In 2025 Article 7 and 2025 Article 8, I described how I assign pre-season NCAA RPI ratings and ranks to teams and then, assuming those ratings and ranks represent true team strength, apply them to teams' schedules to generate predicted end-of-season NCAA RPI ratings and ranks. Once I have done that, at the end of each week of the season I replace that week's predicted results with games' actual results. Then, using those actual results combined with predicted results for the balance of the season, I generate new predicted end-of-season NCAA RPI ratings and ranks. After completing week 5 of the season, I will switch from using assigned pre-season NCAA RPI ratings and ranks as the basis for predicting future results to using the then actual NCAA RPI ratings and ranks as the basis.
Using this process, the predicted end-of-season NCAA RPI ratings and ranks are very speculative at the beginning of the season. However, as each week passes, they become progressively closer to what the actual end-of-season ratings and ranks will be. By the last few weeks of the season, they become helpful when trying to figure out what results teams need in their remaining games in order to get particular NCAA Tournament seeds or at large selections.
Today's report shows where things are with Week 1's actual results incorporated into the end-of-season predictions. The report has a page for teams, for conferences, and for geographic playing pool regions. You can download the report as an Excel workbook with this link: 2025 Week 1 RPI Report. The same information also is set out in tables below, but I recommend downloading the workbook as it likely will be easier to use. (If using the tables below, scroll to the right to see additional columns.)
This year, an emphasis in these reports is on showing why the NCAA RPI, because of how it measures the opponents' strengths of schedule that it incorporates into its formula, discriminates against or in favor of particular teams, conferences, and regions.
TEAMS
This page shows, for each team:
Team name
Geographic playing pool region
Conference
If the team is predicted to be its conference's NCAA Tournament automatic qualifier (AQ)
If the team is predicted to be disqualified from an NCAA Tournament at large selection due to having more losses than wins (1)
Team's
NCAA RPI rank (based on past history, a key factor in selecting teams that will be in the NCAA Tournament #1 through #4 seed pods)
rank as a strength of schedule contributor to opponents under the NCAA RPI formula
Opponents'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributors under the NCAA RPI formula
Conference opponents'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributors under the NCAA RPI formula
[NOTE: Teams have relatively little control over this part of their schedules.]
Non-Conference opponents'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributorsl under the NCAA RPI formula
[NOTE: Teams control this part of their schedules, to some extent. Geographic factors such as travel expenses, available opponents, and other factors can be limiting considerations.]
NCAA RPI Top 50 Results Score
NCAA RPI Top 50 Results Rank (based on past history, a key factor in NCAA Tournament at large selections and in selecting teams that will be in the #5 through #8 seed pods)
Similar rank and strength of schedule contributor rank numbers under the Balanced RPI
KPI rank if available
Massey rank
CONFERENCES
This page shows, for each conference:
Conference name
Conference's NCAA RPI rank
Teams'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributors under the NCAA RPI formula
Opponents'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributors under the NCAA RPI formula
Conference opponents'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributors under the NCAA RPI formula
Non-Conference opponents'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributorsl under the NCAA RPI formula
Conference's Non-Conference RPI rank
Similar rank and strength of schedule contributor rank numbers under the Balanced RPI
KPI rank if available
Massey rank
REGIONS
This page shows, for each region:
Region name
Number of teams in region
Region's NCAA RPI rank
Teams'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributors under the NCAA RPI formula
Opponents'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributors under the NCAA RPI formula
Region opponents'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributors under the NCAA RPI formula
(NOTE: Due to budget limitations, teams may be compelled to play all or most of their non-conference games against opponents from their own geographic regions.]
Non-Region opponents'
average NCAA RPI rank
average rank as strength of schedule contributorsl under the NCAA RPI formula
Similar rank and strength of schedule contributor rank numbers under the Balanced RPI
KPI rank if available
Massey rank
Regions' proportions of games played against teams from each region (NOTE: This years, the numbers of out-of-region games are down about 30% from past patterns. This may result in a significant degradation of the NCAA RPI's already impaired ability to properly rate teams from a region in relation to teams from other regions.)
Proportion of in-region games that are ties (as a measure of in-region parity) (NOTE: The NCAA RPI, because of how it measures Strength of Schedule, on average discriminates against teams from regions with higher region parity.)
No comments:
Post a Comment