Basketball NET / KenPom rankings for the 2025 season

[bac2therac]

You just love to declare games over but not if one team continues to play hard and momentum shifts. College basketball is all about momentum and a game of runs. What does us hitting 9-9 and 5 threes have to do with Michigan State . We hit some against their starters as they kept Cooper and Koehler in the game and even with starters back we hit against all the starters. I know you love to praise other teams but you acting like the comeback was solely caused by a team taking their foot off the gas and the other team having nothing to do with it, is totally ********. This will help the team in the remaining games left whether that is 2/3/4 games.

even the best teams dont hit 9 in a row...you know exactly what happens in these games late and they perfectly snowball and become ridiculous. I am not taking anything away from RU..they never quit and fought to the end and Pike prepared them well for these situations...see usc as well and less efficient but still notable comeback at Wisconsin. The removal of their starters was the catalyst to this, it easily could have been an 85-72 final otherwise. it was a bad job by Izzo and also in getting plays called rather than inbound to the corner to get trapped repeatedly.'

in the end they got it to 4 and it was over..does anyone care that penn state lost to michigan and mich. state by 2 and 4 points

 

[RUDivision]

I watched the whole game and if you have objectivity we should have been up 4-6 at the half not down 1. Dylan might have had his worse game of the year as he carried it into the second half and let Carr get free for the dunks. They got it up to 19 eventually but then Manny played the best 3 minutes he has had in 3 years combined and scored 9 points and offensive and defensive rebounding and even got and and one . That cut it to 12 with 6 minutes left causing Izzo to call a timeout .
then the year long problem of not getting a defensive rebound allows them to expand the lead as they miss shots but still score. It has been a year long problem and cost us too many games. But the guys kept on playing making the great comeback shooting 9-9 . Even if the starters were back in the game , another 2 minutes we likely win.
We should have beat then at home and gave them a game away. That is a good sign because it comes against a really good team that will likely be a 2 or 3 seed.

If Izzo doesn’t put the walk on seniors in we lose by double digits.

The first meeting against MSU was lost by our coaches. Fears had 4 fouls with 5 min to go in the game amd in OT. We are a pick and roll iso offense. Pike should have had Francis hunt Fears every possession until he fouled out . Francis would have gotten great looks because Fears could not guard right. Simple coaching

 

[LeapinLou]

RU still at 151. Need to win today to avoid the shame of a sub 150 NET.

Regarding the argument against the NET, I kind of agree with the premise that it's good for figuring out the top 100 and bottom 100 but the middle is all over the place. Just eyeballing the teams that are ranked 100-150, my subjective opinion is that RU is better than most of them.

 

[LeapinLou]

Final Regular season NET results:

DePaul - 101 (worst Big East team)
110 - Miss St (worst SEC team)
Utah - 129 (worst Big 12 team)
Penn State - 131
Rutgers - 143
Maryland - 151
BC - 159
GT - 167

In the end, this was the most predictable season that I can remember. Other than the home loss to Central Connecticut and the two road wins at UMD and PSU, the favored team won pretty much every game we played.

 

[Colonel HR]

Final Regular season NET results:

DePaul - 101 (worst Big East team)
110 - Miss St (worst SEC team)
Utah - 129 (worst Big 12 team)
Penn State - 131
Rutgers - 143
Maryland - 151
BC - 159
GT - 167

In the end, this was the most predictable season that I can remember. Other than the home loss to Central Connecticut and the two road wins at UMD and PSU, the favored team won pretty much every game we played.

 

[Colonel HR]

Interesting that Penn State is higher than us. Guess they had a better strength of schedule, but this shows that computer rankings aren't always correct.

 

[goru7]

Final Regular season NET results:

DePaul - 101 (worst Big East team)
110 - Miss St (worst SEC team)
Utah - 129 (worst Big 12 team)
Penn State - 131
Rutgers - 143
Maryland - 151
BC - 159
GT - 167

In the end, this was the most predictable season that I can remember. Other than the home loss to Central Connecticut and the two road wins at UMD and PSU, the favored team won pretty much every game we played.

Although the NET has improved about 20 spots in last 6-7 games to get to 143 , it really is useless identifying teams playing well in February and March. Any team between 80-143 is not better than us at this stage so the number is rather irrelevant. We have beaten teams at 70( Northwestern ), 102( Oregon ) , 111( UNLV ) and Penn State 2x at 131. We previously lost to Minnesota at 74 , USC at 78 and Notre Dame at 93 but I consider all 3 a toss up on a neutral floor now. We will find out Wednesday if they truly are toss up games.

 

[dark_check]

Although the NET has improved about 20 spots in last 6-7 games to get to 143 , it really is useless identifying teams playing well in February and March. Any team between 80-143 is not better than us at this stage so the number is rather irrelevant. We have beaten teams at 70( Northwestern ), 102( Oregon ) , 111( UNLV ) and Penn State 2x at 131. We previously lost to Minnesota at 74 , USC at 78 and Notre Dame at 93 but I consider all 3 a toss up on a neutral floor now. We will find out Wednesday if they truly are toss up games.

I think a very easy schedule down the stretch has a lot to do with playing well and climbing in rating.

 

[bac2therac]

Good thing the Central Connecticut loss is just ignored

 

[goru7]

Good thing the Central Connecticut loss is just ignored

That loss punishes too much in the NeT . You will admit without it we are probably no worse than 125 or even higher. But what does that have to do with teams playing better and improving . Do you really think Central Connecticut would beat us home or away today ? Which is the point that the NET does not identify teams that have gotten better. Unless you think we have not gotten better , which maybe that is your feeling

 

[goru7]

I think a very easy schedule down the stretch has a lot to do with playing well and climbing in rating.

The easier schedule doesn’t explain winning road games at Maryland and Penn State or taking Michigan State to the wire. . Nor does it reflect Lino being put into the starting lineup and becoming impactful or the defense slightly improving. Rebounding still a problem costing us. Yesterday PennState had 10 points 10 minutes into the game and 6 were a result of us giving them the ball on a turnover pick 6. Otherwise for 10 minutes they scored only 4 other points. Defense clearly improved. We only had 2 turnovers the rest of the way and therefore the easy win. If we do not turn the ball over , we can compete against the rest of the BIG 10 but we cannot win because of the lack of rebounding and giving up second and third chance points and the holes at the 5 and the 4.

 

[dark_check]

The easier schedule doesn’t explain winning road games at Maryland and Penn State or taking Michigan State to the wire. . Nor does it reflect Lino being put into the starting lineup and becoming impactful or the defense slightly improving. Rebounding still a problem costing us. Yesterday PennState had 10 points 10 minutes into the game and 6 were a result of us giving them the ball on a turnover pick 6. Otherwise for 10 minutes they scored only 4 other points. Defense clearly improved. We only had 2 turnovers the rest of the way and therefore the easy win. If we do not turn the ball over , we can compete against the rest of the BIG 10 but we cannot win because of the lack of rebounding and giving up second and third chance points and the holes at the 5 and the 4.

I love that Lino is improving. And I now want quite a few players back. But don’t fool yourself that MD or PSU were any good, at home or on the road. Yes the team improved but so did most teams. It’s why you practice and play. You saying we can beat anyone ranked net 80 up to 150 is a little ridiculous. As a homer I understand you saying that but it’s not reality. Also saying we can play with anyone in the conf is silly. UCLA, Neb and Minne curb stomped us in the last half of the season. And at home we really didn’t have a chance v wash. Here’s hoping Pike and the GM nail the portal and 12 months from now we don’t have to argue how good of a bad team we are.

 

[goru7]

I love that Lino is improving. And I now want quite a few players back. But don’t fool yourself that MD or PSU were any good, at home or on the road. Yes the team improved but so did most teams. It’s why you practice and play. You saying we can beat anyone ranked net 80 up to 150 is a little ridiculous. As a homer I understand you saying that but it’s not reality. Also saying we can play with anyone in the conf is silly. UCLA, Neb and Minne curb stomped us in the last half of the season. And at home we really didn’t have a chance v wash. Here’s hoping Pike and the GM nail the portal and 12 months from now we don’t have to argue how good of a bad team we are.

