ADVERTISEMENT

First NET Rankings-#22

urmite said:
I am confused. Did I become Fatherspider without knowing it?
Notifications is telling me that Chop quoted my post in his last post. o_O
Click to expand...
Sorry, I meant to reply to you separately. I really like that site that you pointed us to. The design is really cool.
Their "Bracketology" method is terrible, though - it's not at all how the NET is used, and I think encourages misunderstanding of same.
Their bracket will probably be one of the least accurate on Selection Sunday. :)

I wish there was an easy way to post the actual team sheets here (the NCAA publishes them every day) but I can only get them as PDF and I don't have the time or inclination to re-format.
 
WebSpinner said:
to me, we look just like Joel (tom cruise) when the princeton rep, visiting his home during the escort party, looks over his resume and states pretty good work but not quite princeton material now is it to which Joel responds, sometimes you just have to say what the fu$$, looks like the university of illinois!
Click to expand...
Which is exactly how Illinois achieved Lock status for this year's tournament!
 
gospidersgo said:
Because we follow all things Spider basketball - our record and results, opponents results, NET, etc. If the NCAA uses it in some way to help pick tourney teams why wouldn't we follow it? We know it's not the be all end all.
Click to expand...
just saying 97 showed examples where the committee didn't come close to letting NET pick their field, so arguing that NET is unfair is irrelevant. we could have a NET in the 30s and not be selected or in the 50s and get in. end of the day it's just like RPI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChoppinBroccoli
spiderman said:
just saying 97 showed examples where the committee didn't come close to letting NET pick their field, so arguing that NET is unfair is irrelevant. we could have a NET in the 30s and not be selected or in the 50s and get in. end of the day it's just like RPI.
Click to expand...

I agree for the most part, but Clemson and NC State also had questionable resumes. If ours looks pretty good, we might as well have a good net number to go with it. It certainly can't hurt, and we can't read the committee's minds, so we really don't know how many committee members will look at the net as a factor. I mean, it's only two years old now. We don't have a long history of how important they think individual nets are. Early in the year, I said it's more important to have a good resume and quality wins than a good net number. I still believe that, but if you have a good resume with some good wins, why not hope for the highest net possible? That's all I am saying.
 
spiderman said:
just saying 97 showed examples where the committee didn't come close to letting NET pick their field, so arguing that NET is unfair is irrelevant. we could have a NET in the 30s and not be selected or in the 50s and get in. end of the day it's just like RPI.
Click to expand...
Ironically, urmite's site, Bracketologists - which just picks the entire field by NET - has Richmond "in," relatively comfortably. :)
 
VT4700 said:
I agree for the most part, but Clemson and NC State also had questionable resumes. If ours looks pretty good, we might as well have a good net number to go with it. It certainly can't hurt, and we can't read the committee's minds, so we really don't know how many committee members will look at the net as a factor. I mean, it's only two years old now. We don't have a long history of how important they think individual nets are. Early in the year, I said it's more important to have a good resume and quality wins than a good net number. I still believe that, but if you have a good resume with some good wins, why not hope for the highest net possible? That's all I am saying.
Click to expand...
Having a high NET is a plus but if the committees purpose of the NET is to mainly determine what is a quality win compared to a bad loss, then we dont have a good resume compared to almost any P6 bubble team. Thats why Ive been saying its not so much that the NET ranking itself is determining who is worthy but indirectly, it is determining a quality win, and when it considers a road win against Depaul a quad 1 quality win it is hard for us to compete.

If they are going to select teams by the number of quality wins and bad losses as determined by the NET rankings, the NET creates an incredibly big disadvantage for us no matter what our individual ranking may be. If that doesnt makes sense, sorry.
 
Last edited:
ChoppinBroccoli said:
One Quad 2 game. The 76 next to "Davidson" shows exactly that.
Click to expand...
Ok my bad but do u really think they will look into it that hard since every analyst on TV will still only be quoting that Richmond only has two Q1 wins.

Do you think will want to justify our inclusion by saying “but but they missed out for another by one spot?” I dont think so. I think its huge that Davidson get to 75.
 
ChoppinBroccoli said:
<Sigh> I know I'll never convince you, and our athletic department lickspittle is going to like every post you make disagreeing with me.
But Jerry Palm just did a Q&A and he said pretty much word for word what I've been saying to you the past week or so. You don't think he knows how it works either?

