That's a common misconception, probably due to the old "RPI"
Posted on: January 28, 2025 at 10:17:44 CT
zounami MU
Posts:
69999
Member For:
10.77 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
45
model which rewarded teams for playing stronger opponents & punished teams for playing weaker opponents. It was notorious for both its inaccuracy and bias towards the power programs.
Advanced models like Kenpom/Torvik/BPI are designed to eliminate SoS bias as much as possible. However, it's possible for those models to not completely account for the dynamics of a *blowout*. For example, not accounting for reserves being subbed in or players losing interest/intensity thereby impacting offensive/defensive efficiency.
If a team has an unusually high number of blowout games, and those "blowout dynamics" go undetected and accounted for by the model, then it could accumulate to create a negative bias against them.
And it would likely be an SoS-related bias, since blowouts are more likely to occur against weaker "low-major" opponents.
By contrast, a team that avoids low-majors would be playing its "A game" for a greater percentage of the season, causing it to look stronger to a naïve model that doesn't account for those dynamics.
So it's possible that an extremely weak non-conference schedule (loaded with low-majors) could impact Mizzou's ratings by the computer models, but I doubt it would be more than a few spots in the rankings. I'm a Kenpom fan, but Torvik's ranking seems more accurate.