February 6, 201214 yr This was a dagger; too many losses to conference/non-conference teams since the UC game. Their tournament chances are slipping away more and more by the week. I agree with what a few of you said about having to win their conference tournament to make the field.
February 6, 201214 yr As we all know, the risk of the bubble team is that we don't know how many conference tournament upsets there will be allowing teams in that don't show on the bracket at present.
February 6, 201214 yr As we all know, the risk of the bubble team is that we don't know how many conference tournament upsets there will be allowing teams in that don't show on the bracket at present. Bingo!
February 7, 201214 yr As we all know, the risk of the bubble team is that we don't know how many conference tournament upsets there will be allowing teams in that don't show on the bracket at present. right now it wouldn't take too much to put UC and Xaiver in that play-in range. No way they get paired together though.
February 7, 201214 yr Author NCAA RPI was just updated. X is 53. UC is up to 95. Team RPI is not used in the selection room. Insignificant number...
February 7, 201214 yr Team RPI is not used in the selection room. Insignificant number... It's not ignored completely, right? If we agree there is a human factor in the selection process we can't say that the RPI doesn't have an impact whether the individuals on the committee recognize that or not.
February 7, 201214 yr From the NCAA website: The RPI is just one of many factors used by the committee. Each committee member must weigh each factor available and make his or her own decision regarding its importance. Clearly, the RPI will be more helpful to a committee member when evaluating a team out of his or her own region, especially if they never have seen them play. http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Championships/RPI under FAQ It would be difficult to imagine a committee meeting without any type of statistical data to aid the group in its deliberations. If there were no RPI, what type of data should the committee receive? What if they only were supplied with each team’s won-lost record? How would a committee member compare two teams with similar records but no common opponents? What if the committee received printouts of all Division I teams and its game results? Even knowing all a team’s opponents, how would a committee member compare schedules? Without some type of mathematical ranking, it would appear an “RPI-less” committee could run the risk of selecting teams based on reputation rather than facts. An emerging program from a perceived mid- to lower-level conference, experiencing a breakthrough season, might be completely overlooked unless the committee representative from that area could make a compelling argument without a lot of hard data. By contrast, a traditional powerhouse, experiencing a down year, might sneak into the field based solely on reputation and history. Those who wish to do away with the RPI, must be able to offer an alternative set of data for the committee to use.
February 7, 201214 yr Author It's not ignored completely, right? If we agree there is a human factor in the selection process we can't say that the RPI doesn't have an impact whether the individuals on the committee recognize that or not. From everything I have heard of the actual process the RPI is used only as a measure of how you did against your schedule. Record vs Top 25, 50, 100 and so on. Your teams individual RPI is not used from what I know...
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.