biggest pile of garbage I’ve ever see. How in the world is Northwestern ranked ahead of us? Makes no sense
Net Rankings
- Thread starter Rutgers25
- Start date
The NCAA tried but it really didn’t work. Much like the playoff “committee”, any time ESPN has their hands in something in sports it’s usually not genuinely “fair” and gives a nod to the media’s liking, I.e. last seasons record, NCAA berths, history, size of campus green, etc etc .....
This is an argument for more heavily weighting recent games. We're not the same team that lost to Fordham.
Thats not how it works...ratings are designed to give a broad picture of body of work. The last 11 games Rutgers is plsying like a NCAA contender but the first 17 games they weren't.
The selection committee does not use how you finish as a criteria. I dont agree with it either. Wins in the early season take on greater importance because non conference wins are valued
The margin of victory piece is what's changing the math for us.
We have 5 wins of 10+ points (where their margin of victory caps out), over teams ranked 41, 154, 218, 233, 334. That's zero 10+ point victories over top 150 teams before last night, and that win moved us up 10 places in the NET rankings.
We have 8 losses of 10+ points, against teams ranked 8, 8, 11, 27, 43, 56, and 58. We also have an 8 point loss to 241 Fordham.
Our average conference win has been by 6 points, and our average loss has been by 12.
We have 5 wins of 10+ points (where their margin of victory caps out), over teams ranked 41, 154, 218, 233, 334. That's zero 10+ point victories over top 150 teams before last night, and that win moved us up 10 places in the NET rankings.
We have 8 losses of 10+ points, against teams ranked 8, 8, 11, 27, 43, 56, and 58. We also have an 8 point loss to 241 Fordham.
Our average conference win has been by 6 points, and our average loss has been by 12.
And i dont want to make it seem like i am endorsing the NET but the rpi obviously was old and needed a freshening as it was being manipulated schedule wise
Margin of victory in basketball is the dumbest thing ever. Literally the last sport where you should count that for anything if it’s less than 12 points because of the intentional fouling
Well, you can generally tell whether it was a "final shot" one possession game if it's within 4 or so, and anything over 10 points is usually not within reach in the final minutes. Gradations between those points, though? I agree that's a reach for me.
Agreed. Margin of victories shouldn’t matter except maybe as a tiebreaker for seeding purposes.
I can not disagree more. Margin of victory is such a compelling stat and amazed it somehow became verboten. It’s silly and may be the most important stat of all. Who lead the country in scoring margin last year? Villanova. Who won the National Championship last year? Villanova! Lets look this year. Top three Gonzaga, Duke and UVA. The idea that you can’t look at scoring margin is just fear some teams will run it up. It’s still a great barometer.
The RPI was far from perfect but personally I think it was more accurate than the NET. The NET encourages teams to win by large margins. I think Kenpom and Segarin are much more accurate and even they are not perfect. At this point we should be rated ahead of Northwestern Nebraska and Penn State. Teams don't seem to get rewarded for improving a great deal during a long season. Someday we might get respected. Right now we are still trying to overcome how bad we have been for years.
It's weird with the 10 point cap, though, to be honest. A team with 15 wins of 25 points is no better than a team with 15 wins of 10 points in that model. I don't disagree with including scoring margin, just think the way they are implementing it is weird.