Jump to content

NET Rankings


Bills By 40

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Bay Area Billiken said:

A10 NET Leaders:  1. SLU 87; 2. FORDHAM (11-1) 96; 3. UMass 101.

So we play a tough schedule, looking for an at large bid, lose a few of them. Fordham plays cupcakes and beats them, and we are roughly in the same place. Are we doing this wrong? Should we just schedule teams we know we can beat in non-conference play and run up the score on them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 266
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

19 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

So we play a tough schedule, looking for an at large bid, lose a few of them. Fordham plays cupcakes and beats them, and we are roughly in the same place. Are we doing this wrong? Should we just schedule teams we know we can beat in non-conference play and run up the score on them?

Deciphering the NET seems to still be a complicated work in progress. The unpopular, unconventional answer might be Yes. Conventional wisdom answer is No. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

So we play a tough schedule, looking for an at large bid, lose a few of them. Fordham plays cupcakes and beats them, and we are roughly in the same place. Are we doing this wrong? Should we just schedule teams we know we can beat in non-conference play and run up the score on them?

I guarantee you it's cause weve lost two of those games by like a combined 50 points. Would be interesting to see what it would be if they were closer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course those who read my posts know how I feel about the NET.  Basically , the NET needs a large sample size to work. How large?  About 3 months.   In March , my model will matchup around 85% and even the misses at that point won't be as wide as they are now. 

Let's look at some of the strangeness of the Dec NET.

Let's start with Fla Atlantic...a team the NET has at 13th ITN... They are a fine team who will battle UAB  for the Conf USA title.  But 13th???  But don't worry , the NET is on it ...They moved FL Atl from 12 to 13th  in the most recent update so their model is starting to correct.  So I ask my computer, who wins if the Bills play FL Atl...The computer says on neutral ground, the game is even. I have no problem with the NET ranking FA at 13th.  I do have a problem with the Bills at 87th in the NET. The Bills have Strength of Schedule ranking of 33...an A......FA has a SOS of 247...a D+...But the NET says FA is 8-1  and the Bills are only 7-4 (sorry Quinn).  I say to the NET... whatever. The Bills SOS when compared to the AP Top 25 SOS comes in at 3rd. The 3rd toughest schedule of the top 25 teams.

Let's look at 1 more ...Utah St...10th on the NET... A fine Mt West team that will battle Boise St for 2nd  place (SD St will take the conf)...Ut St is 8-0 with a SOS of 130 (B- )...better but still nowhere near the Bills SOS....or the Bills NET ranking. Even Boise doesn't look good in the comparison with a 36 NET ranking. The good news here is that BSU and UtSt will play one another and hopefully the NET will be able to sort it out.

Always remember, that if the NET computer can't figure it out in the end ...the all knowing Committee will do its job...You might say that the Committee is the NCCA's safety NET.

SShoe likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, The Wiz said:

Of course those who read my posts know how I feel about the NET.  Basically , the NET needs a large sample size to work. How large?  About 3 months.   In March , my model will matchup around 85% and even the misses at that point won't be as wide as they are now. 

Let's look at some of the strangeness of the Dec NET.

Let's start with Fla Atlantic...a team the NET has at 13th ITN... They are a fine team who will battle UAB  for the Conf USA title.  But 13th???  But don't worry , the NET is on it ...They moved FL Atl from 12 to 13th  in the most recent update so their model is starting to correct.  So I ask my computer, who wins if the Bills play FL Atl...The computer says on neutral ground, the game is even. I have no problem with the NET ranking FA at 13th.  I do have a problem with the Bills at 87th in the NET. The Bills have Strength of Schedule ranking of 33...an A......FA has a SOS of 247...a D+...But the NET says FA is 8-1  and the Bills are only 7-4 (sorry Quinn).  I say to the NET... whatever. The Bills SOS when compared to the AP Top 25 SOS comes in at 3rd. The 3rd toughest schedule of the top 25 teams.

Let's look at 1 more ...Utah St...10th on the NET... A fine Mt West team that will battle Boise St for 2nd  place (SD St will take the conf)...Ut St is 8-0 with a SOS of 130 (B- )...better but still nowhere near the Bills SOS....or the Bills NET ranking. Even Boise doesn't look good in the comparison with a 36 NET ranking. The good news here is that BSU and UtSt will play one another and hopefully the NET will be able to sort it out.

Always remember, that if the NET computer can't figure it out in the end ...the all knowing Committee will do its job...You might say that the Committee is the NCCA's safety NET.

I think you might be underestimating Utah St. some.  I think they are the best team in the MWC. It is a really well built, balanced team.  Tyler Funk is the kind of player the Billikens have been missing for a decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, The Wiz said:

Of course those who read my posts know how I feel about the NET.  Basically , the NET needs a large sample size to work. How large?  About 3 months.   In March , my model will matchup around 85% and even the misses at that point won't be as wide as they are now. 

Let's look at some of the strangeness of the Dec NET.

Let's start with Fla Atlantic...a team the NET has at 13th ITN... They are a fine team who will battle UAB  for the Conf USA title.  But 13th???  But don't worry , the NET is on it ...They moved FL Atl from 12 to 13th  in the most recent update so their model is starting to correct.  So I ask my computer, who wins if the Bills play FL Atl...The computer says on neutral ground, the game is even. I have no problem with the NET ranking FA at 13th.  I do have a problem with the Bills at 87th in the NET. The Bills have Strength of Schedule ranking of 33...an A......FA has a SOS of 247...a D+...But the NET says FA is 8-1  and the Bills are only 7-4 (sorry Quinn).  I say to the NET... whatever. The Bills SOS when compared to the AP Top 25 SOS comes in at 3rd. The 3rd toughest schedule of the top 25 teams.

