RPI formula problems

[Indy Coug]

The NCAA tournament committee is prohibited from considering past NCAA successes/failures for current seeding. The recent article by Pat Forde where he and other media members sat in on a trial run also mentions the fact that past performance was not considered.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

The NCAA tournament committee is prohibited from considering past NCAA successes/failures for current seeding. The recent article by Pat Forde where he and other media members sat in on a trial run also mentions the fact that past performance was not considered.

Interesting. I read that article but overlooked that. This is going to be the year BYU gets a decent seed and a tourney win. I can feel it.

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by jay santos

I believe the committee is not allowed to review any other rankings besides RPI. I've heard the following as rankings criteria:

1. RPI as a primary guideline
2. Straying from RPI due to other factors
--past NCAA success such as a Gonzaga
--conference standings, i.e. you finished in your conference behind someone with a lower RPI
--last 10 games
--quality wins or record vs top 50 and top 100

The conference standings criteria is especially what did BYU in in the past, IMHO, which excites me for this year, because it should go in our favor.

Here is may worry Jay:

1. Lack of quality non-conference wins (Utah St. is the best one right? Oral Roberts is a pretty decent one too). Does this matter to the committee? Is it good enough?

2. A bad RPI loss: Lamar is like 250. Does the committee consider really bad losses?

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by pelagius

Here is may worry Jay:

1. Lack of quality non-conference wins (Utah St. is the best one right? Oral Roberts is a pretty decent one too). Does this matter to the committee? Is it good enough?

2. A bad RPI loss: Lamar is like 250. Does the committee consider really bad losses?

I think they probably consider all that. I'm having faith, though.

The main reason I feel good is that all three MWC teams should end up top 30 RPI, and I'm having faith that of those three, BYU will be the most deserving of the top pick after we knock AFA off at home, earn an outright conf championship, and then make it to MWC championship game only to lose a tough one on UNLV's home court.

If selection committee is looking at three MWC teams all with starting seeds of 8 or better and BYU is the most deserving, I'm thinking we keep our nice RPI placement and end up no worse than a 9 and I'm going to bet on a 7. That's granted we do what I say and end up with an RPI in the #20ish range.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by pelagius

2. A bad RPI loss: Lamar is like 250. Does the committee consider really bad losses?

I think 4 consecutive conference road wins and going 14-2 after the Lamar loss > the Lamar loss

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by pelagius

Here is may worry Jay:

1. Lack of quality non-conference wins (Utah St. is the best one right? Oral Roberts is a pretty decent one too). Does this matter to the committee? Is it good enough?

2. A bad RPI loss: Lamar is like 250. Does the committee consider really bad losses?

Jerry Palm of collegerpi.com currently has BYU seeded 11th, which is lower than any of the other bracketologists at the moment. The explanation he gives about BYU on his "fence sitters" page is that we have no good non-conference wins. I don't know why the other bracketologists (like Joe Lunardi who has us as a 6 seed) have not let this affect their bracket. Of course it's anyone's guess what the committee actually thinks and year to year they behave differently to some extent because they change out two or three members every year. I'm starting to believe BYU probably needs to beat either SDSU or AFA to avoid the dreaded 12 seed. But that's probably mostly my paranoia from how the committee has dealt with us the last two times we were in the tournament. It would also help if USU and SDSU got into the top 50 and if one of our bad losses like Boise State got into the top 100, thus no longer falling under the committee's definition of "bad loss." If most of those things can happen, along with BYU finishing strong, it would very likely give us a very good seeding.