ADVERTISEMENT

2023–24 NET Ratings

I listen to WFUV all the time because it is far and away the best music radio station in NYC, and the various FU games are broadcast live, so it must be that, those announcers are very young sounding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spiders4ever
68 -> 68 - not much movement around the teams near us either given games last night.
 
Reverse engineering this thing a bit. It does seem that the difference between a small 1 or 2 point victory and a 15 point victory seems to be deemed small in this system. Meanwhile, a bigger blowout seems to be awarded more. If so, I think that should be reversed. I think 15 points is a convincing win, and like I've said, I don't think a 30 point win is that much more impressive.
 
Reverse engineering this thing a bit. It does seem that the difference between a small 1 or 2 point victory and a 15 point victory seems to be deemed small in this system. Meanwhile, a bigger blowout seems to be awarded more. If so, I think that should be reversed. I think 15 points is a convincing win, and like I've said, I don't think a 30 point win is that much more impressive.
Historically, any lead near 20 with 3-4 minutes left becomes junk time with subs on both teams able to get some time. That score could go to 25 or down to 12. Also a game that is 4 points with a minute to go could end up and often does becoming a 10 point game or more because of fouling. Reason putting any emphasis on MOV is plain dumb.
 
Historically, any lead near 20 with 3-4 minutes left becomes junk time with subs on both teams able to get some time. That score could go to 25 or down to 12. Also a game that is 4 points with a minute to go could end up and often does becoming a 10 point game or more because of fouling. Reason putting any emphasis on MOV is plain dumb.
Very good point and one that has always concerned me. In addition to end of game scenarios, basketball, like many sports, is a game of streaks. So, it is difficult to always gain huge insights over small swings. I think that's where the weight placed on margin (and how to handle the extremes) is up for debate. SF's tongue-in-cheek response regarding using AI to decipher play-by-plays is not actually a bad idea. AI could also help determine the expected swings in a given time period and how to weight it.
 
I herd the coaching staff speak on on this very issue, relative to if they change how they manage the game near the end of regulation to maximize NET. Their comment was that is was difficult to evaluate how margin would impact NET and this had to be weighted against the value of developing players on the team. I believe they put a premium on player development and team culture over a slightly better NET and I agree with their philosophy.
 
I understand what they are saying, but it's also very clear that winning by more is better for the NET. I'd hate to get to the end of the season and think we could miss out on the tournament because we pulled our starters six times in order to give a Tanner a few garbage minutes, or something like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whampas
They could just post the formula for all to see and then we wouldn't have to guess how they arrive at the rankings 🤷🏼‍♂️
True. They dont I guess because all teams will try to work the system. Now only the smart teams that have figured it out play the system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 97spiderfan
They could just post the formula for all to see and then we wouldn't have to guess how they arrive at the rankings 🤷🏼‍♂️
They might eventually. I believe they kept the RPI formula a secret for its first 20 or so years of use before releasing it in the mid 2000s.
 
I herd the coaching staff speak on on this very issue, relative to if they change how they manage the game near the end of regulation to maximize NET. Their comment was that is was difficult to evaluate how margin would impact NET and this had to be weighted against the value of developing players on the team. I believe they put a premium on player development and team culture over a slightly better NET and I agree with their philosophy.
Its not slightly better in some cases it seems. Just have to look at a few rankings and gains after certain wins to see it plays a big part.
I think its great some coaches are being asked because it means that folks are realizing it is playing a role but that it is raising an ethics question.
Id love to hear more coaches come out at the end of a game and say “I know if we kept our starters in we moght have won by more than 25 and our NET would benefit but I am not going to do that. Some things are more important.” Maybe then the NCAA will realize rewarding teams for running up the score is a terrible idea.
 
Louisiana Tech jump 14 spots and is ranked 1 spot behind us. They just beat FIU with a net of 300.

Crazy. 14 Spots?? CM really should be telling the guys they should never let up and try to win by 30-40 against bad teams and say sorry to the bench, they arent getting in. It seems to be extremely important.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gcarter52
Louisiana Tech jump 14 spots and is ranked 1 spot behind us. They just beat FIU with a net of 300.

They were favored by 7.5 but won by 40…

so do you move a spot for every 2.3 over or under spread?
 
Crazy. 14 Spots?? CM really should be telling the guys they should never let up and try to win by 30-40 against bad teams and say sorry to the bench, they arent getting in. It seems to be extremely important.
This is getting ridiculous. We're too far into the season to have a single night result in a jump of 14 especially when you're already in the top 100. There's a bunch of other games last night that factor into it, but they would have to have fallen like perfect dominos.

Margin (efficiencies) should be a factor, but it is clearly factored too high. Biggest problem is no limits to it.

Our biggest issue might be our close game with Buffalo.
 
