PDA

View Full Version : The New Big East vs. Old Big East vs. Old Atlantic 10



Xpectations
03-09-2013, 08:23 AM
When the news first broke about XU joining what will now be the new Big East, I knew that it would be a big upgrade in terms of RPI and NCAA Tournament credentials. But I wanted to find out just how much of a boost it would be.

I created a spreadsheet with the previous 10 years (‘02-‘03 through ’11-’12 seasons) of RPI values for the old Big East, the old Atlantic 10 (before Butler and VCU), and the new Big East based on a variety of potential teams being added. Below are the results

5-Year Average RPI:
Old A-10: 116
Old Big East: 73
New Big East (10 teams with XU, Butler, Creighton): 77
New Big East (12 teams, adding Dayton, St. Louis): 77

10-Year Average RPI:
Old A-10: 125
Old Big East: 73
New Big East (10 teams with XU, Butler, Creighton): 76
New Big East (12 teams, adding Dayton, St. Louis): 79

Some interesting conclusions and findings along the way:

Despite many UC fans (and coach) saying the New Big East is not nearly the same as the Old Big East, their RPIs are virtually identical.
The New Big East is obviously a big upgrade for XU, with our new conference opponents being in the neighborhood of 40 to 45 spots higher in RPI than our old conference opponents.
Of the New Big East teams (in either of the above configurations), XU had the 2nd best 5-year RPI (Georgetown 20 vs. XU 22). The next best team was Marquette at 35.
Of the New Big East teams (in either of the above configurations), XU had the 2nd best 10-year RPI (Villanova 38 vs. XU 41). Georgetown and Marquette both had 10-year averages of 43.
Over the previous 5 seasons, XU was the only team that never had an RPI of 50 or worse (worst season was ’11-’12 at 41).
Over the previous 10 seasons, XU was the only team that had 2 or fewer seasons with an RPI of 50 or worse. Marquette and Villanova each had 3 seasons with RPIs worse than 50, and Georgetown had 4. Obviously XU will be below that mark this season though.


I have data sets to create other potential combinations as well (e.g., Richmond, VCU, even Gonzaga) if someone has a different combination they’d like to compare.

RealDeal
03-09-2013, 08:48 AM
You should send this to mike decoursey, apparently he was bad mouthing the new league as well.

waggy
03-09-2013, 09:09 AM
I'd love to see similiar comparisons using different computer metrics. With Bobinskis comments regarding his use of other metrics, and ESPN's BPI, etc., the writing is on the wall..

It's well documented how the RPI can be gamed (and not particularly accurate), but I hope it always a part of whatever rating tools are used in the future. It is one of, if not the only metric that doesn't use points or points spread. The flip side to these ratings systems being score run ups.

GoMuskies
03-09-2013, 09:19 AM
My guess is if you ran the numbers without LaSalle and Fordham, the A-10 would have been pretty close to the Big East. If only the A-10 would have found a way to kick those guys out (or never invite them in the first place)...

Oh, well. The delta between the old A-10 and the new Big East is what I'm focused on, and your numbers show just how big of a step up the new league will be. I'm thrilled that it's finally happening for us.

XUglow
03-09-2013, 10:48 AM
My guess is if you ran the numbers without LaSalle and Fordham, the A-10 would have been pretty close to the Big East. If only the A-10 would have found a way to kick those guys out (or never invite them in the first place)...

Oh, well. The delta between the old A-10 and the new Big East is what I'm focused on, and your numbers show just how big of a step up the new league will be. I'm thrilled that it's finally happening for us.

The only thing that ever bothered me about the A-10 was the bottom feeders. Our rep would have been a lot better over the years without the bottom 4 teams. Small venues, embarrassing OOC losses, etc. Those guys kept the mid-major tag alive for us.

THRILLHOUSE
03-09-2013, 10:52 AM
You should send this to mike decoursey, apparently he was bad mouthing the new league as well.

not shocking since Mike is a shill for UC and Cronin

Xpectations
03-09-2013, 11:00 AM
Here's another interesting stat. From purely a SOS standpoint, XU+Butler+Creighton helps the Catholic 7 a GREAT deal more than the other way around.

I can't say it surprises me, but I think a lot of people would be surprised by the degree of boost provided by the soon-to-be-added programs.

5-Year Average RPI:
Old A-10: 116
Old Big East: 73
New Big East (10 teams with XU, Butler, Creighton): 77

Catholic 7: 90
XU+Butler+Creighton: 44

Xpectations
03-09-2013, 11:10 AM
After reading Go's and Glow's, it made me wonder what the effect will be from the new bottom feeders (Depaul, Providence, St. John's), as well as the contribution of the Catholic 7's Big Three (Georgetown, Marquette Villanova).

Here are some of those results added:
5-Year Average RPI:
Old A-10: 116
Old Big East: 73
New Big East (10 teams with XU, Butler, Creighton): 77

Catholic 7: 90
Additions(XU+Butler+Creighton): 44
Big Three(GTown+Marq+Nova): 34
Bottom 3 (Depaul+Prov+St. John's): 112

Seton Hall--the only school not represented above--is at 89.