Lady Vols vs LSU

#226
#226
This seasons RPI and rankings are hard to fathom across the board. How teams with fewer wins and more losses are ranked two and three slots higher than us is just hard to accept. What is all the love for Auburn about. Look at their record vs ours. I don't see why they are higher ranked, honestly.
 
#227
#227
Rankings for softball basically come from preseason and the pre conference tourneys in California....after that there is not a lot of movement in the polls....only one that matters is rpi
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#228
#228
UCLA at #6 in RPI. Looking at their schedule they play a lot of tough teams. But, they've lost 12 games and they've lost some UGLY games. In our 6 losses we gave up a total of 23 runs. A hair less than 4 a game. And even that is skewed by the 9-1 loss to SC. UCLA has some real stinkers. Lost 10-1 to OK, 9-4 to FL, 11-6 to Baylor,12-7 to Wash, 11-4 to Ore, 8-0 to Ore St and 8-5 to Ore St, and got swept by Utah at home. That's some big scores they've given up. And several times they've given up 7 or 8 runs and still won. In the RPI they are ahead of us.....:unsure: They are ranked a spot below us in the "rankings". I guess that's where the NCAA makes up for the RPI when it doesn't make any sense.
 
#229
#229
I feel like there is a thread in every forum full of people who don't understand the RPI.

Home wins count for less, neutral wins count for more, and road wins count for the most.
Depending on the opponent, a home win could count less than a road loss.

It's not a huge mystery. Most teams with high RPIs have played very tough schedules and have good neutral site and road records.
 
#230
#230
v011s said:
I feel like there is a thread in every forum full of people who don't understand the RPI.

Home wins count for less, neutral wins count for more, and road wins count for the most.
Depending on the opponent, a home win could count less than a road loss.

It's not a huge mystery. Most teams with high RPIs have played very tough schedules and have good neutral site and road records.
Click to expand...

Count me in the group who doesn't understand and considers it a mystery. It's not just a SOS rating because they consider the results. But they don't consider individual game nuance. If UT plays it's first 5 games of the season against the top 5 teams in a tournament and loses them all - and Northern Podunk Tech plays the same 5 teams in the same tournament and also loses them all - they would have the same RPI. Right? But if UT lost all 5 games 1-0 in extra innings and Podunk Tech lost all 5 games 26-0 in 5 innings UT wouldn't get credit for that in the RPI, but it would be clear they had a better team than NP Tech. Is that correct? So it seems like that makes it too much a SOS rating, when there is already a SOS rating. If the RPI was just one of many factors considered when it comes time to seed teams then that would be OK but it seems the last few years we hear that RPI is the main factor. It worries me when a team like UCLA can take an a$$ beating in 8 of their 12 losses, giving up an average of TEN RUNS A GAME-HELLO!!! And UT only gives up more than 4 runs in a game TWICE ALL YEAR, yet UCLA is ranked 4 spots ahead of us in a rating index that we hear is the most important one considered. Maybe I overestimate the importance of the RPI and the committee has more common sense than I give them credit for and can factor in the minutiae:crazy: Please excuse me while I hyperventilate:thud:
 
#232
#232
larjoranj said:
Count me in the group who doesn't understand and considers it a mystery. It's not just a SOS rating because they consider the results. But they don't consider individual game nuance. If UT plays it's first 5 games of the season against the top 5 teams in a tournament and loses them all - and Northern Podunk Tech plays the same 5 teams in the same tournament and also loses them all - they would have the same RPI. Right? But if UT lost all 5 games 1-0 in extra innings and Podunk Tech lost all 5 games 26-0 in 5 innings UT wouldn't get credit for that in the RPI, but it would be clear they had a better team than NP Tech. Is that correct? So it seems like that makes it too much a SOS rating, when there is already a SOS rating. If the RPI was just one of many factors considered when it comes time to seed teams then that would be OK but it seems the last few years we hear that RPI is the main factor. It worries me when a team like UCLA can take an a$$ beating in 8 of their 12 losses, giving up an average of TEN RUNS A GAME-HELLO!!! And UT only gives up more than 4 runs in a game TWICE ALL YEAR, yet UCLA is ranked 4 spots ahead of us in a rating index that we hear is the most important one considered. Maybe I overestimate the importance of the RPI and the committee has more common sense than I give them credit for and can factor in the minutiae:crazy: Please excuse me while I hyperventilate:thud:
Click to expand...

You're definitely overthinking it.
RPI doesn't care what you LOOK like or HOW you win/lose.

That's what polls are for.




RPI provides a ranking based on WHO you win/lose to, the strength of record of the teams THEY have won/lost to, and WHERE you played.
 
#235
#235
I can't imagine that UT will do anything different from what the team has been doing. The only question, I should think, is whether Holcomb or Rowland plays--if florida throws the righty in the first game. There is also the question of who will start game 1 for us, but the coaches seem to have alternated Moss and Arnold for most of the year. This series is the acid test for us--have to find ways to score some runs.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top