storminspank
Justin VanLaere
Irrelevant, granted. But interesting to see how high it could actually climb; probably not much further.
I imagine there were a number of committee members who thought we were a better team than many of the at-large bids, but could not justify putting us in due to our horrible RPI.
This is one case in which the numbers did, in fact, lie.
It's the truth. But it's the way it goes. Iowa knew the rules/standards when they scheduled.
Isn't the standard that the committee take all available data/metrics/indices into account?
It's the truth. But it's the way it goes. Iowa knew the rules/standards when they scheduled.
Isn't the standard that the committee take all available data/metrics/indices into account?
There is no "standard" for how the committee works. Each year some people go off the committee, others come on. Dynamics change for the committee and to what they place the most value on. It is obvious that whatever the committee might say to the contrary, the RPI is far more important to the committee's decision-making than any other metric. And it was also obvious that the standards for getting at-large bids are different for teams from power conferences than those from mid-majors.
The RPI is far more flawed than BPI, Massey, Sagarin and Pomeroy, and that's not just because Iowa fared worse in RPI than those other systems. But Iowa needs to do a much better job of scheduling with RPI in mind.