Please do explain. The RPI component for a win .25 over a win opponent is worth half the value .5 of playing and undefeated one (even if the undefeated one got they way by playing the weak sisters of the poor at home while the winless team got that way by playing ). So basically the value of who you schedule is twice as important as how you actually do. Yes there is a strength of schedule component but that has by far the least variability of any of the components (ie - it doesn't make that much of a difference).
If a team wins, they get more points toward their RPI total than if they lose, no matter who the opponent is. In real life, there are few opponents who have perfect records either way.
Of course they do. But that doesn't support your statement that "RPI It is likely only to be a boost if they win" as the records of who you play matters twice as much as the result.
Assuming a 20-game scheule, a win vs aloss is worthaobur 1.25% of a perfectr RPI rating. To get the same effect from the won-loss record of an opponent, it would haved to be about .250 better than a diffee Assuming a 20-game schedule, a win vs a loss is worth about 1.25% toward a perfect RPI calculation. To get the same benefit in selecting between 2 opponents, the chosen one would have to have a WLT record .250 better than the other, such as .650 instead of .400. In most cases when scheduling non-conference opponents, this has to be done 2 or 3 years in advance, which sometimes doesn't turn out as expected - ask the teams that scheduled UCLA or UC Irvine this year.
Very good. Sure there is some risk, but there is risk in actually playing a game as well - especially on the road. But using your own math to have a win percentage of equal to a .250 difference in loss percentage you'd have to win 75% of the games you play. Not very easy to do unless you schedule a patsy at home each year. But to test your theory that you can't predict winning percentage I took a look at the school you suggested - UCLA and a school that would be consistently at best of the bottom conference. UCLA record from 2009 - 2014 2014 14-5-5 2013 12-3-5 2012 13-3-3 2011 18-4-2 2010 16-5-1 2009 12-4-4 Its a pretty good bet. But that is not the way to go, because if you play them there is a pretty good chance you will lose. Instead what you do is you pick a "Power house" in a weak division. I started with the Northeast but had a problem since I noticed Monmouth switched conferences. So instead of starting at 2015 and going back, I went to 2009 and followed Monmouth when they switched conferences. 2014 11-4-6 2013 8-6-6 2012 11-6-6 2011 14-6-2 2010 12-2-4 2009 18-2-2 Pretty darned consistently good winning percentage and as a bonus, if you are a good team and playing them at home like ACC teams do against their non-conference foes, then you get the .250 for the win, plus double their win percentage. For 6 years Coastal Carolina was between .694 - .840. Looks like this year they will do OK as well. Out West there are no local Monmouth's or Coastal Carolina's that you can schedule get on your schedule. Instead are a lot of difficult teams to play mediocre to bad records like UC Davis.
"But using your own math to have a win percentage of equal to a .250 difference in loss percentage you'd have to win 75% of the games you play." ??????
Great stat for @TopDrawerSoccer & @CSoccerNews: The @BIGEAST tracks 9 offensive stat categories. Fabian Herbers is 1st or T-1st in ALL nine.— Rob Anderson (@_robanderson) September 28, 2015
Gee, that's too bad, I was on pins and needles waiting for your explanation of "using your own math..."
Coach Bolowich talks RPI and playing UNO in articles in today's Omaha World-Herald. The two articles are combined in the online version. Summary on RPI: Knows a slip will hurt Jays because of RPI. Potentially strong non-conference teams (e.g., UC Irvine, Michigan St, Michigan, Tulsa) have had down years, and the conference RPI is down. Summary on playing UNO: Would like for it to happen and will meet with Coach Mims later this week to discuss. A couple of his quotes: "[UNO] would be a great opponent to have on our schedule, and even if you don't get he result you hope for, it's not going to kill you." "And it's good soccer for Omaha. A game like that, if it's well-marketed, would draw a large crowd whether it takes place at our stadium or their stadium."
Creighton looking flat tonight as they trail Drake at the half. Drake hit a beautiful shot after the defensive miscommunication on a counter. Creighton's defense has not been tested much this year, and when they have they look shaky at times. Sparrow is a great keeper, but the defenders don't always listen to him. Herbers has been a nonfactor tonight and Pitter continues to have trouble finishing. Only one goal for the offense in the last 4 halves; forwards need to work together more. Drake is going to continue packing it in, as does almost everyone. I can't help but wonder how Creighton's defense will hold up when they encounter a team that will play them straight up.
