Wednesday, July 23, 2008

The Prestige created another flawed list that rated basketball programs and their relative prestige. The basis was a very flawed formula that you can see here which awarded the best record in a team's conference and conference tournament championships with equal value regardless of the strength of the team's conference. That results in Murray State getting over half of its points based off of winning the Ohio Valley conference 22 times and Gonzaga earning over 54% of its points based on 21 conference titles in the West Coast Conference. Equating winning the Ohio Valley or West Coast with making it to the Sweet 16 is ridiculous.

Patrick Stevens in the Washington Times indicated that three players: LB Eteyen Edet, DT Cody Blue and DT Zach Kerr will have to go to prep school before making their way College Park. He also cleared up the Drew Gloster mystery reporting that he is academically ineligible for this season and may or may not be on the roster next year. I'm guessing that depends on how he handles his academic commitments this year.


smashignitionst said...

I didn't have a problem with their rating system, so much - I suppose there is a small problem there that could be fixed with points for being in a conference with a TV contract or something (hey, it's measuring prestige - not performance on the court... they count Lottery Picks into the score, for example.

What I do have a huge problem with, however, is the conference rankings. ESPN took the average ranking of all the teams in the conference, which gave them the result:

1. Big East
2. Big 10
3. ACC

When you look at the rankings you see that ESPN included Virginia Tech and Miami, coming in a #210 and #145!

The Virginia Tech and Miami earned their terrible prestige rankings in the Big East and other conferences, and all of a sudden those terrible years up to 2004 count towards the ACC's prestige? I'm sorry, but that is so statistically reckless... the ACC did not *have* terrible VT and UM teams in the 1990s. Why are they counting them towards the score?

It's just annoying because it is perfectly clear that the ACC would be #1 without those false years factored in. ESPN is just too lazy to do the hard work to get it right this time, I guess.

Esquire said...

Very good point about Miami and Virginia Tech and the time they spent in the Big East, even if it wasn't for all that long. Miami had a few decent squads but the Hokies were mostly terrible.

My feeling is that if you are measuring prestige then the NCAA tournament should be the benchmark. Many casual fans don't even watch until the conference tournaments start or the NCAA bids are awarded. Being the best team in the Ohio Valley conference is like having the most successful paper company in Scranton. Few people outside that limited area care much about the distinction and your ability to compete at a national level is limited.