NET 81
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
Im not saying that would be a collapse at all but it seems others are. 2-4 and loss first round of B1G likely doesnt get us in and people are saying wed have to “collapse” to not get in.
I am not asking for fans to s*ck RU's d*ck. Just don't take a crap on them. You have a few fans who live for Rutgers failure, so they can say, " I told you so." If Rutgers wins out, they will still talk sh*t.
When it comes to stats, each season is separate from the others. I know the past seasons have been rough, but looking at the entire season this year, it's different from others in several ways. Besides the Illinois game, Rutgers was in every game with a chance to win. If people don't see that, they aren't watching the games. The bottom line, any stat can be flipped to fit the argument for both sides. I do see your point of view as well.
Other people are not clued into the schedule like we are.. 2-4 is the base case but outsiders will just think 2-4 what a terrible finish without considering the context.
A move up of only 13 spots is garbage. I clearly get that we moved up more after Michigan state bc the margin of victory but this move was in line with Ohio state who we beat at home.
Road victories should count more
either way NONE of this matters bc we need to win at least 3 of our remaining games which is a TALL task. Win on Wednesday and that changes everything. Beat both Illinois and Purdue on the road and I would say we are in no matter what. That momentum would break everything in the NET and observers eyes
Road victories should count more
either way NONE of this matters bc we need to win at least 3 of our remaining games which is a TALL task. Win on Wednesday and that changes everything. Beat both Illinois and Purdue on the road and I would say we are in no matter what. That momentum would break everything in the NET and observers eyes
If we keep playing at this level we are definitely in. if We look like we are capable of beating anyone, the committee will want us in the Tournament over teams they know won’t be competitive.
What bugs me is that teams (like UNC and Iowa) that feast on cupcakes, but haven’t beaten quad 1 teams, have much better NET ratings than a team that has FIVE quad 1 wins.
I get that we deserve to be dinged for the quad 3 and 4 losses, but the teams that can’t beat good competition also deserve to be dinged on an equal level.
I get that we deserve to be dinged for the quad 3 and 4 losses, but the teams that can’t beat good competition also deserve to be dinged on an equal level.
Net is garbage. Too much of a heavy lifting to get out of any early season losses and not enough weight towards quad 1 wins vs bad losses. I get that we have some awful losses , but also have much better wins than a ton of teams in front of us. Not all road wins are created equal.
This is the biggest indictment of NET ever. Towson literally beat nobody. The NET rewards mediocrity.
4-2 no worries, playing Thursday /Fri
3-3 very likely in, but good chance Tuesday play-in
2-4, very real worry left out
3-3 very likely in, but good chance Tuesday play-in
2-4, very real worry left out
But their schedule isn’t better than RU’s and the B1G plays 20 league games!!!
We are establishing that the NET is a joke as is the reliance on OCC. BTW, SHU probably in Tourney, DePaul almost took down Providence away and Clemson was a decent win.
It’s not the OCC at all, it’s just that we lost to the worst team on our schedule.
The NET doesn't matter (to us). If we win the games we need to win we'll be in regardless of our NET. The committee will not be debating between us and Towson for an at-large spot.
I would say
2-4 with two BIG1G tournament wins in
2-4 with one BIG1G tournament win bubble
3-3 with one BIG1G tournament win definitely in
3-3 with zero BIG1G tournament wins likely in
4-2 with two BIG1G tournament wins 4 seed
4-2 with one BIG1G tournament wins 7 seed
But isn’t UNC 0-7 in quad 1? So they get a NET ranking that’s 43 (!) spots better than us because they beat all of the mediocre to bad teams on their schedule?
Again, I’m not saying we shouldn’t be dinged for our quad 3/4 losses, but geezus, they’re 43 spots ahead of us. And Iowa is 62 spots ahead of us!
They should both be lower and we should be higher, is all I’m saying. The fact that NET gives more weight to quad 3/4 losses than quad 1 wins is simply mind boggling.
Michigan is on the road at Iowa and Wisconsin the next 2, so Quad 1 would be
tough retain for them
Scheduling games against teams rated like 160-260 instead of teams rated 280 or worse is the oldest strength of scheduling strategy in the book. It's not a secret. It's far better to play Boston U (always been top 260 the past decade, but never better than 126) and Caldwell (non D1 games don't count for SOS) than it is to face Maine (literally always one of the 30 worst teams) and NJIT (worse than 250 in 4/5 years under their current coach).
UNC played six non-conference games against teams ranked 164-272 and none worse than that.
dont think the committee has factored conference tourney performance much over the past few seasons.
It matters for bubble teams. In 2019 Indiana was 17-14 (8-12) and Ohio State was 18-13 (8-12). The played in the BTT and Ohio State won. The Buckeyes got an 11 seed and Indiana went to the NIT.
Conference records are not factored in. Indiana overall record was a factor. 14 losses the difference
did they explicitly say that the game was determinative? have seen too many instances of a win or two in conf tourneys not changing anything. Could be that those two would have ended in the same place anyway. Bottom line for ru is win 3 of next 6 and they will at least start on Tuesday. 2-4 and your upside is Tuesday but probably better than 50% they are left out altogether.
Aren’t Lehigh and Lafayette the two teams we have played the most for almost a hundred years? We are always going to play them as we should. We were scheduled to play Rider too. I still don’t understand why we didn’t find a
Find it amusing that the same fans who bash our OOC schedule ignore the fact that we play 20 B1G games. Or that we could easily increase the OOC by playing Princeton.
And if you want to play a stronger schedule just go 15 miles down the road and play Princeton. Will help us against slower tempo teams like Wiscy or in the Big Dance.
SHU, Princeton, Lehigh, Lafayette, ACC challenge Gavitt games is a perfectly fine schedule.
The. Problem is we lost to Lafayette but we may be the school that breaks the absurdity of the NET.
Find it amusing that the same fans who bash our OOC schedule ignore the fact that we play 20 B1G games. Or that we could easily increase the OOC by playing Princeton.
And if you want to play a stronger schedule just go 15 miles down the road and play Princeton. Will help us against slower tempo teams like Wiscy or in the Big Dance.
SHU, Princeton, Lehigh, Lafayette, ACC challenge Gavitt games is a perfectly fine schedule.
The. Problem is we lost to Lafayette but we may be the school that breaks the absurdity of the NET.
3 more wins means either winning another road game or beating Illinois at home. Both would be big NET boosts.
I hear you, but I’m not sure I agree. Like I said, too many bubble teams with good conf tourney performance that didn’t seem to matter. Let’s hope we don’t have to think about the conf tourney.
If we win the 3 home games without any blowouts and lose the 3 road games plus our conference tournament game, I’d expect us to maybe get into the 70s. Those wins would bump us up maybe 8 spots each on average and the losses would bring us down probably 5 or so on average.
It was a head to head basic elim game..that is an obvious determination
I just mean conference mark or isnt really looked at...and a team can beat another 2x yet still be selected over them
I mean, it has to work that way. How would you do the first week of games when there is no NET data?
Not to mention a team's NET ranking is probably changing during many games and could also change quadrants...
Live look at the guy who wrote the algorithm for the ‘new’ NET:
