RPI I think is the only computer ranking system that factored wins. I don’t believe any of the others do, and that is the problem. Their needs to be a win element added to all these computer metrics (well KenPom says they do, it’s the luck factor, which most yrs VU is upper 200’s or 300’s, several yrs it’s been top 10-20 in worse luck in the nation).
So all those folks on this site that says wins mean nothing for pitchers in baseball and is an irrelevant stat will be the ones that should think the computers have it right with VU. Because who you beat and who you lose to for most to all these computers isn’t factored and is why VU is where they are. Maybe KPI factors wins. If so that’s why VU is higher in that one. And why they are higher in RPI.
My opinion is you need to have some sort of win factor , because ultimately isn’t that what matters. I mean efficiency for example in the Auburn game isn’t changed really if VU wins by 2 or loses by 2. But our feeling after the gsme sure is hugely different.
So all those folks on this site that says wins mean nothing for pitchers in baseball and is an irrelevant stat will be the ones that should think the computers have it right with VU. Because who you beat and who you lose to for most to all these computers isn’t factored and is why VU is where they are. Maybe KPI factors wins. If so that’s why VU is higher in that one. And why they are higher in RPI.
My opinion is you need to have some sort of win factor , because ultimately isn’t that what matters. I mean efficiency for example in the Auburn game isn’t changed really if VU wins by 2 or loses by 2. But our feeling after the gsme sure is hugely different.
