Nothing against the coach, he's a long-time coach of this school and great WIS coach.
However, this really irks me.
How does Puget Sound in DIII Smith get an at-large bid to the NT with their record?

School	Coach	Conf.	Overall	Home	Road	Top 25	Last 10	STRK	RPI	SOS
Puget Sound	naturopath	9-7	14-14	8-6	5-7	0-9	6-4	L1	71	8

The biggest things that bug me are overall record and RPI. In the NCAA, I don't think a .500 team has ever received an at-large bid, especially with an RPI outside the top 60. Even then, they have an 0-9 record against the Top 25!
Given, they play in the toughest Smith DIII conference, and received the 5th NT bid for their conf. but I don't see anything that proves to me they belong in the NT.

How is Puget Sound more deserving of an at-large NT bid than this school?

School	Coach	Conf	Overall	Home	Road	Top 25	Last 10	STRK	RPI	SOS
Arcadia	bdr127	13-3	19-9	6-2	12-6	0-1	7-3	L1	45	37

Does anyone else think the NT selection process needs to be looked at?
If you see something that clearly explains why Puget Sound deserves a NT bid, please let me know.

IMHO, they AREN'T more deserving than Arcadia. I have no explanation for this.

The selections process is jacked up. I have sent in multiple tickets to seble, but it is working as intended (although he also said he'd "look into it"), so I doubt we will see any differences soon.

Puget has played 8 more games against top 25 than Arcadia. Since Arcadia has lost the only game against a top 25, you cant say that their record wouldn't have been 11-17 had they gone through the same schedule.

You also can't say that they wouldn't have won the eight other games.

Posted by dcy0827 on 2/23/2012 1:10:00 PM (view original):
You also can't say that they wouldn't have won the eight other games.

Definitely agree with this. 

What's the breakdown of vs. RPI top 50, top 100?

Posted by tianyi7886 on 2/23/2012 1:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dcy0827 on 2/23/2012 1:10:00 PM (view original):
You also can't say that they wouldn't have won the eight other games.

Definitely agree with this. 

Yeah, I can't stand the "I lost to better teams than you lost to!" argument.  Any team, good or bad, can lose to a good team.  So losing to good teams proves nothing.  But you at least have to be better than bad to beat bad teams.  I'll take a bad win over a good loss any day.

NT selections seemed a little out of whack in DI Allen as well, IMO. 

I've seen a lot of bizarre selections over the years, but this one might take the cake. I can't think of a single rationale for it.

And Arcadia's RPI is clearly inflated because of the 18 road games.  Just another reason people who look at the RPI discrepancy are underanalyzing.  Not saying the computer got it right, just saying that Arcadia's non-con was underwhelming, at best.

Two things I noticed. Not saying I necessarily agree or that these items were in fact determinative, but just for discussion: 

First: 

Median RPI of Puget Sound's opponents in wins: 101.5
Median RPI of Arcadia's opponents in wins: 169.5

So, while Arcadia had more wins, Puget Sounds were perhaps of better quality.

Second: Score margin is a factor. Understanding that point spreads are not the best way of evaluating this, since they are not dynamic, Puget Sound outperformed the point spread by an average of 2.7 ppg, while Arcadia underperformed against the point spread by 0.3 ppg. So as a *very* rough way of estimating, Puget Sound outperformed Arcadia by 3.0 ppg on a normalized basis over the course of the season.

Or I could just be grasping at straws! :) 

I do know that, for better or worse, score margin is a pretty big factor. My S Arkansas DII Team was a #3 seed in the PIT with a 117 RPI.....we basically lost to a ton of top 50 RPI opponents by 10 points or less. I don't know if we would have been #74 on the projection report with an 11-17 record if score margin wouldn't have been such a big deal.

Arcadia also lost to 106 and 142, I don't see any losses against 100+ RPI teams for Puget.  Does that matter?