It's crazy to watch how much Drake is just willing to pack it in. The next 45 mins is going to feel like hours to them.
Thanks for the reassurance! Michigan played well against Creighton in the season opener, I thought. While they couldn't sustain possession in Creighton's third, they possessed in midfield at times and had success on counters. The only other team to sustain possession against Creighton was Michigan State for a third of the game. Drake played 10-11 men behind the ball in the second half, which is NOT the way to beat Creighton, though it almost worked due to skillful defending and brilliant goalkeeping. Creighton peppered Drake to the tune of 21-2 in second half shots and 8 second half corners, and after numerous frustrations, just when things started to become dire the Jays broke through with 11' to play and scored the winner with 5+' to go. Herbers and Pitter looked more like themselves and the team played with energy and passion, completely shaking their first half funk. What Creighton has offensively that it did not last year are several options beyond the German duo, with Myles Englis, Ricky Lopez-Espin, Fernando Castellanos, Noah Franke, Lucas Stauffer, and Ricardo Perez all capable of doing damage. Literally 95% of the second half was played in Drake's third and Creighton's keeper set up camp just shy of the center line. If you're going to beat Creighton you need to keep it open until you take a 2-goal lead and even then you should try to possess some, because when Creighton is desperate and keeps the ball they are very dangerous. Creighton continues to look weak on corners and I can't recall a single goal all year off a corner. Games like this would become so much easier with the ability to head in goals but Creighton generally plays corners short. Considering they Bluejays generate a high volume of corners, it's a shame they aren't strong in the air. As Coach Bolowich alluded to in a previous post, the schedule strength hasn't panned out as he planned. IMO, Creighton isn't being tested as it should this year. Certainly Elmar's not afraid of anyone, having played in non-conference in recent seasons: Maryland, Akron, Indiana, Stanford, Cal, etc. In regard to playing Nebraska-Omaha, there is respect with two Maverick coaches coming out of Creighton. If the Mavs can sustain an RPI around 100 or better, I think we'll see that game soon. The last time the teams played, in exhibition two years ago, the Mavs earned 5 yellow cards and turned things into UFC and that's when they disappeared from the schedule. Elmar greatly appreciates beautiful soccer and wants to play teams that try to play it. Omaha probably has enought skill now to do so.
Drake's victory over Kentucky sets up a rematch between the Dawgs from Des Moines and Creighton. In the first meeting, Creighton controlled the flow in the first half but looked unenergetic as they returned to non-conference play three days after a hard-fought win over Depaul. Not much occured until a failed clearance due to defender/keeper miscommunication led to a beautiful goal by Drake's Mueng Sunday with just :21 left in the 1st half. As the second half opened, Drake promptly went into a shell and put all 11 men behind the ball. The Drake back line was well organized and keeper Darrin MacLeod made some excellent saves, but Creighton stayed calm and eventually broke through at 78'. Drake fell apart and the Bluejays tallied the gamewinner at 84'. Shots ended up 28-5 for the Bluejays. I think the way the first game played out would necessitate a strategy change for the Bulldogs if they manage to get a lead. The way to beat Creighton, as Georgetown twice demonstrated, is to put pressure on its inconsistent defense; countering or recoiling into a shell does not work. Creighton will most likely be without Vincent Keller again in the back (high ankle sprain). I picked Drake over Kentucky because they are fearless and play together, though they don't have the talent in the midfield or up top that Creighton has. Creighton is motivated to potentially play North Carolina; Elmar has said he'd look forward to it because the Tarheels play wide open soccer. He also said he knows where to train and get a good meal in Chapel Hill. Hopefully the Jays don't get caught looking ahead, sweep the Drake series, and set up Elmar's return to North Carolina.
Drake is missing 3-4 starters in this game due to injury, including Sunday. The Drake players are excited about the rematch though. Will be curious to see how the cold weather affects the game.
Great game by Creighton. My first time to Morrison Stadium, beautiful setup and easy access to the interstate. Good luck in the next round!
Thanks. Morrison is a fun environment and a quality playing surface. Congratulations to Drake on the MVC title and knocking off Kentucky. The future is bright under your new coach. I look forward to the series continuing in future seasons.
Really impressed with Creighton from the times Drake has played them. Herbers is the real deal. Hopefully the Fire draft him up. Good luck getting it done!