This article is part of our RotoWire Bracketology series.
There have been plenty of questions surrounding the committee after the initial top-16 reveal last Sunday. A lot of time may have gone into it, but it's clear the members are confused and they're at a crossroads with the statistics available.
RPI has long been the stat the NCAA committee has turned to, but with advanced metrics taking over, the ridicule has been constant for more than a decade. RPI is widely known as a faulty stat that doesn't take into account numerous things like point-differential in wins and losses, while putting too much into strength of schedule. It's been said the committee will look at advanced metrics more this season, although still use RPI as the base for an updated Quadrant structure.
With four new committee members this year, there are still kinks to work out. From the surface, there were a few things that stood out with the first reveal. They used advanced metrics to give Purdue a 1-seed and Cincinnati a 2-seed, yet RPI was the biggest factor for Auburn getting a 2-seed and Clemson a 3-seed. However, advanced metrics were ignored with Michigan State as it got a 3-seed despite a top-six ranking in BPI, KenPom, Strength of Record and Sagarin.
There are also questions as to why Auburn was a 2-seed and Tennessee was a 4-seed. The Tigers beat the Vols on the road, but their best non-conference win was against Middle Tennessee on a neutral court (and they lost to Temple). Tennessee beat Purdue.
The committee has a lot of stats to work with, but there's a chance they might not be ready to use them all. When looking at some teams, advanced metrics work, but at the end of the day, RPI is still the main stat the committee will come back to. That only means there are going to be a lot of upset people on Selection Sunday due to the confusion surrounding the system.
For me, there are still a few weeks to go in the regular season and anything can change. I don't agree with the first 16 revealed and that's seen in my bracket.
Arizona is finally off the one line for me because I wrongly thought the Wildcats would run through the Pac-12. I have West Virginia higher than most because I think it will win four of its final five games. I have St. Mary's lower simply because I don't think it's a good team. I don't know why beating up on WCC opponents means a team should be a higher seed, especially with bad non-conference losses.
As we get closer to the bubble, there are a few things to keep an eye on, particularly in the Big Ten conference, where the committee will be factoring key bubble teams (such as Maryland, Penn State and Nebraska) against the rest of the field.
The Cornhuskers (RPI 51, KenPom 52) will be on the bubble for the remainder of the season even if they finish with 14 Big Ten wins. That's a troubling stat, but that's due in large part to a down year for the conference. Even if they win out, they may have to take down Michigan in the conference tournament, which will likely be the 4/5 matchup in the quarterfinals. The Terrapins (RPI 66, KP 39) and Nittany Lions (RPI 85, KP 38) are in a similar situation, albeit with tougher schedules to close the regular season. Penn State has a better chance for good wins with trips to Purdue and Nebraska remaining, along with a home game against Michigan.
If those three teams can't advance to the semifinals in the Big Ten tournament, it'll be hard to take any of them against teams from the ACC, Big East, Big 12 or SEC due to the strength of each conference. As of Thursday, the ACC had 12 teams in the RPI top 79, the Big East had eight in the RPI top 68, every Big 12 team was in the RPI top 98 and the SEC had 12 teams in the RPI top 84. The Big Ten is nowhere near those numbers with just seven teams in the RPI top 100.
Those three Big Ten teams are at a disadvantage on the bubble against teams from those other power conferences due to less opportunities for big wins. Providence (RPI 34, KP 67) has more losses, but also huge wins against Villanova, Xavier, Butler and Creighton. The same goes for Baylor (RPI 53, KP 33) and really any team in the Big 12. Mississippi State (RPI 69, KP 59) quietly entered bubble conversations only because it doesn't have a losing record in conference play. Even Washington (RPI 42, KP 96) is more widely considered a tournament team than Nebraska, only because it had home opportunities against Arizona and Arizona State in addition to the win against Kansas. The Cornhuskers only played Michigan State, Ohio State and Purdue once and they were all on the road.
These are the things that will be examined over the next few weeks and there will be plenty of conversations regarding metrics used. The ordeal between Nebraska and Washington (in addition to multiple others) is already a pain to look at.
*Stats from KenPom and RPI are as of Feb. 15
To view a compilation of all bracket predictions in the world, check out the Bracket Matrix. This bracket started in 2014 and has been among the most reliable the last three years.
