2017-2018 D1 Women's Soccer Talk!

The sun shines on Cougars ass at least once in its lifetime/season

BYU got a win

Boy You Ugly
 
Swoosh said:
If you would care to read your own link carefully, you would understand that I'm right and you're wrong.

Calculation of RPI.

Once the NCAA has calculated each of these Elements, it combines them to determine the variously called "basic" or "normal" or "original" or "unadjusted" RPI. I call it the Unadjusted RPI or URPI. The formula for determining the Unadjusted RPI is:

(Element 1 + (2 x Element 2) + Element 3)/4

At first glance, this looks like the RPI formula gives Team A's strength of schedule (Elements 2 and 3) three times the impact on the RPI that Team A's winning record (Element 1) has, since Element 1 counts for 25% of the formula weight, Element 2 counts for 50%,and Element 3 counts for 25%. In effect, however, this is not true. The following table shows why:
Click to expand...

Did you bother to read the analysis and mathematically what it comes out to? Clearly not.
 
CaliKlines said:
Although my pom poms can't compare to Mappie's (remember, their 2nd 11 would still be a top 5 team in the nation), the RPI poll that just came out was very favorable for the ACC. 7 teams in the top 21...that is quite an achievement.

(And I love how you try to frame me as anti-this and anti-that! I guess if I was pro-life, you'd portray me as anti anti-abortion?)

Also, I've never been against the ECNL. In the past I have maintained that it wasn't the only way to a great scholarship at a great university in a P5 conference. My mediocre (according to some in this forum) player is proof of that. ECNL continues to be an option for some players, although it's relevance has diminished even more with the introduction of the DA.
Click to expand...
NC State has quietly become a trouble maker.
 
Swoosh said:
If you would care to read your own link carefully, you would understand that I'm right and you're wrong.

Calculation of RPI.

Once the NCAA has calculated each of these Elements, it combines them to determine the variously called "basic" or "normal" or "original" or "unadjusted" RPI. I call it the Unadjusted RPI or URPI. The formula for determining the Unadjusted RPI is:

(Element 1 + (2 x Element 2) + Element 3)/4

At first glance, this looks like the RPI formula gives Team A's strength of schedule (Elements 2 and 3) three times the impact on the RPI that Team A's winning record (Element 1) has, since Element 1 counts for 25% of the formula weight, Element 2 counts for 50%,and Element 3 counts for 25%. In effect, however, this is not true. The following table shows why:
Click to expand...

I will help you out since you love selective editing. Please read ALL of it so that you understand the math.

"At the bottom right of the table, the yellow highlighted numbers show the average effective weights of the three elements over the 10 year period covered by the table, when the three elements are incorporated into the RPI formula using the 25%-50%-25% formula ratios:

Element 1: 49.6% -- roughly 50%

Element 2: 38.9% -- roughly 40%

Element 3: 11.5% -- roughly 10%

These percentages suggest that the NCAA adopted the 1:2:1 weights in the formula for the three Elements in order to have a team's winning percentage count for approximately half the team's RPI (Element 1's roughly 50% effective impact) and the team's strength of schedule count for the other half of the team's RPI (Element 2's roughly 40% effective impact plus Element 3's roughly 10% effective impact). In a January 23, 2009 Memorandum from the NCAA's Associate Director of Statistics to the Division I Men's Basketball Committee, the NCAA confirmed that this is its intention: "About half of the rating is based on winning percentage and the other half on strength of schedule. Winning percentage (Factor I) only receives a 25 percent weighting although its real strength is larger. There always is a far wider gap in the rankings between the top and bottom teams in this category than between the first and last in Factors II and III."

Adjusted RPI.

The formula described above produces Team A's Unadjusted (or "basic" or "normal" or "original") RPI. Once the NCAA has calculated the RPI rating amounts, it then adjusts them by adding bonuses for "good" wins and ties and subtracting penalties for "poor" losses and ties, to produce the Adjusted RPI. As between the URPI and the ARPI, the ARPI appears to be what the Committee uses in its decision-making process, although the Committee has access to all three RPI elements, to the URPI, and to the ARPI. (The Committee also uses a variant of the RPI called the Non-Conference RPI and also has access to its three elements, to the UNCRPI, and to the ANCRPI.)"
 
MakeAPlay said:
I will help you out since you love selective editing. Please read ALL of it so that you understand the math.

"At the bottom right of the table, the yellow highlighted numbers show the average effective weights of the three elements over the 10 year period covered by the table, when the three elements are incorporated into the RPI formula using the 25%-50%-25% formula ratios:

Element 1: 49.6% -- roughly 50%

Element 2: 38.9% -- roughly 40%

Element 3: 11.5% -- roughly 10%

These percentages suggest that the NCAA adopted the 1:2:1 weights in the formula for the three Elements in order to have a team's winning percentage count for approximately half the team's RPI (Element 1's roughly 50% effective impact) and the team's strength of schedule count for the other half of the team's RPI (Element 2's roughly 40% effective impact plus Element 3's roughly 10% effective impact). In a January 23, 2009 Memorandum from the NCAA's Associate Director of Statistics to the Division I Men's Basketball Committee, the NCAA confirmed that this is its intention: "About half of the rating is based on winning percentage and the other half on strength of schedule. Winning percentage (Factor I) only receives a 25 percent weighting although its real strength is larger. There always is a far wider gap in the rankings between the top and bottom teams in this category than between the first and last in Factors II and III."

