Monday Top #25 Ranking?
- Thread starter njxchange
- Start date
I said this about UConn when they were still undefeated, and someone said we “were no where remotely in their neighborhood” .. wel we’re less than 10 spots from them in Kenpom now and in a week or 2 could probably be ahead of them in the AP poll too. They just don’t pass the eye test for me. Depending who they get in the NCAAs I might be picking their opponent as my upset , especially if it’s a lower team from the XII or something. Or a hot AQ little team.
I know, right? He’s always going around insisting he’s an expert on the “full basketball world” while wagging his prehistoric schtick at everyone.
You sure put him in his place, you did. No, really. I mean it.
Why do you think playing the best defense in the country isn't playing like a top 25 team?I know, right? He’s always going around insisting he’s an expert on the “full basketball world” while wagging his prehistoric schtick at everyone.
You sure put him in his place, you did. No, really. I mean it.
I'll go with 23. If anyone takes a look at the B1G standings they will see Rutgers clearly in 2nd. That might impact some who were overlooking RU
Carino has us 22 in his ballot, but he moved Michigan State up from 25 to 19 despite going 1-1 this week. Of the handful of ballots I could find this morning, he's the only one with Michigan State ahead of Rutgers. Leave it to the one voter from NJ to not put Rutgers as the second highest ranked Big Ten team on their ballot.
I rather be the underdog heading into Thursday with them and then blow them out!!
Carino's ballot:
3. Purdue
18. UCant
19. Michigan State
22. Rutgers
Miami at #20
Carino also ran this story at about the same time, so maybe he was influenced by the paranormal?
Interesting how far down you have Illinois. To me, their resume is way better than Clemson’s even with 2 extra losses. Those wins over UCLA and Texas are huge. And Clemson has 2 awful losses. Loyola is a 6 win team. That loss is way worse than Temple.
What a terrible choice by Jerry
Makes zero sense and while all across the country schools have their homers Rutgers doesn't have an advocate here
First place 7-0 in ACC
Personally i would not vote them that high but more if a prediction of how it could shake out
Are you asking what i think the AP and coaches will think? Or just what I think?
Regarding the poll, we had elite D all season long, right? But, so far, not only were we not ranked, teams we beat were still ranked ahead of us. And we didn’t get many votes. Maybe our record will finally change that. You’d have to ask the AP and coaches why we weren’t ranked.
Regarding where I think we should be ranked, I‘m changing what I guessed last night (somewhere from 25 -35) to say I really have no idea how all the other teams across the country are performing, I only know how we’ve played against the teams we’ve played. So I cannot make an informed guess.
I only watch our games and so I only know other teams records, not how well they are actually playing. I think we’re playing great D (except Iowa) but we’re meh on offense. We’re winning but also a lot of those wins were us scraping by, not dominant 10+ point wins.
So I don’t know where that stacks us up against other good teams across the country.
Last edited:
Are you asking what i think the AP and coaches will think? Or just what I think?
we have one of the largest point differentials in the country 18 games in.
Because we are 13-5, dug a hole in the beginning of the year and lose a game right before being ranked. Iowa a prime example. Then there’s the usual fawning over traditional programs. If it was just numbers, point diff, SOS etc, we would be at our Net.
Okay. Well, we’ll see where the coaches and AP rank us soon enough. I keep trying to be interested, but mostly I am not.
I am, however, very excited by this team and how it‘s playing and its potential to win many more games this season. Winning the conference would be huge.
its not my poll, its how i think they will vote, plus he is ranking Michigan State ahead of RU which is totally bizarre
Fair enough. The ACC is beyond crap but they are oddly much better positioned this year than last for a significantly higher volume of at large bids.
Louisville, FSU, ND, Boston College and GT are historically awful major conference teams. Among them, they are something close to 2-20 against everyone else. It’s going to make for some gaudy conference records for the other schools. With 6-7 games against those teams, if those are wins and you go 500 against the rest of the pack you end up with a 13-7 or 14-6 record.
There is no way UNC, for example, doesn’t make the field with 11 total losses
It seems obvious most voters do not know we were missing Caleb and Paul for that Temple game. If that’s not a loss, we’d be ranked in the teens in every ballot.
Yeah, injuries must affect rankings. Presumably, voters also discount or even ignore wins against really weak competition and weigh wins against strong competition heavily. Our win over Purdue, for example.
Coaches, in particular, must not have a ton of time to research their votes.
Should it matter to the voters that those two didn’t play? If I had a vote in the polls I would base it on the team’s season record. Not how they’ve done in the last two weeks or month. Not how they would have done if only this or that didn’t happen.
Parrish usually does his research. And he did a whole article on our controversial loss at OSU. I’m pretty surprised he’s been overlooking us.
Still has Duke in his rankings.
Still has Duke in his rankings.
Yes of course it should and would if it was known. We are a completely different team with those 2 players. They average over 30 mpg each.
Temple dropped 72 points on us. There is no way that would’ve happened if Caleb had played. Guess how many teams broke 70 points against us? Just Iowa.
This guy has us at #16.
OSU was without Likekele in our first meeting. Iowa did not have McCaffrey. Should our losses in those games be adjusted to evaluate our performances and make them worse?
Fact is, the voters are like fans - they value offense more than defense. If — like Rutgers — you play elite defense but mediocre (and at times, bad) offense, you’re not viewed as good as a team that plays really good offense but mediocre defense.
We’re viewed as playing “rock fights,” mucking things up and winning ugly. Just not going to get as much respect from the people that vote, despite now defeating the three teams (Indiana, Purdue, OSU) who were predicted in the preseason to be in the top 4 in the B1G — and of course we really beat OSU twice.
All good, though, the human polls are meaningless, and moreover, I think our team plays better when they have a chip in their shoulder and have something to prove.
We’re viewed as playing “rock fights,” mucking things up and winning ugly. Just not going to get as much respect from the people that vote, despite now defeating the three teams (Indiana, Purdue, OSU) who were predicted in the preseason to be in the top 4 in the B1G — and of course we really beat OSU twice.
All good, though, the human polls are meaningless, and moreover, I think our team plays better when they have a chip in their shoulder and have something to prove.
In the coaches poll they have 7 teams in big with more votes than us. We beat 5 of them and haven’t played the other 2 yet. So much for polls.
It's scary how some of the voters (uninformed) walk around casting votes that impact perception which turns into reality. They say by age 5, people have developed their view of the world and habits they will carry most of their life. It's a hard habit to break when you don't have time to train yourself in the correct way of judging things.
