Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="nelsonmuntz, post: 4520718, member: 833"] RPI was better than NET. It was simple, straightforward, and measured wins and losses. No matter how anyone cuts it, Palm is right. Scoring margin drives the NET. Run up the score on a schedule of bad teams and you have a good shot of getting a bid. It is ironic that the NET, a supposedly superior tool, is actually less decisive in bid selection now than the RPI was in the 2000's. The RPI would pretty much dictate which teams got in and, for the most part, where they got seeded, with a handful of exceptions every year. Now, even the committee does not trust the NET, because they will jump around to select and seed the teams outside of where the NET would indicate. [/QUOTE]