From ESPN's Bubble Watch today, which is in essence is saying that after years after being factored we don't know if it will still be going forward: (Full link)
Notice, however, that "strength of schedule" is yet to rear its discrete head in this discussion. That's because it already is baked into both the NET and the quadrants. Any power ranking must take strength of schedule into account, and the quadrants are self-evidently defined by how good your opponent is and where you play them.
So why is "SOS" still appearing as its own number in 2019? Good question, and, more specifically, this is still a very open question.
People who talk about selection and seeding love to talk about strength of schedule. Decades of trafficking in the RPI taught and indeed rewarded such talk, and in 2019, the number for SOS often is still listed next to a team's NET ranking. This is happening despite the fact that the NET ranking itself, of course, incorporates a schedule-strength component.
Truth be told, talking this way might still hold value -- if the committee still works this way. The promise of the quadrant-and-NET approach is that it already has factored in SOS and yielded a verdict. How the committee translates that verdict, however, is the question in 2019.
Notice, however, that "strength of schedule" is yet to rear its discrete head in this discussion. That's because it already is baked into both the NET and the quadrants. Any power ranking must take strength of schedule into account, and the quadrants are self-evidently defined by how good your opponent is and where you play them.
So why is "SOS" still appearing as its own number in 2019? Good question, and, more specifically, this is still a very open question.
People who talk about selection and seeding love to talk about strength of schedule. Decades of trafficking in the RPI taught and indeed rewarded such talk, and in 2019, the number for SOS often is still listed next to a team's NET ranking. This is happening despite the fact that the NET ranking itself, of course, incorporates a schedule-strength component.
Truth be told, talking this way might still hold value -- if the committee still works this way. The promise of the quadrant-and-NET approach is that it already has factored in SOS and yielded a verdict. How the committee translates that verdict, however, is the question in 2019.
