Anyway, the anal retentive accountant in me wants to reconcile the NCAAT Champion RPI for 11-25 which should be 23.8% for a column total of 100%.
Thanks. Found the screw-up on my spreadsheet and will update that table sometime today.
I would have thought that the average RPI of the champ (6.9) would be closer to the average RPI of the runner-up (11.38) if I am reading the columns correctly.
Why? If the ranking system has any correlation to reality, shouldn’t the average champion be ranked higher than the average runner-up? (Yes, you’re reading the columns correctly.)
I’m not sure how much significance we should put into averages, but it is something that I had never thought of looking at. It’s interesting that the average Final Four loser ranks 11.98, very close to the average champ game loser at 11.38.
