"It's about time the NCAA tournament modernized its selection process" - ESPN.com
Joe Lunardi, Senior Writer
9Posted: 08/22/18, :50 AM CT
"The RPI is dead, apparently, so long live NET (the new NCAA Evaluation Tool).
If nothing else, credit the NCAA for a clever acronym. Forgive me for withholding any additional credit for the time being. Had the RPI long outlived its usefulness? Had schools and conferences learned how to "game" the system? Was the tiresome approach -- "it's only a sorting tool" -- failing to recognize the RPI's outsized influence within the NCAA men's basketball selection committee?
Yes, yes and yes.
Cutting to the chase, then, we are left with two unanswered questions as the RPI is laid to rest:
• Is NET a better metric for team selection and seeding?
• Will the selection committee utilize it correctly?
To answer the first question, even without a complete breakdown of the new formula, NET almost can't help but improve upon the RPI. The only thing worse than RPI's emphasis on "who you played" over "how you played" was the committee's seeming inability to evaluate outliers. This is how we'd get inexplicable outcomes such as Wichita State (30-4) being a No. 10 seed in 2017...."
Joe Lunardi, Senior Writer
9Posted: 08/22/18, :50 AM CT
"The RPI is dead, apparently, so long live NET (the new NCAA Evaluation Tool).
If nothing else, credit the NCAA for a clever acronym. Forgive me for withholding any additional credit for the time being. Had the RPI long outlived its usefulness? Had schools and conferences learned how to "game" the system? Was the tiresome approach -- "it's only a sorting tool" -- failing to recognize the RPI's outsized influence within the NCAA men's basketball selection committee?
Yes, yes and yes.
Cutting to the chase, then, we are left with two unanswered questions as the RPI is laid to rest:
• Is NET a better metric for team selection and seeding?
• Will the selection committee utilize it correctly?
To answer the first question, even without a complete breakdown of the new formula, NET almost can't help but improve upon the RPI. The only thing worse than RPI's emphasis on "who you played" over "how you played" was the committee's seeming inability to evaluate outliers. This is how we'd get inexplicable outcomes such as Wichita State (30-4) being a No. 10 seed in 2017...."
Comment