Toggle sidebar

Lunardi Has Us As An #11

G

G- RUnit

All-American
Sep 13, 2004
14,418
8,038
113
But publicity and buzz is a good thing.

Even though at this time it’s ridiculous it’s still ridiculous to have RU at 11 and last four before play ins.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUJMM78 and socaldave
S

Scarlet Shack

Heisman
Feb 3, 2004
26,407
16,328
73
What do I know ?

That some 2,3, and 4 seed is really hoping we get hot, win or get close to winning the big ten , and earn a 2,3, or 4 seed so that they don’t have to deal with our defense on one day preparation ….
 
S

ScooterSports

All-Conference
Jul 5, 2022
556
1,358
50
Decourcy has us an 8 playing San Diego St. That game would be a defensive slugfest if it actually happened.
 
G

G- RUnit

All-American
Sep 13, 2004
14,418
8,038
113
superfan01 said:
@bac2therac only bracketologist worth paying attention too.

I follow bracketology and bac better them all.
Click to expand...
Although I disagree with BAC’s refusal to acknowledge officiating as a critical factor, he is the best bracketologist out there.

Sonny Moore has us ranked 8th in the nation. We are not an 11 seed and last in. January or not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Scangg
S

Scarlet83

Heisman
Feb 4, 2004
9,535
10,674
103
bac2therac said:
thats not how it works

that being said its too early for bracketology or seeding thoughts.....about 4 weeks to go
Click to expand...
Of course it’s too early. Tell that to Lunardi.

But at this very early place in the season, it roughly works. And a NET 16 team is NOT an 11 seed. NFW. That is garbage.
 
A

armenius

All-Conference
Nov 4, 2011
817
1,289
93
ScarletDave said:
Duke is a 3 we are a 7. Got it. Meanwhile we beat Purdue and Wake who both absolutely crushed Duke. Got it.

Too much reading the name on the front still going on with these morons
Click to expand...
That's not how it works. The transitive property never applies in sports.

Look at the overall resumes.
Duke has no Quad 3 or 4 losses, Rutgers has 2 (Seton Hall and Temple).
Each team is 2-2 in Quad 1 with Duke picking up wins over Xavier and Ohio State, while Rutgers beat Purdue and Indiana. Those games are a wash.

The two bad losses keep Rutgers as a 7 while Duke can maintain a 3 at this time.
 
S

Scarlet83

Heisman
Feb 4, 2004
9,535
10,674
103
armenius said:
That's not how it works. The transitive property never applies in sports.

Look at the overall resumes.
Duke has no Quad 3 or 4 losses, Rutgers has 2 (Seton Hall and Temple).
Each team is 2-2 in Quad 1 with Duke picking up wins over Xavier and Ohio State, while Rutgers beat Purdue and Indiana. Those games are a wash.

The two bad losses keep Rutgers as a 7 while Duke can maintain a 3 at this time.
Click to expand...
And the NET accounts for all of that. We are NET 16.

I would put us as a 5/6.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ScarletDave
A

armenius

All-Conference
Nov 4, 2011
817
1,289
93
Scarlet83 said:
And the NET accounts for all of that. We are NET 16.

I would put us as a 5/6.
Click to expand...
The NET is not the only factor being considered, it has its obvious flaws.

Florida Atlantic has a NET of 11. Should they be a 3 seed?
 
P

PSAL_Hoops

Heisman
Feb 18, 2008
14,535
13,896
78
armenius said:
That's not how it works. The transitive property never applies in sports.

Look at the overall resumes.
Duke has no Quad 3 or 4 losses, Rutgers has 2 (Seton Hall and Temple).
Each team is 2-2 in Quad 1 with Duke picking up wins over Xavier and Ohio State, while Rutgers beat Purdue and Indiana. Those games are a wash.

The two bad losses keep Rutgers as a 7 while Duke can maintain a 3 at this time.
Click to expand...

I agree that our losses are technically worse and we have one more - however, they lost 2 of their 3 by double digits and were taken to the woodshed in the Purdue game on a neutral floor.

I also don’t think the wins are a “wash”. Winning at Purdue is a much better win right now than beating Xavier on a neutral floor. Indiana and OSU are about equal.

Also, WF is way better positioned to make the tournament as a third field win for us than anyone else Duke beat (Iowa for instance). Iowa already has 6 losses and a home win over Iowa State is their only win over a likely field team. WF has only 4 losses and wins @ Wisconsin, Duke and VTech.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scangg and Scarlet83
A

armenius

All-Conference
Nov 4, 2011
817
1,289
93
PSAL_Hoops said:
I agree that our losses are technically worse and we have one more - however, they lost 2 of their 3 by double digits and were taken to the woodshed in the Purdue game on a neutral floor.
Click to expand...
Rutgers will have plenty of chances to surpass Duke. We have 10 weeks to prove to the committee that we are the real deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scangg
P

PSAL_Hoops

Heisman
Feb 18, 2008
14,535
13,896
78
armenius said:
Rutgers will have plenty of chances to surpass Duke. We have 10 weeks to prove to the committee that we are the real deal.
Click to expand...
Sure - brackets are pointless at this time of year because so much will change but if your going to put a bracket together it should at least be reflective of resumes through this point. There is not a 7 seed gap (4 vs 11) between Duke’s resume and ours right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scangg and Scarlet83
A

armenius

All-Conference
Nov 4, 2011
817
1,289
93
PSAL_Hoops said:
Sure - brackets are pointless at this time of year because so much will change but if your going to put a bracket together it should at least be reflective of resumes through this point. There is not a 7 seed gap (4 vs 11) between Duke’s resume and ours right now.
Click to expand...
See Above... I have Duke as a 3 and Rutgers a 7.

