But it doesn't appear to be disregarded when it comes to seeding teams. Here's the top 8 seeds, with their RPI in parentheses:ICGrad wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 3:16 pmThe fact that Duke had a #7 RPI invalidates the very notion of RPI.suitcase10 wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 2:41 pm Never has a team with a top 10 rpi been left out of the tourney, much less the 7 rpi. and left out for the 15 rpi?
Their best win was against the #9 RPI team. They lost to 3 teams with sub-20 RPIs - including to RPI 30 Syracuse - and lost a total of 6 games. A majority of their wins were against teams with RPIs in the mid-20 to 50-ish range.
The fact that that translates to a #7 RPI tells me that RPI is something that can be wholly disregarded.
Duke (and others) have figured out how to game the RPI system - lots of games against mediocre teams from mid-level conferences likely to end up with good records. Ironically, it doesn't even matter if you win or lose these games. This year the committee looked at their "accomplishments" and said "nyet." Good for them.
1. Maryland (1)
2. Georgetown (2)
3. Penn (4)
4. Yale (6)
5. Princeton (3)
6. Rutgers (5)
7. Cornell (8)
8. Brown (10).
Looks pretty tight to me, and definitely not being disregarded. Duke gets knocked out, as they should, because they had three significant losses (which is part of the selection criteria) to Jacksonville, Loyola, and Syracuse. You can't respect the RPI when it comes to seeding teams, but then selectively disrespect Duke's RPI when it comes to giving ND credit for two top 10 wins.