And no, I don't think Lavin looked that closely. He's not on the committee.
The committee spends a lot of time on this.
Click to expand...
Palm said the individual NET of a team is not that relevant to that team getting in or out, not that the number of quality wins/bad losses as determined by the NET arent that relevant. He knows that is the bulk of what gets a team in and is why St. Johns got in ad why UCLA may get in w bad NET. They had enough Q1 wins AS DETERMINED BY NET.
 
fatherspider said:
That actually is a decent explanation and thank you for it but if accurate, all it really does is make it more obvious that the entire system and possibly all systems of its kind are complete BS.
Click to expand...
Could you not say the same thing about a human poll, though? If a poll voter put Duke at #6, and you said "That's absolutely INSANE! What a JOKE!" wouldn't it be fair for them to ask 1) Who should be #6, then? and 2) Where should Duke be ranked? Would it be fair for them to say "I voted Duke #6 because they beat the #1 team in the country on a neutral court, they beat Michigan State on the road, and they are still 24-6, which - outside the Top 5 teams - is still a better record than everybody else, except Florida State - who Duke also beat." I mean if you're going to call something INSANE I think you should be willing to say what IS sane.

fatherspider said:
Does the same explanation pertain to how WV is still 21 at 19-10 after losing 6 of last 7 games? Only a few behind them played well enough to get above them over these last 3 weeks?
Click to expand...
WV dropped from the Top 10 to 21. They may well still be overrated, but they certainly didn't hold steady. My explanation was why Duke didn't drop, in my estimation. WVU dropped.

fatherspider said:
These rankings are created by self imposed geniuses who think they can cure all complications through a math formula and all just accept their formula results as truth, when they are far from it. Many want to believe their formula is telling the truth as to what teams are most worthy because it is simple to agree and to question them complicates matters.
Click to expand...
I don't know what a self imposed genius is. You're making a pretty big assumption that "all just accept their formula results as truth." I saw that "worthy" comment and wanted to respond to it sooner, and then saw Jerry Palm got a question using the exact same premise, and his answer was gold - NET (or any of these systems really) is not designed to determine worthiness. Not at all.

I think the NET is flawed, sure. There's one big issue in tandem with the Quads. But it has nothing to do with some conspiracy theory that they aren't really capping the MOV. Big moves in the mediocre teams are very easy to explain. You'll probably want to be sitting down when I post my criticism of the NET. :)

This is a weird year. It's the parity that's making this so stressful. Last year it felt like you knew who the really good teams were in the P6 and who the bad ones were. This year, everyone is beating everyone else. There are five teams tied at 9-9 in the ACC right now! Some are on the bubble, others are not. There are just a lot more teams on the bubble this year, this late:
ChoppinBroccoli said:
Parity in the P6 probably makes it tougher on the mid-majors. I have no empirical evidence, it just seems logical that more P6 teams fighting for those 36 spots is not a good thing.

23-8 (or worse), we'll need some help.
24-7, our showing in Brooklyn will probably determine where we go next.
25-6 or better, we should be in.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: plydogg
fatherspider said:
Having a high NET is a plus but if the committees purpose of the NET is to mainly determine what is a quality win compared to a bad loss, then we dont have a good resume compared to almost any P6 bubble team. Thats why Ive been saying its not so much that the NET ranking itself is determining who is worthy but indirectly, it is determining a quality win, and when it considers a road win against Depaul a quad 1 quality win it is hard for us to compete.

If they are going to select teams by the number of quality wins and bad losses as determined by the NET rankings, the NET creates an incredibly big disadvantage for us no matter what our individual ranking may be. If that doesnt makes sense, sorry.
Click to expand...

Makes a lot of sense. I agree with you. I guess we just have to hope the committee has some sense when they look at these quads. They have a lot of outs, where they can just pick and choose who they want, so if they want to get a team in the the dance based on several quad 1 and 2 wins, they can certainly do that, and that is what is so worrisome to I'm sure you as well as me.
 
fatherspider said:
Ok my bad but do u really think they will look into it that hard since every analyst on TV will still only be quoting that Richmond only has two Q1 wins.

Do you think will want to justify our inclusion by saying “but but they missed out for another by one spot?” I dont think so. I think its huge that Davidson get to 75.
Click to expand...

I do too. I think they will not expect us to have five or six quad one wins like these majors do, but 3 looks a heck of a lot better than two.
 
fatherspider said:
I agree we have to at least win two more. Away against the Dukes is a must. They are a pretty good team and senior night is always an emotional one. It will be a battle I believe.
Click to expand...

If we need to win at least 2 more, but only win 2, then it might be better to win 2 tourney games after losing to Duquesne. Wouldn't that be better then beating Duquesne and losing in the semis? So, while Duquesne feels like a must-win, it's only a must-win if we need to win three more games, which we might need to do, so let's do it!
 
Out of all of the P6 games I have watched the last 2 weeks, this Prov/X game is the best so far. Really good basketball by both teams.