You have no depth perception. You dismiss the Maryland and Penn State road wins but saying they are no good is generally true but don’t tell that to Iowa or Washington or Illinois . Maryland beat Iowa and Washington and played Illinois to the wire but against Rutgers they lost wire to wire. Penn State gave Purdue and Michigan games but they generally bad but that didn’t stop Rutgers from a wire to wire won Your dismissal of it is the opposite of a homer , it is someone with their head in the sand and wondering if you think these things out.

Who is it ranked between 80-143 do you think we likely will not beat? To say it is not reality we can compete and beat them really makes me think you don’t think we have improved at all. Plus your statement that all teams get better is simply fantasy and minimizing our improvement. But it is your opinion.
If you read my comment correctly I said we cannot compete against the top 5 teams in the country or at the top of our conference so that would include Nebraska and borderline Wisconsin. I did say with our improvement we should compete and have a chance to win against Minnesota. You putting those 3 teams together was not what I said. You also have a reading problem. I never said we are a good team but we are an improving team which was my only point. Without a competent 4 and 5 we will not be a good team but our guards are playing better so we are competing. I will be a little suprised with the same result against Minnesota Wednesday but we will see .

 

[bac2therac]

You have no depth perception. You dismiss the Maryland and Penn State road wins but saying they are no good is generally true but don’t tell that to Iowa or Washington or Illinois . Maryland beat Iowa and Washington and played Illinois to the wire but against Rutgers they lost wire to wire. Penn State gave Purdue and Michigan games but they generally bad but that didn’t stop Rutgers from a wire to wire won Your dismissal of it is the opposite of a homer , it is someone with their head in the sand and wondering if you think these things out.

Who is it ranked between 80-143 do you think we likely will not beat? To say it is not reality we can compete and beat them really makes me think you don’t think we have improved at all. Plus your statement that all teams get better is simply fantasy and minimizing our improvement. But it is your opinion.
If you read my comment correctly I said we cannot compete against the top 5 teams in the country or at the top of our conference so that would include Nebraska and borderline Wisconsin. I did say with our improvement we should compete and have a chance to win against Minnesota. You putting those 3 teams together was not what I said. You also have a reading problem. I never said we are a good team but we are an improving team which was my only point. Without a competent 4 and 5 we will not be a good team but our guards are playing better so we are competing. I will be a little suprised with the same result against Minnesota Wednesday but we will see .

Tallest midget argument

 

[goru7]

Tallest midget argument

Not the point as you missed it again. We are a better team than earlier in the year and definitely since out of conference ended , and that improvement has led to more wins as a result .

Just like your head in the sand comments about comebacks are only the result of the leading team taking their foot off the gas and giving no credit to the team coming back, which I guess you not only apply to Rutgers/ MSU but I guess you apply to Nothwestern being down 16 to Minnesota with 5 minutes and coming back to take the lead but then losing or Washington being down 20 to Oregon and coming back to lead but lose anyway.

 

[dark_check]

Not the point as you missed it again. We are a better team than earlier in the year and definitely since out of conference ended , and that improvement has led to more wins as a result .

Just like your head in the sand comments about comebacks are only the result of the leading team taking their foot off the gas and giving no credit to the team coming back, which I guess you not only apply to Rutgers/ MSU but I guess you apply to Nothwestern being down 16 to Minnesota with 5 minutes and coming back to take the lead but then losing or Washington being down 20 to Oregon and coming back to lead but lose anyway.

First of all you’re the one with the reading problem, I said most teams improve. Not all. My statement is true. I will applaud though, the way you cherry pick stats and results almost has me believing we’re the top 70 NET team you say we are. We’re not. Actually you also cherry picked our NET to say we improved. Wasn’t our NET higher in Nov than at the end? Is that improving? Did it go up from absolutely embarrassing power conf NeT in Jan. Yes. Take off the scarlet colored glasses. We’re a very flawed team.

 

[bac2therac]

Not the point as you missed it again. We are a better team than earlier in the year and definitely since out of conference ended , and that improvement has led to more wins as a result .

Just like your head in the sand comments about comebacks are only the result of the leading team taking their foot off the gas and giving no credit to the team coming back, which I guess you not only apply to Rutgers/ MSU but I guess you apply to Nothwestern being down 16 to Minnesota with 5 minutes and coming back to take the lead but then losing or Washington being down 20 to Oregon and coming back to lead but lose anyway.

Sub 500 schools lose. 13-18 schools are not good

 

[LeapinLou]

Final Regular season NET results:

DePaul - 101 (worst Big East team)
110 - Miss St (worst SEC team)
Utah - 129 (worst Big 12 team)
Penn State - 131
Rutgers - 143
Maryland - 151
BC - 159
GT - 167

In the end, this was the most predictable season that I can remember. Other than the home loss to Central Connecticut and the two road wins at UMD and PSU, the favored team won pretty much every game we played.

Updated through yesterday, RU has overtaken Penn State!

RU - 131
PSU - 136
UMD - 135
BC - 159
GT - 168

 

[goru7]

First of all you’re the one with the reading problem, I said most teams improve. Not all. My statement is true. I will applaud though, the way you cherry pick stats and results almost has me believing we’re the top 70 NET team you say we are. We’re not. Actually you also cherry picked our NET to say we improved. Wasn’t our NET higher in Nov than at the end? Is that improving? Did it go up from absolutely embarrassing power conf NeT in Jan. Yes. Take off the scarlet colored glasses. We’re a very flawed team.

Yes that flawed team with all those warts just happened to win against Minnesota last night reversing the 19 point loss , which strengthens my point to you that we are a better team and have improved. You on the other hand choose to say the wins were against bad teams and don’t count we still suck I will ask you again , we were 143 in the Net before yesterday and now 131. Go take a look at the teams 80 to 131 and tell me with a straight face that we cannot beat them today. The NET doesn’t account for a team like ours improving it punishes the Central Connecticut loss too heavily.

 

[dark_check]

Yes that flawed team with all those warts just happened to win against Minnesota last night reversing the 19 point loss , which strengthens my point to you that we are a better team and have improved. You on the other hand choose to say the wins were against bad teams and don’t count we still suck I will ask you again , we were 143 in the Net before yesterday and now 131. Go take a look at the teams 80 to 131 and tell me with a straight face that we cannot beat them today. The NET doesn’t account for a team like ours improving it punishes the Central Connecticut loss too heavily.

10 of our wins are against losing teams and the others are against low major D1s. Who have we beat? Minne played six and had so many injuries. I’m glad we won! Geez you biased homers don’t get that. We all want Rutgers to succeed! But to magically think we’re better than half the teams in front of us in the NET is just the silliest thing ever. Bill Parcells used to say you are what your record is.

 

[Luvscarletknights]

10 of our wins are against losing teams and the others are against low major D1s. Who have we beat? Minne played six and had so many injuries. I’m glad we won! Geez you biased homers don’t get that. We all want Rutgers to succeed! But to magically think we’re better than half the teams in front of us in the NET is just the silliest thing ever. Bill Parcells used to say you are what your record is.

PDS is very strong with this one.

It was the same team that beat us by 19 points but now it is the injuries that allowed us to win.

 

[dark_check]

PDS is very strong with this one.

It was the same team that beat us by 19 points but now it is the injuries that allowed us to win.

PDS. That is pretty funny. Seriously. Ok they beat us by 19, but they’re still a bad team. It doesn’t make us near a good team.

 

[goru7]

PDS. That is pretty funny. Seriously. Ok they beat us by 19, but they’re still a bad team. It doesn’t make us near a good team.

Now you sound like a stupid fool and Luv showed you how stupid and shallow your argument was and got torn to shreds. You double down instead. Can you actually say we are improved but at the same time until we get a competent 4 and 5 we cannot compete and beat the upper echelon better teams ? Is that so hard to comprehend ?

 

[G- RUnit]

Yes that flawed team with all those warts just happened to win against Minnesota last night reversing the 19 point loss , which strengthens my point to you that we are a better team and have improved. You on the other hand choose to say the wins were against bad teams and don’t count we still suck I will ask you again , we were 143 in the Net before yesterday and now 131. Go take a look at the teams 80 to 131 and tell me with a straight face that we cannot beat them today. The NET doesn’t account for a team like ours improving it punishes the Central Connecticut loss too heavily.

