Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="ecasadoSBU, post: 4897388, member: 3976"] The biggest issue with the NET (for me) is that the formula isn't public. When something is guarded as a secret it can easily lead to abuse because someone will always find out the formula and then there is asymmetry of information which leads to unfair advantages. The formula needs to be public, transparent. If everyone knows the formula then the benefits are negated. The beauty of the RPI was the transparency in its formula and how easy everyone could access it. If everyone tried to game it, the effects of gaming it would end up being neutralized and that's fair game. The RPI was simple and it worked for so long. So why change it? At the end of the day - there is no perfect way to select 68 teams. If perfection isn't possible then objectively nothing makes the NET any better than the RPI. Its just another selection tool. The only thing we ended up losing was transparency and gave the keys of the castle to the NCAA. A program would get mad that the RPI left them out. But if a team can't make a cut of 68 they are more to blame than any given selection criteria The conspiracy kitty in me tells me the NCAA ultimately had bad intentions with the NET. Something gives me the impression that the end goal was to get more Power-6 teams into the NCAA with reduced backlash by reducing the transparency. [/QUOTE]