Really, what a game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChoppinBroccoli
VT4700 said:
If we need to win at least 2 more, but only win 2, then it might be better to win 2 tourney games after losing to Duquesne. Wouldn't that be better then beating Duquesne and losing in the semis? So, while Duquesne feels like a must-win, it's only a must-win if we need to win three more games, which we might need to do, so let's do it!
Click to expand...
We will be off the bubble if we lose at Dukes IMO. After that we would gave to win it all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nathanw19, gospidersgo, urfan1 and 1 other person
Yes, I definitely agree with you that there is some bad basketball in those overrated P6 conferences - particularly Pac 12 and Big 10. But the Big East and, actually, the AAC games I've watched have been better.
 
fatherspider said:
We will be off the bubble if we lose at Dukes IMO. After that we would gave to win it all.
Click to expand...

You really think so? Who behind us will really pass us though? Maybe a couple teams, but we could easily pass them right back. And, getting to the finals would allow us to pass a few more teams, and might give us a better win than Duquesne. Not sure, but I definitely think loss, win, win is better than win, win, loss. Plus, we would still be playing on Sunday with a chance at the conference title. Even if we lose in the finals, we would still clearly be A-10 #2 if we did that. Win, win, lose, and Rhode Island could pass us.

Not at all trying to say Friday is not a huge game. It is. They all are now. Just looking at all the possible scenarios.
 
Down 3 spots to 45. Arkansas (not surprising), Providence (also not surprising), and Wichita State.
 
Spider B said:
Agreed. Win this game. We are the better team.
Click to expand...
are we sure? they beat SLU both home and away. they lost to Dayton by 4 at home. they're very good.
I don't know the spread but I assume they're favored. this is a tough conference road game and would be a really good win.
this isn't a "we clearly should win" game like Radford.
 
  • Like
Reactions: plydogg and VT4700
spiderman said:
are we sure? they beat SLU both home and away. they lost to Dayton by 4 at home. they're very good.
I don't know the spread but I assume they're favored. this is a tough conference road game and would be a really good win.
this isn't a "we clearly should win" game like Radford.
Click to expand...
I agree they are not like Radford but a bit Jekyll & Hyde...
Sweep SLU by 14 twice. but recently...

Duquesne seems to play close games at home.
3-3 at home since Mid January.

Wins
Fordham by 2 in OT
LaSalle by 2
GMU (without Greene) by 3 last Sat

Losses
GW by 3
SBU by 3
Dayton by 4

I expect UR favored by 1/2...
 
Maybe we didn't drop at all, and those three teams just moved up.
For all we know, we were ahead of the Shockers by .00001.
 
  • Like
Reactions: plydogg
VT4700 said:
You really think so? Who behind us will really pass us though? Maybe a couple teams, but we could easily pass them right back. And, getting to the finals would allow us to pass a few more teams, and might give us a better win than Duquesne. Not sure, but I definitely think loss, win, win is better than win, win, loss. Plus, we would still be playing on Sunday with a chance at the conference title. Even if we lose in the finals, we would still clearly be A-10 #2 if we did that. Win, win, lose, and Rhode Island could pass us.

Not at all trying to say Friday is not a huge game. It is. They all are now. Just looking at all the possible scenarios.
Click to expand...
My thinking is in response to how the bubble has been going and the number of P6 teams that are moving up while we stand still.
We have stayed the last team or two out for like three weeks now and are 8-1 in our last 9 games. It seems that they are just waiting for us to stumble and have an excuse to disregard us.
If we lose Friday we will drop to the bottom of next four out. From there we cant recover imo.
If we win tomorrow we may move into the field and if there are a couple loses from teams just above us we will move Into a less precarious position.
Winning now gives us time to move up when others stumble. Then once we are in one loss to a decent team in semis wont knock us out.
I think once we are 4,5,or 6 teams out we are done unless we win it all. But I could be totally wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChoppinBroccoli
spiderman said:
are we sure? they beat SLU both home and away. they lost to Dayton by 4 at home. they're very good.
I don't know the spread but I assume they're favored. this is a tough conference road game and would be a really good win.
this isn't a "we clearly should win" game like Radford.
Click to expand...
They're good, no doubt.
But it's a game a tournament team should win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 97spiderfan, plydogg and gospidersgo
fatherspider said:
My thinking is in response to how the bubble has been going and the number of P6 teams that are moving up while we stand still.
We have stayed the last team or two out for like three weeks now and are 8-1 in our last 9 games. It seems that they are just waiting for us to stumble and have an excuse to disregard us.
If we lose Friday we will drop to the bottom of next four out. From there we cant recover imo.
If we win tomorrow we may move into the field and if there are a couple loses from teams just above us we will move Into a less precarious position.
Winning now gives us time to move up when others stumble. Then once we are in one loss to a decent team in semis wont knock us out.
I think once we are 4,5,or 6 teams out we are done unless we win it all. But I could be totally wrong.
Click to expand...

