A yardstick of sorts?

[ea_1]

Sat 10-26 at Fordham, RU won 73 57 (exhibition)
Tue 11-05 at Fordham, ND won 60 55 (first game of season)

Can we reasonably use this as any kind of comparison?

 

[manfrer]

I wouldn’t. Game timings were different, e.g. during our exhibition, coaches agreed to only take a 5 minute halftime intermission. Also, I believe there were many more timeouts allowed than would have been allowed in a regular game.

 

[Knight Time Fan_rivals]

I agree with manfrer about a comparison between Rutgers and Notre Dame.

As to saying something about Notre Dame - they are not predicted to be as untouchable as they often have been; to be simple about it, they are rebuilding. I don't think in past years that would have been so close.

 

[ea_1]

Okay, let´s try this one, Coppin State:
11/9 at Rutgers L 33 - 107
11/21 at 25 West Virginia L 47 - 82

 

[fbc1866]

Blow outs should not be used for comparisons. Too many unknown factors, how did the coach use their bench, did th9ey stop pressing, did the other team stop playing because it was a blowout, there are too many variables to compare scores.

 

[Knight Time Fan_rivals]

Enough already. In general, games are not comparable. They say nothing about how teams "match up". Which is such a big factor. Also, how hot was the team that day?

Now, you can get a feel for how good or bad other teams are by how they did against teams you are familiar with. And whether they won or lost against a common opponent can be somewhat enlightening. But it really doesn't go all that far.

 

[Rutgers36]

I believe Coach Eatman deserves some credit in terms of when he filled in for coach Stringer he encouraged an aggressive, all out take no prisoners approach and the team went on a nice run late in the year. I believe that same aggressive, confident style is showing up here early in the season and this team is looking to crush opponents. I think there is a positive roll over from late last year. The girls look like they are having fun and are playing with great enthusiasm and great skill. They are fun to watch!

 

[scarlettb]

Enough already. In general, games are not comparable. They say nothing about how teams "match up". Which is such a big factor. Also, how hot was the team that day?

Now, you can get a feel for how good or bad other teams are by how they did against teams you are familiar with

I wouldn’t. Game timings were different, e.g. during our exhibition, coaches agreed to only take a 5 minute halftime intermission. Also, I believe there were many more timeouts allowed than would have been allowed in a regular game.

Yes there are always unknown variables when comparing one team's performance against another's against a common opponent, but I think RU compares favorably to ND based on their performances against Fordham (and subsequent performances against other teams) and also Coppin State against WV versus our performance against them. RU is not currently a top 25 team, but IMO, they probably should be. Voters need to look at performance against the same opponents as a basis for ranking them.

 

[ea_1]

Enough already...

Pardon? I do not want to misinterpret. Surely you are not ordering someone not to post on a topic that invited discussion and did not insult or demean anyone.

 

[ea_1]

Voters need to look at performance against the same opponents as a basis for ranking them.

Yes, indeed. Record against common opponents is a part of some ranking systems.

 

[Knight Time Fan_rivals]

Pardon? I do not want to misinterpret. Surely you are not ordering someone not to post on a topic that invited discussion and did not insult or demean anyone.

Post away. I like the discussions. I was just reflecting on this: I don't agree that scores against a common opponent are particularly significant . Wins and losses, yes to a degree. Maybe win big versus squeak by. I believe there are systems that look at records against common opponents and use the score differentials to help determine team strength. Good systems - but they work because they average multiple games. They often can correctly predict a game result, and the more data the more accurate they are. But not always. Upsets happen.

As a long ago RU fan said - "That's why they play the games".

None of this has anything to do with whether RU should be ranked. That's a yes, but they won't be until they garner some significant wins. That's just the way of it.

RU is better than Notre Dame at this time, they are pretty bad. Whether they are better than Notre Dame when the injured players return and as the season goes on and both teams mature - I don't know.

 

[BeKnighted_rivals]

Systems like Massey do take scores into account when rating teams (and also look at home/away differentials to help normalize those scores), but wins and losses are the most important factor, as they should be.

 

[FELONIOUSMONK]

Attention all Boomers..A yardstick for lunatics is one point of view is a lyric from what 60's song?

 

[hoquat63]

Attention all Boomers..A yardstick for lunatics is one point of view is a lyric from what 60's song?

Who cares what games we choose, little to win nothing to lose


Prove FM and I are both old farmers

 

[hoquat63]

Yes there are always unknown variables when comparing one team's performance against another's against a common opponent, but I think RU compares favorably to ND based on their performances against Fordham (and subsequent performances against other teams) and also Coppin State against WV versus our performance against them. RU is not currently a top 25 team, but IMO, they probably should be. Voters need to look at performance against the same opponents as a basis for ranking them.

ND wins close over #21 MI

 

[ea_1]

Attention all Boomers..A yardstick for lunatics is one point of view is a lyric from what 60's song?

I looked it up. My guess (CCR) was wrong.

 

[hoquat63]

Attention all Boomers..A yardstick for lunatics is one point of view is a lyric from what 60's song?

Strawberry Alarm Clock, “Incense and Perppetmint”