|
Post by n00b on Dec 4, 2015 13:23:05 GMT -5
Doesn't weighting who you beat objectively result in determining quality wins? Beating USC adds to your OPP % more than beating Utah. Right now going 1-1 against makes no difference who you beat.
You are saying don't fix the RPI, but come up with other indices. Why not both? BB did/does it.\
Good discussion!
Basketball did what? Their only modification to the standard RPI formula is a Home/Away adjustment because schools with money pay schools without money to play non-conference home games so the imbalance between home and road games is enormous (imagine if every top 20 team scheduled the same way Hawaii does). That's the only modification to men's basketball RPI.
|
|
|
Post by vbphilsdad on Dec 4, 2015 13:38:28 GMT -5
So BB changed RPI -- and also have other criteria, which change over time. That's all I said.
|
|
|
Post by vbman100 on Dec 4, 2015 13:52:39 GMT -5
I think another issue is the "W/L vs Top 25, top 50, top 100" criteria. Look who is 26 - Hawaii, 51 - Kansas St. That cutoff makes it seem like wins against those teams would be insignificant. Maybe use W/L vs the 16 seeds. And W/L vs the 16 seeds + automatic bids/conf champions.
I also think when determining the final at-larges for who should make the NCAA tournament, look at a team's resume and see if anything in their season indicates that they could beat a highly ranked team (the eye test). At least it would indicate they could be competitive. Of course, it is always about match-ups, but if Arizona St looks like they can't beat anyone without Gardner, or if Colorado hasn't beat anyone, or if Long Beach hasn't beaten anyone, then keep them out. That should be the nitty-gritty.
Still use RPI, fine. But add some of these factors.
|
|
|
Post by vbphilsdad on Dec 4, 2015 13:57:12 GMT -5
I think there is a "selection criteria complaint" thread out there. AQ wins is nowhere near quality wins.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Dec 4, 2015 14:00:35 GMT -5
I think another issue is the "W/L vs Top 25, top 50, top 100" criteria. Look who is 26 - Hawaii, 51 - Kansas St. That cutoff makes it seem like wins against those teams would be insignificant. Maybe use W/L vs the 16 seeds. And W/L vs the 16 seeds + automatic bids/conf champions. I also think when determining the final at-larges for who should make the NCAA tournament, look at a team's resume and see if anything in their season indicates that they could beat a highly ranked team (the eye test). At least it would indicate they could be competitive. Of course, it is always about match-ups, but if Arizona St looks like they can't beat anyone without Gardner, or if Colorado hasn't beat anyone, or if Long Beach hasn't beaten anyone, then keep them out. That should be the nitty-gritty. Still use RPI, fine. But add some of these factors. They do use those factors. All of them. They don't only use the 1-25, 26-50, etc groups. Each team has a "Team Sheet" that lists every single match they played with opponent RPI, location and result. Arizona State is a once-a-decade case. This committee voted that their body of work outweighed the lack of success over the past few weeks. People seem to overlook the fact that ASU beat Colorado without Gardner (yes, I know Colorado later avenged that loss at home in 5). That match could have been the deciding factor. The nitty gritty sheet actually has only a small percentage of the information they receive. Keep in mind that every decision made by the committee is by virtue of a vote. The 8 (I think) members can weigh different criteria differently in their own mind and there is no doubt differences of opinion within that group. I assure you everything that you listed IS considered by the committee.
|
|