2025 ARTICLE 19: RPI REPORTS AFTER WEEK 6 GAMES

Below are the following reports, following completion of Week 6 of the season:

1.  "Predicted" End-of-Season Ranks.  These are RPI reports based on the actual results of games already played PLUS predicted results of games not yet played.  The purpose of these reports is to give an idea of where teams might end up at the end of the regular season. The reports show both NCAA RPI and Balanced RPI ranks.

The result predictions for future games use teams' actual current NCAA RPI ratings as the basis for the predictions.  So these reports show where teams will end up if they all perform exactly in accord with their current NCAA RPI ratings.  As each week passes, the predictions will come closer and closer to where teams will end up.

2.  Actual Current Ranks.  These are RPI reports based only on games already played.  Teams' actual ranks in these reports (and the ratings on which the ranks are based) exactly match those published by the NCAA at the NCAA's RPI Archive, with the exceptions mentioned below, and also those published at Chris Henderson's 2025 Division I College Women's Soccer Schedule website.  These reports also include teams' current KPI, Massey, and Balanced RPI ranks so you can see how the different rating systems compare.

There are two items of interest regarding the NCAA's current RPI ratings:

1.  For purposes of New Haven's rating, the NCAA is excluding from consideration its first two games of the season, which were losses to Brown and Stony Brook.  These games, however, are included for purposes of Brown's and Stony Brook's ratings.  This is something I have not seen before and I do not know why the NCAA has done it.

2.  The NCAA has imposed maximum penalty adjustments for ties and losses to non-Division 1 opponents.  Several years ago, there was a decision NOT to impose penalties for these games and I am not aware of a decision to go back to imposing penalties.  I suspect the NCAA currently imposing the penalties is an error.  I have advised them of this and expect they will make a correction for future RPI publications.  This is not a big issue, as the teams receiving the penalties are unlikely to be contenders for NCAA Tournament participation.

"PREDICTED" END-OF-SEASON RANKS

Here are the predicted end-of-season NCAA RPI  and Balanced RPI ranks for teams.  For an Excel workbook containing these data, use the following link: 2025 RPI Report After Week 6.

The color coded columns on the left show, based on past history, the teams that would be candidates for NCAA Tournament seed pods and at large positions if these were the final NCAA RPI ranks.

Of particular importance are the differences between teams' NCAA RPI ranks and their ranks, within the NCAA RPI formula, as strength of schedule contributors to their opponents' ratings.  While the NCAA itself publishes various sets of RPI-related data, it does not publish teams' ranks as strength of schedule contributors.  It seems likely they don't publish these ranks because they would expose a serious flaw within the RPI formula.

Here are the predicted end-of-season ranks for conferences:

And here are the predicted end-of-season ranks for the four geographic regions.  Note that at the right end of the table, the table shows the proportions of games for each region's teams that are in-region and out-of-region and the percentages of each region's in-region games that are ties (as an indicator of the level of in-region parity).

ACTUAL CURRENT RANKS

Here are the actual current NCAA RPI and Balanced RPI ranks for teams.  For an Excel workbook containing these data, use the following link: 2025 RPI Report Actual Results Only After Week 6.

As with the end-of-season reports, note the differences between teams' NCAA RPI ranks and their ranks, within the NCAA RPI formula, as strength of schedule contributors to their opponents' ratings.

Also, for each of teams, conferences, and regions, these reports show current KPI and Massey ranks so you can compare them to the NCAA RPI and Balanced RPI ranks.

In the Teams table, the color coded columns on the left show, based on past history, the teams that are potential seeds and at large selections for the NCAA Tournament.

Here are the actual current ranks for conferences:

And here are the current actual ranks for the regions.  Again, on the far right, you can see each region's distribution of games between in-region and out-of-region games as well as the percentage of each region's in-region games that have been ties.

2025 ARTICLE 18: RPI REPORTS AFTER WEEK 5 GAMES

Now that we have completed the fifth weekend of the season, each week I will publish two sets of reports:

1.  "Predicted" End-of-Season Ranks.  These are RPI reports based on the actual results of games already played plus predicted results of games not yet played, which are the kinds of reports I have published so far after each week of the season.  The purpose of these reports is to give an idea of where teams might end up at the end of the regular season. The reports show both NCAA RPI and Balanced RPI ranks.

New this week, however, the result predictions for future games use teams' actual current NCAA RPI ratings as the basis for predicting future results, rather than the assigned pre-season ratings used in my previous reports.  So these reports show where teams will end up if they all perform exactly in accord with their current NCAA RPI ratings. 

As an interesting note, the actual results of games played so far are slightly more consistent with the assigned pre-season ratings than with the actual current NCAA RPI ratings.

