UDPride Discussion Forums    
     

Go Back   UDPride Discussion Forums > LATEST ARTICLES > UDPride Articles

UDPride Articles Published content from your UDPride staff

» Log in
User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!
» Advertisement
Comment
 
Article Tools Display Modes
RPI Blowback From The Global Sports Main Event
RPI Blowback From The Global Sports Main Event
Christopher Rieman
Published by Chris R
01-03-2011
RPI Blowback From The Global Sports Main Event

DAYTON (OH) -- In-season tournaments are all the rage now, and they should be considering the NCAA allows teams to count such festivals of round-robin roundball as one just one game on the schedule. For programs like Dayton that must bolster their post-season tourney resume' outside their league, it's a great chance to add some games to the schedule and play BCS schools that might otherwise turn down a home-home series.

Sometimes the luxury of playing a BCS opponent comes at a steep price however. This year, the Global Sports Main Event is a perfect example of the Flyers getting snookered for a game with Cincinnati at the expense of three RPI-killing opponents to round out the tournament field.

Just how damaging was the Global Sports Main Event (GSME)? What if I told you Dayton's non-conference RPI would be significantly better had we skipped match-ups with Mount St. Mary's, Savannah State, and Florida A&M altogether and chosen instead to play a one-way game at Cincinnati's home court of Fifth Third Arena -- and lost 68-34?

Instead of adding three wins at home against cupcakes and taking a loss at US Bank Arena, UD would have been better served by simply agreeing to play UC at their facility.

But things get even more interesting.

What if I told you the Flyers would have boosted their non-conference RPI by simply avoiding the entire GSME altogether? Instead of going 3-1 and padding the non-conference record at 12-3 overall, Dayton would have earned an equally dramatic jump in RPI had they finished the non-conference season at 9-2. What they trade in overall victories, they make up for in Strength of Schedule -- and SOS is worth 50% of overall RPI -- twice as much as winning percentage.

All of this sounds plausible, but I have the data to officially back it up. The conclusion is quite elementary:

Dayton was penalized by the RPI for participating in the Global Sports Main Event no matter how well the Flyers performed. Taken in totality of the four-game tourney, UD had nothing to gain and everything to lose by virtue of the three cupcakes forced upon the schedule for the privilege of playing Cincinnati.

Not only was the GSME an RPI boat anchor, our research is based upon Cincinnati's undefeated record (14-0) as of this writing. As the only game of significance in the tournament, UC's perfect record inflates the merit of the GSME to its most positive light. Had UC lost a few games, the impact would be even more pronounced.

The GSME has handicapped Dayton's RPI from NCAA lock status to bubblicious at very best.

Let's look at how we got here and what the data reveals.

CURRENT REALITY

- The UDPride RPI (the most accurate RPI ANYWHERE) currently has the Flyers at #52 with a 12-3 non-conference record. This includes four games in the Global Sports Main Event: three home victories over MSM, Savannah State, and FAMU; one loss at Cincinnati (US Bank Arena will be classified as a UC home game after we petition the NCAA later this season).

THE OTHER POSSIBLE OUTCOMES


- Let's assume Dayton went 4-0 in the GSME instead of 3-1, thereby earning maximum value within the RPI computation. Dayton would be 13-2 with an RPI of #37.

- Let's assume Dayton agreed to play in the GSME for the chance to play Cincinnati on a neutral court (even though it is considered a road game by the NCAA), and knowingly swallowed three home match-ups at UD Arena against poor RPI opponents for the privilege. Our assumption here is Dayton viewed playing Cincinnati as equal to or greater in value than the burden of playing three cupcakes at home. In other words, UD only really wanted the UC game and this was the only way to get it.

Suppose Dayton kept it far simpler and agreed to play Cincinnati at Fifth Third Arena in a one-way one-game series, still lost 68-34, and three matches against MSM, Savannah State, and FAMU never existed. Dayton's record would be 9-3 and their RPI would be #22.

- Finally, let's suppose the GSME never took place. Dayton would be 9-2. Their RPI would be #22.

RECAPPING THE RPI'S BASED ON THE GLOBAL SPORTS MAIN EVENT

Current (3-1, 12-3 overall) = 52
Sweep (4-0, 13-2 overall) = 37
UC Away (0-1, 9-3 overall = 22
No GSME (0-0, 9-2 overall = 22

CONCLUSION

As you can clearly see, Dayton was penalized more by winning three games at home against terrible teams than by losing just once away from UD Arena. Further, Dayton was identically penalized for playing the four-game tournament to begin with.

