As of today, UD is #77 in the “unadjusted” RPI. The NCAA selection committee makes several adjustments to the raw RPI data for things like games against the bottom of the rankings, top of rankings etc. While many know exactly how the raw RPI is calculated, the NCAA holds its adjustment formulas very close to the vest.

As far as Dayton’s chances and how upcoming games will affect our RPI, the Flyers can make a major move in the RPI over the final two weeks. UD’s opponents are currently 298-284 (after adjusting for games against Dayton). That yields .256 points in the RPI. The Flyers are 16-9, good for .16 points in the RPI. The total RPI for UD is .5573, meaning the third factor is worth .1413 points. If the Flyers go 6-0 to reach the finals of the A10 tourney their record will be 22-9, and worth .1774 RPI points. The remaining scheduled opponents are 67-33, and assuming Xavier doesn’t lose before March 4, and Umass loses twice the rest of the way, Dayton finishes 3rd. Dayton probably plays St Bonaventure and St Joes the first and second rounds if those events come to pass. Add in those teams and the remaining opponents are 103-46, for a cumulative record of 401-330, a .5485 winning percentage and .2743 RPI points. Picking up the .1774 Factor I points, plus .2743 Factor II points, and assuming Factor III remains about the same at .1413, and Dayton’s RPI rises to .593. That would currently rank 38th in the RPI. Actual results would be a little different since every win by an A10 opponent creates a loss for another opponent, and it assumes other opponents maintain their current winning percentages. Regardles, if Xavier were the final opponent I think Dayton would be a pretty heavy favorite for a place in the field of 64, regardless of the outcome of the championship game.

The RPI is solely based on winning percentages. It is irrelevant where teams are ranked, where the game is played, or what the margin of victory is. From an RPI standpoint beating Temple at Temple is no better than beating Temple at home. Similarly the RPI considers Temple losing to UMass at Temple in overtime to be identical to beating UMass by 32 at UMass. The RPI always uses the current record of your opponents, not the record at the time the game was played.

The RPI formula is 25% of your winning percentage, 50% of your opponents’ winning percentage, and 25% of your opponents’ opponents’ winning percentage. The idea is that: 1) winning games is important (your winning percentage); 2) beating teams that win their other games is much better than beating teams that lose other games (your opponents’ opponents’ winning percentage); and 3) it is even better if you opponents built a winning record by playing teams that also won games instead of a bunch of cupcakes (opponents’ opponents’ winning percentage).

This third factor is supposed to make it better to play a 14-11 Georgia, who is currently ranked 14th in the RPI and has played the toughest schedule in the country than to play 20-5 Hampton who is ranked #167 in the RPI and has played the worst schedule in the country. IMHO, the biggest criticism against the RPI is that the third factor is woefully ineffective in making the necessary adjustment. Based on the RPI formula you get .28 Factor II points (.56 % times 50%) for playing Georgia and .40 Factor II points (.80 % times 50%) for playing Hampton. Factor III is supposed to make up for the differences in their schedules, but it doesn’t. Georgia’s opponents are 460-237 for a .660 winning percentage. Adding 25% of that to the .28 above yields .445 total RPI points for playing Georgia. Hampton’s opponents are 224-402 for a .358 %. The RPI yields .489 points for playing Hampton. From a pure RPI standpoint you gain much more from playing Hampton than Georgia – the .044 is equivalent to about 50 places in the RPI rankings – before even considering which team you are more likely to defeat. And the Factor III issue becomes largely irrelevant once you include every opponent of every opponent you played in a year because of the sheer volume of games.