This has been talked about, but after looking at the last few tourney seedings in Phelan and Iba, I'm convinced this is absolutely necessary. The current criteria we've been given is based primarily on wins, with very little qualification on them. I give to you as an example a team that is a 2 seed with a 17 RPI and a 239 SOS (rated 699 btw) vs. the team with a 10 RPI and 24 SOS (750 rated) that got a 5 seed. Really? In Phelan there was a team with a 60 RPI and SOS in the mid-100's that recieved a 11 seed over a team with a 47 RPI and 14 SOS, who got a 14 seed.

In RL you have a committee who looks at the quality of wins, relative conference strengh and schedule strength. This isn't happening in WIS. And with many worlds suffering a bit of a downturn in population, there are more and more low and mid majors who are just doing their thing, but are in ghost conferences and being rewarded for running the table on a total sim sched. Not their fault, but that's how the system is running. They are getting abnormally higher rankings and higher seedings. Some teams that, in RL, would be severly downgraded due to schedule issues, are being rewarded in the rankings and seedings because there is no safety valve.

This isn't the end of the world, but between this and the gaming of the RPI system, you are getting proportionally higher amounts lower quality teams in higher seeds.

It used to be that schedule was everything, now it seems it means nothing as long as you win. This really hurts the BCS conferences who HAVE to play good teams and rewards those who schedule all sims. Not good.

Two solutions.

WIS shifts gives their current employees more work responsibilities with no additional financial motivation (NOT LIKELY with decreased revenue coming in)

Market product to get more humans. More humans = less Sims = better teams.

I wouldn't tell a friend to pickup HD right now. Not with the questionable engine. Once the new release comes about then I might continue to get friends to join.

I don't think that was at all what he was talking about tho eric, I think doomey means he thinks the criteria for NT selection and seeding needs to be fixed

WOW!

Another thread complaining about how the seeding for the NT is messed up.

I think people should get the RPI and compare it to the real world seeds. RPI does not equal seeding. The NCAA always give preference to teams with gaudy records over the 18-12 power 6 teams that are 12 seeds.

seeding is messed up? say it aint so

reinsel, I'm not clear what you are saying. Are you saying they take gaudy mid-majors over BCS schools? I don't think so.



Indians and fdny, you think it's not? I'll post this:

In Iba, #54 RPI is a 9 seed while #10 is an 6.

'Nuff said. Can be and should be fixed. Even CS says it's being addressed, so they must think it needs fixing.

Quote: Originally Posted By doomey on 9/03/2009
reinsel, I'm not clear what you are saying. Are you saying they take gaudy mid-majors over BCS schools? I don't think so.



Indians and fdny, you think it's not? I'll post this:

In Iba, #54 RPI is a 9 seed while #10 is an 6.

'Nuff said. Can be and should be fixed. Even CS says it's being addressed, so they must think it needs fixing.

We are saying we know its messed up, its been pointed out MANY times.

There is no damn need to keep making the same f*cking threads over and over and over.

jesus, indians, what is your problem? So it has been brought up. So what? The more it is discussed and solutions offered (and agreed upon) the quicker it will get addressed. If the community as a whole says a solution is necessary and agrees on one, then we take it to CS and point out a thread and say "This is what we want." A quick perusal of the forum didn't show much recent activity on this so I posted for the first time in many months as the disconnect seems to be getting much worse. Take some ritalin or something and chill out.

Is not SOS part of the RPI formula?

Why would you consider SOS a 2nd time?

Maybe I have my head in the sand, but I think NT seeding should be near the bottom of the priority list.

I have a lot of teams, and while I seem to have a hard time getting many of them to the NT (), the ones that do make the tourney are generally seeded about right. Sometimes I do feel ripped off, but so do many of the teams that make the tourney in real life.

At 75% of RPI, SOS is indirectly a huge part of the seeding formula. Teams who play teams with better eventual W-L records get a significant credit to their RPIs (opponents' W-L % is given 50% weight in RPI, double that of actual W-L %), simply by playing (not beating) those good teams. If WIS would adjust RPI to give more weight to a team's W-L record, then throw in weight for avg win margin, I think they'd have a pretty solid seeding panacea. Without such a formula, HD is with a less than perfect, but still pretty solid seeding formula, in my opinion.

Quote: Originally posted by doomey on 9/03/2009jesus, indians, what is your problem? So it has been brought up. So what? The more it is discussed and solutions offered (and agreed upon) the quicker it will get addressed. If the community as a whole says a solution is necessary and agrees on one, then we take it to CS and point out a thread and say "This is what we want." A quick perusal of the forum didn't show much recent activity on this so I posted for the first time in many months as the disconnect seems to be getting much worse. Take some ritalin or something and chill out.

No offense but honestly saying "If we talk about it and offer solutions that are agreed upon and it will get fixed" is so far from off base. Just because we have thought something is/was wrong and had agreed on things that needed to be done WIS has not made changes based on what the forum decides.

Agreed. That is one of my biggest beefs with WIS. They spend too much time denying and rationalizing (by usually pulling out some beyond the curve RL game or season) on things the community is, as a whole, agreed upon than improving the product as a result of that communication.