Based on current RPI's, there was no circumstance where playing the Global Sports Main Event would have been more beneficial than simply playing Cincinnati on their home court, losing, and avoiding the other three matches. Going one step further, simply avoiding the entire tournament (and tourney results of any kind) altogether would have yielded the same RPI improvement.

FINAL THOUGHTS

Some mistakes were clearly made in scheduling this tournament. First and foremost was the guarantee of Savannah State in the tournament field. Unlike Mount St. Mary's and Florida A&M, Savannah State is a basketball independent and does not have the shelter of a conference to overcome the poor non-conference record from six weeks of barnstorming against quality opponents.

All three teams take a bevy of guaranteed paydays during their non-con schedule to pad the athletic department books at the expense of losses on the overall record. All three teams have poor records, but Dayton can re-claim some RPI points when The Mount and FAMU play teams in the NEC and MEAC and (hopefully) grind out a few wins. Savannah State's schedule eases up after New Year's, but they play just three home games the rest of the season (and just six all season). The Mount and FAMU split the remainder of the season at home and on the road as a result of conference play. Not that The Mount and FAMU get off the hook either -- they are poor teams too and do nothing to help UD's RPI either. There were a bunch of red flags that should have gone up however with regard to all of these teams.

Dayton must proceed with caution and learn from the Global Sports Main Event. Sometimes getting greedy for a BCS opponent and a bunch of buy games to replenish the piggy bank can turn out of be more harm than good. As the data has shown, beating awful teams at home actually HURTS your RPI -- and the more of those games played, the greater the penalty for playing them. Nothing good comes from scheduling sub-300 teams in the RPI, other than making money from ticket sales and concessions.

Perhaps that last point was a major part of the decision. At $20 a ticket and 13,000 tickets sold, that's $260,000 a game. At three games and concessions, UD took in close to $1M in gross revenue. Certainly bills must be paid, but at what point does the proposition become a matter of jumping over dollars to save dimes? True market value of the UD basketball program is earned with NCAA bids and no in-season series should subject that goal to compromise.

It should be noted that many of these in-season tournaments are organized by third parties and provide tournament concepts and parameters schools like UC and Dayton agree on as main hosts of the event. But sometimes opponents are not known when contracts are signed.

It behooves Dayton to tread more carefully in the future and run the numbers -- both financially and competitively. The RPI is a formula everyone knows and should understand. The Flyers have already committed to the Old Spice Classic in Orlando next year, a no-brainer given the quality teams that tournament has invited in past years. The same goes for the 2013 Maui Invitational -- a tourney that invites six BCS schools and one non-BCS school every year to join host Chaminade in the premier in-season tournament of the college basketball calendar.

Some tourneys eye closer scrutiny however and the Global Sports Main Event falls in that category. We're suffering from an RPI of 52 when staying home and adding more practice time would have yielded an RPI of 22. Judging by past non-conference seasons, the Flyers have entered A10 play with an RPI in the teens or 20s every time they fought realistically for an NCAA at-large bid. Few teams can and do charge up the RPI rankings after finishing the non-conference with an RPI in the 50s -- unless eight of the top 16 teams in the RPI are in your conference as the Big East has.

It's a long climb. Here's hoping Mount St. Mary's, Savannah State, and Florida A&M pull a few upsets along the way to make it easier for us.

We didn't make it easy on ourselves -- which is very un-UD like considering how well we've played the RPI game in years past.
__________________

Hot shooting hides a multitude of sins.
Make everyone else's "one day" your "day one".
Article Tools
  #1  
By cralford on 01-03-2011, 08:49 PM
Excellent article Chris. Thanks for doing the research.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
By Swampy Meadows on 01-03-2011, 09:05 PM
Excellent piece, Chris. Good to see you again Saturday.

I mentioned this in my game notes in the "FTS" for the NMU game and it bears repeating here. Doug Hauschild told me that originally Morehead State (UD Pride RPI #123) was in the GSME field but backed out. Not sure who replaced them (probably SSU for the reasons you cited) but that would have changed the dynamic somewhat, would it not? Maybe you could run our RPI with a win over MSU instead of SSU and see what that does. Doug also said that we could have backed out as well, but that's not the UD way.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
By Chris R on 01-03-2011, 09:10 PM
Hence my last few points in the article on teams that tend to back out or organizers that do not guarantee opponents.

These small time in-season opponents scare me for these very reasons. They are too fluid and open to changes that penalize squads like UD.

