I don't really follow the advanced metrics all that much (especially this year). Will moving away from RPI to the Ken Poms of the world be helpful to non-power at large hopefuls or will it just consolidate more power in the power conferences?

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...new-metric

(01-14-2017 12:48 PM)STexMiner Wrote:  I don't really follow the advanced metrics all that much (especially this year). Will moving away from RPI to the Ken Poms of the world be helpful to non-power at large hopefuls or will it just consolidate more power in the power conferences?

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...new-metric

There is nothing they will do that will help the non-power hopefuls. And everything I read suggesting that they are considering the so called G5 (not that this particular article does) is just propaganda. If they ever intend on helping the G5, the first thing they would do is stop using the G5 label. And if they really want to have a playoff, do the same damn thing that's done in every other sport on earth - conference champs get a seat even if they get blown out by a better team first round. End of story. Everything else is just bull****.

(01-14-2017 01:05 PM)Up2stuff Wrote:  

(01-14-2017 12:48 PM)STexMiner Wrote:  I don't really follow the advanced metrics all that much (especially this year). Will moving away from RPI to the Ken Poms of the world be helpful to non-power at large hopefuls or will it just consolidate more power in the power conferences?

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...new-metric

There is nothing they will do that will help the non-power hopefuls. And everything I read suggesting that they are considering the so called G5 (not that this particular article does) is just propaganda. If they ever intend on helping the G5, the first thing they would do is stop using the G5 label. And if they really want to have a playoff, do the same damn thing that's done in every other sport on earth - conference champs get a seat even if they get blown out by a better team first round. End of story. Everything else is just bull****.

Valid points, but it's talking basketball. I should have gone with major-non major. My bad.

(01-14-2017 12:48 PM)STexMiner Wrote:  I don't really follow the advanced metrics all that much (especially this year). Will moving away from RPI to the Ken Poms of the world be helpful to non-power at large hopefuls or will it just consolidate more power in the power conferences?

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...new-metric

I don't see how this can be any more biased toward the "names" in CBB than the RPI already is and has been for decades.

(01-14-2017 01:16 PM)STexMiner Wrote:  

(01-14-2017 01:05 PM)Up2stuff Wrote:  

(01-14-2017 12:48 PM)STexMiner Wrote:  I don't really follow the advanced metrics all that much (especially this year). Will moving away from RPI to the Ken Poms of the world be helpful to non-power at large hopefuls or will it just consolidate more power in the power conferences?

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...new-metric

There is nothing they will do that will help the non-power hopefuls. And everything I read suggesting that they are considering the so called G5 (not that this particular article does) is just propaganda. If they ever intend on helping the G5, the first thing they would do is stop using the G5 label. And if they really want to have a playoff, do the same damn thing that's done in every other sport on earth - conference champs get a seat even if they get blown out by a better team first round. End of story. Everything else is just bull****.

Valid points, but it's talking basketball. I should have gone with major-non major. My bad.

No - my bad. I was just scanning the board for interesting topics before I headed out the door. Didn't have time to read the article and my comment was completely based on the topic line and my brain is stuck on football. Hard for a Southern Miss fan to think basketball. Hopefully that'll come back soon. Honestly though, it's too bad football playoff isn't more like the basketball - at least the conference tournament champ gets a shot.

(01-14-2017 01:16 PM)STexMiner Wrote:  

(01-14-2017 01:05 PM)Up2stuff Wrote:  

(01-14-2017 12:48 PM)STexMiner Wrote:  I don't really follow the advanced metrics all that much (especially thisbasketball/story/_/id/18468008/ncaa-tournament-officials-meet-analytics-experts-consider-creating-new-metric

year). Will moving away from RPI to the Ken Poms of the world be helpful to non-power at large hopefuls or will it just consolidate more power in the power conferences?

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-

There is nothing they will do that will help the non-power hopefuls. And everything I read suggesting that they are considering the so called G5 (not that this particular article does) is just propaganda. If they ever intend on helping the G5, the first thing they would do is stop using the G5 label. And if they really want to have a playoff, do the same damn thing that's done in every other sport on earth - conference champs get a seat even if they get blown out by a better team first round. End of story. Everything else is just bull****.

Valid points, but it's talking basketball. I should have gone with major-non major. My bad.

Every team in Division I is major, period. Don't buy into the EP5N high, mid, low BS.

(01-14-2017 01:05 PM)Up2stuff Wrote:  

(01-14-2017 12:48 PM)STexMiner Wrote:  I don't really follow the advanced metrics all that much (especially this year). Will moving away from RPI to the Ken Poms of the world be helpful to non-power at large hopefuls or will it just consolidate more power in the power conferences?

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...new-metric

There is nothing they will do that will help the non-power hopefuls. And everything I read suggesting that they are considering the so called G5 (not that this particular article does) is just propaganda. If they ever intend on helping the G5, the first thing they would do is stop using the G5 label. And if they really want to have a playoff, do the same damn thing that's done in every other sport on earth - conference champs get a seat even if they get blown out by a better team first round. End of story. Everything else is just bull****.

(01-14-2017 01:16 PM)STexMiner Wrote:  

(01-14-2017 01:05 PM)Up2stuff Wrote:  

(01-14-2017 12:48 PM)STexMiner Wrote:  I don't really follow the advanced metrics all that much (especially this year). Will moving away from RPI to the Ken Poms of the world be helpful to non-power at large hopefuls or will it just consolidate more power in the power conferences?

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...new-metric

There is nothing they will do that will help the non-power hopefuls. And everything I read suggesting that they are considering the so called G5 (not that this particular article does) is just propaganda. If they ever intend on helping the G5, the first thing they would do is stop using the G5 label. And if they really want to have a playoff, do the same damn thing that's done in every other sport on earth - conference champs get a seat even if they get blown out by a better team first round. End of story. Everything else is just bull****.

Valid points, but it's talking basketball. I should have gone with major-non major. My bad.

Ok I didnt realize hoops either. Didn't read article. One of the issues right off the bat and even more damning for us was the use of the "BCS" / "non BCS" label floating into college basketball. Never mind the Non BCS / G5 being hurt but conferences like Missouri Valley, Big East, etc etc etc that were never considered low level were thrown into that group. Thankfully most college basketball experts and your brighter fans know that college hoops has over 320 teams and high major, major, Mid major, low major were common terms used long before Roy Kramer & Disney turned Mid major into a demeaning segregation type term.

I think there will always be a divide among "power" confs getting more teams in and the only thing that will cure that is for other confs to keep winning games.

You can bet whatever they do it will be detrimental to non power teams getting in. I bet if they could find away to get rid of the auto bids for us their would do it.

Normally, I'd agree that this could and should help the non-power conferences. Over the long run, it should.
But I also find it "convenient" that this year with MTSU's RPI well above their KenPom ratings that this gets rolled out.
Middle, you are building a solid At-Large resume. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. But I have to say this makes you less of a lock than I thought you were yesterday.

But RPI is crap so I'm still glad they're de-emphasizing it.

Only one G5 received an at large last year. The system is stacked against mids. No room for error.

It is stacked and with the way they schedule they are effectively locking us all out. I have even heard some scuttlebutt about if they expand to have most of our at large bids nothing but glorified play in games. The power programs wont give up until they ruin both basketball and football. Baseball will be next.