides that their athletic teams should be called Charlotte instead of UNCC or North Carolina - Charlotte, which they used for years.

And the media says "ok, you're Charlotte"

It's easier to associate the name "Charlotte" with UNCC when the Bobcats are so god-awful.

That was the reason one media outlet gave for refusing to call us Charlotte. Basically just told me that that news media outlet thought it's readership was retarded.

From this distance, it appears the national media refers to Charlotte and there was no transition problems. It appears to have been easier than getting them to refer to us by UAB rather than some name we have never used in the past.

(12-04-2013 02:19 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  Oh really? I didn't know Haase had made it to an NCAA tourney and won a CUSA title at this point like Davis did at UAB just before he was fired. What I saw last year was UAB actually perform worse in his first year than Davis had his last. A 30 spot drop in RPI rankings infact from Davis's last year.

It's narrow minded people like you just never bother to look back and jump to conclusions. I mean holy hell, I'm not allowed to have an opinion on Davis and think a coach that took a team with one NBA journyman and a bunch of nobodies to the friggen National Final and beat a loaded defending champ Duke along the way, or that just won a CUSA championship and took UAB to the NCAA's recently was a solid coach. I mean damn, obviously the guy that is 21-19 in his career is so clearly doing a better job let's go ahead and declare it.

You aren't hurting my feelings, I have little respect for your opinion anyway, and as far as derailing it they don't want to talk about the UNC game. I offered to leave again above and they still kept talking ****.

Oldtiger is about as respectful as one can be on this board. If you riled him up enough to do something out of character, you should realize what an ass you are being.

The first year of Haase was almost identical to the first year under Davis. The difference is Davis had some good players to work with, Haase was left with a bare cupboard. Keep on keeping on about Haase's one bad year. It's going to be all you have. What we saw last year was a team that improved as the season went on. We were undermanned and learning a new system. Nobody expected that team to win 20 games.

Davis went to a National Final, and then proceeded to get fired from that position. He didn't do everything right there, huh? Let's be honest, Davis was very lucky to get that C-USA title. If Memphis didn't play like 2 different teams all season, it was theirs for the taking. And did you see his team in the NCAA game? Davis had a ton of shortcomings, and in game adjustments(or lack of) was possibly the biggest of them.

Haase is doing a better job. There is excitement around the program. He reaches out to fans. He recruits his ass off. He gets guys to buy into what he is doing. You are trying to take one season and define a guy's career with it. Doesn't work that way.

And we keep talking **** because you are that damn stupid.

(12-04-2013 02:41 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  

(12-04-2013 02:22 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(12-04-2013 01:13 PM)demiveeman Wrote:  

(12-04-2013 12:37 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  What I have never understood is how easy Charlotte got that done. UAB has tried for decades to get media members to refer to UAB and not Alabama-Birmingham (which is not our name).

Charlotte decides that their athletic teams should be called Charlotte instead of UNCC or North Carolina - Charlotte, which they used for years.

And the media says "ok, you're Charlotte"

It's easier to associate the name "Charlotte" with UNCC when the Bobcats are so god-awful.

That was the reason one media outlet gave for refusing to call us Charlotte. Basically just told me that that news media outlet thought it's readership was retarded.

From this distance, it appears the national media refers to Charlotte and there was no transition problems. It appears to have been easier than getting them to refer to us by UAB rather than some name we have never used in the past.

Charlotte has always been treated better nationally than locally, at least when it comes to media IMHO.

Quote:Oh really? I didn't know Haase had made it to an NCAA tourney and won a CUSA title at this point like Davis did at UAB just before he was fired. What I saw last year was UAB actually perform worse in his first year than Davis had his last. A 30 spot drop in RPI rankings infact from Davis's last year.

If you go back and look at Davis' record against Top 100 competition in the 6 years he was here it isn't pretty. That is the only thing that matters on whether or not he needed to go. You have to win more of those top 50 games (or win a conference tournament) if you ever want to go to the NCAAs in CUSA. He was pretty bad at both of those things.

Top 25:
2-15 (11.8%)

RPI 1-50:
4-29 (12.1%)

RPI 51-100:
23-24 (48.9%)

(12-04-2013 02:40 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  Isnt' trash talking oldtiger a ban able offense?

You mean the guy throwing the "retarded" label at me first?

(12-04-2013 02:56 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  Oldtiger is about as respectful as one can be on this board. If you riled him up enough to do something out of character, you should realize what an ass you are being.

He was just to lazy to look back and see who started it and assumed I came over here to shat on your win which was not the case.

Quote:Davis went to a National Final, and then proceeded to get fired from that position. He didn't do everything right there, huh?

...and how many National Finals has Indiana been to since? The fact is they have been to one Final 4 in the last 20 years and it was Davis that took them there, not Bob Knight, not Crean. Not to mention a 3 year stretch of losing 20+ games a year each year after he was fired.

History has shown he really wasn't that bad to get 7 NCAA wins in 6 years when his predecessor Knight had stalled out and had two in his previous 6 years and his successors absolutely destroyed the program the 5 years after and had all of 1 NCAA win in the 5 years after. Not to mention the 66 losses over a 3 year period. He was seriously a bright spot there in retrospect over a 17 year period.

Quote:Let's be honest, Davis was very lucky to get that C-USA title. If Memphis didn't play like 2 different teams all season, it was theirs for the taking. And did you see his team in the NCAA game? Davis had a ton of shortcomings, and in game adjustments(or lack of) was possibly the biggest of them.

He had you in the top 51 RPI four of the last 5 years he was there. It wasn't a fluke.

Quote:Haase is doing a better job.

that's hardly proven.

Quote:There is excitement around the program. He reaches out to fans. He recruits his ass off. He gets guys to buy into what he is doing. You are trying to take one season and define a guy's career with it. Doesn't work that way.

Your projected RPI this year is 120 on RPI forcast (which would be an improvement mind you). If that plays out or he gets beat down many more times like the Temple game this year they will certainly turn on him.

I'm looking forward to watching you throw basketball smack on the Aack board.

(12-04-2013 03:38 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I'm looking forward to watching you throw basketball smack on the Aack board.

Who are the programs over there coming off a 140 ranked season, with some unproven coach, that draw 4k fans? If there are any talking crap to me I would have no reason not to feel like we were on that level or to be talked down to at this point by them.