Now that we have the RPI

[rc1963]

So, it's too early to tell if the RPI will do what it's intended to do. I suspect it will get some tweaks, hopefully something added for playing up class games.

The question I have now is, since we have such a substantial and meaningful ND schedule, how does game selection need to change? Having a system where schedules are decided in clumps of two years, doesn't seem to make much sense, and the wish list method seems to have some holes. So, does anyone have recommendations for our beloved state officials on how to improve the ND scheduling process. Or am I alone thinking it needs to be changed?

 

[Zowwy21]

Has anyone done any analysis to see how the RPI would have changed last year playoffs? It’s so young I honestly don’t even know what will be significantly impacted and what will be mute points.

 

[rc1963]

That would be an interesting analysis. I wonder if the state did that. You'd think maybe they would have, since it would have given them early in the year to make adjustments if huge problems were identified. I think it's a bigger task than I want to take on. I'm guessing they have a database they can run the formula against.

While that would be good to test the rpi, I wonder if it really makes much moot now, as there are several moving pieces - New districts, smaller districts, more districts, more ND games, and I assume some coaches made ND wish list changes due to the RPI going into effect.

 

[ISUChip]

Since districts are set in two-year cycles, it only makes sense for non-district games to be done that way also. That way the home/away schedules aren't a pain to match. You know you'll have 9 home games in a two-year span.

From the perspective of scheduling non-district opponents, you have to decide what the best combination is among (1) beating poor teams, (2) losing to good teams, (3) maintaining traditional rivalries, and (4) finding new intersectional opponents.

 

[Zowwy21]

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn’t beating your non-conference opponents outweigh the benefits of your opponents good record? Since your individual winning percent is 37.5% and you’re nondistrict games are going to only account for 3/9 of the Opponents component of 37.5%? I suppose best scenario is you beat a team that goes on to have a strong record (I know, Mr. Obvious here). But still the win has more impact on overall RPI.

 

[rc1963]

Since districts are set in two-year cycles, it only makes sense for non-district games to be done that way also. That way the home/away schedules aren't a pain to match. You know you'll have 9 home games in a two-year span.

From the perspective of scheduling non-district opponents, you have to decide what the best combination is among (1) beating poor teams, (2) losing to good teams, (3) maintaining traditional rivalries, and (4) finding new intersectional opponents.

I agree, those are the factors to consider. I question why we need to know two years for some seasons but one year is ok for the others? Having schedules set this spring was plenty of time to plan this season. I get with the District schedule you have a home/away parity to maintain. I just wonder if you get stuck playing a team in rapid decline when you're looking for quality opponents.

 

[ISUChip]

I question why we need to know two years for some seasons but one year is ok for the others?

Conference affiliations for other sports don't rotate every two years like football districts do.

Imagine trying to set up non-district games on a year-by-year basis. If you have 4 home games one year, you're going to want 5 the next year to balance it. But what if some of the teams you want to play are in the same boat? Then someone is going to lose out on that 5th home game ($$$).

 

[rc1963]

Conference affiliations for other sports don't rotate every two years like football districts do.

Imagine trying to set up non-district games on a year-by-year basis. If you have 4 home games one year, you're going to want 5 the next year to balance it. But what if some of the teams you want to play are in the same boat? Then someone is going to lose out on that 5th home game ($$$).

Well, I get your point, doing them in sets of two games series does make it easy to ensure balance of home and away. But there are only 4 ND games, so two home games a year, then your district schedule dictates the rest.

to your point, I guess if you wanted a particular matchup bad enough you'd forego having a home game...wow, that sets up a scary precedent, of the teams who are attractive ND matchups essentially being able to hold out for homefield? I guess as long as the state is the clearinghouse, it should be able to control that.

Doesn't seem like it would be that big of a deal for each school to submit a wish list of 8-12 schools, ranked and then have a program to match up the teams, consider if they played last year and swap the location if they did. As long as that was known by Feb or March, I think everyone could deal with it.

 

[rc1963]

Anybody know when the state will publish their first RPI?

I get that after week one it was pretty pointless (half the teams with .375 the other half with zero. But after week two there would be a little data.

Maybe after week 3?

 

[BCtrack]

Anybody know when the state will publish their first RPI?

I get that after week one it was pretty pointless (half the teams with .375 the other half with zero. But after week two there would be a little data.

Maybe after week 3?

Actually after week one everyone was still the same, because you add yours and your opponents with both equal to .375.

 

[rc1963]

Actually after week one everyone was still the same, because you add yours and your opponents with both equal to .375.

true, hadn't thought that far....either way I get it was pointless to post.

 

[Iabeastmode]

true, hadn't thought that far....either way I get it was pointless to post.

After week 4 the IAHSAA will post rankings based on RPI.

 

[JoshAllen25]

One thing having the RPI does do, is limit the opportunities to schedule hard teams to toughen up your squad. (i.e. Xavier v. Regina, PC v. Oskaloosa, etc.) That's a valuable thing that some teams will lose.

 

[rc1963]

One thing having the RPI does do, is limit the opportunities to schedule hard teams to toughen up your squad. (i.e. Xavier v. Regina, PC v. Oskaloosa, etc.) That's a valuable thing that some teams will lose.

Certainly makes it more difficult. You have to try to find a bigger, better team, who you have a chance to beat. Maybe it will help keep injuries down by keeping schools from wanting to play too far over their heads. With the IHSAA in the clearinghouse business for these games it's not like you can bargain for such games anyway.

It may come down to a good 1A school trying to schedule a couple of good 2As, a good ND 1A and maybe a great single A (who presumably will go on and win) For every team over our class who wants a 1A game, there's one in single A who wants one too. Maybe striking that balance is a way to stretch a teams' capabilities and not risk too much RPI.

 

[JoshAllen25]

For every team over our class who wants a 1A game, there's one in single A who wants one too. Maybe striking that balance is a way to stretch a teams' capabilities and not risk too much RPI.

I agree with you. Pella Christian obviously didn't take this approach lol.

 

[rc1963]

I agree with you. Pella Christian obviously didn't take this approach lol.

Nor Regina - although I still wonder exactly how that ND scheduling process happens.

PC obviously become Osky's biggest fans now. Van Meter continues to cause problems for them. If Van Meter continues their winning ways, it's good for PCs RPI. If they do and win their district, then PC gets to face them in the playoffs. Good thing rooting for/against a team doesn't count for much.

 

[rc1963]

I know most everyone has moved on to the playoffs, but I'm circling back to RPI and qualification.

I keep going back and forth between should there be more teams in the playoffs or not.

On the one hand a bigger playoff field always means some blowouts, very few surprises, increased chance of injury and can rarely be said to have yielded a state champ or finalist who was below a 16 seed (in a 32 bracket....has it ever happened?)

On the other hand you have RPI making a distinction between teams who beat up on essentially nobody vs teams who played tough schedules (perhaps not entirely of their own chosing) and lost.

Bottom line is you win to move on. I think we can agree that's the general concept of having playoffs. So, I thought I'd look at our neighboring states and see how they do it. I looked at MN, WI and IL, They all have classes or sections etc of about 50 teams and they all run 32 team brackets. They all have a variety of qualifying schemes, but the basic Tennent is if you are over .500 you deserve another shot to prove your worth in the playoffs.

Something for the state to consider.