and as opposed to calling it a joke (not a statistical term :-)). Massey is a good one and I am sure yours is too. As a statistician, you know that there is no perfect metric. Each metric has to decide what to include and how much to weight it. There is some subjectivity there. No way around it. You also know that there is a margin of error around any result. What's lousy is that there is a precise cutoff at 16. And our team keeps hovering around that. From what I have seen here, it may not have been the metrics/formulas that got us. People listed categories - wins against top 50, top 10, etc. as other things that were considered. The weighting of those is also subjective. The strength of the SEC conference clearly helps there and hard for us to compete with that in a slate of ACC opponents. That's likely the place where the SEC gets an advantage over every other conference. But, it's not that it's all unearned. They had the best OOC W/L pct of any conference. Pete said that he believed our schedule incorporated a number of strong OOC opponents. And that some of them did not turn out to be as strong as we hoped. But, please keep posting. There's always room for more data-driven commentary.