Comments about ‘Power rankings: Pac-12, WCC, MWC men's basketball, Version 2’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Dec. 4 2013 10:50 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
JoCo Ute
Grants Pass, OR

Come on Nate. Can't the D-News Sports Department pick a POV and stick to it. Rock criticizes Utah football (who had the toughest schedule in the county) for losing, and praises USU (who had an SOS of about 85) for winning.

Then you guys turn around and knock Utah basketball for having a very weak basketball schedule and winning. How can you have both ways?

Funny/witty screen name
Orem, UT

@ Jo
You can have it both ways because basketball and football are two different beasts played two different ways.

nategagon
Taylorsville, UT

@JoCo Ute

I was thinking it was pretty optimistic to rank the Utes in the top 15. I don't think they have done much in recent years to deserve the benefit of the doubt in basketball. But I thought they looked good against Boise last night. I like Loveridge a lot.

souptwins
Lindon, UT

I'll explain it to you. SOS is something to consider if a team has a lot of wins to verify if they have been quality wins. If you don't win, no one cares because you're just another win on someone else' schedule and siting your SOS comes off as excuse making. Once a team has several wins, we can then have the SOS conversation. This is why the poor SOS for the Utes in Bball comes up-- those wins aren't as meaningful because of the poor SOS. SOS didn't matter when talking about the Utes' football team because they weren't winning those games anyway. It was just brought up by those wishing to justify the losses. Win = talk about SOS. Lose = SOS doesn't matter except to those looking for an excuse. Not too hard.

souptwins
Lindon, UT

BTW-- I understand why the Utes have taken this approach in rebuilding the Bball program and it's quite smart. So far (except BSU) the games have amounted to live scrimmages where the team can learn to run the system and gain confidence in a competitive game situation. The coaches have basically thrown in the towel on post season tourney play-- barring miracles-- by playing such a soft schedule. In the long run, it will probably pay off because it accelerates the team's progress. The team is looking better than they've looked in several years so that's terrific. They may even upset some good opponents this year. I'd love to see more strong teams in the state and wish them well. None of that changes the validity of the SOS talk.

JoCo Ute
Grants Pass, OR

Hi Funny. I have to disagree w/ you on your analysis. The criteria for Football and Basketball rankings for post season play is almost identical for both sports this year and will be identical next year. Basketball post season ratings currently leans on RPI and next year football will be looking at SOS.

@ Souptwins if you think SOS doesn't matter if you lose, then take a look at the Sagarin computer rankings where Utah is ranked # 33. This ranking is based on the very strong SOS. Utah ranks higher than #37 UCF @ 10-1, #38 No. Illinois @ 12-0, #40 Duke @ 10-2 and even #42 USU @ 8-4. . . SOS matters

souptwins
Lindon, UT

Jo-- Of course it matters if you have a few "good losses" but not if you lose more than you win. It matters to Sagarin because it's their job & they make money to take it out farther than most people care. It matters to you because you're looking for an excuse-- I'll assume you're talking about football here. Thanks for providing the perfect example.

tinplater
scottsdale, AZ

Just as an observation, strength of schedule isn't really realistic until the end of the season based on real rankings is it? My advice is just go and win the games you have scheduled and don't look for excuses.

4601
Salt Lake City, UT

During the football season the ute SOS was all important. Now with basketball, not so much.

Chamberlain
Salt Lake City, UT

JoCo Ute

Sagarin is very generous to the Utes in football, but Sagarin is only one of several computer rankings in the BCS formula, and the Utes aren't nearly as highly thought of in a lot of other rankings:

Sagarin - #28 BYU > #33 Utah
BCS - #39 BYU > #56 Utah
CBS Sports - #38 BYU > #67 Utah
USA Today - #34 BYU > #76 Utah

Just the FAX
Olympus Cove, Utah

JoCo Ute

"Come on Nate. Can't the D-News Sports Department pick a POV and stick to it."

What you and a lot of Utah fans don't seem to understand is that rankings embody TWO criteria, record and SOS.

Losing against a strong SOS (see Utah) or winning against a weak SOS (see Utah) yields similar results in ranking.

Football BCS Rankings
#39 BYU(8-4)
#58 Utah(5-7)

Basketball RPI Rankings
#9 BYU(6-2) #6 SOS
#137 Utah(6-1) #330 SOS

poyman
Lincoln City, OR

My 2 cents on SOS:

In both Football and Basketball it is ultimately about winning a National Championship or about finishing as highly ranked as possible...

In Football a team will usually only play the NCAA maximum of 12 games and a Bowl (unless you play in Hawaii or somewhere off the mainland...Most Conferences require 9 Games within the Conference, leaving only 3 games that can be scheduled outside the Conference... So strength of conference matters more for Bowl placement... For Independents (like BYU and ND) SOS matters more for rankings and bowl placement.

In Basketball most teams play a 30 to 32 game schedule and usually 35% to 40% of those games are OOC... Strength of Conference still matters but it is only 60% to 65% of the equation... Where as in Football it is 75% of the equation... In Basketball a Selection Committee determines who gets bracketed in a national playoff and who doesn't and they have put a lot of weight on OOC Schedule Strength (Particularly for Mid Major teams)...

In Football you qualify for bowls based on contractual agreements and where you finish in your conference... Recently the BCS has acted as the FB selection committee for the NC.

Tators
Hyrum, UT

It's quite impressive that BYU has the 4th toughest schedule in the country, yet still has multiple times more wins than losses. Even more impressive is that even a few Ute fans have acknowledged that.

@ JoCo Ute:
The primary difference between Ute football and BYU basketball is that even though both teams have (or had) national top-5 levels of competition, the Utes lost most of their games, while BYU is currently winning most of theirs. Thus, the difference in perception and recognition from the press.

Having the hardest schedule in the world in any sport means basically nothing if most of those games are lost... since nothing meaningful is then proved.
A team with a difficult schedule who wins most of their games is usually better than a team who wins all of their games with a very easy schedule.
BTW:
When an athletic director purposely creates a very easy schedule for his/her team, it's usually for a reason that isn't deemed positive... even though an effort to help rebuild a struggling program is in itself positive.

UtesBy5
Syracuse, UT

@Just the FAX

'What you and a lot of Utah fans don't seem to understand is that rankings embody TWO criteria, record and SOS.

Losing against a strong SOS (see Utah) or winning against a weak SOS (see Utah) yields similar results in ranking.

Football BCS Rankings
#39 BYU(8-4)
#58 Utah(5-7)

Basketball RPI Rankings
#9 BYU(6-2) #6 SOS
#137 Utah(6-1) #330 SOS"

@Tators

"A team with a difficult schedule who wins most of their games is usually better than a team who wins all of their games with a very easy schedule."

So I'm assuming based on your comments that you both agree BYU's 1984 football team that had the #84 SOS out of 110 teams shouldn't have been crowned the National Champions over Washington?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments