. . . our shortcoming is clear. Forget the losses in Charlotte. Even if we win those games there were very few opportunities to enhance our RPI. Yes, you can make a case that some of those opponents underperformed but that case is really a weak one if you study the recent history of the teams and their rosters. These first three weeks created a non-conference SOS of 152. 14 of the 18 teams ranked above us have non-conference RPI's of 50 or better. Contrast our schedule to Duke's during February. Duke took some losses but those were to high RPI opponents, essentially no damage done. The schedule we played essentially put us in a must-win scenario in most games. The way the system is structured you have more room for experimentation, error, and player development playing the tougher schedule. ** Edited by MidloHokie at 5/10/2026, 8:02:41 AM ** Edited by MidloHokie at 5/10/2026, 8:08:18 AM ** Edited by MidloHokie at 5/10/2026, 9:02:29 AM ** Edited by MidloHokie at 5/10/2026, 9:07:52 AM

And every team is subject to its rules and or the same imperfections - such as hammering a team like UGA who will likely be a host- and we may end up there wow! But rules are rules and RPI and SOS is what everyone “ signed up for” until ( hopefully) a better ranking system can emerge… maybe we just “ punt” like NCAA basketball did last week and add additional teams and hosts… but folks will still ***** for sure even with that! That said I Like our chances next few weeks!

. . . between the upper echelon and everyone else adding teams would serve little purpose. Unlike college baseball where Coastal Carolina can compete for a natty there's almost zero probability of any non-P4 softball team winning a natty. JMU was the last one to make it to OKC in 2021. I'm not sure we'll see another this decade, if ever.

That hurt.

The Hokies came out of the GT series with an RPI of 20 and an SOS of 68. That alone wasn't a disaster, RPI-wise. But then, the Liberty loss happened and RPI dropped to 21. Now it's an uphill battle to get back within striking distance. No doubt those losses hurt, but if they didn't have the Michigan State and Charlotte losses earlier, they would have been starting on higher ground with regards to RPI and would have had more room for error. Even with a series win over GT, I believe there still would have been some concerns about hosting - especially when the Committee Chair said on an April 20 Podcast that KPI and DSR were just used as "informational items" and were "not part of the selection criteria." That was totally different from what had been previously inferred. And surprisingly, Stanford didn't get a huge RPI boost from sweeping FSU. Before the April 10th weekend series, the Cardinal had an RPI of 18 with a SOS of 7; afterwards, their RPI moved to 17 with an SOS of 6. I would have expected a much bigger jump. All that circles back to whether or not RPI is the best selection tool available. I do not think it is, but apparently old habits are hard to break. Regardless of the past, there will be a new season starting next weekend. Hopefully, the Hokies can make the most of it.

Because as they said at the time, it is "considered outdated, inefficient, and too heavily reliant on strength of schedule, often disadvantaging mid-major teams". In the softball context, mid major is anyone with conference limitations (like VT this year) and can't get to Clearwater or other early season showcases where top teams play each other. The fact that Stanford got very little RPI boost from sweeping FSU is silly. Not sure how the NCAA can justify saying a ratings system is outdated for one of their sports but is still the gold-standard for another. Not surprising, of course, since it is the NCAA.

has been all season. We can be a surprise team in the tournament.

Would have helped absorb later losses. We were in the conversation with a chance despite the RPI and SOS. Is a bigger problem the lack of real movement despite winning against higher ranked teams? I get that it is hard to move if other teams don't lose, but stanford against fsu only moving it up one spot? Vt against uva and duke in the tournament Stanford had its “weaker” teams but played texas, oregon, oklahoma state, and it got three of the tougher teams in the ACC, i.e. fsu, Louisville, duke to go along unc. If kpi and dsr are just informational, relying on rpi will continue to be flawed as you said. Thanks for the response.

Is softball different then say hoops? Is the RPI rank the whole ball of wax to the committee? Plenty of examples of the committees in other sports ignoring certain analytics and using their own criteria. Is it formalize in their criteria that rpi be given great weight or is that just a myth?

At the beginning of the year, there was talk about the committee using KPI and DSR as tools to help them select and seed the tournament. BUT, the NCAA Committee Chair said on an April 20 Podcast that KPI and DSR were just used as "informational items" and were "not part of the selection criteria." That was totally different from what had been previously inferred. RPI is not a great tool, which is why basketball stopped using it. But apparently "old habits die hard," and the decision makers continue to rely on it, much to many people's dismay.

regional against the team who will be just ahead of us in the rankings.

to host.

RPI is the flaw. Specifically opponents’ opponents records accounting for 25% of the metric Bringing that into the equation THEN ALSO talking about SoS when talking about teams close together on the RPI scale?…it’s like double dipping to penalize a team whose schedule is not as strong. Hokies have the highest WINNING PERCENTAGE vs the top 25 teams of any team 10-18. Guess what the committee gave as a deciding metric last year? Winning percentage vs top 25…when comparing teams with unequal number of games played ** Edited by hokiepro at 5/10/2026, 7:50:28 AM

the result they want. Sometimes in the same year.

Not sure how you would undo that bias without creating a less objective bias.