Referring to RPI (the ratings not the team) it seems to me that in certain
leagues it is next to useless for comparing a team in that league to
others for the purpose of regional seeding.  If a team comes from a league
that plays virtually no non-conference games .... how does the RPI have
any meaning when it comes to comparing that team with someone from another
league?  To me, this seems an inherent weakness that will appear in any
ranking system based on strength of schedule and will only be improved
(fixed is probably not the right word :-)) by more interconference play
from some of the leagues.  (Yes, this is a constant theme of mine, but I
feel it is important.)
 
It is my understanding that basketball uses a similar rating, but it
becomes much more meaningful there. For example, UCLA finished something
like 16-2 in Pac 10 play and 25-2 overall, indicating about 8 or 9 out of
conference games, and this is typical of bigtime basketball ... and one of
the reasons why it IS possible to rank teams nationally, at least
approximately. In the Big Ten, my old school Illinois made it in with
19-11 record but only play 20 or so games against the Big Eleven teams
(sorry, it IS Big Eleven, no?).
 
Just my 100 old pesos.
 
Tony Buffa
RPI '64  Two more wins and we are in!!
 
BTW:  maybe we should have a contest for the currency that has the most
XXXXXXX per dollars......??? Just a thought in the midweek lull.