Crazy. 14 Spots?? CM really should be telling the guys they should never let up and try to win by 30-40 against bad teams and say sorry to the bench, they arent getting in. It seems to be extremely important.
We have made a few mistakes at end of games that have narrowed the score. Not sure if it is bad luck or not wanting to foul.

One of the reason we have been successful in the portal with both transfers out and in is team chemistry. The coaching staff has build tremendous loyalty of both current and past players. Telling the bench players sorry, you not going to get in because we are going to run up the score would not create a winning culture.
 
They were favored by 7.5 but won by 40…

so do you move a spot for every 2.3 over or under spread?
Do you think spread is in the equation? Spiders were 2.5 fav at Fordham and won by 14 and only went up 2 spots.
 
We have made a few mistakes at end of games that have narrowed the score. Not sure if it is bad luck or not wanting to foul.

One of the reason we have been successful in the portal with both transfers out and in is team chemistry. The coaching staff has build tremendous loyalty of both current and past players. Telling the bench players sorry, you not going to get in because we are going to run up the score would not create a winning culture.
I get it. Bur King and a few others are in their last rodeo and if keeping them in moves NET ffom 65-50 by year end with a much better chance for an at large, I think the bench guys would accept that and agree, imo. ,
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eight Legger
This is getting ridiculous. We're too far into the season to have a single night result in a jump of 14 especially when you're already in the top 100. There's a bunch of other games last night that factor into it, but they would have to have fallen like perfect dominos.

Margin (efficiencies) should be a factor, but it is clearly factored too high. Biggest problem is no limits to it.

Our biggest issue might be our close game with Buffalo.

A game against the 300th ranked team should never move the needle that much no matter what the MOV is. Ridiculous.
Vegas spread cannot possibly be a factor for a ranking system.
Agree but arent the predictive outcomes within the system the same thing? And as stated by others here, MOV compared to predicted outcome is in play.
Lets hope the analysts start calling this crap out.
 
A game against the 300th ranked team should never move the needle that much no matter what the MOV is. Ridiculous.

Agree but arent the predictive outcomes within the system the same thing? And as stated by others here, MOV compared to predicted outcome is in play.
Lets hope the analysts start calling this crap out.
I would very much doubt the system explicitly scores MOV against its own predicted outcome. There is an element of this likely baked into it as in beating the 10th ranked team by 15 is better than beating the 300th ranked team by 15. But I would be very surprised if the system says you get extra credit for beating the 300th ranked team by 16 since we projected you to win by 15.

That said, using margin inherently makes it a predictive system. It just very unlikely uses its own projection as basis for the next rank.
 
Richmond's teams have never really blown out other teams. Our really good teams, even in the Tarrant years, have always found a way to win. This one is no different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mojo-spider
Louisiana Tech is 0-3 in Quad 1; 1-1 in Quad 2; 4-1 in Quad 3; and 8-1 in Quad 4. It is also 3-0 against D-2 schools. Yet, they are ranked 69, right behind our 68.

 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
Louisiana Tech is 0-3 in Quad 1; 1-1 in Quad 2; 4-1 in Quad 3; and 8-1 in Quad 4. It is also 3-0 against D-2 schools. Yet, they are ranked 69, right behind our 68.

Its comical. Obviously Q1 and 2 record has little impact on ranking. That resume should be near 200.
 
Its comical. Obviously Q1 and 2 record has little impact on ranking. That resume should be near 200.
The margin of victories over the D2 schools were the same as it's MOV after FIU. This will lead to schools like Kentucky scheduling a game, mid-season, against the 300th school, just to blow them out by 60 points.
 
I know most of you know this site but for those that dont its an easy way to see resumes and record by Q’s.
Some of the teams ahead of UR are head scratchers.
San Fran has 1 Q1 - 2 win lol and is 61. ONE
 
Kind of crazy how angry people are with the NET here when it has given us a very favorable resume in terms of quad based wins, which is much more important for the committee than a teams NET ranking.
 
UNI down 30 at home to a bad Murray State team. That’s gonna hurt.
 
Louisiana Tech jump 14 spots and is ranked 1 spot behind us. They just beat FIU with a net of 300.

Not saying I agree with it or that it is right.
but does seem consistent…
Kenpom 67
Torvik 65
BPI 70
 
It's a dumbass system when a top 100 team jumps 14 spots with a quad 4 win.
Yes and there are many other examples why its a dumb ass system. One thing positive is that it makes you think there is a chance to move up if you win big in Q3 and 4 games. LaSalle needs to be a total beatdown at home. Win by 10 probably lose ground, win by 30 and may go up 10.
Not saying I agree with it or that it is right.
but does seem consistent…
Kenpom 67
Torvik 65
BPI 70
RPI? And fid they all have them going ip 14 spots after beating FIU?
 
And here I thought the system was so screwed up we would jump becuase we lost to a perceived "better" school (historically, not this season).
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT