How did Boise and maybe other MWC teams game the RPI system?

JonDMiller

JonDMiller

Publisher/Founder
Jay Bilas Was Wrong About the Committee Going By Who You Lost To, It Was The Bad Teams You Beat That Were the Difference | The Big Lead

Great read....games v Non-D1 teams do not factor into RPI...Boise played two of them...two 50+ point wins....

If you are a power conference team, you want a home game for the $$$...granted, two NAIA opponents will not pull in 15,400 in IC, but you might get 8K...and that's coin, which is a part of what home games are for....that win will not help your RPI formula, but it won't hurt it, whereas Iowa's five wins against teams rated 300 or lower absolutely hurt them.
 


It seems like the NCAA is doing their best to destroy small school programs. If they are going to continue punishing big league schools for scheduling low RPI teams, they will quit scheduling them, depriving them of much needed revenue.
 


HawkeyeTech said:
It seems like the NCAA is doing their best to destroy small school programs. If they are going to continue punishing big league schools for scheduling low RPI teams, they will quit scheduling them, depriving them of much needed revenue.
Click to expand...

The RPI is what is wrong.
 


IMO, the "right" answer is to get rid of the conference tournaments and go to a system where everybody makes the tournament. I would have been vehemently against that idea (which I hear floated out periodically) just a couple years ago, but I've come around on it.

The conference tournaments are kinda stupid anyways. They are a cash grab (and I'm guessing not even that lucrative of a cash grab) on the part of the conferences. Other than that, they just serve as a weird mechanism to assign out automatic bids, which lends some kind of quasi-legitimacy to them.

I say just seed 'em out 1-300&whatever and let them play it out. The only thing left for debate is who should be seeded where, who's seeded too high, too low...but in such a large field, that debate probably doesn't have a lot of teeth.
 


So if we take off our bottom 2 schools our non conference SOS is 150 or so instead of 300 and some? Then everyone would not even mention the thing that hurt us the most. Pretty sweet.
 


So no need to schedule 100-150 RPI teams; downgrade from 250+ RPI squads to NAIA teams.

RPI is awesome.
 


The mid-majors have figured out all they need to do is schedule some Power Six schools good or not and manipulate the SOS garbage.

Iowa needs to stop scheduling the worst of the worst D1 teams. Of course, had they beat some better teams in conference it wouldn't have mattered anyway. Scheduling some better non-conference teams though, would not put them in a position to have to knock off more teams than they would ever hope to.

Next year, it may be a different story anyway as Iowa should be a lock from Day one, but what a better schedule gets them is a higher seed.

Look at how Minnesota played down the stretch and their SOS was very high, they played Duke and Memphis, that is it. Iowa has to get one or two more teams that are on roughly the same level as ISU. Also, playing away from Carver a few games before conference isn't a bad thing either, so a home and home series against someone would work. Just stop with the awful, awful teams like TAMUCC, they have always been awful.
 


Is it worth the money lost to play at some crappy team's place? 1.4 wins vs. 0.6 wins according to the RPI weighting scheme.
 




sportstalent said:
The mid-majors have figured out all they need to do is schedule some Power Six schools good or not and manipulate the SOS garbage.

Iowa needs to stop scheduling the worst of the worst D1 teams. Of course, had they beat some better teams in conference it wouldn't have mattered anyway. Scheduling some better non-conference teams though, would not put them in a position to have to knock off more teams than they would ever hope to.

Next year, it may be a different story anyway as Iowa should be a lock from Day one, but what a better schedule gets them is a higher seed.

Look at how Minnesota played down the stretch and their SOS was very high, they played Duke and Memphis, that is it. Iowa has to get one or two more teams that are on roughly the same level as ISU. Also, playing away from Carver a few games before conference isn't a bad thing either, so a home and home series against someone would work. Just stop with the awful, awful teams like TAMUCC, they have always been awful.
Click to expand...


Minnesota"s SOS has nothing to do with playing teams like Duke and Memphis. They have a good SOS because where the bottom teams on their schedule ended up RPI wise.
 




I said this in another thread, Iowa would be better off scheduling D2 Upper Iowa than playing Coppin State if they need to play someone for a warm up game as there is no hit on the RPI. UNI did this by scheduling a game against Wartburg.
 


ssckelley said:
I said this in another thread, Iowa would be better off scheduling D2 Upper Iowa than playing Coppin State if they need to play someone for a warm up game as there is no hit on the RPI. UNI did this by scheduling a game against Wartburg.
Click to expand...

If we would have done that we might have made the tourney. Pretty dumb.
 




528646 said:
IMO, the "right" answer is to get rid of the conference tournaments and go to a system where everybody makes the tournament. I would have been vehemently against that idea (which I hear floated out periodically) just a couple years ago, but I've come around on it.

The conference tournaments are kinda stupid anyways. They are a cash grab (and I'm guessing not even that lucrative of a cash grab) on the part of the conferences. Other than that, they just serve as a weird mechanism to assign out automatic bids, which lends some kind of quasi-legitimacy to them.

I say just seed 'em out 1-300&whatever and let them play it out. The only thing left for debate is who should be seeded where, who's seeded too high, too low...but in such a large field, that debate probably doesn't have a lot of teeth.
Click to expand...

everyone is already invited to the tournament. it starts with round 1 of your conference tourney.
 


No more giving props to the Goofs for their schedule, etc. They actually got worse from last season to this one, and got rewarded for doing so.
 




528646 said:
IMO, the "right" answer is to get rid of the conference tournaments and go to a system where everybody makes the tournament. I would have been vehemently against that idea (which I hear floated out periodically) just a couple years ago, but I've come around on it.

The conference tournaments are kinda stupid anyways. They are a cash grab (and I'm guessing not even that lucrative of a cash grab) on the part of the conferences. Other than that, they just serve as a weird mechanism to assign out automatic bids, which lends some kind of quasi-legitimacy to them.

I say just seed 'em out 1-300&whatever and let them play it out. The only thing left for debate is who should be seeded where, who's seeded too high, too low...but in such a large field, that debate probably doesn't have a lot of teeth.
Click to expand...

What if the conference tournament champions got auto bids to the NIT? That way you take away the AQ vs at-large dichotomy, and you could be more sure of getting the strongest possible field. This seems like a possible way to value regular season performance, and value conference tournament performance, but not make the tournament more important than the season.
 


For your own sake dont comment if you haven't read the article.

The RPI just lost all credibility IMO. Hopefully someone like ESPN will expose the RPI.

The more I read the more I am convinced that the committee is fully aware of the flaws of this RPI system. I find it impossible to believe they could have been unaware of the information contained in this article. They use it because they wan't an excuse to take more mid majors vs teams like Iowa.
 


I just don't get the rpi at all. They say that Iowa doesn't get in because they scheduled too many "cupcakes and patsies" but yet they play in the Big Ten. Meanwhile Gonzaga plays 5 or 6 decent teams then play in a conference of not but "patsies and cupcake" but yet somehow that is better????? I think that the rpi is an unfair system that is programmed and swayed by biased individuals. If they want mid majors to look good, all they have to do is change the rpi to make them look better than they are.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top