Respect?

General NCS Basketball21

Often when polls are discussed by NC State fans, the issue of “respect� is brought up…usually in the context of “We are not getting any respect�. This statement was probably said more during the 2004 season than any other. That year, a number of ACC teams behind State in the conference standings were actually ranked ahead of State in the national polls.

It occurred to me this morning that State fans don’t really have room to complain about lack of respect during this preseason. Currently State is ranked 18th by the USA/ESPN coach’s poll (got to love that corporate sponsorship) and 21st by the AP poll. For lack of a better term, what is this respect based on?

Here is a brief summary of the teams (and their RPI ranking) that State has played so far this year:

North Carolina St. 91, (325) Stetson 61

North Carolina St. 91, (304) The Citadel 59

North Carolina St. 73, (239) Delaware
57

North Carolina St. 75, (281) Virginia Military Inst 55

North Carolina St. 61, (49) Notre Dame 48

(55) Iowa
45, North Carolina St.
42

North Carolina St. 92, (84) Appalachian St.
68

North Carolina St. 86, (243) NC Asheville
56

North Carolina St. 81, (145) Miami
FL 69

Currently, State’s record is 8-1 (1-0 in ACC). State ranks 77th in the RPI with the SOS ranking of 235 (275 in OOC). Now answer this question honestly, If Middle Tennessee had this exact record and RPI ranking, would they be ranked in the national polls? I think that most people would say “No.�

This “respect� is obviously based on the past seasons and not this season. While it’s nice that State is getting some benefit from past seasons this year, this clearly shows one of the main problems with polls, especially in the early part of the season…people are voting on reputation instead of performance.

A combination of the Sweet 16 last year, four straight trips to the NCAA tournament, and even the insipid analyses by people like Gminski are clearly paying some dividends for State this year. Now it would easy to say that the polls are meaningless because everything of value is determined on the court, but that would be taking too narrow of a view.

Perception of State’s program is important. I don’t really care what G-man or the pollsters think about NC State. However, consistently being in the top-25 should pay dividends on the recruiting trail. However, for there to be any real value to a national ranking in the early part of the season, State will have to win some meaningful games and maintain (or improve) the ranking it currently has.

About this time last year, State was highly ranked going into the game at UW. That loss along with the death spiral that State went through for six weeks, put State in a bad position. This year, State needs to build on an early season ranking, not squander it away like last year. Fame is fleeting unless you do something new and better to maintain it.

Warning
I have the ability to edit or delete comments made on the entries that I write. Keep the comments civil and on subject or the entire post will be deleted with no explanations given. I have access to the comments directly from my “Favorites” and it takes exactly one click to delete a message. I will not waste time deleting only part of a comment.

About VaWolf82

Engineer living in Central Va. and senior curmudgeon amongst SFN authors One wife, two kids, one dog, four vehicles on insurance, and four phones on cell plan...looking forward to empty nest status. Graduated 1982

General NCS Basketball

21 Responses to Respect?

  1. choppack 12/20/2005 at 4:10 PM #

    VaWolf – You make some good points. Clearly, we haven’t been more impressive than say, Clemson, this year.

    I am one of those who really doesn’t care about the regular season rankings – but I don’t disagree w/ your take. From my perspective, they don’t mean squat – if we make it into the Top 10 this year, collapse and don’t have a successful ACC and NCAA tourney – it doesn’t make me feel any better. However, from strictly a national perception point of view – I think it’s a good thing.

    Like you, I think we need to capitalize on this ranking. If we can beat both of our next 2 opponents, I think you’ll see us go into the new year w/ a top 16 ranking.

    Lest we forget, our turnaround really begin in 2002 when we beat a Top10 ranked UVa squad (who had just been to the tourney.) I say this not to contradict your point on rankings – but to re-emphasize that fame is fleeting – and it means nothing if you don’t build on it.

  2. Mr. O 12/20/2005 at 4:18 PM #

    We are 19th in the predictor of the Sagarin rating. It takes into account margin of victory. The RPI is really worthless at ths point. However, I do agree that we get more respect this year than we have since Sendek arrived. We get more respect from ACC fans and the media in general.

    That is because we have had some success the last 4 years.

  3. VaWolf82 12/20/2005 at 4:44 PM #

    I don’t disagree about the RPI’s value early in the season. However, the Stetson, Citadel, VMI, etc wins are not worth much no matter what ranking you use.

    Is there a website that contains historical Sagarin Rankings? It might be interesting to make comparisons between the two over the season.

  4. SaccoV 12/20/2005 at 4:47 PM #

    I think the real point that you have made here VaWolf, is that our team HAS BENEFITTED from rankings which were not necessarily reflective of our acheivements thus far. Although I can recall a time when this WAS NOT the case, I do think that Sendek has become somewhat of a media favorite (only insofar as the media’s votes account for rank in the polls). Though some writers have criticized some of Herb’s successes, there is no lack of paper courage in those who broadcast the games (Gminski, Bonner, Vitale, etc). I think that we should be lucky that our rank has been high considering our loss to Iowa and not having played in any preseason tournament of note. Ranking is nice, and VaWolf is correct in that this team needs to keep its rank for the entire season and build upon it.