Adjusted RPI.

The formula described above produces Team A's Unadjusted (or "basic" or "normal" or "original") RPI. Once the NCAA has calculated the RPI rating amounts, it then adjusts them by adding bonuses for "good" wins and ties and subtracting penalties for "poor" losses and ties, to produce the Adjusted RPI. As between the URPI and the ARPI, the ARPI appears to be what the Committee uses in its decision-making process, although the Committee has access to all three RPI elements, to the URPI, and to the ARPI. (The Committee also uses a variant of the RPI called the Non-Conference RPI and also has access to its three elements, to the UNCRPI, and to the ANCRPI.)"
Click to expand...
I just let the NCAA do the math for me.
Is that bad?
 
One thing I forgot to mention,..
Every college program I have ever traveled to watch, allows the players to "guest list" the parents as a common courtesy.
This weekend one of the teams my kid played, made every one of the guests pay full boat.

I dont want to embarrass the Anteaters, so I wont mention the college, but yeah.
Bush League.
 
CaliKlines said:
Although my pom poms can't compare to Mappie's (remember, their 2nd 11 would still be a top 5 team in the nation), the RPI poll that just came out was very favorable for the ACC. 7 teams in the top 21...that is quite an achievement.

(And I love how you try to frame me as anti-this and anti-that! I guess if I was pro-life, you'd portray me as anti anti-abortion?)

Also, I've never been against the ECNL. In the past I have maintained that it wasn't the only way to a great scholarship at a great university in a P5 conference. My mediocre (according to some in this forum) player is proof of that. ECNL continues to be an option for some players, although it's relevance has diminished even more with the introduction of the DA.
Click to expand...

I'll give you the ACC RPI jumbo-jumbo. But as always...... in true spin form, selective memory you choose see I.
giphy.gif
 
CaliKlines said:
Although my pom poms can't compare to Mappie's (remember, their 2nd 11 would still be a top 5 team in the nation), the RPI poll that just came out was very favorable for the ACC. 7 teams in the top 21...that is quite an achievement.

(And I love how you try to frame me as anti-this and anti-that! I guess if I was pro-life, you'd portray me as anti anti-abortion?)

Also, I've never been against the ECNL. In the past I have maintained that it wasn't the only way to a great scholarship at a great university in a P5 conference. My mediocre (according to some in this forum) player is proof of that. ECNL continues to be an option for some players, although it's relevance has diminished even more with the introduction of the DA.
Click to expand...

I love how you parse everything so that it paints the picture that you want to paint and conveniently forget most of the pertinent details so that you look like mister innocent. Some of us remember all of your sins from the previous forum. I won't bother to go into them but you talked a lot of $hit about both of our players previous club and most was flat out lies and the ignorance of a newbie soccer parents.

You must not have or like back because you sure as hell like to front....
 
Ricky Fandango said:
One thing I forgot to mention,..
Every college program I have ever traveled to watch, allows the players to "guest list" the parents as a common courtesy.
This weekend one of the teams my kid played, made every one of the guests pay full boat.

I dont want to embarrass the Anteaters, so I wont mention the college, but yeah.
Bush League.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a Re-distribution of capital allocation....courtesy of Don Bren & Co.
 
MakeAPlay said:
No it isn't. My man swoosh just doesn't like reading so he stopped at what he thought proved his point.
Click to expand...

The "effective impact" of the formula is 50/40/10 for each element as a result of the spread across each element. The formula ratios applied are still 25/50/25 ("when the three elements are incorporated into the RPI formula using the 25%-50%-25% formula ratios"). Swoosh referenced the formula, not the effective impact of the formula. But that's only if you want to get "specific."
 
Ricky Fandango said:
One thing I forgot to mention,..
Every college program I have ever traveled to watch, allows the players to "guest list" the parents as a common courtesy.
This weekend one of the teams my kid played, made every one of the guests pay full boat.

I dont want to embarrass the Anteaters, so I wont mention the college, but yeah.
Bush League.
Click to expand...

I've seen this lack of courtesy before which was why I had a few bucks just in case. I don't know why some schools don't allow a list...
 
Ricky Fandango said:
One thing I forgot to mention,..
Every college program I have ever traveled to watch, allows the players to "guest list" the parents as a common courtesy.
This weekend one of the teams my kid played, made every one of the guests pay full boat.

I dont want to embarrass the Anteaters, so I wont mention the college, but yeah.
Bush League.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the ONE garage they opened on an otherwise desolate Sunday to charge us $10 for parking. 4-1 karma.
 
Dangerous WCC RPIs. The only safe bet is the automatic bid awarded to the champion. A couple of losses and the RPI goes into the abyss. FOUR teams below 150!

23 LMU
29 Pepp
43 SCU
73 Zags
76 BYU
98 USF
161 Portland
209 Pacific
220 San Diego
223 St. Mary's
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top