[CTcard]

Question... how strictly does the committee adhere to the RPI? 

It appears that the committee doesn't put all that much stock in RPI lately, though of course the obvious question is "compared to what?".

Off memory, last year there were a set of teams with good RPIs that did not get in (highlighted by UNC at 19 (I think) and Iregon State) and a group with low RPIs that did get in (including UW who was rewarded for finishing #2 in the Pac 12).

[That's all by my shaky memory - some details may be off.]

We'll see tomorrow but Stanford is likely to look pretty good for a national seed by RPI. Hope they don't opt for some measure where we come off worse.

EDIT: Warren Nolan has Stanford at #9 in RPI right now, but only 2/10000 of a point behind Kentucky. That's just about a tie.

[CTcard]

Question... how strictly does the committee adhere to the RPI? 

It appears that the committee doesn't put all that much stock in RPI lately, though of course the obvious question is "compared to what?".

Off memory, last year there were a set of teams with good RPIs that did not get in (highlighted by UNC at 19 (I think) and Iregon State) and a group with low RPIs that did get in (including UW who was rewarded for finishing #2 in the Pac 12).

[That's all by my shaky memory - some details may be off.]

We'll see tomorrow but Stanford is likely to look pretty good for a national seed by RPI. Hope they don't opt for some measure where we come off worse.

EDIT: Warren Nolan has Stanford at #9 in RPI right now, but only 2/10000 of a point behind Kentucky. That's just about a tie.