=>See Pomeroy's front page:

<a href='http://kenpom.typepad.com/ha/2005/03/breaking_rpi_ne.html' target='_blank'>http://kenpom.typepad.com/ha/2005/03/break...ing_rpi_ne.html</a>

*******

COPIED, FOR YOUR PLEASURE

Breaking RPI News

After seeing the 'team sheet' that Luke Winn posted, the alarm bells sounded in my head (see previous post). But then I read Gregg Doyel's piece this morning, and noticed this...

Until Wednesday, the Pac-10 had been the country's No. 2-rated RPI league for months. Bowlsby himself thought the Pac-10 remained the No. 2 league, referring to that league as second behind the ACC, until Hancock informed him of the change.

The ACC remains No. 1. The Pac-10? It's now fourth. In between are the Big 12 (second) and the Big East (third), which had been third and fourth behind the Pac-10 until Wednesday.

In the computation you have been seeing on my page, the Pac-10 has remained number two all week, and comfortably so. But now I am fairly certain this computation is wrong based on the above the information.

Back in January, when the RPI changes were announced, I mentioned that there were two possible ways for the changes to be applied.

Now that the ingredients have been revealed I will be posting this version of the RPI on the main page. There is one possible bit of confusion. Will they do it the way I tested in that earlier post, or will they do it the way that makes sense? The way I talked about before is to only apply these adjustments to Part I of the RPI. The sensible way is to apply the adjustments to all three parts.

I had no way of knowing which one was correct. I chose to apply it the way that made sense. ESPN and others have done it the same way. It turns out all the lemmings have gone over the cliff on this one.

The RPI is actually being computed the other way. Without independent confirmation from the NCAA - which will never happen - I can't be totally certain. But based on the two pieces of information I have come across over tha past 12 hours, I am certain enough to now post data based on the other version of the formula. The way the Pac-10 would be fourth in overall RPI is by applying the home/road adjustment only to the winning percentage portion of the RPI, and not to the SOS factors.

So for the last five days of the season, my RPI will differ significantly from what ESPN uses, but it will be nearly identical to what the NCAA people are looking at this week, based on the glimpses that they have let the fans see over the past couple of days.

NEW RPI's

<a href='http://kenpom.com/rpi.php' target='_blank'>http://kenpom.com/rpi.php</a>

NCAA selection committee blasted on the front page of <a href='http://www.miamihawktalk.com/' target='_blank'>MiamiHawktalk.com</a> over this, also for your pleasure.

The MAC is toast.
:(

You had to think the new RPI was too good to be true. Surely the powers that be wouldn't give up that much to the mid-majors.

Here's a quote from Dr. Jerry Palm of CollegeRPI.com:

Quote:Selection committee chair Bob Bowlsby held another press conference today, which provided a nugget of info about conference RPIs. Long ago, Gary Johnson, the NCAA's keeper of the RPI, told me that a conference's RPI was simply the average of the team RPIs. Bowlsby described it very briefly, but differently. He described it more like each conference was treated like it was a team and the RPI was based on the 25-50-25 ratio. He also said the current top four are the ACC, Big 12, Big East and Pac 10, which a different order than the team averages creates. I won't be able to get clarification from Gary this week, for obvious reasons, but I'll get it cleared up in the offseason. Conference RPI rankings are not particularly relevant to the process anyway, so it's not a big deal, except that I would like to calculate it however it needs to be done.

A different take, certainly, than Pomeroy who I think is a bit Chicken Little-ish today.

Uh oh...Jerry Palm now has the same calculations as Pomeroy. Looks like we've been mislead re: the RPI all season. Current RPI rankings:

#36 Miami-OH
#49 Buffalo
#52 Kent St.
#64 Akron
#84 Ohio
#95 Toledo
#104 WMU

At this point, I think our only chance at 2 bids is if Miami loses in the finals to Buffalo. Otherwise, we're probably a one bid league.