I mean the fact that they gave themselves an out means that they're going to be ambiguity about it, no? I would not like to be in 9th in the PWR with St. A's sitting in 4th, would you?First you say:
"This would appear to give the selection committee a way out of selecting a team for the tournament if their schedule was not comparable to the rest of Division I, even if an eligible team (say, St. Anselm) made it into an at-large position based on RPI"
Then you end by saying:
"Not only will a top 8 alliance team have no clue whether or not they are even being considered for selection, but think about what the bubble teams will be going through. If you’re sitting in 7th or 8th in the Pairwise among “regular” D-I teams, but St. Anselm is looming in 4th in the RPI to potentially knock you out despite not having a D-I caliber roster, you’re going to have a very, very long and stressful day to look forward to."
I do not know what this meansAnd you literally ignore what Sarah Fraser told you.
Did you, like, personally write the NCAA handbook and are mad that I'm criticizing? I can't figure out why you're so personally offended by all this.All I can conclude is that you are hoping you'll get hits by being controversial. I supposed in our age of Cheetos Jesus and "alternative facts" you can just make up whatever you want, but if you want to be taken seriously, you should still try to actually be a journalist.
*Clearly* it's an interesting quirk of how the criteria is set up and how the Pairwise works. You can not think so, that doesn't bother me, but the visceral response is nothing short of bizarre.