That’s exactly the problem. Punishes us severely for a bad loss in December and doesn’t recognize improvement. We would beat a pretty fair number of the teams ahead of us in the many ranking systems.

Back in the day the last ten games was a metric many used. We would do much better if that was still a thing rather than “Whole Body of Work”.

 

[dark_check]

Now you sound like a stupid fool and Luv showed you how stupid and shallow your argument was and got torn to shreds. You double down instead. Can you actually say we are improved but at the same time until we get a competent 4 and 5 we cannot compete and beat the upper echelon better teams ? Is that so hard to comprehend ?

You always go right to the name calling. It shows how weak your arguments are and it earns you no respect. Anywho. Did we improve, in isolation, at Minne vs Minne neutral site? Yes. Does that mean every player has improved and they’re all worth keeping and just adding a legit C and rebounder? No. Far from it. We still only beat a team with a losing record. We’re still not a good team. If you read my posts I agree there are 4 or so players I’d like to keep and I’ve often said adding at least a legit C and another strong rebounder is my plan too. It’s not that hard to understand but you just like to be a Pike adorer and are very argumentative

 

[Luvscarletknights]

I have dark-check on ignore and the response below solidifies my reasoning.

"PDS. That is pretty funny. Seriously. Ok they beat us by 19, but they’re still a bad team. It doesn’t make us near a good team."

That is the weakest response ever and proves your PDS.

We are simply arguing that the team is improving. We almost beat MSU twice and you can only play the teams on your schedule at this point, and we are winning more than losing.

 

[goru7]

You always go right to the name calling. It shows how weak your arguments are and it earns you no respect. Anywho. Did we improve, in isolation, at Minne vs Minne neutral site? Yes. Does that mean every player has improved and they’re all worth keeping and just adding a legit C and rebounder? No. Far from it. We still only beat a team with a losing record. We’re still not a good team. If you read my posts I agree there are 4 or so players I’d like to keep and I’ve often said adding at least a legit C and another strong rebounder is my plan too. It’s not that hard to understand but you just like to be a Pike adorer and are very argumentative

Never said I adore Pike. Read carefully. We are much improved team and it is showing up with more wins. We won yesterday against Minnesota and did a lot of bad things in the first half to prevent us from having a sizable lead at he half. We played a much better second half , attacked the zone , hit some shots and rebounded and played defense. That is marked improvement and the coach along with the players deserve some credit.
Luv laid it out pretty clear for you and do you think he was argumentative or just plain made you look silly with your posts. ?

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

You always go right to the name calling. It shows how weak your arguments are and it earns you no respect. Anywho. Did we improve, in isolation, at Minne vs Minne neutral site? Yes. Does that mean every player has improved and they’re all worth keeping and just adding a legit C and rebounder? No. Far from it. We still only beat a team with a losing record. We’re still not a good team. If you read my posts I agree there are 4 or so players I’d like to keep and I’ve often said adding at least a legit C and another strong rebounder is my plan too. It’s not that hard to understand but you just like to be a Pike adorer and are very argumentative

Saying there are “4 worth keeping” is an opaque comment because of the money factor. At what price point? Keeping a guy and paying them the going rate for a frosh is miles different from keeping a guy to pay him $1M.

We paid Dylan Grant this year to be the face of our program. We won’t be in a position to do that again. Our total budget for the whole team wasn’t even $4M so for most guys other than Francis, we should be able to modestly bump them up without spending much at all. We have a pretty decent group of guys with relatively high floors who have shown they can be solid contributors depending on the match up. None of them have profiles that suggest they will be sought after for crazy numbers by other teams either.

 

[dark_check]

Never said I adore Pike. Read carefully. We are much improved team and it is showing up with more wins. We won yesterday against Minnesota and did a lot of bad things in the first half to prevent us from having a sizable lead at he half. We played a much better second half , attacked the zone , hit some shots and rebounded and played defense. That is marked improvement and the coach along with the players deserve some credit.
Luv laid it out pretty clear for you and do you think he was argumentative or just plain made you look silly with your posts. ?

