NET Rankings

[wgstl]

2 hours ago, HoosierPal said:

We are not a good road team. We have 9 away league games. Will 7-2 keep us in the at large bubble?  Depends on the 2 losses. 

6-3?

 

No, we're not.  But I'm not worried about at least 2 of those road games. 

[cgeldmacher]

2 hours ago, Compton said:

Let's say we had 2 or 3 away losses. Given the NET system, is it best to have the away losses be against the worst teams in the conference, which would mean wins at Dayton, UMass, Davidson, VCU, etc...., or would we want the losses to come against the best away opponents on our schedule?

I'm asking seriously. I can't tell to what extent the "it's who you beat" arithmetic applies.

I think that's a very good question, and I don't know the answer.

[Bills By 40]

21 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said:

I think that's a very good question, and I don't know the answer.

I don't know if anyone knows the answer because NET is rigged. At a minimum it's suspiciously non-transparent. 

All we can do is win and hope it's rewarded by the powers that be.  

[Bay Area Billiken]

Per a quick search uncovering a Washington Post article, the last time the A10 was a one bid NCAA Conference was in 2005, which was SLU's last season in C-USA before it joined the A10.

SLU's NET today is 80, which is still best in the A10, with UMass at 83, Fordham (9-1) at 99 and Duquesne (7-1) at 101.  SLU's designated home and home opponents are VCU 144, Davidson 176, Dayton 187, and Loyola Chicago 269.  Other A10 team NET's: George Mason 146, St. Bona 147, Richmond 178, GW 206, LaSalle 241, St. Joe's 301, URI 307.

SLU's final three nonconference opponents are Boise State (7-2) NET 56, Drake (8-1) NET 57, best in the MVC, and SIUe (5-3) NET 100.

The A10 today is ranked 13th in Conference NET, behind #5 Mountain West, #8 WCC, #9 C-USA, #10 American, #11 WAC, #12 Missouri Valley, and just ahead of the #14 Ivy and #15 Sun Belt. The Big XII is #1, B1G #2, SEC #3, Big East #4, Pac-12 #6 and ACC #7.

 

[The Wiz]

6 hours ago, Compton said:

Let's say we had 2 or 3 away losses. Given the NET system, is it best to have the away losses be against the worst teams in the conference, which would mean wins at Dayton, UMass, Davidson, VCU, etc...., or would we want the losses to come against the best away opponents on our schedule?

I'm asking seriously. I can't tell to what extent the "it's who you beat" arithmetic applies.

If you are going to lose 2 or 3 games...from a NET point of view ie to get the highest ranking.....you want to have those losses against the best possible opponents whether in conference or not.  To increase your chances to Dance...you can lose the  2 or 3 games in conference to anyone ....as long as you finish in the top 4 of the A10.

[CenHudDude]

2 hours ago, Bay Area Billiken said:

Per a quick search uncovering a Washington Post article, the last time the A10 was a one bid NCAA Conference was in 2005, which was SLU's last season in C-USA before it joined the A10.

SLU's NET today is 80, which is still best in the A10, with UMass at 83, Fordham (9-1) at 99 and Duquesne (7-1) at 101.  SLU's designated home and home opponents are VCU 144, Davidson 176, Dayton 187, and Loyola Chicago 269.  Other A10 team NET's: George Mason 146, St. Bona 147, Richmond 178, GW 206, LaSalle 241, St. Joe's 301, URI 307.

SLU's final three nonconference opponents are Boise State (7-2) NET 56, Drake (8-1) NET 57, best in the MVC, and SIUe (5-3) NET 100.

The A10 today is ranked 13th in Conference NET, behind #5 Mountain West, #8 WCC, #9 C-USA, #10 American, #11 WAC, #12 Missouri Valley, and just ahead of the #14 Ivy and #15 Sun Belt. The Big XII is #1, B1G #2, SEC #3, Big East #4, Pac-12 #6 and ACC #7.

 

Well at least we’re better than the Ivy!  Woo hoo!

[Fraz]

6 hours ago, Bay Area Billiken said:

Per a quick search uncovering a Washington Post article, the last time the A10 was a one bid NCAA Conference was in 2005, which was SLU's last season in C-USA before it joined the A10.

SLU's NET today is 80, which is still best in the A10, with UMass at 83, Fordham (9-1) at 99 and Duquesne (7-1) at 101.  SLU's designated home and home opponents are VCU 144, Davidson 176, Dayton 187, and Loyola Chicago 269.  Other A10 team NET's: George Mason 146, St. Bona 147, Richmond 178, GW 206, LaSalle 241, St. Joe's 301, URI 307.

SLU's final three nonconference opponents are Boise State (7-2) NET 56, Drake (8-1) NET 57, best in the MVC, and SIUe (5-3) NET 100.

The A10 today is ranked 13th in Conference NET, behind #5 Mountain West, #8 WCC, #9 C-USA, #10 American, #11 WAC, #12 Missouri Valley, and just ahead of the #14 Ivy and #15 Sun Belt. The Big XII is #1, B1G #2, SEC #3, Big East #4, Pac-12 #6 and ACC #7.

 

Dayton 187 lol.  These numbers are worse than I thought. 
 

Is this a double outlier year for the conference?  Injuries have hurt the top 3 teams (I’m counting Perkins’s knee), but man.

[Old guy]

Do not count the outliers until the season is over, please.

[Bay Area Billiken]

SLU is #19 in the RPI, the old tool used by the NCAA, still used by the NCAA in Soccer and Baseball.

SLU is #81 in the NET.  

[slubillikens43]

I know they'll never use it, but Kenpom always seems to be very accurate on ranking teams at the end of every season. Why can't they just use that system?

