University of Massachusets Athletics
Ask The A.D.: McCutcheon Responds To Fans About Scheduling
March 24, 2006 | General
March 24, 2006
Thanks for so many responses to my most recent column. Many fans have been bringing up interesting points and questions, some of which come up often among athletic directors.
It is my understanding that the factor that tends to minimize the impact of the second and third levels of the RPI calculation. I believe some of you are correct in your percentages, that is because the data pool is so big it tends to average out the bigger it gets from one school to another. The second level that averages the win-loss percentages of your opponents is based on 26 opponents who play 27 games each, that's hundreds of games.
The third level would be your opponents' opponents win-loss percentage average. That's based roughly on those opponents' games times another 27 games totaling thousands of games. Well at last count there are only 334 Division I teams so you can see that many of the games involve common opponents which in turn tends to neutralize the calculation.
Therefore, even though it may only be 25% of the formula your own win-loss record probably has the greatest impact because it isn't compromised by anything else.
The other very important factor is the multiplier used for home away and neutral site games. A home win is factored by .6, an away win is factored by 1.4 and a neutral site game is 1. This is a new component of the RPI calculation.
My comment previously that "There is no such thing as a good loss" was made to emphasize the importance of winning in the calculation. Statistically, yes a loss to a top 50 RPI team is better than a loss to a team above 200 to be sure. The relative weight this brings on the overall calculation, however, is the issue.
On the other side of the coin, a WIN against a top 50 team vs. a win against a team above 200 has a much more dramatic impact. That is why you want to schedule as high on the competitive ladder as possible but still have a realistic opportunity to win.
A quick look at this year's end of regular-season RPI shows that of the top 75 schools almost all had 18 or more wins but the strength of schedules range as high as 207. Idaho on the other hand had a strength of schedule of 109, only won three games and their RPI was 301.
I am sure that there are RPI gurus out there, I do not profess to be one, who disagree with the theory above and if so I am always open to looking at other data.
As stupid and simple as it sounds, and admittedly it is easy for me to sound stupid just ask my wife, wins are better than losses and wins against better teams are better than wins against bad teams. The key though no matter how you slice it is ... WINS.