2025 ARTICLE 26: NCAA TOURNAMENT BRACKET PROJECTIONS AFTER WEEK 11 GAMES AND IN/OUT CASE STUDY

Below in this week's bonus article, I show a predicted NCAA Tournament bracket based on the Women's Soccer Committee's historic patterns (1) with the Committee using the NCAA RPI as its rating system and (2) as if the Committee were using the Balanced RPI rather than the NCAA RPI.  I also include Chris Henderson's projected bracket so that you can compare all three.  The Henderson bracket projection will not quite give an apples-to-apples comparison, as his data includes a couple of games from Monday, October 27.

The NCAA RPI and Balanced RPI predictions are based on the actual results of games played through Sunday, October 26, and predicted results of games not yet played including conference tournament games.  The predicted results are based on teams' current NCAA RPI ratings, in other words what the results should be if all teams perform exactly in accord with their ratings as adjusted for home field advantage.

In addition, I am including a case study showing why the Committee likely would include Saint Louis as an at large team if using the NCAA RPI but instead would include Kansas State if using the Balanced RPI and how the difference relates to the way the NCAA RPI computes strength of schedule.

PROJECTED BRACKET COMPARISON

The following table shows projected brackets.  Scroll to the right for a key:

Saint Louis or Kansas State Case Study

In this week's table, there is only one team that gets an at large position using the NCAA RPI -- Saint Louis -- that does not get one using the Balanced RPI, and one team that gets an at large position using the Balanced RPI -- Kansas State -- that does not get one using the NCAA RPI.  So the question for today is: Why the Saint Louis/Kansas State switch?  The key is in how the NCAA RPI computes the teams' strengths of schedule.

NCAA RPI Formula, Rank

Saint Louis

                        RPI Rank:  27

                        Opponents' Average Rank/Rank as Strength of Schedule Contributors:  127/139

                        Conference Opponents' Av Rank/Rank as SoS Contributors:  115/114

                        NonConference Opponents' Av Rank/Rank as SoS Contributors:  147/180

Kansas State:

                         RPI Rank:  54

                        Opponents' Average Rank/Rank as Strength of Schedule Contributors:  102/122

                        Conference Opponents' Av Rank/Rank as SoS Contributors:  56/91

                        NonConference Opponents' Av Rank/Rank as SoS Contributors:  174/171

In the above information, the important thing to note is that Saint Louis' opponents' ranks as strength of schedule contributors to its RPI are 12 positions poorer than their actual RPI ranks whereas Kansas State's are 20 positions poorer.  In other words, although the RPI appears to be understating Saint Louis' strength of schedule, it is understanding Kansas State's strength of schedule by significantly more.

Here are the comparable numbers for the Balanced RPI:

Balanced RPI Formula, Rank

Saint Louis

                        RPI Rank:  46

                        Opponents' Average Rank/Rank as Strength of Schedule Contributors:  140/140

                        Conference Opponents' Av Rank/Rank as SoS Contributors:  139/139

                        NonConference Opponents' Av Rank/Rank as SoS Contributors:  141/142

Kansas State:

                         RPI Rank:  48

                        Opponents' Average Rank/Rank as Strength of Schedule Contributors:  85/85

                        Conference Opponents' Av Rank/Rank as SoS Contributors:  41/41

                        NonConference Opponents' Av Rank/Rank as SoS Contributors:  155/155

Note here that the teams' opponents' RPI ranks and ranks as strength of schedule contributors are essentially the same, rather than having the differences of the NCAA RPI.

The result of using the Balanced RPI is that Kansas State moves up in the rankings from 54 to 48.  And the bigger result is that Saint Louis moves down from 27 to 46.  Why does Saint Louis drop so far?  Because there are more teams than Kansas State that are in the same opponents' strength of schedule situation as Kansas State and when those teams' opponents' strengths of schedule are corrected, they move ahead of Saint Louis in the rankings.

In addition to the change in RPI rank, there is another change using the Balanced RPI that is a prime contributor to Kansas State displacing Saint Louis as an at large team.  That change is in the teams' good results against Top 50 opponents, which when paired with the RPI is the prime driver of the Women's Soccer Committee's at large decisions (as demonstrated by the Committee's historic decision patterns in relation to the data it sees).

NCAA RPI Formula, Top 50 Results (Good Results)

Saint Louis

                        #20 Dayton Win Away, Points 144

                        Total Top 50 Results Points 144, Total Points Rank 60

Kansas State

                        #13 Colorado Tie Away, Points 576

                        #35 UCF Tie Away, Points 12

                        Total Top 50 Results Points 588, Total Points Rank 44

Note: Under the NCAA RPI, Saint Louis' RPI is better than Kansas State's, but Kansas State's Top 50 Results Score is better than Saint Louis'.  However, Kansas State's Top 50 Results are not enough to overcome Saint Louis' better RPI.

Balanced RPI Formula, Top 50 Results (Good Results)

Saint Louis

                        #43 Dayton Win Away, Points 4

                        Total Top 50 Results Points 4, Total Points Rank 96

Kansas State

                        #8 Colorado Tie Away, Points 2880

                        #23 UCF Tie Away, Points 90

                        Total Top 50 Results Points 2970, Total Points Rank 33

Note: Under the Balanced RPI:

(1) Dayton's rank is poorer, for reasons similar to why Saint Louis' rank is poorer.  As a result, Saint Louis' Top 50 Results score and rank are poorer. 

(2)  Colorado's and UCF's ranks are better, for reasons similar to why Kansas State's rank is better.  As a result, Kansas State's Top 50 Results score and rank are better. 

(3)  The net effect is that Kansas State, rather than Saint Louis, gets an at large position.

Thus once the RPI's defective way of computing strength of schedule is corrected, Kansas State gets an at large position and Saint Louis does not. 

2025 ARTICLE 25: RPI REPORTS AFTER WEEK 11 GAMES

This week's article has updates of the following reports:

Rankings and other data based on the results of games actually played to date;

Ratings and other data based on the results of games actually played to date PLUS predicted results of games not yet played.

Predicted NCAA Tournament bracket based on the Women's Soccer Committee's historic patterns (1) with the Committee using the NCAA RPI as its rating system and (2) as if the Committee were using the Balanced RPI rather than the NCAA RPI.  This also includes Chris Henderson's projected bracket so that you can compare all three.

 In a bonus article this week, I'll post a predicted NCAA Tournament bracket based on the Women's Soccer Committee's historic patterns (1) with the Committee using the NCAA RPI as its rating system and (2) as if the Committee were using the Balanced RPI rather than the NCAA RPI.  The bonus article also will include Chris Henderson's projected bracket so that you can compare all three.  And finally, it will include a case study showing why the Committee likely would include Saint Louis as an at large team if using the NCAA RPI but instead would include Kansas State if using the Balanced RPI and how the difference relates to the way the NCAA RPI computes strength of schedule.

THIS WEEK'S TABLES

1.  Actual Current Ranks.  These are based only on games already played, through Sunday, October 26.  Teams' actual ranks in these reports (and the ratings on which the ranks are based) match those published by the NCAA at the NCAA's RPI Archive (except that the NCAA mistakenly is imposing penalty adjustments for losses and ties against non-Division 1 opponents), 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 compare those systems' ratings.

2.  "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, including in conference tournaments.  The reports now are getting close to where teams will 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.

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 11.

NOTE:  If you use the link, you will see the workbook in a Google Sheets format, which will be difficult or impossible to read.  Rather than trying to use that workbook, take the following steps to download the workbook as an Excel workbook:

Click on File in the upper left.

In the drop down menu, click on Download.

In the drop down menu, click on Microsoft Excel (.xlsx).

This will download the workbook as an Excel workbook.

In the tables, be sure to note the differences between teams', conferences', and regions' NCAA RPI ranks and their ranks, within the NCAA RPI formula, as strength of schedule contributors to their opponents' ratings.  You also can see the same information for the Balanced RPI.  Also check the the salmon-highlighted columns showing the differences between actual winning percentages and probable winning percentages.  The probable winning percentages are based on current NCAA RPI 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, given their NCAA RPI ranks at this point in the season.

Here are the actual current ranks for conferences:

And here are the current actual ranks for the regions.  Note that at the right end of the table are the distributions of each region's games among the different regions.  Next to that, you will see the proportion of tie games when teams from a region are playing opponents from the same region, which is an indicator of the level of parity within the region:

"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 11.

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:

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

And here are the predicted end-of-season ranks for the four geographic regions:

2025 ARTICLE 24: RPI REPORTS AFTER WEEK 10 GAMES

 This week's article has updates of the following reports:

Rankings and other data based on the results of games actually played to date;

Ratings and other data based on the results of games actually played to date PLUS predicted results of games not yet played.

Predicted NCAA Tournament bracket based on the Women's Soccer Committee's historic patterns (1) with the Committee using the NCAA RPI as its rating system and (2) as if the Committee were using the Balanced RPI rather than the NCAA RPI.

THIS WEEK'S TABLES

1.  Actual Current Ranks.  These are based only on games already played, through Sunday, October 19.  Teams' actual ranks in these reports (and the ratings on which the ranks are based) match those published by the NCAA at the NCAA's RPI Archive (except that the NCAA mistakenly is imposing penalty adjustments for losses and ties against non-Division 1 opponents), 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 compare those systems' ratings.

2.  "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 reports suggest 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 come closer and closer to where teams will end up.

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 10.

NOTE:  If you use the link, you will see the workbook in a Google Sheets format, which will be difficult or impossible to read.  Rather than trying to use that workbook, take the following steps to download the workbook as an Excel workbook:

Click on File in the upper left.

In the drop down menu, click on Download.

In the drop down menu, click on Microsoft Excel (.xlsx).

This will download the workbook as an Excel workbook.

In the tables, be sure to note the differences between teams', conferences', and regions' NCAA RPI ranks and their ranks, within the NCAA RPI formula, as strength of schedule contributors to their opponents' ratings.  You also can see the same information for the Balanced RPI.  Also check the the salmon-highlighted columns showing the differences between actual winning percentages and probable winning percentages.  The probable winning percentages are based on current NCAA RPI 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, given their NCAA RPI ranks at this point in the season.

Here are the actual current ranks for conferences:

And here are the current actual ranks for the regions.  Note that at the right end of the table are the distributions of each region's games among the different regions and the proportion of tie games when teams from a region are playing opponents from the same region:

"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 10.

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:

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

And here are the predicted end-of-season ranks for the four geographic regions:

PREDICTED NCAA TOURNAMENT BRACKET

I also have used my bracket formation program to show the currently projected NCAA Tournament bracket using the NCAA RPI as compared to what it would be if the Women's Soccer Committee were using the Balanced RPI.  I won't go into a detailed explanation here of how the program works, except to say it is based on the Committee's decision patterns from 2007 to the present and by the end of the season its predictions have been on average within 1 position of the Committee's at large selections.  I believe the current comparison paints a good general picture of the difference between the NCAA RPI and the Balanced RPI.  Remember, the NCAA RPI discriminates against some conferences and regions and in favor of others.  The Balanced RPI eliminates most of the discrimination.

The following table shows how the systems' NCAA Tournament brackets compare.  It has teams arranged by region and then by conference, as I believe this gives the best picture of what happens when the Balanced RPI removes the NCAA RPI's discrimination.  To the right of the table is a key to the entries in the Status columns.

Peruse the table and draw your own conclusions.  I recommend that rather than focusing on specific teams, you focus on the regions and conferences with teams moving up or down in the seeds, in or out of the at large candidate group, and in and out of the at large selections in the shift from the NCAA RPI to the Balanced RPI.

2025 ARTICLE 23: RPI REPORTS AFTER WEEK 9 GAMES

This week, I've added a new item to the RPI Report that is limited to games already played.  The new item compares teams', conferences', and regions' actual winning percentages so far (using the NCAA winning percentage formula) to what one would expect their winning percentages to be based on their current NCAA RPI ratings.  This allows you to see which teams, conferences, and regions have performed better or more poorly than their NCAA RPI ratings say they have performed.  In other words, they show where the current NCAA RPI ratings overstate or understate teams', conferences', and regions' ratings.

Ths article also will include projected NCAA Tournament seeds and at large selections based on the Committee using the NCAA RPI, as compared to projected seeds and at large selections if the Committee were using the Balanced RPI.

THIS WEEK'S TABLES

Below are the following reports, after completion of Week 9 of the season:

1.  Actual Current Ranks.  These are based only on games already played, through Sunday, October 12.  Teams' actual ranks in these reports (and the ratings on which the ranks are based) match those published by the NCAA at the NCAA's RPI Archive (except that the NCAA mistakenly is imposing penalty adjustments for losses and ties against non-Division 1 opponents), 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 compare those systems' ratings.

2.  "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 reports suggest 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 come closer and closer to where teams will end up.

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 9.

NOTE:  If you use the link, you will see the workbook in a Google Sheets format, which will be difficult or impossible to read.  Rather than trying to use that workbook, take the following steps to download the workbook as an Excel workbook:

Click on File in the upper left.

In the drop down menu, click on Download.

In the drop down menu, click on Microsoft Excel (.xlsx).

This will download the workbook as an Excel workbook.

In the tables, be sure to note the differences between teams', conferences', and regions' NCAA RPI ranks and their ranks, within the NCAA RPI formula, as strength of schedule contributors to their opponents' ratings.  You also can see the same information for the Balanced RPI.  Also check the the salmon-highlighted columns showing the differences between actual winning percentages and probable winning percentages.  The probable winning percentages are based on current NCAA RPI 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, given their NCAA RPI ranks at this point in the season.

Here are the actual current ranks for conferences:

And here are the current actual ranks for the regions.  Note that at the right end of the table are the distributions of each region's games among the different regions and the proportion of tie games when teams from a region are playing opponents from the same region:

"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 9.

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:

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

And here are the predicted end-of-season ranks for the four geographic regions:

PREDICTED NCAA TOURNAMENT BRACKET

I also have used my bracket formation program to show the currently projected NCAA Tournament bracket using the NCAA RPI as compared to what it would be if the Women's Soccer Committee were using the Balanced RPI.  I won't go into a detailed explanation here of how the program works, except to say it is based on the Committee's decision patterns from 2007 to the present and by the end of the season its predictions have been on average within 1 position of the Committee's at large selections.  I believe the current comparison paints a good general picture of the difference between the NCAA RPI and the Balanced RPI.  Remember, the NCAA RPI discriminates against some conferences and regions and in favor of others.  The Balanced RPI eliminates most of the discrimination.

The following table shows how the systems' NCAA Tournament brackets compare.  It has teams arranged by region and then by conference, as I believe this gives the best picture of what happens when the Balanced RPI removes the NCAA RPI's discrimination.  To the right of the table is a key to the entries in the Status columns.

Peruse the table and draw your own conclusions.  I recommend that rather than focusing on specific teams, you focus on the regions and conferences with teams moving up or down in the seeds, in or out of the at large candidate group, and in and out of the at large selections in the shift from the NCAA RPI to the Balanced RPI.

2025 ARTICLE 22: PROJECTED NCAA TOURNAMENT BRACKET BASED ON THE NCAA RPI AS COMPARED TO THE BALANCED RPI

As a bonus this week, I have used my bracket formation program to show the program's currently projected NCAA Tournament bracket using the NCAA RPI as compared to what it would be if the Women's Soccer Committee were using the Balanced RPI.  I won't go into a detailed explanation here of how the program works, except to say it is based on the Committee's decision patterns from 2007 to the present and by the end of the season its predictions have been on average within 1 position of the Committee's at large selections.  At this stage of the season, the projections are crude, but I believe the a current comparison paints a good general picture of the difference between the NCAA RPI and the Balanced RPI.  Remember, the NCAA RPI discriminates against some conferences and regions and in favor of others.  The Balanced RPI eliminates most of the discrimination.

