It would be. But I didn’t think we’d be doing the most outlandish unrealistic hypotheticals. If 20 other teams decide to take a CBI bid over the NCAA hey that makes our chances better too.
2023–24 NET Ratings
- Thread starter SFspidur
- Start date
It would be. But I didn’t think we’d be doing the most outlandish unrealistic hypotheticals. If 20 other teams decide to take a CBI bid over the NCAA hey that makes our chances better too.
Welcome to the NIT as a #1 seed. A zero quad 1 win team without a conference tournament autobid is not going to the NCAAs as an at large. The committee is looking for mid-majors who proved they can beat the P6 teams. Not one that proved it can beat the teams it is supposed to (no Q4 losses).
More like a #5 seed on the road once the P6 schools are done taking all the home game slots.
We only play Dayton once - at home. We need to win that game!
I am shifting my allegiance from NET to GROSS. It takes many more things into consideration.
I appreciate your explanation. It is making a little more sense to me but it still seems weird that W’s and L’s seem to have lost some of their importance.
Example… I am also a St Johns fan. The last two games they lost to Creighton and Marquette by 1 point each. With the current NET you are saying that it really doesnt matter much that they lost by a point rather than won by a point, the ranking would be very close to the same. Correct?
Doesnt that take away from the overall competitiveness of the game? Its suppose to be about winning games, not coming close.
Last edited:
Its hard to imagine a 16-2 A10 team not making the tourney but I say you are probably correct. If it happens it shows the depths of the A10.Torvik has his teamcast feature where you can play with results, and it does include a NET column. Obviously the actual formula isn't public, so I'm not sure how he's generating those numbers and how much faith to put in them.
Caveats aside, his predictions have us going 14–4 in A-10 leading to a NET of 51, but the 16th team out with a 2.1% chance, likely due to the quality win issue.
This obviously doesn't include any A-10 tournament games, but you can add them against whatever opponents you want if you like, and also play with the results of the remaining games.
Teamcast for Richmond - Customizable College Basketball Tempo Free Stats - T-Rank
T-Rank College Basketball Ratings and Rankings. And fun.barttorvik.com
Edit: Playing around with this, adding wins isn't bumping our NET up much, although we do move up the "first teams out" list. Giving us wins over Dayton, VCU, URI, and Mason, while still leaving the rest as probabilities moves us to a predicted 16–2 A-10 record and third team out, but NET is still just 49. So yeah, I'm suspect of his ability to predict NET, unsurprisingly.
What sucks about basing so much on ratings is that it taKes out the human element of the committee just saying “this team is playing great basketball and has had a Great season and they deserve an invite.” They used to also emphasize how hot teams were and put more on later games than earlier ones.
But when so much value is now placed on this number next to each team the committee likely has reservations about rocking the boat.
Just need to go 18-0 and I think it would be tough to keep them out.
There is still a very large human element to selection, the NET is only used as one of many tools available to the selection comittee. They can decide to do whatever they want at the end of the day. I believe a few years ago they let in Toledo when literally not a single bracketologist had Toledo making the tournament. They can literally just do whatever they feel like.
Update: it was Tulsa, who got in over St. Bonaventure https://www.midmajormadness.com/201...gemen-st-bonaventure-monmouth-ncaa-tournament
Last edited:
Awesome. You said exactly what Ive been trying to say but much more simply. Thank you. The “nerds” are trying to change the entire objective of the game. Just win, baby!!!
Thanks. It’s clear that Dayton is a must win if we want any chance.
We have no really good wins against p5 opponents. The committee is already so biased towards the P5 as we all know.
I think the scenario urmite was posing involved also meeting them in the A-10 tourney so that our only two A-10 losses would be to a top 25 team.
As has been pointed out, this is just another tool. The committee decides, and I think a lot will still depend on how they feel the team has been playing recently.
It still is important to win. The win or loss can just be broken down more with these tools. It's just generally better to lose by 1 than by 15. And it's more impressive to win by 15 than to squeak it out. This just provides a numerical interpretation to it.
