First NET Rankings-#22
- Thread starter LongTimeLurkerFirstTimePoster
- Start date
Quick glance of being pleasantly surprised UR is #22. Mystified though that the Dukes are ahead of them.
Appears even if a Bama loss Mooney's team should be in a good position.
Appears even if a Bama loss Mooney's team should be in a good position.
Have to scroll down to the next page to find VCU.
Also our Non conference SOS is a full hundred plus better than VCU's according to the NET. So, hmmm.Have to scroll down to the next page to find VCU.
Unrelated to VCU, this is outstanding. I think it validates our fantastic start but also our scheduling for this year of scheduling a bunch of teams that are pretty good. Wisconsin is 51. Vandy is 99. South Alabama, BC, ODU, College of Charlestown all between 130-160.
You put that all together and you have a fairly computer friendly schedule, particularly when you win all of those games.
NET has us ranked higher than any other computer ranking https://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm. Our schedule has not been computer friendly, it has been NET friendly. Maybe Lunardi knows something
I'm not understanding how this works.
shouldn't all your records in the quadrants add up to your total record?
shouldn't all your records in the quadrants add up to your total record?
Still buried in the Top 25 voting:
Others receiving votes:
North Carolina 41, Xavier 40, Wichita State 31, Purdue 30, Liberty 25, Marquette 23, Indiana 23, Virginia Commonwealth 21, Utah State 14, Saint Mary's 13, Northern Iowa 12, Colorado 12, Texas 10, Florida 7, DePaul 6, Georgetown 3, Richmond 3, Virginia Tech 3, LSU 3, Stanford 3, Seton Hall 3, Oklahoma State 2, Duquesne 1, BYU 1, Arkansas 1
Others receiving votes:
North Carolina 41, Xavier 40, Wichita State 31, Purdue 30, Liberty 25, Marquette 23, Indiana 23, Virginia Commonwealth 21, Utah State 14, Saint Mary's 13, Northern Iowa 12, Colorado 12, Texas 10, Florida 7, DePaul 6, Georgetown 3, Richmond 3, Virginia Tech 3, LSU 3, Stanford 3, Seton Hall 3, Oklahoma State 2, Duquesne 1, BYU 1, Arkansas 1
This link has the proper quadrant records...
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2020/schedule/Richmond
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2020/schedule/Richmond
According to our team sheet, we are 0-1, 1-0, 5-0, 3-0.
Oddly, they list the games in each quadrant and they have four of our Quad 3 games listed in Quad 4 (but the records are accurate). I glanced at a few other team sheets and it looks like a lot of home games have been improperly "demoted." Even with the delay, their reports don't seem to be fully ready for prime time.
Link to actual NET team sheets, Richmond page 22
https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats Library/NET Team Sheets - Dec. 15, 2019.pdf
They list us 5-0 quad 3 then put 4 of those games in quad 4. Why records wrong on overall listings I don't know, something is up but hopefully just formatting errors not data errors.
Glad to be at 22, was not expecting to be that high. SOS is a big factor with committee, something to continue to watch imo. can't afford to lose either of these next two or the numbers will see a big drop.
https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats Library/NET Team Sheets - Dec. 15, 2019.pdf
They list us 5-0 quad 3 then put 4 of those games in quad 4. Why records wrong on overall listings I don't know, something is up but hopefully just formatting errors not data errors.
Glad to be at 22, was not expecting to be that high. SOS is a big factor with committee, something to continue to watch imo. can't afford to lose either of these next two or the numbers will see a big drop.
I haven't really paid much attention to what NET is measuring, but I find it odd that we would be rewarded so handsomely for playing a decent schedule so far, but Duquesne would be rewarded even more for playing a much worse schedule. So are we to presume that it values quantity of wins more than quality? I can't quite tell. And I get that it's very early, so maybe the bugs will get worked out as things go along.
Half the Atlantic 10 is in the top 100 (Top 72, to be precise), plus Davidson at 101. That is a good thing for the rest of our season. Top 75 road games are Quad 1.
It appears they have corrected the problems with the Team Sheets and Nitty Gritty report.
It appears they have corrected the problems with the Team Sheets and Nitty Gritty report.
It will matter come selection time, since this is supposedly one of the main evaluators the committee will use.
Not to the committee.
Top 25 teams (in the polls) can get left out of the tournament (St. Mary's and MTSU recently, I think).
I doubt a top 25 team in their evaluation tool would be left out.
As the games are played, the NET will become more "accurate."
(Although the widely ridiculed initial NET last season had UVA #2 and Texas Tech #3)
I don't think the selection committee takes the polls into consideration. They are largely beauty contests from either media and/or coaches. And can be manipulated as such.
Which computer rating influences the NCAA committee the most nowadays?
That may be different from which one is most accurate in predictive value.
The NET is the tool the NCAA designed to replace the RPI to help them seeding and at large bids.
As long is that isn’t the quote of the guy who fell off a 14 story building as he passed the fifth floor...
mite - had not heard that recently although had heard it years ago and give you "props" for a very timely usage.................................well placed humor warms the heart.....................and is "good medicine"...............
Obviously this isn't the final NET ranking, the one the committee will actually use to make their selections. But the big thing is that the longer we are towards the top part of the list the more likely they are to remember us come selection Sunday. Echoing what many have said already.... Just keep winning.
VCU beats Missouri State and moves from 1 vote to 21. We beat Charleston and remain the same. I mean WTF. Is anyone even trying to do their jobs here?
It appears the local PBS guy gave us, 3 points, Duquesne 1, VCU 0.
Not sure why 7 or so guys suddenly found VCU...
It's just so sloppy and lazy, and I get that it doesn't really matter, except that you do get a lot of national exposure from having your name in the mix (and they are actually 25th in the coaches' poll). I'd get it had they actually beaten someone good, but we beat a better team than they did!
Much ado about nothing. I reviewed the NET rankings and I think throwing darts at a list of all the DIV 1 teams is just about as accurate. Of course, it is very early in the season, the NET will get better, and the final iteration is the one that matters.
I humbly disagree. The Final NET is determined by a number of factors including strength of schedule. There is only a couple games left for most teams before conference play starts, which means that this recent NET ranking is vitally important in helping our strength of schedule in conference play. With 3 A10 teams in the top 25 and 7 in the top 72, our strength of schedule should be pretty high.
80s I don’t need the NET. Finish in the top 3 of the A10 and there may be something to talk about. Win the A10 regular season and there should be something to talk about. Win the A10 tournament and there IS something to talk about.
Go Spiders!
Go Spiders!
Below is from an article about the original NET rankings from last year, which came out earlier than they did this year. Even though it was heavily criticized, it identified the two teams in the Natl Championship, 3 of 4 in the Final 4, and 5 of 8 in the Elite 8.
But the top 10 teams in the NET rankings on Nov. 26, 2018, were as follows (2018-19 finish in parentheses):
- Ohio State (20-15, lost in the second round of the NCAA tournament)
- Virginia (35-3, won national championship)
- Texas Tech (31-7, national runner-up)
- Michigan (30-7, lost in the Sweet 16)
- Gonzaga (33-4, lost in the Elite Eight)
- Duke (32-6, lost in the Elite Eight)
- Michigan State (32-7, lost in the Final Four)
- Wisconsin (23-11, lost in the first round of the NCAA tournament)
- Virginia Tech (26-9, lost in the Sweet 16)
- Loyola Marymount (22-12, lost in the third round of the CBI)
I am not a statistics expert, but something tells me that a sample size should be more than 1.
Well that's all we have right now. There is zero supporting evidence to your claim that the NET means nothing at this point in the season. But there is evidence from last year that the teams ranked in the Top 10 of the original NET went on to have very good seasons.
Similar threads