The following table shows how the systems' NCAA Tournament brackets compare.  It has teams arranged by region and then by conference, as I believe this gives the best picture of what happens when the Balanced RPI removes the NCAA RPI's discrimination.  To the right of the table is a key to the entries in the Status columns.

Peruse the table and draw your own conclusions.  I recommend that rather than focusing on specific teams, you focus on the regions and conferences with teams moving up or down in the seeds, in or out of the at large candidate group, and in and out of the at large selections in the shift from the NCAA RPI to the Balanced RPI.

2025 ARTICLE 21: RPI REPORTS AFTER WEEK 8 GAMES

In the weekly reports this year, the detailed data has included teams', conferences', and regions' NCAA RPI and Balanced RPI ranks and their opponents' average ranks, but also their ranks and their opponents' average ranks as strength of schedule contributors within the respective RPI formulas.  As you have been able to see, for the NCAA RPI, the overall ranks and the ranks as strength of schedule contributors can be very different.  For the Balanced RPI, they essentially are the same.  Here is a table that shows this for teams based on all seasons since 2010 (excluding Covid-affected 2020):

As you can see, the average and median differences between teams' NCAA RPI overall ranks and their ranks within the NCAA formula as strength of schedule contributors are large, with an extremely large maximum.  Further, only about a third of teams have differences of 15 or fewer positions, meaning about two-thirds have differences greater than 15 positions.  One result of this is that teams, when scheduling, need to consider not only the likely ranks of potential opponents but also their likely ranks as strength of schedule contributors since it is those ranks that get built into the NCAA RPI formula.  It makes it possible to "trick" the RPI by scheduling opponents whose ranks as strength of schedule contributors are likely to be better than their overall ranks.  The significance of the 15 or fewer positions difference percentage is that it is roughly the break point below which worrying about the difference between overall rank and strength of schedule contributor rank isn't very productive.

I designed the Balanced RPI specifically to equalize teams' overall ranks and their ranks as strength of schedule contributors.  As you can see, for practical purposes Balanced RPI overall ranks and ranks as strength of schedule contributors are the same.  (In a later post, I'll show how this essentially eliminates the NCAA RPI's discrimination when rating conferences' and regions' teams in relation to teams from other conferences and regions.)

In the weekly reports, you can see that this results in the NCAA RPI and Balanced RPI ranking teams differently.  And, especially as the weeks pass, I anticipate you will see that the NCAA RPI and KPI ranks tend to be relatively similar to each other, with the Balanced RPI and Massey ranks being similar to each other.  Starting with this week, I've re-arranged the report columns so that you more easily can see how the four systems compare.

THIS WEEK'S TABLES

Below are the following reports, after completion of Week 8 of the season:

1.  Actual Current Ranks.  These are 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 (with two minor exceptions).  These reports also include teams' current KPI, Massey, and Balanced RPI ranks so you can see how the different rating systems compare.

2.  "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 come closer and closer to where teams will end up.

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 8.

NOTE:  If you use the link, you will see the workbook in a Google Sheets format, which will be difficult or impossible to read.  Rather than trying to use that workbook, take the following steps to download the workbook as an Excel workbook:

Click on File in the upper left.

In the drop down menu, click on Download.

In the drop down menu, click on Microsoft Excel (.xlsx).

This will download the workbook as an Excel workbook.

In the tables, be sure to note the differences between teams', conferences', and regions' NCAA RPI ranks and their ranks, within the NCAA RPI formula, as strength of schedule contributors to their opponents' ratings.  You also can see the same information for the Balanced RPI.

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, given their NCAA RPI ranks at this point in the season.

Here are the actual current ranks for conferences:

And here are the current actual ranks for the regions.  Note that at the right end of the table are the distributions of each region's games among the different regions and the proportion of tie games when teams from a region are playing opponents from the same region:

"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 8.

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:

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

And here are the predicted end-of-season ranks for the four geographic regions: