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


#21

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


#22

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


#23

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.


#24

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.


#25

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


#26

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