I only read about the committee's subjective observations in the link. I see no equation. And that makes sense given Lundardi has Nevada as a 4 seed and they not only do not have any Quad 1 wins, they haven't even played a Quad 1 team this season...
CBS Sports: Do you put as much philosophical stock into KenPom, KPI, BPI and the like as you do the NET, or do you knowingly put more emphasis on the NET's numbers given that they are the ones determining strength of schedule, etc. on the team sheets?
Muir: This is going to sound politically correct, but I'm looking at all of it. To say I weight one over the other, it would be really difficult. I'm trying to be consistent in how I look at it. I think all of the tools are really important just to get a snapshot of a particular team. I think observation is really critical too. I think schools would expect our group, our 10, to put great stock into, hey, what did you see? That's collectively where 10 members are really helpful to say, how did you see this, how did factor that in, here's what some of the metrics say. To say I'm just going to use these tools or a particular tool, there's so much more that goes into a particular account when you're making your selections.
