RPI and Bracketology for D1 Women's Soccer Blogspace: REPORT 10: UPDATE INCORPORATING RESULTS THROUGH SEPTEMBER 10

This is my fourth weekly report for the 2023 season. Each week I show:

1. Teams’ simulated ranks using the current NCAA RPI and my Balanced RPI;

2. Based on the current NCAA RPI, teams in candidate pools (expanded) for NCAA Tournament #1, 2, 3, and 4 seeds and for at large selections and where they appear to fit within the pools; and

3. Likely differences in at large selections for the NCAA Tournament if the Women’s Soccer Committee were to use the Balanced RPI rather than the current NCAA RPI.

The background for the information is in 2023 Reports 1 through 4.

Each week, I replace my simulated results for the previous week with actual results. So this week’s information is based on actual results of games played through Sunday, September 10, and simulated results of games not yet played.

Summarizing the likely differences in at large selections for the NCAA Tournament in changing from the current NCAA RPI to the Balanced RPI, derived from the last table below:

At Large Candidate Teams: 9 teams that are not at large candidates under the current NCAA RPI are candidates under the Balanced RPI. Of these, 4 are from the West, 2 from the South, 2 from the Middle, and 1 from the North regions. 8 are from Power 5 conferences and 1 is not from a Power 5 conference.

No Longer Candidate Teams: 9 teams that are at large candidates (if not Automatic Qualifiers) under the current NCAA RPI are not candidates under the Balanced RPI. Of these, 4 are from the North, 2 are from the South, and 3 are from the Middle regions. All 9 are from non-Power 5 conferences. Of these, all either are Automatic Qualifiers or likely would not get at large selections under the current NCAA RPI.

Selected Teams: 6 teams that likely are not at large selections under the current NCAA RPI likely are at large selections under the Balanced RPI. Of these, 3 are from the West, 2 from the Middle, and 1 from the South regions. 5 are from Power 5 conferences and 1 is not.

No Longer Selected Teams: 6 teams that likely are at large selections under the current NCAA RPI likely are not at large selections under the Balanced RPI. Of these, 2 are from the North and 4 from the South. 1 is from a Power 5 conference and 5 are not.

The basic change pattern is that teams dropped from the at large candidate pool either are Automatic Qualifiers or likely are not at large selections under the current RPI, so they are not hurt by a change to the Balanced RPI. But of the teams added to the candidate pool under the Balanced RPI, some likely are at large selections, displacing teams that are at large selections under the current NCAA RPI. Thus the effect of the defects in the current NCAA RPI is to prevent teams that deserve at large selections from even being considered by the Committee, with the result that less deserving teams are getting at large selections.

I have added two additional columns to the last table below, on the right. These show teams’ opponents’ average current NCAA RPI ranks and then the opponents’ average current NCAA RPI Strength of Schedule Contribution ranks. If you look at these columns for the teams that are in the at large candidate pool under the Balanced RPI but not under the current NCAA RPI, you will see that for all but one of these teams the current NCAA RPI underrates their Strengths of Schedule, with 1 rated about right. On the other hand, for the teams that drop out of the candidate pool under the Balanced RPI, the current NCAA RPI underrates only 2 of their Strengths of Schedule and either rates the others’ strengths of schedule about right or overrates their Strengths of Schedule. It is the defective Strength of Schedule ratings that cause the wrong teams to be in the Top 57 at large candidates group.

Simulated Ranks

(ARPI 2015 BPs is the current NCAA RPI; URPI 50 50 SoS Iteration 15 is the Balanced RPI)