Wins/losses play way too much of a factor in determining seeding.  USC is a 6 RPI & yet is a 4 seed.  SOS needs to have much more weight placed on it when determining seeding. 

I wish that margin of victory mattered for seeding.  Losing by 20 to a #1 ranked team at home is a LOT different that going to the #1 team's place and losing by 2. 

Duke played the #1,#2,#3 RPI teams 6 times and lost 5 times by margins of 3, 7, 12, 12 and 17 points and won one of the games by 17 points.  That's pretty close on most of them.

Duke's double digit losses were vs. #2, at #3 and vs. #3 RPI, and then a weird loss in the CT to #74.
So 9 of the 13 losses were by 1-9 points.   

Posted by brikeisco on 10/5/2010 9:50:00 AM (view original):
Wins/losses play way too much of a factor in determining seeding.  USC is a 6 RPI & yet is a 4 seed.  SOS needs to have much more weight placed on it when determining seeding. 

brike, I think USC's problem is that they played some pretty crappy teams out of conference, and then only went 5-5 vs. NT teams in conference (and none of those teams had an elite rpi -- half the games were against rpi 40/41 and the best was 16). So while they had the rpi of a 2 seed, they didn't have the overall resume of a 2 seed.

They did the 10 noncon away game trick too, which is a little bit cheap in my opinion.  I mean it pads the RPI artifically.  I really think that RPI shouldn't treat home wins as 0.6, but as like 0.8....that's too much of a manipulative factor.