History DOESN'T always repeat itself

Updated conference tournament brackets and projections at Bubbleteams.com

Yesterday we analyzed the recent trends and history of teams that finished in the top 40 RPI and how that correlated to inclusion in the NCAA Tournament. What we failed to address was the recent changes to the RPI and how those changes have already has a significant affect on the teams in the top 40 RPI and what teams may (or may not) make the NCAA Tournament field.

It has been well publicized and well documented that in December 2005, the NCAA committee implemented a revised RPI formula to give additional weight to playing and winning games on the road. The new formula weighs road victories and home losses at 1.4; home victories and road losses, at .6; and neutral-site victories and losses at 1.0. The impact and significance of that change has yet to be determined and likely will not be for several years. However, we can analyze the short-term impact and how the landscape of something as simple, yet powerful, as the top 40 teams in the RPI has been affected.

Since 1999 the number of at-large teams selected from the top 40 RPI has remained steady, never falling below 27 and never rising above 30.

In that time the following trends have occurred:

The Big 6 conferences (ACC, SEC, Big 10, Pac 10, Big 12, Big East) have nabbed 152 at-large bids and 40 automatic bids (in fact, only twice in the last seven years has a Big 6 team from outside the RPI top 40 won an automatic bid-2003 Oregon #50 RPI and 2000 Arkansas #45 RPI).

In that same stretch of time, the top 40 RPI teams from the not-so-major, yet not-so-mid-major conferences (Conference USA, Atlantic Ten, Mountain West and WAC) have earned 17 automatic bids and 37 at-large bids.

Over the same period, the top 40 RPI "mid-majors", comprising the Missouri Valley, West Coast, Southern, MAAC, Big West, MAC, Sun Belt, America East, Colonial and now defunct Midwestern Collegiate (now the Horizon League) and TAAC (now the Atlantic Sun) conferences have earned 16 automatic bids and 10 at-large bids.

This breakdown of bids (automatic and at-large) is only significant if you look at the change in the RPI top 40 teams representing the lower major and mid-major programs last year and this year. There were 7 mid-major teams in the top 40 RPI in 2005 and in 2006 there is an improvement on those numbers with 9 mid-major teams in the top 40 RPI. That total number of 15 teams from this season and last season is almost equal to the number of top 40 mid-major RPI teams from the previous six seasons (19 total) combined.

The surprising statistic is that the teams from the Big 6 conferences have not suffered. From the years 1999-2004, the Big 6 have averaged 27.5 teams in the top 40 RPI. The Big 6 had 27 teams in last season's final top 40 RPI and this season that number remains the same at 27.

The conferences that have suffered are the low-majors (Conference USA, WAC, Mountain West, Atlantic Ten). The years 1999-2004, 48 teams from low-major conferences had teams in the final top 40 RPI, an average of almost 7 per year. Last season, that number dropped to six teams. This season, that number has dwindled to a seven-year low of 4 teams. Some argument can be made that the losses by Conference USA to the Big East has lowered the number of top 40 RPI worthy teams, but the impact is still the same.

The low-major conferences have been significantly hurt by the defections to the Big 6 conferences, the rise in the mid-majors... and possibly by the alteration in the RPI formula.

The question now posed is "Given the tendency of the NCAA Selection Committee to select teams from the top 40 RPI (198 of 205 eligible teams since 1999) and the predominance of mid-major teams in the top 40 RPI this year (nine as of today's date), will the committee buck the trends of the past and ignore those mid-major teams with top 40 RPI for at-large teams from other conferences?"

If the committee does reward those top 40 RPI teams from mid-major conferences, what can be said about the short-term impact of the changes to the RPI formula?

We would be remiss to close without noting......... To say that the changes in the calculation of the RPI has already changed the teams selected by the NCAA Tournament Committee would be shortsighted and without merit, considered such a small sample of seasons affected by the changes in the new RPI. However, in years to come, it will be most intriguing to observe if the college basketball world will forever be altered by such a subtle change in a glorified math formula.

As always, your comments, questions and outbursts are welcome and encouraged.