Started By
Message
re: NCAA Regional bids, host sites
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:44 am to bbap
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:44 am to bbap
LINK
50% of the formula is way too high to put on opponents record.
It's a pretty good article
quote:
Ultimately, the RPI is just a formula. It doesn’t think, it doesn’t scheme—it just reflects winning percentages (25 percent of the formula), and opponents’ winning percentages (50 percent), and opponents’ opponents winning percentages (25 percent). In recent years, the NCAA tweaked the formula to weigh road wins more than home wins, in order to mitigate the very real disadvantage that Northern teams face by having to spend the first six weeks of the season on the road
quote:
And the RPI says Indiana State (No. 21) is an NCAA tournament lock with a chance to host a regional, even though the Sycamores are just 1-2 against the top 25 and 2-4 against the top 50. High Point (No. 41) ranks 10 spots higher than Arkansas despite an 0-3 mark against the top 25 and a 1-7 record against the top 50. High Point is 23-16 overall; Arkansas is 25-16. But whose resume is more impressive? The problem with the RPI isn’t that it is biased. The problem is its lack of bias. The RPI looks only at the numbers, and the numbers say High Point has played a tougher schedule than Arkansas because High Point’s opponents have an aggregate winning percentage of .545, and Arkansas’ opponents have a .541 aggregate winning percentage.
quote:
But because opponents’ winning percentage comprises 50 percent of the RPI formula, playing a few games against a team with a horrific winning percentage has a disproportionate impact on RPI. So Arkansas pays a huge price for playing five games against No. 295 Mississippi Valley State (3-29) and No. 300 Grambling State (12-26). As a result, Arkansas ranks 46th in strength of schedule. Remove the three games against MVSU, and its SOS jumps to sixth. Take away the two games against Grambling, and it jumps to No. 1
50% of the formula is way too high to put on opponents record.
It's a pretty good article
3
Posted on 5/19/14 at 8:51 am to Hawgeye
yeah i read it when it came out. it is good.
Posted on 5/19/14 at 9:06 am to Hawgeye
If I'm not mistaken they said a couple days ago the lowest RPI ever to get a national seed was 12 right?
Posted on 5/19/14 at 9:38 am to Hawgeye
That's all true about the problems with RPI, and it was exacerbated this year by the change in RPI formula, with the 1.3/.7 road win/home win factor. Still, I expect the committee to continue to lean heavily on RPI when it comes to making the field of 64, and as justification for rewarding undeserving northern teams with host and seeding decision. They will probably cite other factors in making some of the key decisions, such as hosting and national seeds, that are too important to be left to a calculator, but its still going to play a big role in the process.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News