I go into last night's round of games as a 6 RPI and a 6 SOS, wake up this morning an 8 RPI & a 8 SOS and get a 6 seed. What the hell is up with that??? I know I wasn't getting a #1 seed, but I honestly feel with how this is suppose to work (seeding done based on RPI) that I would have at least gotten a #2 or a #3 seed. There are 4 teams (a 2 seed, a 3 seed, a 4 seed, and a 5 seed) above me whom I beat this season.

Seble and/or any of the Veterans, please feel free to input any thoughts on this one. I'm waiting for the "company line" of complete and utter bullsh*t on this one.

Court

Who told you that seeding is based on RPI?  It's based on a NUMBER of things, some relate to RPI, others do not.  Check out the help files. 

The problem with seeding in HD is that we can't actually see the teams play.  In real life, using RPI is awful because it is clearly flawed.  In HD, I'm not sure what else to use.  I understand that things like vs. top-25/50/100 are all included, but there are problems with that, too.  Seeding will never be perfect in HD because it can't be perfect.  In my opinion, there are a lot bigger issues with the game than this, although it would be interesting to see some rationale for the low seed because usually seeding is mostly based on RPI.

The main negative I can see is the loss to Davis and Elkins. And possibly the number of losses in total, but I can't see the bracket to see what amount of losses the other teams had et al.

There are about 10 categories, including RPI,  that are related to seeding. But we don't know how much weight each of them pulls.

I agree, though, that with an 8 RPI and 8 SOS, that you should've had a better seed.  You won 20 games against a very tough schedule! Unfortunately, when the process is computer-driven, without a human committee to hash things out,  there can be problems.  What mid-major school was it, a few years ago, that missed the NT despite having a 31 RPI?  If the committee hadn't been involved, that school was easily have gotten a bid.

I know that San Diego State missed the NT a couple years ago with a mid-30s RPI.  Even in HD, I think that RPI might service as a passable proxy for where you might get seeded, but every so often you're going to see deviations, some bigger than others.

Posted by alblack56 on 8/16/2010 11:36:00 AM (view original):
There are about 10 categories, including RPI,  that are related to seeding. But we don't know how much weight each of them pulls.

I agree, though, that with an 8 RPI and 8 SOS, that you should've had a better seed.  You won 20 games against a very tough schedule! Unfortunately, when the process is computer-driven, without a human committee to hash things out,  there can be problems.  What mid-major school was it, a few years ago, that missed the NT despite having a 31 RPI?  If the committee hadn't been involved, that school was easily have gotten a bid.

Utah State in 2004 or 2005? they were 22 in the coaches and low RPI with a 26-2 record and got the boot.    

It was Missouri State with an RPI of 21 in 2006.

Conference tournament performance seems to play a big role in NT seeding. Since you didn't even make your CT championship game, you were punished accordingly. I don't agree with the apparent weight that is given to CT performance, but in my experience it does play an outsized factor in NT seeding.

For those of you interested in the Brackets and Seedings here's the breakdown.

http://www.collegiateinsider.com/wcaab/headline.asp?article=W6_S43_T2_seeds or this link, not sure which one will work. click here for EXCLUSIVE March Madness coverage on CollegiateInsider.com


I beat #2 seed Glenville St, #3 seed Franlkin Pierce, #4 seed San Francisco St, and #5 seed Mercy.

Posted by isack24 on 8/16/2010 11:54:00 AM (view original):
It was Missouri State with an RPI of 21 in 2006.

What a crime.  An RPI of 21 should be more than enough.  Imagine the hell that would be raised if Duke had an RPI of 21 and was left out of the tournament.  CBS would have filed a lawsuit...

Posted by gomiami1972 on 8/16/2010 12:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 8/16/2010 11:54:00 AM (view original):
It was Missouri State with an RPI of 21 in 2006.

What a crime.  An RPI of 21 should be more than enough.  Imagine the hell that would be raised if Duke had an RPI of 21 and was left out of the tournament.  CBS would have filed a lawsuit...

That's all assuming that RPI is a suitable metric.

Should Missouri State have gotten in?  Probably.  But I wouldn't base anything on RPI. 

In real life, there are WAY better ways to make that determination.  The problem in HD is that there really isn't anything better.  Sorry, colonels, that includes BPI.

8 losses is a lot for a #3 seed.   I don't think there is any question that HD values a team with a 26-2 record and a RPI of 10 MUCH MUCH higher than a team with a RPI of 8 and a record of 20-8.

I don't think that is a bad thing either. 

It does cause some worse RPI teams into the NT, and punishes early CT exits (you have less wins). 

Both factors were working here, but I would have expected a 5 seed. 

You lost to RPI 20, 33, 38, 50, 51,53, 55, 113,
You beat RPI 6, 7, 18, 21, 26, 44, 50, 53, 53, 55, 64

8 losses...13-7 vs. top RPI 100. 

The #3 seeds had 9 losses COMBINED. 


You can complain you didn't get a 5, but no way does that squad deserve a #3 seed over the 4 teams that got em with records of 28-1. 27-2, 25-4, 24-5 and RPIs of 7, 14, 15, and 17.

Side Note:  I got left out of the D1 PT as RPI 91 while teams with worse RPIs got let in.  Reason, 15-14 record, tough SOS.  Its just how things work, and it saves the big conferences from dominating everything.

Just glancing at the teams quick, all the 4 seeds and up either won their conference tournament or at least made the final game. They also all averaged road records of about 13-2.

Looking at the 5 seeds, 2 of them made or won their CT final and had road records of 13-4.

The last 2 five seeds were Washburn who lost in their CT semifnal, had a road record of 10-5, and an RPI of 10, SOS 5....and Assumption who lost in their CT semifinal, had a road record of 13-3, and an RPI of 11, SOS 9.

Your road record was 9-8 and you lost in your CT semifinal. If I had to guess those were the 2 things holding you back. First reading this, it sounded like you got ripped off but after looking  at the teams I definitely don't think you deserved a 4 seed or higher. And the 5 seeds all had RPIs of 10, 11, 13 except for the team that won it's CT (RPI of 21). So maybe you could have gotten a 5 seed but I don't think it's a travesty that you didn't.

And like was said before, a computer generated formula for seeding is never going to be perfect. Probably never even close.

Honestly man, I'd be happy with the 6.  In real life I think an 8-loss team would be overjoyed with a 6 seed.  Your SOS and tough road games brought that RPI up, but realistically I wouldn't want to see 20-8 teams taking top seeds regardless of who they played.