The RPI is dead, but will NET be an improvement?


Continue to struggle to understand why efficiency (scoring margin divided by possessions) AND (capped) scoring margin are included.


The NCAA decided 5 factors sounded better than 4? Honestly I have no clue what else it could be.


I mean. It’s worse than just that… The three other factors…

It has win percentage, adjusted win percentage and then “Team Value Index” which just sounds like an RPI style adjusted win percentage.


Yeah what the hell lol. It literally says in the description of the “Team Value Index” that “this is the results-oriented component of the N.E.T.” and then just throws out two adjusted versions of the same thing as half of the remaining factors.


As we’ve seen over the years, the committee is very very dumb.


More likely that the advanced analytics reshuffle the deck at the expense of powerful interests.