RPI Discussion.

#852
#852
Dougie_D said:
When TN is in the same voting pool than Mizzou, LSU, and Arky, than it will be bad for us. That would be 4 sec teams and 4 randoms.

That would mean they passed up Mizzou and TN at least once.
Click to expand...

What voting pool are you talking about?

I think you're confused about how the selection process works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#855
#855
I thought 8 teams are mentioned...then they vote on 4 teams for that seed. And then they get 4 more newer teams.

Every time they vote for 4 teams for a certain seed, they will always have a pool of 8 teams to choose from. It simplifies the process. Add 10 to that bunch, it gets harder.
 
Last edited:
#857
#857
Dougie_D said:
I thought 8 teams are mentioned...then they vote on 4 teams for that seed. And then they get 4 more newer teams.

Every time they vote for 4 teams for a certain seed, they will always have a pool of 8 teams to choose from. It simplifies the process. Add 10 to that bunch, it gets harder.
Click to expand...

Who's adding 10 teams?
 
#858
#858
bleedingTNorange said:
No, not on a game by game.

I can give my opinion, which is usually pretty close, but not exact. A win is probably a 2-3 spot bump, loss 8-10 spot drop.
Click to expand...

Jmo but I really think that we still get in with a loss in the last 3. I guess what I'm saying is I don't think a loss tomorrow will send us packing. Even if we just win one in the sect. Our SOS is just too strong.
 
#859
#859
BigZiti09 said:
Jmo but I really think that we still get in with a loss in the last 3. I guess what I'm saying is I don't think a loss tomorrow will send us packing. Even if we just win one in the sect. Our SOS is just too strong.
Click to expand...

I think we would have to win at least 2 Sect games if we were to drop 1 of the last 3.

Obviously at that point every bubble game, and potential bid stealers become must watch as there's zero wiggle room.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#864
#864
Moved up to 50 last night, shouldn't be any games that effect it before ours so, 50 should be the number. We'll see what it does with a win or loss.

I'm thinking up 2 spots with a W, drop 8-10 with a L.
 
#865
#865
RPI is not the only tool the committee uses. They look at a lot of things. It used to be a big mystery, but in later years the committee has been more open. I do not have the information given last year, but I know the head of the committee did release a statement to the press and offered up a few of the things they look at to partially explain why a few teams did not get in. That said I think with another loss we are out, especially if we have an early exit in the SEC tourney. But I could be wrong. There is no end to the experts who think they know though. In a few days you will be able to turn on a sports channel and wait a few minutes and you will have an "expert" opinion.
 
#866
#866
The RPI isn't used as the only tool, but it can almost be tracked 100% as to what your odds of getting into the actual dance are.
 
#868
#868
I'm just wondering how much stock the committee uses the RPI. The RPI was created in a time when you didn't have the internet, stock footage at rapid speed, social media, etc..

Plus, there are tons of different RPI's out there. So even if they rely on the RPI to help, which one does each committee use?

What is considered "safe"?

What exactly do they look for? It's just another ranking that goes beyond top 25.

I personally think that the RPI is used more during the seeding process.
 
Last edited:
#869
#869
Dougie_D said:
I'm just wondering how much stock the committee uses the RPI. The RPI was created in a time when you didn't have the internet, stock footage at rapid speed, social media, etc..

Plus, there are tons of different RPI's out there. So even if they rely on the RPI to help, which one does each committee use?

What is considered "safe"?

What exactly do they look for? It's just another ranking that goes beyond top 25.

I personally think that the RPI is used more during the seeding process.
Click to expand...

It's not the only tool, but if you look at the past couple of years, higher RPI teams get in over lower ones. Last year, MTSU had a good RPI (top 35 maybe) but had beaten no one. I think they only had 2 top 100 wins. Most teams will have 6-8+. They just had alot of wins. They took MTSU over other big conference bubble teams. RPI is a real factor. They also reward scheduling. We could have scheduled 2 cupcakes instead of Wichita and NC State, and we would have 2 more wins. However, each year is different.
 
#870
#870
VolGee4 said:
It's not the only tool, but if you look at the past couple of years, higher RPI teams get in over lower ones. Last year, MTSU had a good RPI (top 35 maybe) but had beaten no one. I think they only had 2 top 100 wins. Most teams will have 6-8+. They just had alot of wins. They took MTSU over other big conference bubble teams. RPI is a real factor. They also reward scheduling. We could have scheduled 2 cupcakes instead of Wichita and NC State, and we would have 2 more wins. However, each year is different.
Click to expand...

This is the most frustrating part of the selection committee process. One year it's SOS, the next it's who was hot down the stretch, the next it's mid-majors with gaudy RPIs and on and on and on. I think the NCAA would take way less heat if they would pick a criteria and stay with it instead of the moving target it is now.
 
#871
#871
Dougie_D said:
I personally think that the RPI is used more during the seeding process.
Click to expand...

No. It is hardly used at all in the seeding process.

It's not meant for use as a guideline as to in or out, but you can pretty much draw a line in the RPI and say in or out.

Since the field expanded to 68 teams no high major with a RPI better than 56 has been left out on selection Sunday. Now I'm obviously not suggesting to cut it that close, but you get the point. As a high major (which Tennessee is) if you have a RPI inside of 50 of selection Sunday you can pretty much start making your travel arrangements.
 
#872
#872
zansdad said:
This is the most frustrating part of the selection committee process. One year it's SOS, the next it's who was hot down the stretch, the next it's mid-majors with gaudy RPIs and on and on and on. I think the NCAA would take way less heat if they would pick a criteria and stay with it instead of the moving target it is now.
Click to expand...

Don't disagree with that. It really is frustrating when different committees emphasize different things.
 
#873
#873
This is the first year with some "new" basketball conferences, right? I think we need to factor that in too. That means that a lot of these conferences have gotten stronger, not weaker. That may possibly be the reason why the SEC looks so weak this year.
 
#874
#874
Dougie_D said:
This is the first year with some "new" basketball conferences, right? I think we need to factor that in too. That means that a lot of these conferences have gotten stronger, not weaker. That may possibly be the reason why the SEC looks so weak this year.
Click to expand...


SEC looks weak because the league sucks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#875
#875
Dougie_D said:
This is the first year with some "new" basketball conferences, right? I think we need to factor that in too. That means that a lot of these conferences have gotten stronger, not weaker. That may possibly be the reason why the SEC looks so weak this year.
Click to expand...

Isn't there just 1 new conference?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top