    Without going too far afield here, I think the real travesty is the RPI system as an indicator of schedule strength. Given that the ACC is going to be in the top three (3rd at worst) in overall conference strength according to RPI, there’s no doubt that every team in the ACC will benefit from just playing its conference schedule. This leads to the fiasco of ten or so years ago when a 6-10 ACC team (FSU, I believe) made it to the NCAA tournament. The RPI is innately flawed. It basically says that the toughest teams are in big conferences and those same teams therefore play the toughest schedules. Although the committee took a huge step in rewarding Air Force with a bid last year, there’s not much doubt that a big conference .500 or even .450 will get that spot this year and for the next ten years.

  5. Mr. O 12/20/2005 at 4:54 PM #

    I would certainly say that we have earned the rankings we have received the last few years. We have been consistent and that has earned us a certain amount of respect.

    Vawolf82: You can go all the way back in the Sagarins for something like 6 years. http://www.sagarin.com

    Go to the archives.

  6. Class of '74 12/20/2005 at 4:58 PM #

    Let’s face it, the voters in these polls don’t see everyone so the poll is little more than name recognition until league play begins. We should be happy for now and wait for the GW game and ACC play to reveal what we really have in Raleigh this year.

  7. Mr. O 12/20/2005 at 5:06 PM #

    99 – na/#49
    00 – na/52
    01 – na/#73
    02 – #23/#22
    03 – #46/#45
    04 – #16/#13
    05 – #26/#21
    06 – #27/#23

    The second number is the “predictor” that takes into account margin of victory. The first number is a “blended” score that makes margin of victory less important. Sagarin prefers the predictor as the most accurate measure of teams however due to pressure from people who don’t like systems that reward teams for running up the score, he changed his rating system.

    This years ranking changed from yesterday.

  8. Mr. O 12/20/2005 at 5:09 PM #

    Having posted those rankings, Herb really needs to have a top 20 type of finish this year at a minimum. That would make a pretty solid run of seasons over the last 5 years using the Sagarin as a measure. Of course there are certainly other measures as well.

  9. choppack 12/20/2005 at 5:15 PM #

    “This leads to the fiasco of ten or so years ago when a 6-10 ACC team (FSU, I believe) made it to the NCAA tournament. The RPI is innately flawed. It basically says that the toughest teams are in big conferences and those same teams therefore play the toughest schedules. Although the committee took a huge step in rewarding Air Force with a bid last year, there’s not much doubt that a big conference .500 or even .450 will get that spot this year and for the next ten years.”

    You see, I don’t call that progress. I’m sorry, but a 6-10 ACC team is generally much better than 10-6 team in mid-major conference. I can’t think of a more socialistic system than simply taking the cream of the crop from each conference, and leaving strong 8-8 teams at home from a conference like the ACC where every game is a war and almost every team has top notch talent.

    I think the RPI and Sagarin are OK. In some cases, the poles are out-right wrong, but I think we all suspect that at this time, NC State is better than 78th in the country. But, hey, you need some hard fast rules somewhere to do a computer ranking -and I think they do a good job on that.

  10. VaWolf82 12/20/2005 at 5:31 PM #

    This leads to the fiasco of ten or so years ago when a 6-10 ACC team (FSU, I believe) made it to the NCAA tournament. The RPI is innately flawed.

    Actually, the RPI formula was changed last year to give more credit for road wins and less credit for home wins. The net effect was to lower the RPI ranking of teams in the “middle” of power conferences and raise the rankings of the mid-majors. Kenpom had an article on this last year and it may still be up.

    You can go to the 2005 RPI ratings at kenpom.com and he includes both the new formula and the previous formula. Scroll down the list and see who benefitted and who got hurt. Using the old formula, State’s RPI ranking was 53. Using the new formula it was 65.

    Some of the teams that were helped by the change:
    Miami (OH) was 15 spots higher
    La Lafayette was 25 spots higher
    Ohio was 19 spots higher
    Utah St was 12 spots higher

    However, it still wasn’t enough for Miami (OH). They had the highest RPI ranking of a team that did not receive an at-large bid.

  11. packwx 12/20/2005 at 7:37 PM #

    Until I moved away from Raleigh (to Miami) recently, I never appreciated the exposure that being in the Top 25 gives you. Even in an “ACC market” like this one, the only teams that get a writeup in the paper or even a boxscore are Top 25 teams.

    Being ranked at this point in the season doesn’t have that much value otherwise, but it keeps you on the radar in the glut of sports going on this time of year.