I mentioned this before, but I think it's worth reiterating. Wins and Losses are not dropped from the equation. They are still implicitly included when using margins. A positive margin is a Win. A negative margin is a Loss. Obvious but important to realize that using margins does not, then, eliminate the Win or Loss from the equation.
Jumped App State last night and now at 72 and appears one of our Q3 wins moved to Q2 as well so 5-2 in Q2.
Last edited:
Our resume will have a huge hole in it and a reason for exclusion if that comes true, zero Quad 1 wins. Not sure if a team has ever gotten an at large with zero Quad 1 wins, but I would think that is highly unlikely.
I'm square on Gkiller's hill. We need to beat Dayton to put ourselves in the at large conversation, if we lose, we stay where we are, which is not in the at large conversation.
Either way, I'm just glad we can even have the debate right now. And hopefully, we keep winning and this debate intensifies.
Win the next two and the season gets very interesting. I'm in agreement with the need to beat Dayton crowd. If we had picked off Colorado, maybe not, but our OOC did not give us any real big wins. UNLV was a good win, and could get a little better, but they will need to almost win the MWC, they already have a couple good wins in conference but have re-matches away.
Bottom line is we will need to go something like 11-2 or 10-3 at worst the rest of the way, which is probably not happening. Never say never, but it would be tough. If we do that, it's a double-edged sword. We either beat all the bad/average teams and lose to the good ones, in which case we didn't get any good wins, or we beat the good teams but lose to a few bad/average ones, in which case we have "bad" losses in the eyes of the committee.
The A-10 does have a bunch of top-100 teams, and that should minimize the "bad loss" effect, but I have a feeling the committee won't view any of those teams as being as good as the NET suggests they are. If we don't beat Dayton at home, that's a black mark because they can say "You had a chance to beat the best team in your league at home and you still couldn't do it, therefore you're out."
The A-10 does have a bunch of top-100 teams, and that should minimize the "bad loss" effect, but I have a feeling the committee won't view any of those teams as being as good as the NET suggests they are. If we don't beat Dayton at home, that's a black mark because they can say "You had a chance to beat the best team in your league at home and you still couldn't do it, therefore you're out."
Correct. Also we have been living in the razor's edge of winning. Any or all of the past 3 road wins could easily have gone in the loss column, at some point the law of averages is going to even that out, I suspect.
I think it helps that Dayton is at 15 in the NET. Lose a close one to them, and I don't think the committee says that. If they were around 40 NET, yes, but I do think we can survive a loss to them. I think a lot of factors will come into play.
How many other non power teams will get at larges? If not many, that will help us. The committee will say that doesn't matter and it shouldn't, but they don't want to seem any more biased than they already are. There usually seems to be a 'questionable" non power team or 2 that gets in. Maybe that could be us without a Q1 win.
What will the bubble look like? Not all years are the same. Some years, the bubble is full of average looking teams resume wise, and a couple A-10 tourney wins with a close loss in the finals could separate us a little.
I have heard the committee talk Q1 and Q2 together, and talk up Q2 wins, so even if you are 0-3 Q1, if you get 7 or 8 Q2 wins, we could hear "they went 8-6 against Q1 and Q2." This could possibly look better to the committee than a team that might have 2 Q1 wins, but is 5-9 against Q1 and Q2.
It would help to separate from other A-10 teams not named Dayton. At the end, we don't want it to be "Dayton and the other A10 teams", we want it to be "Dayton, Richmond, and the other A-10 teams". So, if not 1st in the regular season, finishing 2nd alone would be huge.
I agree a Dayton win would be huge and would dramatically improve our at large chances, but I do think we have a path with a loss. Just too many games left by every team and too many unknowns right now to say a record like 25-9 would give us a 0% chance at an at large.
Last edited:
I'm just glad we're playing well enough to have this discussion ... after we were picked 10th preseason.
