Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="CardiacCuse, post: 2959889, member: 6979"]
Yeah the current system values the first half of the season too highly - in NCAA - with constant roster churn and new players every season - the second half of the season should be given more weight.  Teams don't  often become "themselves" until March and the most successful teams often improve/gel considerably in FEB/MARCH/APR...its the norm for teams to evolve considerably over 4 or 5 months...

As is, the first half of the season seems to lock in the range of what can happen with the rankings too narrowly, imo.  I prefer a recency bias to game weight - but I can see why some don't...by highly valuing the non-conference it makes all of the games more important...and gives teams a chance to rise above being in a weaker conf. (in theory anyway)

My problem with that is that it seems like a conference that does well early can just ride the coattails of that all year - like the big10 - i refuse to believe they are the best conference - not even close imo...it might be more fair to value the non-conference but it isn't as predictive.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?