|
|
 |
|
2000's have produced 32
.500 and sub-.500 NCAA tournament at-large
teams
Since 2000, there have
been 25 at-large teams invited to the NCAA
tournament with .500 conference records,
along with 7 teams with sub-.500 records. It
is no coincidence that all of these teams
were from BCS conferences, and they had 8-8,
9-9, 7-9, or 8-10 conference records. Having
a .500 record does not necessarily mean that
you might not receive a relatively good
tournament seed, as 10 of these 32 teams
were seeded Nos. 5, 6, or 7 in the NCAA
tournament. Note that the better RPI
rankings generally translate to a better
tournament seed. Also, 8 teams in the lists
had sub-.600 overall won-lost records
entering the tournament.
Conf All
RPI
Year Seed School
Conf. W L W L Pct Rank
2000
8 Wisconsin B10 8 8 18 13 .581
30
2001
8 Ga. Tech ACC 8 8 17 12
.586 38
2001
8 Tennessee SEC 8 8 22 10 .688
15
2001
7 W. Forest ACC 8 8 19 10 .655
28
2002 11 B.
Coll. BE 8 8 20 11
.645 42
2003
8 LSU
SEC 8 8 21 10 .677 39
2003
7 Indiana B10 8 8
20 12 .625 44
2003 10
Auburn SEC 8
8 20 11 .645 38
2004
8 Alabama SEC 8 8
17 12 .586 25
2004
6 Vandy SEC
8 8 21 9 .700 27
2004
6 N. Caro. ACC 8 8 18 10
.643 19
2004 10 S.
Caro. SEC 8 8 23 10 .697
42
2005
7 West Va. BE 8 8
21 10 .677 44
2005
5 Ga. Tech ACC 8 8 19 11
.633 31
2006
6 Mich. St. B10 8 8 22 11 .667
18
2007
6 Duke ACC
8 8 22 10 .688 15
2007
9 Mich. St. B10 8 8 22 11 .667
24
2007 10 Ga.
Tech ACC 8 8 20 11 .645
52
2008
7 Miami FL ACC 8 8 22 10
.688 34
2008
9 Oregon P10
9 9 18 13 .581 58
2008
9 Texas A&M B12 8 8 24 10 .706
41
2008 12
Villanova BE 9 9 20 12
.625 51
2009 10
Minnesota B10 9 9 21 10 .677
42
2009 12
Arizona P10 9 9 19
13 .594 62
2009 10
Michigan B10 9 9 19 13
.594 44
2001
7 Penn St. B10 7 9 19 11
.633 24
2003 10
Alabama SEC 7 9 17
11 .607 36
2005 10
N.C. St. ACC 7 9 19 13
.594 74
2005 10
Iowa B10
7 9 21 11 .656 54
2007 12
Arkansas SEC 7 9 21 13
.618 35
2008 10
Arizona P10 8 10 19 14
.576 38
2009 10
Maryland ACC 7 9 20 13
.606 55
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bracket Bits from The RPI Report and The Women's RPI Report
From The RPI Report: So far, The 2000's have accounted for 25 at-large NCAA tournament teams with a conference record of .500 and 7 at-large teams with sub-.500 conference records. Of these 32 teams, the ACC had 9 at-large tournament teams, the Big Ten and SEC each had 8, the Big East and Pac-10 had 3 each, and the Big 12 had 1. This is definitely the domain of the BCS conferences. Ten of the teams with .500 records have been in the NCAA tournament the last 3 seasons, but there does not seem to be a trend favoring such teams being selected more recently. There were 12 .500 teams from 2000-2004 and 13 from 2005-2009. Six of these 25 teams were below .600 in all games played at the end of the regular season, and just 2 were .700 or better. Arizona had double-digit conference losses in 2008, only the 6th time that has happened in the 64/65-team NCAA tournament era, which last occurred in 1998.From The Women's RPI Report: There have been 45 teams that were ranked in the top 50 of the RPI since 2000 that were left out of the NCAA tournament. All in all, the reasons teams did not make the cut are lumped into only a few categories. They include not enough wins, too many losses, bad losses, bad all games and non-conference schedule strength rankings, poor finishes to the season, losing conference records, and poor records against top 50 or top 100 opponents. Of course, they were compared to other teams that were "on the board", and ultimately, only the individual committee members know why they voted as they did. |
|
Teams with No. 1 schedule strength rankings
can usually look forward to NCAA tournament invitation
Virginia ended an 8-year streak in which the top-ranked schedule strength team which was eligible did not receive an invitation to a post-season tournament. The Cavs ended the 2009 regular
season with the No. 1 schedule
strength rank, but their 10-18 overall record and 4-12 ACC mark was too much to overcome for post-season play. Since 1991,
14 of the 19 teams holding the No. 1
regular season schedule strength rank have been in the NCAA tournament and 15 of 19 teams have been in post-season play. In four of the last nine years, the team
holding top schedule strength honors has lost in
the first round of the NCAA tournament. List
|
|
Several conferences use CBN's RPI data to break tournament seeding ties
Nearly all conference offices subscribe
to both The RPI Report and The Women's RPI Report because they know they can count on the most accurate weighted RPI for the men
and the adjusted, or "secret", RPI for the women anywhere this side of the NCAA tournament selection
committees. CBN first made the Adjusted RPI ratings (which are no longer
used for the men) available to The RPI Report and The Women's RPI Report subscribers during the 1998-99 season. The NCAA used the Adjusted RPI ratings from the 1993-94
through the 2003-04 season for the men and
have used the weighted RPI since the 2004-05
season, while the women continue to use the
Adjusted RPI. The weighted RPI gives more credit to
teams that schedule tough opponents and that
beat good teams both at home and on the
road. Story |
|
AP carries the Men's RPI Ratings for 15th consecutive year during the 2008-09 season
For the 15th consecutive year, the Associated Press (AP) is carrying the RPI, provided by CBN, for both men's and women's college basketball. In addition, this is the
12th season that the AP has distributed the women's RPI. The final, full season men's and women's RPI ratings will be sent to the AP following the NCAA championship games. Story |
|
|
|
Statistics updated through games of Sunday, February 7, 2010
The February 8, 2010 issues of The RPI Report and The Women's RPI Report are now online |
Listen to a short radio clip that CBN's Jim Sukup had
on ESPN Radio with Chuck Wilson, Tony Bruno, and Mike Tirico on Sat., March 13, 1993. This was the first national radio interview that Sukup gave regarding
the RPI. Note that the RPI formula has changed several times since then. Listen
|
|
