Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="orangenirvana, post: 2097769, member: 156"] Palm sure knows what team to use in his headline for those clicks! What's wrong with Palm's projection here is that he's using 23 years of history. The committee today isn't the same as its been for the last 23 years. But (as far as I know) it is relatively the same as it has been the last two years. And the last two years the RPI has been pretty much ignored and big wins (record vs. Top 50/25) are valued over anything else. Teams with poor RPI, bloated number of losses and multiple Top 50 wins have gotten in over teams with great RPI and only 1 or 2 Top 50 wins. I still don't understand what he sees in Cal to consider them "in for now." 1-7 vs. the Top 50 (0-6 vs. the Top 25). And unlike a Wake Forest or Xavier they don't have good computer rankings - average of 47. I don't get it. [/QUOTE]