PDA

View Full Version : Stupid pollsters!


YCN
01-22-2003, 11:57 AM
I am really starting to have some issues with the way that the polls rank women's basketball teams. I think there are a lot of teams that are badly misplaced in the polls, and I believe much of it has to do with preconceived biases about the expected performances of different teams.

As a case in point, take a look at Colorado and Vanderbilt. I think a solid argument could be made that neither of these teams really deserves to be ranked in the top 25 based upon their performance to date, but for Vanderbilt to be ranked where they are relative to Colorado has to be solely on the basis of recent reputation for winning in basketball. I can't find any other logical explanation.

When you look at these teams, and whom they've played, you immediately realize that neither team has beaten one single opponent that would be considered to be a likely NCAA team, except perhaps as conference tournament champion of a weaker conference. Both teams have challenging remaining schedules, but based upon their performances thus far, it would be easy to project a regular season record of around 21-6 for Colorado, and around 16-11 for Vandy.

I would love to hear the rationalizations made by pollsters for their reasons why they decided to rank Vandy where they did, and why CU isn't ranked at all.

Assuming that they actually evaluate teams at all, except for looking at the names of the teams and their won-loss records.

If you think the comparison of Colorado and Vandy is stupid, you wouldn't even want to see what a comparison of Oklahoma and Vandy looks like.


<PRE style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-VARIANT: normal"> Conf All Rank
Team W-L W-L RPI SOS AP USA
---------- ----- ----- --- --- -- ---
Colorado 3-1 13-2 21 75
Vanderbilt 1-2 11-5 43 46 17 16


Colorado

Rank Opponent Result
105 Rice W 85-66
248 Detroit W 86-43
277 Hartford W 69-40
13 Villanova L 54-59
75 @ Wyoming W 73-62
80 vs Evansville W 74-42
169 @ California W 66-47
72 Colorado St W 65-51
62 Southern Cal W 93-86
117 @ Syracuse W 78-75
125 vs Buffalo W 76-47
103 Iowa State W 64-63
5 @ Kansas St L 36-61
107 Nebraska W 74-54
151 @ Kansas W 71-50
139 @ Oklahoma St
4 @ Texas Tech
85 Baylor
129 @ Missouri
151 Kansas
134 @ Texas A&M
11 Oklahoma
33 @ Texas
129 Missouri
103 @ Iowa State
5 Kansas St
107 @ Nebraska


Vanderbilt

Rank Opponent Result
204 @ Boston U W 68-51
117 @ Syracuse W 73-65
260 Youngstown St W 91-60
77 Harvard W 84-44
14 vs Purdue L 66-73
193 Wis-Milwaukee W 98-51
94 Austin Peay W 84-50
267 @ Tenn-Martin W 101-77
57 @ TCU L 53-70
119 Charlotte W 66-43
49 @ Louisville L 82-92
115 Holy Cross W 86-54
90 @ Duquesne W 78-56
10 @ Mississippi St L 75-78
22 South Carolina L 57-66
108 Kentucky W 84-50
8 Arkansas
9 @ LSU
32 @ Auburn
2 Tennessee
70 Alabama
108 @ Kentucky
83 @ Mississippi
24 Georgia
79 @ Florida
2 @ Tennessee
9 LSU </PRE>

Bball Girl
01-22-2003, 12:27 PM
Perhaps SOS gets more credit than we realize. Except for the games Vandy has lost (to TCU?)...the rest of their schedule is not that impressive.

CU's had some quality wins and I include Cal,USC, Rice, and ISU and others.

Certainly the SEC's conference RPI is #1 this year...I think the Big 12 is 4th or 5th. That's probably hurting CU too. Even though CU's overall RPI is higher than Vandy's. Vandy also has Chantelle Anderson and I think they're getting some sympathy votes with losing Jim Foster and still hanging in there.

Ceale Barry is probably using this as bulletin board material and sometimes it helps to be off the radar screen a bit...gives your team some motivation and less pressure.

CU is one of those teams that no one should take for granted..they've got the talent and the skill and the coaching to beat anyone, it's just getting it all going at the same time.
The Tech coaching staff sees this week as our toughest conference week if not the toughest and believe me no one has forgotten CU's overtime win at the USA last year.