The formula for calculating the RSCI rankings is quite simple and completely objective. Here’s how it works:
It’s not exactly rocket science but it does achieve the desired effect of providing a more unbiased, consensus ranking, which one might argue, is even more accurate than any of the single top 100 lists alone.
- The process begins with a single top 100 list from one of the experts.
- The players listed are assigned points based on their position on that list. The top ranked player is given 100 points, #2 gets 99 points, #3 gets 98, and so on with #100 getting 1 point.
- Repeat step 2 for each of the top 100 lists.
- Finally, add up the scores based on all the lists and sort the players by their score in descending order.
However, this process is not without its pitfalls:
- The RSCI formula is objective but the underlying ratings it is based on are not. This subjective aspect should never be underestimated.
- Some experts include 5th year and prep school players (denoted by “*” in the RSCI rankings) in their top 100 lists and other don’t. This means that a really great 5th year player might be ranked #10 by one expert and not listed at all by the others, thereby dropping his RSCI ranking dramatically. In other words, RSCI rankings of 5th year players aren’t worth much.
- By its very nature the RSCI rankings get less and less accurate the further down the list you move. The reason is twofold. First, the affect of a single, high rating from one expert can effectively override the prevailing opinion of the other experts that may have left the player off their lists entirely. Also, a player that just narrowly misses making 1 or more top 100 lists receives no points from those lists and is not effectively distinguished from all the others that were not ranked. For example, a guy ranked #101 gets the same zero points as a guy ranked #250 even though they clearly aren’t that close. Stated simply: “a miss is as good as a mile.”