The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

247
https://247sports.com/Article/College-ba...-120922399

CBS Sports
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...g-the-rpi/

NCAA
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men...lacing-rpi

Jeff Borzello @jeffborzello
Just received clarification from the NCAA: the NET rankings will be public available beginning in late November or early December, and updated daily through Selection Sunday.

It will be interesting to see how this affects the new scheduling being done by CUSA, Sun Belt, and other conferences. Or is this an attempt to circumvent them? Is says its used some historical data to help develop the new evaluation, so maybe there was consideration given to teams from one-bid leagues that should have had multiple bids. Don't like the use of ESPN's evaluation in the process, though. We'll see.

Making scoring margins a factor is a mistake.
Can’t afford to give the bench quality time in a decided game now when a tournament seed or berth might be dependent on a blowout win.

I would hope the put a cap on it though. Like margins over 20 points are counted the same as 20 point margins

Another link.

I had a lot of faith in the new system until I read this:

“The NCAA Men’s Basketball Committee has had helpful metrics it has used over the years, and will continue to use the team sheets, but those will now be sorted by the NCAA Evaluation Tool,” Gavitt said. “As has always been the case, the committee won’t solely focus on metrics to select at-large teams and seed the field. There will always be a subjective element to the tournament selection process, too.”

So they consulted with a ton of people to bring in a more balance analytical approach, but then basically negated it by saying that they're still probably going to take Syracuse over Middle Tennessee.

I’ll wait to see what the new rankings look like, but the RPI was already being phased out, and when it wasn’t it sure wasn’t doing a bit of good for non p5 teams. Maybe there will be some ways for decent teams form outside these conferences to rank well here.

I have no problem with a subjective element n the decision making process. The problem is when it is a prejudicial factor.

I think the good old fashioned "Eye Test" was easier on us & the rest of the G5. The person at the table recommending leaving you at home had to spit it out that "Illinois or Boston College both at 19-11 were much more worthy of inclusion than 2nd place VCU or UAB at 24-6.

Now they have another stupid piece of paper to hide behind.

NCAA: "AND NO, I PROMISE, THIS WILL BE MORE (x3) FAIRER-ER-ER"... "And this time,... we mean it!"

(08-22-2018 11:58 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  Making scoring margins a factor is a mistake.
Can’t afford to give the bench quality time in a decided game now when a tournament seed or berth might be dependent on a blowout win.

I would hope the put a cap on it though. Like margins over 20 points are counted the same as 20 point margins

From the CBS article:

As for scoring margin, it now matters -- to a certain point. The NET puts a cap on margin of victory/defeat at 10 points "to prevent rankings from encouraging unsportsmanlike play, such as needlessly running up the score in a game where the outcome was certain."

This seems to be heading in the wrong direction of determining worthy tournament schools.

The NCAA need to adjust for games played in conference away and home vs. out of conference away and home games. There are P5 teams who rarely play out of conference away games against teams not considered a P5 team.
The NCAA must incentivizes teams like Kansas, Kentucky, UCLA, Duke and other similar situated teams, to play teams not considered P5 away from home. Not only away from home but on that teams home floor. Unless the new rule take in to account conference home and away games vs. out of conference games, causes team to schedule teams not P5 H and H, nothing really will change. The P5 will load up with conference games vs. other similar top tier teams and still get that good win or lost, while still getting credit for playing away games.
A better result may come by limiting the ALL conference games by half, then adding the out of conference games to arrive at a score.
The bad P5 team that play 18 conference games, winning 9 and losing 9, should not get in over a lower tier team that played 18 games, winning 17, losing only the conference championship SEE MT.

Another reason to exclude non-power teams.