I am afraid the Mountain West may hurt us. They have 6 teams in the top 60 Net, and a staggering 4 in the top 30. A10 has Datyon #15 as VT mentioned, and then we are next at 72. I'm not sure what is considered a Quad 1 win, but take Boise for instance. They have wins over KP ranked 22, 29, 32, 52, not to mention 63 USF Dons. By contrast, our biggest win to date is over 77 UNLV.
Since you asked .. here are the definitions from the NCAA
- Quadrant 1: Home 1-30, Neutral 1-50, Away 1-75
- Quadrant 2: Home 31-75, Neutral 51-100, Away 76-135
- Quadrant 3: Home 76-160, Neutral 101-200, Away 135-240
- Quadrant 4: Home 161-353, Neutral 201-353, Away 241-353
I think you even mentioned, with NIL/transfer portal, these predictions are more meaning less, especially for mid majors that are not getting the big $ NIL transfers. Unless you are an FAU and returning ALL 5 starters off a dominant team - its a crapshoot. We will be in the same position next season trying to replace a ton of production.
I do love that Dji has taken a huge step (or IMO just remained healthy to show what he can do), and also that Tyne has got really good experience this year. I am hopeful that he takes a step and can be more consistent on offense next year, but not overly confident that he can replicate King's production. So yes, this is the new paradigm and it really is going to depend on what you can do in the portal year to year.
And someone speculated above if Dayton loses to us, they drop out of the Top 25 rankings .. that might be true if if they lose a close game to us and we beat GW on Wednesday, I doubt they drop much in NET since it would be a Q1 loss for them. Still think our odds are 4X higher for an at-large with a Dayton win versus a loss but also agree there could be a path but would be majorly helped if JMU, McNeese, Princeton all win their tourneys.
What happens to our NET if we beat Dayton by 1 Saturday compared to if we beat them by 36?
LOL...I will take a 1 point win no matter what happens to out NET, but if we win by 36, our efficiency will be off the charts good, which would likely result in a nice NET jump.
My crystal ball - assume we beat GW and are around 70 going into the Dayton game.
Win by 1: go to 65
Win by 36: go to 53
I am fine with either possibility
Win by 36 against Dayton. Lock for the NCAAs considering how they seem to overinflate the margins. Joking. But certainly would be very impressive to blowout Dayton and should certainly award us extra spots in the ranks vs a 1 point win. Agree?My crystal ball - assume we beat GW and are around 70 going into the Dayton game.
Win by 1: go to 65
Win by 36: go to 53
I am fine with either possibility
I think u r a little too literal at times. I can be that way myself fwiw. So what if we were not officially 0.00%. If u r at 1% or 2% or even a lot higher on selection sunday u r not on the bubble anyway.
Dayton win required for any somewhat realistic chance. Let's go 2-0 this week and then we can really crunch the #'s.
That’s why I said on another post that we need to take a one game at a time approach.
If we run thru the A10 as we are hoping in this discussion, are we really in competition with jmu for a bid?
I was just going to say, Mountain West is a big hurdle for us...they are a power conference this year. Excellent OOC performance by half a dozen teams, so even their conference schedules are littered with Q1 opportunities against each other.
If we do run through the A10, all the heat is on jmu. Their signature win will be MSU and our win will be Dayton, not a bad comparison!
My JMU comment was if we don't win on Sat and finish like 15-3 or 16-2 in conference. Then we would head into A10 tourney and need to get to finals at least and hope that there aren't bid stealers out there - i..e favored teams like JMU and Princeton will get their auto bids.
Richmond - NET Rankings and Quad Wins
2024 Richmond Quad wins for NCAA College Basketball. NET rankings and Quadrants are used to help select teams for the NCAA Tournament during March Madness.
Currently 0-2 in Quad 1 but 5-2 in Quad 2 wins. A couple of our Quad 2 wins are barely hanging onto that status, but that is a nice Quad 2 record. Only 1 Quad 3 loss. We are a Quad 1 win away right now from having a respectful NET sheet.
JMU is probably 1-2 more losses total from being eliminated from at large consideration. Their schedule is terrible.
