define('DISALLOW_FILE_EDIT', true);
define('DISALLOW_FILE_MODS', true);<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: RTC Bubble Watch: February 14 Edition	</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rushthecourt.net/2013/02/14/rtc-bubble-watch-february-14-edition/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2013/02/14/rtc-bubble-watch-february-14-edition/</link>
	<description>The Independent Voice of College Basketball</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2013 18:48:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.1.9</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Daniel Evans		</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2013/02/14/rtc-bubble-watch-february-14-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-915313</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Evans]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2013 18:48:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=90235#comment-915313</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The NCAA Selection Committee has shown in its history that it is going to extensively use the RPI to evaluate teams. That is a known fact. The committee chair said during his teleconference on Wednesday that the committee has around twelve tools it uses to evaluate teams.

Committee chair Mike Bobinksi said that they did an analysis of the statistical tools they use (he did not specifically name Sagarin or Kenpom but did act as though we should know which statistical formulas he&#039;s referring to) and that the RPI is the best predictive tool. Here&#039;s the exact quote:

&quot;Interestingly, if we went through that, we were all surprised to see that the RPI actually did end up with the highest level of predictive value and the highest correlation with ultimately success in the tournament. &quot;

We know the committee is going to rely heavily on the RPI. We are 100% sure of that. The committee usually does not speak of its other &quot;tools&quot; like Sagarin or Kenpom, meaning we don&#039;t know how much those are actually weighed in the discussion. We do know that the EVERY team sheet listing good and bad wins lists the RPI as its way to categorize each win. Those team sheets are the exact team sheets the NCAA Selection Committee uses every time it ranks the teams. None of them list Sagarin or Kenpom.

As far as your thought process on who should be in or out, that really isn&#039;t my job. My job is to use the Selection Committee&#039;s past results, the RPI, the SOS, and my predictive tools to guess who will be in the field. Everyone has a different opinion on who should be in or out, but only the Selection Committee&#039;s opinion counts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The NCAA Selection Committee has shown in its history that it is going to extensively use the RPI to evaluate teams. That is a known fact. The committee chair said during his teleconference on Wednesday that the committee has around twelve tools it uses to evaluate teams.</p>
<p>Committee chair Mike Bobinksi said that they did an analysis of the statistical tools they use (he did not specifically name Sagarin or Kenpom but did act as though we should know which statistical formulas he&#8217;s referring to) and that the RPI is the best predictive tool. Here&#8217;s the exact quote:</p>
<p>&#8220;Interestingly, if we went through that, we were all surprised to see that the RPI actually did end up with the highest level of predictive value and the highest correlation with ultimately success in the tournament. &#8221;</p>
<p>We know the committee is going to rely heavily on the RPI. We are 100% sure of that. The committee usually does not speak of its other &#8220;tools&#8221; like Sagarin or Kenpom, meaning we don&#8217;t know how much those are actually weighed in the discussion. We do know that the EVERY team sheet listing good and bad wins lists the RPI as its way to categorize each win. Those team sheets are the exact team sheets the NCAA Selection Committee uses every time it ranks the teams. None of them list Sagarin or Kenpom.</p>
<p>As far as your thought process on who should be in or out, that really isn&#8217;t my job. My job is to use the Selection Committee&#8217;s past results, the RPI, the SOS, and my predictive tools to guess who will be in the field. Everyone has a different opinion on who should be in or out, but only the Selection Committee&#8217;s opinion counts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Brett S. - Siege of Petersburg Online		</title>
		<link>http://rushthecourt.net/2013/02/14/rtc-bubble-watch-february-14-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-915298</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brett S. - Siege of Petersburg Online]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:59:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rushthecourt.net/?p=90235#comment-915298</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Honest question.  Why use RPI rather than better metrics such as KenPom and Sagarin predictor which take margin of victory into account?  I don&#039;t want to know necessarily who the NCAA selection committee might pick as much as I want to know who deserves to be in or out.  Keep the RPI in to help people see who the committee might pick, but include other, better metrics as well.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Honest question.  Why use RPI rather than better metrics such as KenPom and Sagarin predictor which take margin of victory into account?  I don&#8217;t want to know necessarily who the NCAA selection committee might pick as much as I want to know who deserves to be in or out.  Keep the RPI in to help people see who the committee might pick, but include other, better metrics as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>