Id prefer to stick with the more major tourneys with larger fields to mitigate risk and avoid something exactly like we suffered this year.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
By UD62 on 01-03-2011, 09:28 PM
Originally Posted by Chris R View Post
Hence my last few points in the article on teams that tend to back out or organizers that do not guarantee opponents.

These small time in-season opponents scare me for these very reasons. They are too fluid and open to changes that penalize squads like UD.

Id prefer to stick with the more major tourneys with larger fields to mitigate risk and avoid something exactly like we suffered this year.
We appear to be doing that the next three years.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
By C-time on 01-03-2011, 09:55 PM
Excellent Analysis Chris.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
By TA111 on 01-03-2011, 09:59 PM
I mentioned this in another thread, but our RPI isn't as important as who we've beaten and good wins vs bad losses. I agree that playing weak teams just for the sake of playing them can really only hurt you if you were to lose- a win in these games is of little value to the selection committee. Right now the most important fact is that UD has 5 top 100 wins. We must hope that the teams we beat maintain a good RPI.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
By Alberto Strasse on 01-04-2011, 11:51 AM
Excellent Work

Thanks for a very enlightening article. Keep up the good work.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
By AdamtheFlyer on 01-04-2011, 07:32 PM
You're not accounting for the replacement games if you take away the bad.

Take away the exempt event and make it a single game vs Cincy, you have 12 games. To the best of my knowledge NCAA teams can schedule 29 regular season games, meaning your count of 12 is incomplete. We all know UD would play that game, likely at home. You have to account for that.

Taking away all four games, you're missing 2 games. Again, that must be accounted for.

It's not as simple as taking away the bad and forming a new conclusion. You have to see it all the way through to the logical conclusion, not the one that makes your hypothesis become reality.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
By Chris R on 01-04-2011, 09:02 PM
Adam, Im afraid you missed the point of the article. I apologize if I was not clear.

Im not advocating ending the non-con at 9-3, though it is not entirely unprecedented. Just for context, we played 29 games when we went to the NCAAs in 2004 against DePaul. That is just one more game than 9-3/12-4 for a 21-7 record this year if we removed the GSME and played Cincinnati at Fifth Third Arena. As it is however, at 12-3/12-4, thats a 31 game schedule.

We are not required to play 31 games a year, nor are we expected to quite frankly. We've played 29 in the past and still earned an NCAA bid from that scheduling model. That 29 game schedule even included Maui which I believe at the time was an exemption to further enlarge the regular season schedule.

With 13 games out of conference that season compared to a plausible 9-3 without the BSME which is 12, we are only needing to bridge one basketball game. Play Duke on the road in a one-way game and the rest is cream cheese, even if we get beat by 40. The RPI will be drastically better. Not just a little better. But a lot better. Im not here to say getting beat by 40 at Duke is a good thing. All I am saying is the RPI would be far better.

I was not making the statement that I was in favor of just 12 non-con games (even though it is not unprecedented for UD or other schools to short-schedule their OCC when quality opponents are absent), but the fact that playing more games and playing more bad teams adversely affects RPI. Substituting bad teams at home for good teams on the road helps your RPI -- in most cases -- in spite of the outcome. That's the conundrum of the RPI formula.

Playing better teams on the road -- and losing -- helps the RPI more than winning against poor teams at home. There is virtually no RPI gain by beating bad teams at home. In most cases it is a significant RPI penalty. There is just no way around the gap between the 0.6 multiplier at home and the 1.4 multiplier on the road that the NCAA uses. Its so powerful that the opponent is almost secondary. But this is exactly what the A10 and other conferences like ours have been advocating for years. We should be embracing it, not running from it.

Keep in mind, this article focused on the RPI only and how the RPI gets computed to achieve the best possible RPI rankings. The article does not factor in other variables like Top-50 wins, Bottom-100 losses, road wins, conference finish, and other factors.

The RPI is but one tool. Im not endorsing the tool. I just comment on how the computations get affected by scheduling. I prefer 15 non-conference games, but I prefer a better 15 than the ones this year.

And when the subtraction of teams altogether improves your RPI more than beating them, it's worth discussing why those teams are on the schedule to begin with.

We could substitute FAMU, MSM, and Savannah State with anyone you like and the RPI could hardly suffer worse.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
By MD Flyer Pride on 01-04-2011, 11:25 PM
Great post and great article, Chris! A must read.
Reply With Quote
Comment

Article Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement System V2.6 By   Branden

Article powered by GARS 2.1.8m ©2005-2006

     
 
Copyright 1996-2012 UDPride.com. All Rights Reserved.