STEVEHOLT
There are FIVE letters in the name BLAIN.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 16,636
- Like
- 24,534
I guess we have to ask ourselves are we essentially going down the rabbit hole of having the at large teams selected by vegas professional handicappers? Let's just have Sam Ace Rothstein select the at larges.In the end it seems that NET and RPI wind up with the same inherent flaw. The calculations put too much value on something other than winning/losing.
RPI: you benefit too much from playing good teams even if they destroyed you, just playing them helped you.
NET: you benefit too much from margin against bad teams and that disproportionally boosts your conference.
EDIT: I do understand that both NET and RPI were trying to weight the value of the teams you won and lost to. Obviously that is necessary but not at the expense of undervaluing the most important part of a game result which is of course getting the W. In one thread jncuse talked about some tweaks that would give us something that landed in-between NET/RPI which on its face made a lot of sense to me.
Conference record SHOULD matter. This is how you have done against your peer programs. Year to year conference strengths fluctuate and there can be some obvious adjustment made to account for this when comparing teams across conference. However it is quite clear that in recent years the ACC keeps getting crappy conference rankings yet does well in the NCAA. Small sample sizes and all, this to me means something. Once these teams enter conference play, it just becomes a viscious cycle that either hozes you or elevates you.