2.  Actual Current Ranks.  These are RPI reports based only on games already played.  Teams' actual ranks in these reports (and the ratings on which the ranks are based) exactly match those published by the NCAA at the NCAA's RPI Archive and also those published at Chris Henderson's 2025 Division I College Women's Soccer Schedule website.  These reports also include teams' current KPI, Massey, and Balanced RPI ranks so you can see how the different rating systems compare.

"PREDICTED" END-OF-SEASON RANKS

Here are the predicted end-of-season NCAA RPI  and Balanced RPI ranks for teams.  For an Excel workbook containing these data, use the following link: 2025 RPI Report After Week 5.

The color coded columns on the left show, based on past history, the teams that would be candidates for NCAA Tournament seed pods and at large positions if these were the final NCAA RPI ranks.

Of particular importance are the differences between teams' NCAA RPI ranks and their ranks, within the NCAA RPI formula, as strength of schedule contributors to their opponents' ratings.  While the NCAA itself publishes various sets of RPI-related data, it does not publish teams' ranks as strength of schedule contributors.  It seems likely they don't publish these ranks because they would expose a serious flaw within the RPI formula.

Here are the predicted end-of-season ranks for conferences:

And here are the predicted end-of-season ranks for the four geographic regions.  Note that at the right end of the table, the table shows the proportions of games for each region's teams that are in-region and out-of-region and the percentages of each region's in-region games that are ties (as an indicator of the level of in-region parity).

ACTUAL CURRENT RANKS

Here are the actual current NCAA RPI and Balanced RPI ranks for teams.  For an Excel workbook containing these data, use the following link: 2025 RPI Report Actual Results Only After Week 5.

As with the end-of-season reports, note the differences between teams' NCAA RPI ranks and their ranks, within the NCAA RPI formula, as strength of schedule contributors to their opponents' ratings.

Also, for each of teams, conferences, and regions, these reports show current KPI and Massey ranks so you can compare them to the NCAA RPI and Balanced RPI ranks.

Here are the actual current ranks for conferences:

And here are the current actual ranks for the regions.  Again, on the far right, you can see each region's distribution of games between in-region and out-of-region games as well as the percentage of each region's in-region games that have been ties.

2025 ARTICLE 17: RPI REPORT AFTER WEEK 4 GAMES

Below are my weekly tables showing predicted end-of-season rankings for teams, conferences, and regions based on the actual results of games played through Week 4 of the season and predicted results of games not yet played.  We are about a third of the way into the season, so the numbers remain pretty speculative.  Please note that the tables include NCAA RPI, my Balanced RPI, and Massey rankings.  As soon as KPI rankings are available, most likely next week, they also will be in the tables.

For those with a serious interest in the numbers, I sugest you download the 2025 RPI Report After Week 4 Excel workbook, which should be easier to use than the tables below.

As I have written previously, in the tables, it is worthwhile to look at the differences between teams' NCAA RPI ranks and their ranks as Strength of Schedule contributors, both for the teams themselves and for their opponents.  If you spend time looking through these differences on the Teams, Conferences, and Regions tables, you should be able to see the NCAA RPI's discriminatory patterns.

TEAMS

CONFERENCES

REGIONS

2025 ARTICLE 16: RPI REPORT AFTER WEEK 3 GAMES

Below are my weekly tables showing predicted end-of-season rankings for teams, conferences, and regions based on the actual results of games played through Week 3 of the season (including Labor Day, September 1) and predicted results of games not yet played.  Since we still are not very far into the season, the numbers remain pretty speculative.  Please note that the tables include NCAA RPI, my Balanced RPI, and Massey rankings.  Later in the season when KPI rankings are available, they also will be in the tables.

For those with a serious interest in the numbers, I sugest you download the 2025 RPI Report After Week 3 Excel workbook, which should be easier to use than the tables below.

Something I am watching very closely is the percentages, by region, of in-region games that are ties.  I watch this because, as discussed previously, the NCAA RPI formula punishes regions with high levels of parity, one measure of which is the percentage of in-region games that are ties.  This is a problem the Committee made a little worse last year when it changed the value of ties in the RPI formula's calculation of a team's winning percentage from half a win to a third of a win.  You can find the percentage of in-region ties for each region on the Regions page at the far right of the table.  So far this year, it looks like the West and Middle regions will have extraordinarily high levels of in-region ties, significantly higher than for the North and South regions.

The other things to look at on the tables, at this point, are the differences between teams' NCAA RPI ranks and their ranks as Strength of Schedule contributors, both for the teams themselves and for their opponents.  If you spend time looking through these differences on the Teams and Conference pages, you should be able to see for yourself the NCAA RPI's discriminatory patterns.

TEAMS

CONFERENCES

REGIONS