Woodrey needs to be moved..

[Jaromir Jagr]

But you said your quote was "way before" we moved on to the topic of randomness in national champions. I showed that it was after we started that discussion. Is it that difficult to say "my bad, I forgot that I responded one more time about Jim Morris"?

Again I already said I was going to respond to all of your digressions.

That doesn't mean I hadn't moved on to educating you on the broader topic. It's actually much more interesting than debating whether Jim Morris is one of the winningest postseason coaches. He just is. Move on.

But you said your quote was "way before" we moved on to the topic of randomness in national champions. I showed that it was after we started that discussion. Is it that difficult to say "my bad, I forgot that I responded one more time about Jim Morris"?

 

[Brian Piccolo]

Of course they are.

It's one of the criteria but they're not based 'almost entirely' on it.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

There has been exactly one national seed outside the RPI's top 12 out of the last 40 national seeds.

There have been 136 national seeds.

34 of them came from outside the top 8 in the RPI.

That's 25%.

In fact 12.5% of them have been 12th or higher.

The committee can't pick the champion. The pollsters can't pick the champion. The RPI can't pick the champion. The ISR can't pick the champion.

But it's perfectly predictable.....says one bozo.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Of course they are.

It's one of the criteria but they're not based 'almost entirely' on it.

It's not one of the "criteria" (sic), it's many of the "criteria". RPI, record vs various groups within the RPI, non-conference RPI, SOS based on RPI, etc.

85% of the national seeds in the last five years have been in the top 9 of the regular season RPI. But you think it's just a small piece of the puzzle.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

There has been exactly one national seed outside the RPI's top 12 out of the last 40 national seeds.

There have been 136 national seeds.

34 of them came from outside the top 8 in the RPI.

That's 25%.

In fact 12.5% of them have been 12th or higher.

The committee can't pick the champion. The pollsters can't pick the champion. The RPI can't pick the champion. The ISR can't pick the champion.

But it's perfectly predictable.....says one bozo.

"But, 1999"

There you go again relying on data from 17 years ago when the process has clearly changed.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

Oh how convenient. He said it on a message board but you can't find it. Even though the description on the actual site says something different.

You don't have to believe me but it's true. Anybody who read the Rivals board circa 2006-07 can vouch for it. In fact me and another Canes fan are one of the reasons he stopped doing his weekly column. He was giving us too much ammunition to crush him with on the message board.

But I've been at this a lot longer than you have and know a lot more about it than you do. So I can understand if you're at a deficit.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

But it's perfectly predictable.....says one bozo.

Fraud. Liar. Intellectually dishonest.

Show me the post where I said it is all "perfectly predictable" and I'm gone forever.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Oh how convenient. He said it on a message board but you can't find it. Even though the description on the actual site says something different.

You don't have to believe me but it's true. Anybody who read the Rivals board circa 2006-07 can vouch for it. In fact me and another Canes fan are one of the reasons he stopped doing his weekly column. He was giving us too much ammunition to crush him with on the message board.

But I've been at this a lot longer than you have and know a lot more about it than you do. So I can understand if you're at a deficit.

2006-2007? Good grief.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

"But, 1999"

There you go again relying on data from 17 years ago when the process has clearly changed.

This is what defeat looks like.

1999 was when the field expanded to 64 teams.

The process has not changed. The committee members turnover every few years but the process is the same.

You're just lost.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

"But, 1999"

There you go again relying on data from 17 years ago when the process has clearly changed.

This is what defeat looks like.

1999 was when the field expanded to 64 teams.

The process has not changed. The committee members turnover every few years but the process is the same.

You're just lost.

Break down the top 8 RPI's in the last five years and compare those to the numbers from the first five years.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

85% of the national seeds in the last five years have been in the top 9 of the regular season RPI. But you think it's just a small piece of the puzzle.

The two main criteria are RPI and Conference standing.

RPI alone won't get you a national seed. So to say that it's 'almost entirely' is just factually incorrect.

I didn't say it was a small piece of the puzzle.

Another lie.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

Fraud. Liar. Intellectually dishonest.

Show me the post where I said it is all "perfectly predictable" and I'm gone forever.

Randomness is the absence of a pattern or predictability.

You claim that it's not random.

So you're saying that it's perfectly predictable.

What else are we supposed to take from that?

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

In 1999 there were three national seeds outside the top 8. One of those was #17 .

National seeds outside the top 8:
2015: 2
2014: 1
2013: 1
2012: 1
2011: 2

National seeds at #15 or worse:
2015: 0
2014: 0
2013: 0
2012: 0
2011: 0

Right, no difference whatsoever.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

2006-2007? Good grief.

So now years have something to do with the purpose of the ISR?

You are so lost it's frightening.

Just admit that you've been crushed and that you don't know anything about any of this.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

Break down the top 8 RPI's in the last five years and compare those to the numbers from the first five years.

Just last year the # 2 RPI team didn't get a national seed.

Get a clue.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

In 2000, a national seed had an RPI of #15 . Number of #15 teams in the past five years to get a national seed? Zero.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Break down the top 8 RPI's in the last five years and compare those to the numbers from the first five years.

Just last year the # 2 RPI team didn't get a national seed.

Get a clue.

If you don't see why Dallas Baptist is an outlier, then you probably think Virginia wasn't any good last year.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

In 1999 there were three national seeds outside the top 8. One of those was #17 .

There were also three in 2008. It proves nothing.

But that's outside your arbitrary 5 year window.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

In 1999 there were three national seeds outside the top 8. One of those was #17 .

There were also three in 2008. It proves nothing.

But that's outside your arbitrary 5 year window.

Right, because recent history means less than eight years ago or 17 years ago. It's all the same.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

Right, no difference whatsoever.

There have been two occasions where all 8 of the national seeds were in the RPI top 8.

2003 and 2006.

Neither of them within your arbitrary 5 year window. The first being in your arbitrary 'first 5 years' window.

It proves nothing.

The process is the same. The only thing that changes are the committee members.