[slubillikens43]

nm

[wgstl]

Starting to think playing an easier OOC and flying through it is better. 

[Billiken Rich]

40 minutes ago, wgstl said:

Starting to think playing an easier OOC and flying through it is better. 

Maybe......maybe not......no one outside of the post dispatch has any respect for the gaudy record of  Tigers of spumac.....

[cgeldmacher]

19 hours ago, The Wiz said:

If you are going to lose 2 or 3 games...from a NET point of view ie to get the highest ranking.....you want to have those losses against the best possible opponents whether in conference or not.  To increase your chances to Dance...you can lose the  2 or 3 games in conference to anyone ....as long as you finish in the top 4 of the A10.

I think we all understand that losses to higher ranked opponents hurt less than losses to lower ranked opponents.  I think the question being floated is a bit different.  My understanding of the question is this: If you are going to have three losses in the non-conference schedule, would you rather beat your best opponents and lose to weaker ones (therefore, have very good wins on the resume, but also bad losses) or would you rather lose to the best teams and beat all of the weaker ones (therefore, you have no good wins on your resume, but also no bad losses)?  Which is better for the NET and for making the tournament?

[Billiken Rich]

13 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said:

I think we all understand that losses to higher ranked opponents hurt less than losses to lower ranked opponents.  I think the question being floated is a bit different.  My understanding of the question is this: If you are going to have three losses in the non-conference schedule, would you rather beat your best opponents and lose to weaker ones (therefore, have very good wins on the resume, but also bad losses) or would you rather lose to the best teams and beat all of the weaker ones (therefore, you have no good wins on your resume, but also no bad losses)?  Which is better for the NET and for making the tournament?

Apparently beating crap teams by 30 is the way to go

[wgstl]

2 hours ago, Billiken Rich said:

Maybe......maybe not......no one outside of the post dispatch has any respect for the gaudy record of  Tigers of spumac.....

I dont mean as light as what they've done to this point. I think having an 11-1 OOC while avoiding top 50 and 200+ as much as possible. 

[Lord Elrond]

47 minutes ago, Billiken Rich said:

Apparently beating crap teams by 30 is the way to go

Very true

[The Wiz]

1 hour ago, cgeldmacher said:

I think we all understand that losses to higher ranked opponents hurt less than losses to lower ranked opponents.  I think the question being floated is a bit different.  My understanding of the question is this: If you are going to have three losses in the non-conference schedule, would you rather beat your best opponents and lose to weaker ones (therefore, have very good wins on the resume, but also bad losses) or would you rather lose to the best teams and beat all of the weaker ones (therefore, you have no good wins on your resume, but also no bad losses)?  Which is better for the NET and for making the tournament?

 There is a missing part to your question  which is scoring margin. If I wanted to beat the NET (which may or may not help you make the tourney) I would lose 3 to the best teams (by close margins) and pound the weak teams (with big margins).  Even if you beat the good teams ...if they are really good you are not going to pound them. And if you do they will no longer be a quad 1 team.  But pounding weak teams is an easy way to gain rank in the NET. 

The only team I know that beat the system ( beat the NET in a big way) was Colgate where they were ranked 9th (a possible 2 or 3 seed) playing all weak opponents(including conference games)  and the Committee "punished" them and moved them to a 13th seed.  One could argue they didn't beat the system because they won their weak division and tourney and would have made it anyway. But the question remains , had they lost the conf tourney they would not have had a bid....their ranking would have fallen ...but they still would have been a high ranked team that would not have made it...an embarrassment to the NCAA. Of course it can be argued that happens frequently in 1 bid conferences where the lower ranked team upsets the #1 seed.  But usually its #180 losing to #215.

Bottom line ...There is no easy answer to your question because it is not just about beating good or bad opponents...It is about scoring margins when it comes to the NET.  If you want to save yourself some anguish start following the NET on March 1st where it will be a bit more real by then.

[Slu let the dogs out?]

20 hours ago, wgstl said:

Starting to think playing an easier OOC and flying through it is better. 

I could be convinced of this but that would likely require SLU to finish in the top 3 of the A10 (for an at-large bid) which they haven't done since Ford took over. Maybe not?

Going 11-1 in OOC vs Q3 and Q4 teams and then 12-6 (Ford’s best conference record) or 11-7 in conference play doesn’t seem like an attractive resume for a committee that will use any excuse it can to put in .500 Power 5 programs.

Just saw your other post, WG. Sadly, I’m not sure we could go 11-1 vs 51-199 teams unless the better opponents are played at Chaifetz. That would take some skillful OOC scheduling on SLU’s behalf to achieve an OOC schedule of teams in the 51-199 range with the only road/neutral games against the worst of the group  

 

[BACKHANDtheRICAN]

On 12/8/2022 at 8:30 AM, BrettJollyComedyHour said:

If we're head and shoulders above the rest of the conference in NET it will.

Is it nice living in fantasy land? 

[Taj79]

Everybody now ,,,,,, WE SUCK THE LEAST!  WE SUCK THE LEAST! 

It's gonna catch on.  Fer shure.

[BrettJollyComedyHour]

3 hours ago, BACKHANDtheRICAN said:

Is it nice living in fantasy land? 

Is it nice not living with any joy? 

[Bay Area Billiken]

SLU's NET is 90, and no longer best in the A10.  UMass is 85.

SLU is #61 in Pomeroy, still best in the A10.

[Bay Area Billiken]

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

[Old guy]

I suggest we start looking for the systems that rate SLU most favorably, it may not help with the season, but it will certainly make a lot of people feel better.