Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Bear11, post: 2609834, member: 7934"] Despite Mississippi State now picking up a loss, most still consider them a lock for a 1 seed. I have no problem with this, and I think they are a top 3 team nationally. However, I don't understand how they are considered a lock for a top seed while Baylor is expected to get a 2. Mississippi State is now 5th in RPI, which is claimed to be the key metric. They have an RPI SOS of 21, basically the same as Baylor's at 25 (as a side note, I hate bringing up both RPI and RPI SOS, since RPI largely IS SOS, but that is another battle). Massey and Sagarin have Baylor with a stronger schedule, though I realize that likely won't be considered. All metrics I can find have Baylor over Mississippi State. So why is one a lock and the other consider a long shot? I don't bring this up to argue that Mississippi State should be a 2 seed, because I think they are deserving. I just wanted to highlight some confusing logic that Creme, and perhaps the committee, tends to indulge in. On the men's side, it has been made known that the committee is de-emphasizing the RPI, and allowing advanced metrics like Massey, Sagarin, KenPom, and ESPN's strength of record. Does anyone know if there is any equivalent movement on the women's side, or will they continue to cling to RPI like it is 1983? [/QUOTE]