At this point, most of us would agree that the RPI is a piss-poor methodology to use. Even though its use has been somewhat lessened, it still plays a major role since it is used to determine the "quadrants" used by the selection committee. I present to you the following examples of why the whole system should be canned. Take a guess at the RPI for each before scrolling to the bottom where I list the RPIs.

a) Middle Tennessee (19-5): 3 total wins over Top 100 (@55-WKU), @81-ODU, 87-Murray State); one loss to non-Top 100.
b) Buffalo (17-7): one win over Top 100 (69-Toledo). Only 4 total wins over teams in Top 150. Losses to @173-Kent and @224-NIU.
c) Vermont (20-5): no (zero, nada, zilch) wins over Top 100. No bad losses.
d) VT (18-7): six wins over Top 100 including #'s 1 and 9 plus #46 on a neutral court. One loss to non-Top 100.

One could ask: how can a team be ranked (substantially) higher than the ranking of the best team it has beaten. MTSU- top win against 55, Vermont beat 106 and Buffalo beat 69.



The corresponding RPIs: MTSU - 28, Buffalo - 32, Vermont - 44, VT - 56. Look at Buffalo again and tell me how this makes any sense. I realize that the selection committee will most likely recognize these outliers but I still believe that these types of results should invalidate the whole method.