I have no respect for Luv’s posts but knowing that his takes are always foolish I’ll say he’s being argumentative. He’d give Pike a lifetime contract. As for your post I was almost going to like it but then saw “much” in the first line. Then you say how many mistakes we made in the first half. How can a MUCH improved team make that many mistakes. I don’t know why it’s so hard for you guys to understand, I want Rutgers to do well. I’ll praise them for good things. Three straight losing seasons is not good. Looking for nuggets to hope on doesn’t do it for me. We’re two sides of a coin. I along with others are on the realist side. You’re on the Pollyanna side. I do hope Pike and the team beat ucla.

 

[dark_check]

Saying there are “4 worth keeping” is an opaque comment because of the money factor. At what price point? Keeping a guy and paying them the going rate for a frosh is miles different from keeping a guy to pay him $1M.

We paid Dylan Grant this year to be the face of our program. We won’t be in a position to do that again. Our total budget for the whole team wasn’t even $4M so for most guys other than Francis, we should be able to modestly bump them up without spending much at all. We have a pretty decent group of guys with relatively high floors who have shown they can be solid contributors depending on the match up. None of them have profiles that suggest they will be sought after for crazy numbers by other teams either.

Agree. Tell me we can keep Ogbole or Davis for $50k I’d agree that adds to the four. Be careful with the high floors. A lot of our guys have been pretty bad when they’re bad.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Agree. Tell me we can keep Ogbole or Davis for $50k I’d agree that adds to the four. Be careful with the high floors. A lot of our guys have been pretty bad when they’re bad.

You can’t even throw out an amount that way though, because it’s relative. If your telling me that the going rate for remaining frosh who have not yet committed to a team yet for next season is $0 then sure, maybe then $50K for Ogbole would be reasonable. But some are saying frosh are going to get $250K - guys who have never played a single possession of college basketball, and at this point, we are talking about the ones who aren’t all that desirable since they aren’t taken yet. Ogbole is worth more than these types of guys. A lot more. Clearly we saw that with Ware - correct? For the avoidance of doubt - we had NOTHING to back up our frontcourt yesterday. So if Ware could’ve shown anything he would’ve gotten a run. Clearly he can’t. Ogbole should easily be getting 50-100k more than starting rate for a complete unknown that isn’t in the sought after high 4* frosh recruit category.

 

[dark_check]

You can’t even throw out an amount that way though, because it’s relative. If your telling me that the going rate for remaining frosh who have not yet committed to a team yet for next season is $0 then sure, maybe then $50K for Ogbole would be reasonable. But some are saying frosh are going to get $250K - guys who have never played a single possession of college basketball, and at this point, we are talking about the ones who aren’t all that desirable since they aren’t taken yet. Ogbole is worth more than these types of guys. A lot more. Clearly we saw that with Ware - correct? For the avoidance of doubt - we had NOTHING to back up our frontcourt yesterday. So if Ware could’ve shown anything he would’ve gotten a run. Clearly he can’t. Ogbole should easily be getting 50-100k more than starting rate for a complete unknown that isn’t in the sought after high 4* frosh recruit category.

Fair. I’ll admit it’s all relative. Would you say it’s fair then that if I find a longer guard with better metrics than Davis for the same price you send Davis packing?

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Fair. I’ll admit it’s all relative. Would you say it’s fair then that if I find a longer guard with better metrics than Davis for the same price you send Davis packing?

Yes - sure. But you probably won’t find that for his position in another high major player who has logged meaningful minutes. So if the price point is 350K - the guy you have in mind would have to be ready to accept an offer specifically from Rutgers University (declining other offers) to relocate and come play back up PG for us for that price in J Mike’s place.

Flipping it back to Ogbole - I doubt Fall came to Rutgers for free. We might’ve even paid him more than EO. So again - I’m flipping it back to you. Think about what type of center we are going to get to come to RU for $300k to back up a high ticket starter who we hopefully land. 300k may seem high at face value based on what Ogbole contributes but when you take a step back and realize that we probably played more than this for Fall, and not all that much less for Ware, who is completely unplayable, well the picture gets clearer. Just as there might be value for EO in staying put at RU where he probably is settled in and has friends, the same can be said for utility centers everywhere. Why are they choosing to come to RU to sit on our bench?