from Jay Bilas at ESPN.com. If you are wondering what factors are considered by the committee, here they are:

a team's record against Division I competition, a team's RPI (overall, conference, and non-conference), conference records, road records, record in the last 10 games, records against teams sorted by the RPI, head-to-head results, common opponents results, good wins, bad losses, good losses, bad wins, the quality of competition throughout the year, and injuries, scheduling issues and other circumstances that could have affected the results on the floor.

Makes a lot of sense. But then Bilas adds a whole separate section on why the RPI is "RIP" in the selection process, meaning that it really is not used by the committee. What? Looking at the factors above, I see team's RPI (overall, conference, and non-conference) as one factor, and records against teams sorted by the RPI as another. So i'm not sure exactly what he's talking about. Regardless, even if the committee doesn't use the term "RPI" in its discussions, it is a bit misleading to say that the RPI is not considered. it's clear that the committee is looking at many of the same factors that the RPI attempts to capture like a team's record (including road record) and the quality of competition throughout the year (see the last paragraph of this post for a quick description of the RPI). While the committee has the luxury of looking at other factors individually (good and bad wins and losses, common opponents), the RPI does this by indexing all of a team's wins, losses, and opponents. Obviously, simply looking at a team's RPI ranking is not as effective as looking at every single one of its games and opponents, but when you're quickly trying to compare bubble teams, especially in a 30-second tv segment, having one number versus a detailed breakdown is much more appropriate.

in any event, i bring all this up because the RPI has been and probably will continue to be attacked. this year in particular, RPI rankings are not matching up very well with how many teams are perceived, which is angering quite a few of the talking heads. I'm not only referring to the Pac-10's high RPI ranking that is being assailed, but also the high rankings of many mid-major teams. it will be interesting to see how some of the high RPI mid-major schools without automatic bids get treated, especially if they are not media darlings. not that the RPI is perfect (far from it), but it is objective, and its rankings aren't succeptible to preconceived notions regarding a particular team. we all know that the same cannot be said about most human analysis.

for reference, the RPI measures winning percentage, opponents' winning percentage, and opponents' opponents' winning percentage, with a new weighting in place this year that gives extra credit for road victories. You can check Ken Pomeroy's discussion for the exact figures used.