  12. JeremyHyatt 12/20/2005 at 7:52 PM #

    We are definitely reaping the benefits of the last couple years’ improvement and visibility from the Sweet 16s. Maybe 2 (or 3?) years ago with this record and we are ranked 30 or lower in the AP poll voting. But as many have reiterated, that i concur, is that it is very early. Still, the Pack has shown much promise thus far and hopefully will continue to gel; less turnovers, stronger rebounding, solidifying Gavin’s ball handling, Cedric’s post moves, Cam’s coming of age, Tony’s health, things of this nature.

    But weren’t we also predicted to finish 4th in the ACC conference this year? Respect for the program as far I see it, which is why i go ape when i see the criticize Herb talk (who had to deal with the Valvano suspension fallout and bootstap this program).

    Well the script is yet to be written, but we have A LOT of home games that may help us along. I think that to make the “jump” we are hoping for the program, we will need to be very competitve with UNC, Maryland, and Wake Forest in Jan and Feb.

  13. Sam '92 12/20/2005 at 8:05 PM #

    We’re getting the respect we’ve earned — we’re somewhere around the 20th best team in the nation. Good, but not great, not really inspiring to watch, unlikely to beat any top ten team, or other top 20 team on their home court. Unlikely to pull out a close win against a good team, or to come from behind.

    Herb’s teams are going to continue to be like that, and it’s not so bad — certainly better than we have been since Jimmy V — but it doesn’t, and won’t, have us in the thick of the national championship hunt.

  14. packbackers 12/20/2005 at 10:46 PM #

    The reason State is finally getting respect around the college basketball world is that Herb Sendek has earned it. He is building a contender. Notice I didn’t say he “has built” a contender, because there is still work to be done. I’m just glad to finally see the day that our basketball program is getting the respect it deserves.

  15. PACDADDY 12/20/2005 at 11:15 PM #

    I think our roster speaks for itself. The fact that we lost one of the most complete players to ever play at NCSU, and we are currently a Top 25 team early in the season, says alot about the perception our program has earned…Herb Sendek has earned!

    Mr. O ….you mean we finished in the Top 25 in Sagarin final poll 3 of last 4 years…That can’t be true…you must be mistaken.

  16. TVP 12/21/2005 at 12:52 AM #

    “It basically says that the toughest teams are in big conferences and those same teams therefore play the toughest schedules.”

    And that’s…completely accurate. Right?

    Interesting thing about the new v. old rpi: Some metrics that try to predict the NCAA field were more accurate using the old than the new last year. I don’t think it makes much difference.

    Back on topic – there’s no way this isn’t a good thing. Why did Arizona stay in the rankings for so long despite some losses – or Texas after they were blown out twice? Name recognition and starting position. Our ranking right now is proof that we are rebuilding the NC State “brand image”.

  17. Matthew Barker 12/21/2005 at 6:19 AM #

    Hey, as you know, my name is Matthew Barker, and I own and maintain an Ohio State sports blog called Buckeye Sports Blitz.

    While searching the web for good college basketball poll and not being able to , I decided to start one.

    I have founded the College Basketball Bloggers Association or the “CBBA”.

    If interested in joining and being a voting member, click the link above to the home of the CBBA.

    Here is the link to the complete poll.

    Looking forward in having you as a voting member,
    Matt

  18. Rick 12/21/2005 at 11:02 AM #

    The media really has seemed to take Sendek under its wing.

    If we can actually maintain this ranking and not go into another death spiral then maybe we have something here. Until I see something different (which I have not) I wil expect the same things from this team as every other.

  19. Mr. O 12/21/2005 at 1:33 PM #

    Pacdaddy: There are always multiple ways of looking at things, so some people won’t be that impressed with 3 top 25 finishes in the last four seasons. They will bring up the entire 10 years that Herb has been here and say that 3 in 10 years isn’t that impressive. I actually agree with that, however the fact that these top 25 finishes were in the last four years is the start of a solid trend.

    Essentially, Herb needs to combine a regular season like Hodge’s junior year with a post-season at least equivalent to last year. Herb has yet to have what I would call a “complete season”. I think a “complete season” would show most everyone that maybe, just maybe Herb Sendek can get it done at NC State. But until that happens, the questions will persist from some people.

  20. choppack 12/21/2005 at 2:13 PM #

    Essentially, Herb needs to combine a regular season like Hodge’s junior year with a post-season at least equivalent to last year. Herb has yet to have what I would call a “complete season�. I think a “complete season� would show most everyone that maybe, just maybe Herb Sendek can get it done at NC State. But until that happens, the questions will persist from some people.

    Excellent point O. IMHO, that’s why he’s still such a divisive figure 10 years into his tenure. He hasn’t hung any banners – and he hasn’t produced satisfying results in the 3 key parts of a season – conference, ACC tourney, and NCAA tourney.

    It would actually be nice if our coaches in either of the 2 big sports could put together a complete book of work.

  21. Rick 12/21/2005 at 3:29 PM #

    Agreed O
    Someone would have to be a fool to deny we are not better under Sendek. They would also be a fool to be sure Sendek is the right person.
    The problem I have is he has had more than enough time to prove he can do it. There is little reason to believe anything significant will change this year.

Leave a Reply