Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="jncuse, post: 5263169, member: 1969"]
The NCAA announced this summer that they would also be tracking two Barttorvik stats, along with KP.   The one Barttorvik ranking [B]"Wins above Bubble"[/B] was quality of record and either didn't include margin or heavily diminshed it.     It was actually quite intriguing as a ranking tool.

[B]A margin based system like KP and NET is probably the best way to fairly rank teams #100-#350, or teams that are not in top conferences (like CUSA for example). [/B]   [B]But the question has to be asked -- do we need a system that best ranks the bottom 250 of the country when none of them are going to make the tourney as at larges, and wins against those teams are not Q1 or Q2, and are largely deemed meaningless?  Or do we want a system that better measures the top 100 schools and the quality of their record, and does a crappy job with those in the bottom ha;?[/B]

The Barttorvik stat that was proposed "Wins Above Bubble", probably does a bad job ranking the worst 200 teams or so in the country.    But it probably does a better job ranking the top 100, especially since its a W/L metric.    Perhaps that is the way to go.

None of it would really help Syracuse so far either way, but in larger picture for all teams.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?