The RPI is the one to look at. The committee looks at it as well. BPI is just something ESPN made up to rival Pomeroy ratings. I don't believe the selection committee looks at either of the two, it would be nice if they did though because we are a top 25 team in the Pomeroy rankings.
The BPI considers missing players in its rankings. And, there's no way you can do that with a computer and remain objective. I have never taken the BPI seriously.
What if a player is suspended for violating team rules? Is a win over them now worth less? Is a loss to them now worse than before?
What if the team steps up and plays better without the lost player? Still going to devalue those games?
What if someone is lost for the rest of the season? Going to flip it and now devalue all games that the lost player was in?
IIRC, it also hurt Buzz's chances one year when Jon Higgins was declared academically ineligible and wouldnt have been available for post-season play.Actually, yes. That is something the selection committee looks at. If a player hurts his ankle and the team drops a couple of games, it doesn't affect their seeding as much as if they had their star player. Same if a star player goes down for the season late down the stretch. It would likely affect their seeding. That's been told a few times during Selection Sunday and I think we even experienced it when Lofton got hurt a few years ago.
why is that funny? If they come out and play like we know they're capable of and Martin coaches well then we can beat almost anyone.
Actually, yes. That is something the selection committee looks at. If a player hurts his ankle and the team drops a couple of games, it doesn't affect their seeding as much as if they had their star player. Same if a star player goes down for the season late down the stretch. It would likely affect their seeding. That's been told a few times during Selection Sunday and I think we even experienced it when Lofton got hurt a few years ago.
I agree completely with the Selection Committee considering the impact of missing players.
What I don't agree with is a computer rankings formula considering missing players. I should have been more clear about that. It's not possible for a computer to fairly, completely, and objectively consider missing players. That's a big reason why I think the BPI is a joke.
But, I definitely think it's good for the Committee to discuss missing players among themselves when considering teams.
Every computer rankings has it's flaws, including the RPI.
You can bash it all you want, but as long as the committee keeps putting a lot of stock into it we have to take it for what it is.
Every computer rankings has it's flaws, including the RPI.
You can bash it all you want, but as long as the committee keeps putting a lot of stock into it we have to take it for what it is.