We can disagree about where we might fall. And, of course we are just guessing because who knows where we even are in the committee's minds right now. Have you taken a look at the teams below us? I don't think a lot of non tourney teams now have much of a chance to pass us. I think Lunardi and Palm have it right regarding who the last teams are battling for spots. Lunardi has Cincy and Rutgers in, and Palm has us and Utah St in. Those are the teams they differ on. You are looking at Lunardi's bracket, and then dropping us three or four spots if we lose. What if we looked at palms bracket, and drop us maybe two spots if we lose? Then, we only need to pass two more teams to get right back in there. I think getting to the conference finals would accomplish that, and if we had to lose one game, out if the next 3, I would rather lose tomorrow and get to the finals. Just my opinion. Not saying it's right because we have no way of knowing. Hopefully, we win at least three in a row and won't have to find out. All good.
 
spiderman said:
I'm sure their fans think this is a game they should win too.
Click to expand...
Yes very much so. We should be playing with more desperation though or I would hope.

Our key seems to be the play of Nick Sherod. If he goes cold it seems that the whole team struggles offensively. He needs to play w total confidence. Does any one have Nick’s stats home vs away?
 
  • Like
Reactions: plydogg
seems there are more good teams on the bubble than usual ... teams with something impressive on their resume to point to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatherspider
VT4700 said:
We can disagree about where we might fall. And, of course we are just guessing because who knows where we even are in the committee's minds right now. Have you taken a look at the teams below us? I don't think a lot of non tourney teams now have much of a chance to pass us. I think Lunardi and Palm have it right regarding who the last teams are battling for spots. Lunardi has Cincy and Rutgers in, and Palm has us and Utah St in. Those are the teams they differ on. You are looking at Lunardi's bracket, and then dropping us three or four spots if we lose. What if we looked at palms bracket, and drop us maybe two spots if we lose? Then, we only need to pass two more teams to get right back in there. I think getting to the conference finals would accomplish that, and if we had to lose one game, out if the next 3, I would rather lose tomorrow and get to the finals. Just my opinion. Not saying it's right because we have no way of knowing. Hopefully, we win at least three in a row and won't have to find out. All good.
Click to expand...
I hope the team is looking at it my way nd not yours. Just saying. They need to think this is a due or die game. Get hot right away and never let up. Playing catchup, like at Bonnies, likely wont work out well.
 
spiderman said:
seems there are more good teams on the bubble than usual ... teams with something impressive on their resume to point to.
Click to expand...
Or at least that is what the NET Quads say. But yes it seems 20 teams have a case and since we are a MM, they all think we shouldnt even b in the discussion.
 
fatherspider said:
But they didnt play.
Click to expand...
Two of them scored big wins - one of which you watched and said was some of the best ball you've seen all season.
Wichita State didn't play, correct. But we essentially flipped places with them; one above to one below. It's not a dramatic move. Surely you don't expect the needle not to move at all - a lot of our opponents played, and our second best win got poleaxed on their home court. My point is it could have been a tiny move.

You are 100% correct that tomorrow is a must-win game.
We will need a lot of help if we're heading into next Saturday with 8 losses. The way this season is going, that help ain't coming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gospidersgo, plydogg and fatherspider
ChoppinBroccoli said:
Two of them scored big wins - one of which you watched and said was some of the best ball you've seen all season.
Wichita State didn't play, correct. But we essentially flipped places with them; one above to one below. It's not a dramatic move. Surely you don't expect the needle not to move at all - a lot of our opponents played, and our second best win got poleaxed on their home court. My point is it could have been a tiny move.

You are 100% correct that tomorrow is a must-win game.
We will need a lot of help if we're heading into next Saturday with 8 losses. The way this season is going, that help ain't coming.
Click to expand...
Of the years the VCU was an at large, only one time did they have more than 7 losses in the regular season... 2014 they had 8. They still likely would have made it many years with another loss or two but lets just beat Dukes and keep it at 7.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChoppinBroccoli and plydogg
fatherspider said:
Of the years the VCU was an at large, only one time did they have more than 7 losses in the regular season... 2014 they had 8. They still likely would have made it many years with another loss or two but lets just beat Dukes and keep it at 7.
Click to expand...
Well, except that year they were an at-large from the CAA...... :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F

Board Game Show… guess the NET

Replies
23
Views
946
UR Basketball Board
mr.spider
M
Gallipoli

NIT Rule Changes hurt A10

Replies
17
Views
857
UR Basketball Board
plydogg
plydogg
Section9.RowD

Key Games -- NET standings and eventual bubble implications ..

Replies
178
Views
8K
UR Basketball Board
spiderman
spiderman
urmite

While waiting for the NET

Replies
0
Views
132
UR Basketball Board
urmite
urmite
Wood Hall

SBA cracks the top 20

Replies
2
Views
381
Off Topic Posts
urmite
urmite
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back