Let's look at 1 more ...Utah St...10th on the NET... A fine Mt West team that will battle Boise St for 2nd  place (SD St will take the conf)...Ut St is 8-0 with a SOS of 130 (B- )...better but still nowhere near the Bills SOS....or the Bills NET ranking. Even Boise doesn't look good in the comparison with a 36 NET ranking. The good news here is that BSU and UtSt will play one another and hopefully the NET will be able to sort it out.

Always remember, that if the NET computer can't figure it out in the end ...the all knowing Committee will do its job...You might say that the Committee is the NCCA's safety NET.

I would call the NCAA final judgment Committee the NCAA Fudge Factor Committee. In religious terms it means "Our will be done."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, brianstl said:

I think you might be underestimating Utah St. some.  I think they are the best team in the MWC. It is a really well built, balanced team.  Tyler Funk is the kind of player the Billikens have been missing for a decade.

I like Ut St...They along with Boise St are both A- teams ...SD St is an A team...all 3 are good enough to Dance.  It is just a question of whether  the Committee would give 3 bids to the MWC.

My beef is not with Ut St but their NET ranking...they are good enough to Dance but are they 10 th ITN...I think that is a bit high. The NET has Ut St at 10...BSU at 36...SD St.at 39... My computer is showing 28 for SD St...43 for BSU and 44 for Ut St.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lord Elrond said:

The problem seems to be that the NET doesn’t seem to take SOS into account, or if it does account for it, it doesn’t value it much

I’m assuming (probably wrong) that the committee is there to counter-balance pathetic schedules. So far, there is little to no reason to play tough OOC games because it hurts efficiency numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some quotes on the NET by one of the largest sports and data research companies.........

 

Adjusted net efficiency is now the most heavily weighted part of the NET formula, so running up the score can have a significant effect on NET rankings.

Bracketology is complicated, as much an art as a science. Exactly how the NCAA utilizes its own evaluation tools and team sheets is convoluted and vague, perhaps even intentionally so.

The NET is a complex analytical model, but it’s still just one part of the picture. Tournament seedings are not solely decided based on NET ranking.

Despite spending millions on developing algorithms, the March Madness selection committee is ultimately still a human committee, and thus a flawed one. For all its high talk of “amateurism” when discussing its athletes, the NCAA is still run like a business. March Madness brings in over a billion dollars of revenue every year, and one has to wonder what impact that has on tournament selection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, money talks, the more money the louder it talks. I assume that at least one of the goals of the committee is to maximize the revenue from March madness, and that means making decisions that will pump up viewership. I have no idea about who the members of that selection committee are, but I would not doubt that they include a representative (s) of the media network that bought the the right to carry the broadcasting rights for the year. After all the experts on viewership are the networks that carry the feed. This is not real knowledge, it is merely an educated guess.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So playing a weak schedule and running up the score on them does improve your NET. Not sure about the logic there, but I am sure the NCAA doesn’t care what I think…

 

The point about the revenue is made by Wiz is very valid, I think, even if the NCAA won’t admit it. I’m willing to bet television ratings of various programs also plays into the selection committee, and is probably the tie-breaker more than the NCAA would ever admit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I posted in the "B!tch about Coach Ford" thread: 

Dayton is now the 88th ranked team in NET after climbing 20 spots from 108 following their 40-point victory yesterday. Just 4 days ago they moved 29 spots from 145 to 116 after beating Wyoming by 17 in a game they were only favored by 2.5, and just 6 days before that they moved 30 spots from 189 to 159 after beating UNC Asheville by 23 in a game they were only favored by 10.5. They improved 101 spots in the NET rankings in a span of ~11 days. 

This goes to show two things: There's a LOT of room for movement in the NET rankings (albeit maybe less in the sub-100 range than there is above it), and it's very important that we win big in the games we can.  

 

A10 NET Rankings (and Games on the Schedule):

87th SLU

88th Dayton (02/10 @ Dayton, Q2 - 13 spots from a Q1 game | 03/03 @ Chaifetz, Q3 - " ")

103rd Fordham (01/31 @ Fordham, Q2 - 28 spots from a Q1 game)

106th UMass (01/04 @ UMass, Q2 - 31 spots from Q1)

130th George Mason (01/11 @ Chaifetz, Q3)

134th Duquesne (02/18 @ Chaifetz, Q3)

138th Davidson (01/27 @ Davidson, Q3 - 3 spots from Q2 | 02/15 @ Chaifetz, Q3 - 22 spots from Q4)

145th VCU (02/03 @ Chaifetz, Q3 | 02/28 @ VCU, Q3 - 10 spots from Q2)

152nd Richmond (02/21 @ Richmond, Q3 - 17 spots from Q2)

191st St. Bonaventure (01/07 @ Chaifetz, Q4 - 31 spots from Q3)

204th George Washington (01/14 @ GW, Q3)

220th Loyola Chicago (01/18 @ LoyChi, Q3 - 21 spots from Q4 | 02/25 @ Chaifetz, Q4)

(Everyone else is well out of reach of being anything more than a Q4 game either at home or on the road, F*** this year's A10)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

As of today we are 0-3 in Q1, and 2-1 in Q2.

And Dayton is winless in Q 1 thru 3, but 8-0 in Q4, and is inexplicably one spot behind us in NET

 

edit: whoops, didn’t see Bills by 40 had just mentioned something similar in the post before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

Then there should be no bitching asking why we don't play any good OOC games in StL.  I can go either way just as long as  it helps not hurt.

The problem with the OOC schedule is not the schedule but the fact that we didn't we didn't win more of them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...