If you had the power to tweak the RPI what would you do?

[theguru]

This post by gbballfan21 in another thread got me thinking:

Scheduling for really good, small school programs is going to get increasingly more difficult. The RPI has changed everything! Bigger schools don’t get much of a reward for beating a smaller school, and if it’s a smaller school such as a Mayfield, Beechwood, LCA type of team, that they would in most cases probably lose to, then the mediocre 5A and 6A schools are not really going to line up to take this chance. This leaves teams like Mayfield to either play a bunch of really good 5A-6A schools, or find some mediocre 4A, 5A type teams to play. Unfortunately, the RPI is changing the way teams construct their schedules. 

==============

What would change/adjust?  What about when you play out of state teams?

[gbballfan21]

As far as in state teams, they need to put more weight on if you play up in class and lose to a really good team, then you should get rewarded for that. As it currently stands, if you play a good much higher class team, and lose, you are not rewarded for throwing your hat in the ring with the big boys. A perfect example of this, was this past year. Beechwood’s only 2 losses were to 5A Cov Cath by 2, and 6A Dixie by 8. Beechwood also had wins over 4A Corbin, and 6A Ryle, but yet, they were on the road for the semi finals to play West Carter, whose best win was against 3A Russell, but they had a bunch of wins against mediocre to not good 4A and 5A schools. 

I think what you see happen in 1A, with KCD stacking up wins against mediocre to bad 4A and 5A schools and they pad their RPI. Pikeville plays much better competition and they end up worse in the RPI because of it.

These are just 2 examples, there are several just like these, across the state. 

As far as out of state competition, that needs to change as well. Beechwood has several really good teams they could match up with across the river, but the only teams in Ohio that are willing to play Beechwood, are the ones that view Beechwood as a Harbin points cow. Nobody in Ohio that thinks they will lose to Beechwood, will play Beechwood, and with the current RPI situation in Ky, Beechwood would be dumb to play an Ohio team that would more than likely beat them, because beating them is a low reward, and losing to an Ohio team is a high risk situation.

Just my thoughts on the situation!

[ImJustHere]

15 minutes ago, gbballfan21 said:

As far as in state teams, they need to put more weight on if you play up in class and lose to a really good team, then you should get rewarded for that. As it currently stands, if you play a good much higher class team, and lose, you are not rewarded for throwing your hat in the ring with the big boys. A perfect example of this, was this past year. Beechwood’s only 2 losses were to 5A Cov Cath by 2, and 6A Dixie by 8. Beechwood also had wins over 4A Corbin, and 6A Ryle, but yet, they were on the road for the semi finals to play West Carter, whose best win was against 3A Russell, but they had a bunch of wins against mediocre to not good 4A and 5A schools. 

I think what you see happen in 1A, with KCD stacking up wins against mediocre to bad 4A and 5A schools and they pad their RPI. Pikeville plays much better competition and they end up worse in the RPI because of it.

These are just 2 examples, there are several just like these, across the state. 

As far as out of state competition, that needs to change as well. Beechwood has several really good teams they could match up with across the river, but the only teams in Ohio that are willing to play Beechwood, are the ones that view Beechwood as a Harbin points cow. Nobody in Ohio that thinks they will lose to Beechwood, will play Beechwood, and with the current RPI situation in Ky, Beechwood would be dumb to play an Ohio team that would more than likely beat them, because beating them is a low reward, and losing to an Ohio team is a high risk situation.

Just my thoughts on the situation!

Hit the nail on the head with this one. 

[Voice of Reason]

It really is very simple - fix the strength of schedule calculation. You can't just go by what class a school is in to determine how strong an opponent they are. RPI is way too reliant on the class level to determine the value of a win. Under the current system, teams looking to boost RPI should be begging to get the worst 6A team they can on their schedule.

[Tigerpride94]

I would add a margin of victory component. Could cap it at 36 points so teams don’t run up score for sake of RPI. 

[Voice of Reason]

13 minutes ago, Tigerpride94 said:

I would add a margin of victory component. Could cap it at 36 points so teams don’t run up score for sake of RPI. 

I don't like margin of victory at all. 

[Tkinslow]

I agree you should get something for losing to good teams I know Glasgow lost to South Warren by 1 point two years ago and it didn’t help them at all so I noticed this season they dropped South off the schedule and added Greenwood which is still as higher class team but a more winnable game and no Gator fans I’m not saying you’re a pushover but year over year not near as tough as South.

[DearToday]

I like the RPI, but to hit on what's already been stated it has its downfalls. 

Like the Beechwood situation, you're going to cut out some fun matchups that were good for both teams in years past because big schools don't want to risk playing small good teams. Matchups like Corbin vs Mayfield and Corbin vs Beechwood are two off the top of my head that stuck out. 

I've tried to think of ways to take that into account, but there's nothing I can think of. One of those easier said than done type things. 

I also don't like win margin coming into play.

[Colonels_Wear_Blue]

On 3/20/2021 at 3:30 PM, Voice of Reason said:

I don't like margin of victory at all. 

Why do you say that? I feel like it's relevant...but I could be convinced otherwise, I suppose.

[theguru]

On 3/20/2021 at 3:16 PM, Tigerpride94 said:

I would add a margin of victory component. Could cap it at 36 points so teams don’t run up score for sake of RPI. 

I would also cap it at 36 but add a time element to the algorithm meaning the quicker you get to 36 the more weight it carries.  

[Voice of Reason]

13 minutes ago, Colonels_Wear_Blue said:

Why do you say that? I feel like it's relevant...but I could be convinced otherwise, I suppose.

First and foremost, I don't want teams running up scores on purpose to help their RPI.  I don't want any incentive to a team to run up a score.

 Let's take it even further. It's late in a 2 score game that is clearly over but the winning team wants that extra touchdown to boost their RPI so they leave the starters in, call timeours and try to pound in another score.  No playing time for backups. Margin of victory is just a bad incentive.

Second, I'm not sure how much value you get out of it. Weird things happen in games all the time. Teams can lose by 4 touchdowns to somebody and come back the next game and beat them. Which score and result do you use to determine RPI?  I see margin of victory being almost as subjective as human opinions.

[theguru]

2 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

First and foremost, I don't want teams running up scores on purpose to help their RPI.  I don't want any incentive to a team to run up a score.

Second, I'm not sure how much value you get out of it. Weird things happen in games all the time. Teams can lose by 4 touchdowns to somebody and come back the next game and beat them. Which score and result do you use to determine RPI?  I see margin of victory being almost as subjective as human opinions.

They would be both figure into your RPI the same as playing any other team. 

[ATLCat]

1. "Quality of Victory" and "Quality of Loss" components. A capped margin of victory, a bonus for road and neutral site non-district wins, and a bonus for quality of opponent. If the non-district team you defeat reached the 3rd Round the previous season there is a bonus. If they reached the State Finals there is an added bonus.Conversely, a narrow loss should weigh more than a blowout loss and losing to those same late advancers should have more value than losing to a 2A team who lost in Round 1.

2. The Out of State component is crap. There is no reason every team should essentially be viewed as a .500 team who plays .500 competition from a generic classification. the info is out there thanks to Calpreps and Maxpreps. Properly weighing an out of state opponent's quality should be done. It astounds me that Trinity losing to a top-ranked Ben Davis (IN) by 1 point can be a worse result than Boyd County beating a winless Hannan (WV) tam by 6 points.

 

There is no reason we shouldn't be able to count those teams' win percentage and opponent's win percentage. Furthermore, there is no reason a Kentucky Class Equivalent variable shouldn't be able to be assigned so if you are playing a school with 2000 students it should be factored differently than playing a school with 200 students.

3. A team should never be punished for having to be handicapped by a larger/weaker District. If you are forced to play in a 6 team District where 4 of the six teams have low RPI scores you should not be penalized because a team in a 4 team District can schedule two additional Non-District games. 

Every team should have three District results count toward their RPI. If you lose District games, those automatically have to be counted. Otherwise you take the highest results from District games. If you play more than three District games, the games you choose to "cull" can either be counted as your RPI result if you win those games, or you can choose to duplicate your lowest Non-District results to replace them.

For example:

Rockcastle County has to play Five District Games. Ashland has to play Three District Games. All three of Ashland's games count toward their RPI and they have freedom to play whoever they want to complete their schedule. Rockcastle County does not have that luxury, so they would count their three best RPI wins over Bell County, Garrard County, and let's say Estill County. Rockcastle will then choose to either use their wins over McCreary Central and Jackson County toward their RPI Calculation, or they can replace those two results with their two losses in the regular season to Letcher Central or and Lincoln County if those losses actually provide a better RPI result than their weakest District wins.

 

 

 

I think if you do those three tweaks, the RPI gets infinitely better immediately.

[ATLCat]

44 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

First and foremost, I don't want teams running up scores on purpose to help their RPI.  I don't want any incentive to a team to run up a score.

 Let's take it even further. It's late in a 2 score game that is clearly over but the winning team wants that extra touchdown to boost their RPI so they leave the starters in, call timeours and try to pound in another score.  No playing time for backups. Margin of victory is just a bad incentive.

Second, I'm not sure how much value you get out of it. Weird things happen in games all the time. Teams can lose by 4 touchdowns to somebody and come back the next game and beat them. Which score and result do you use to determine RPI?  I see margin of victory being almost as subjective as human opinions.

I think margin of victory on it's own merit is a bad idea... but when it is part of "Quality of Victory" or "Quality of Defeat" it makes too much sense to ignore.

Let's say that Beechwood and West Carter played 1A NewCath in non-district games.

 

If Beechwood wins 46-6 on the road in a running clock, and West Carter needs a late turnover to pull out a 22-20 win at home, should those two outcomes be weighed exactly the same?

Now on the flipside, if you have a "Quality of Victory component" that gives a minimal yet meaningful bump to Beechwood's performance because A) They had a "convincing" win and B) Because they won on the road. Then this result gets a more realistic weight assigned to it. Even if it is a mere .0200 adder for the quality of victory and a .0100 adder for the Away Game factor, that would make the win at least more rewarding for the team who accomplished more.

 

 

[DearToday]

34 minutes ago, ATLCat said:

 

3. A team should never be punished for having to be handicapped by a larger/weaker District. If you are forced to play in a 6 team District where 4 of the six teams have low RPI scores you should not be penalized because a team in a 4 team District can schedule two additional Non-District games. 

Every team should have three District results count toward their RPI. If you lose District games, those automatically have to be counted. Otherwise you take the highest results from District games. If you play more than three District games, the games you choose to "cull" can either be counted as your RPI result if you win those games, or you can choose to duplicate your lowest Non-District results to replace them.

 

I love that.