I was not defending Lunardi, he stinks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSAL_Hoops
F

FinalFourOrBust_rivals142702

All-Conference
Dec 5, 2022
1,346
1,664
0
This board clearly has no idea how seeding works. Everyone calls Lunardi an idiot even though he had us in the first four last year and nailed it. He knows what he’s doing.
 
R

RU848789

Heisman
Jul 27, 2001
65,459
44,500
113
Not worrying about seedings and tourneys until I think we're a lock to be in or close to it. Get to 10 B1G wins and I think we're in. The OOC is over and we've crushed all the cupcakes, so we won't have any bad losses, like Lafayette was last year, meaning our NET, if we go 18-13/10-10, will be significantly better than last year's #76, since it's so high now and we only play fairly highly ranked teams from here on out. Plus we already have the best road win in the country (and should have a 2nd). And I'm hoping we get to 10 B1G wins on our way to 12-13...
 
S

Scarlet83

Heisman
Feb 4, 2004
9,535
10,674
103
Greene Rice FIG said:
1. Any analysis on Jan 4 is garbage.
2. Take the NET and chuck it in the garbage

Who in the AP Top 30 does Rutgers deserve to have a higher seed?


Our schedule (to date!) is not that good and we have 4 losses.
Click to expand...
I agree it’s wayyy to early. But Lunardi is the one who put this hot garbage out.

That said, Rutgers should be a MUCH higher seed. Hmmm. I wish there is a computer model that would take all of this into account. And that model can be used as one of a few significant factors to compare teams.

Maybe we can call this the NET.
 
F

fluoxetine

Heisman
Nov 11, 2012
23,529
16,898
0
Greene Rice FIG said:
1. Any analysis on Jan 4 is garbage.
2. Take the NET and chuck it in the garbage

Who in the AP Top 30 does Rutgers deserve to have a higher seed?


Our schedule (to date!) is not that good and we have 4 losses.
Click to expand...
Wisconsin
TCU
Auburn
Charleston
LSU
Mississippi St
Kentucky

this is according to T-Ranketology NOW which is Bart's model assuming the season ended now. Has us as a 7 seed FWIW
 
F

fluoxetine

Heisman
Nov 11, 2012
23,529
16,898
0
Also Bart has us projected as a 4-seed with a 99.1% chance of making the tournament. I've said before; Bart's model underestimates the variance. But even so, 99.1% is a good place to be; only 16 teams are higher.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scangg
D

DHajekRC84

Heisman
Aug 9, 2001
30,708
19,816
0
Greene Rice FIG said:
1. Any analysis on Jan 4 is garbage.
2. Take the NET and chuck it in the garbage

Who in the AP Top 30 does Rutgers deserve to have a higher seed?


Our schedule (to date!) is not that good and we have 4 losses.
Click to expand...
I'll just start with #24 who we beat their place and should be 9-4 (not 10-3) and we'd be 11-3 , 3-0, and tied first place if you want to talk records and head to head .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scangg
F

fluoxetine

Heisman
Nov 11, 2012
23,529
16,898
0
1984 said:
I'll just start with #24 who we beat their place and should be 9-4 (not 10-3) and we'd be 11-3 , 3-0, and tied first place if you want to talk records and head to head .
Click to expand...
The selection committee, to the extent they even remember what happened between Rutgers and OSU in December, is going to accept the official results of the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scangg and bac2therac
G

Greene Rice FIG

Heisman
Dec 30, 2005
40,437
23,613
0
fluoxetine said:
Also Bart has us projected as a 4-seed with a 99.1% chance of making the tournament. I've said before; Bart's model underestimates the variance. But even so, 99.1% is a good place to be; only 16 teams are higher.
Click to expand...
But that is Rutgers analyzed on a possession by possession basis and not based on wins and losses.

Rutgers is like 63rd ranked right now using Wins above bubble.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
The Knight Report

Latest

  1. 01 The Knight Report Rutgers Football Postgame Show: Nebraska Cornhuskers Edition - TKR Pod
  2. 02 The Knight Report Rutgers Football HC Greg Schiano's Nebraska Postgame Press Conference
  3. 03 The Knight Report Rutgers Football flattened by Nebraska for fourth straight loss
  4. 04 The Knight Report How to watch Rutgers / Nebraska; Pregame Info, Spread, More: Gameday Central
  5. 05 The Knight Report Rutgers Football safety Chris Joines out for rest of 2026 season
Top Bottom