So Someone Explain These NET Ratings To Me

ericd7633 said:
Nebraska has played 4 opponents ranked 300+
Purdue has played just 1 such team. That is why scheduling can be tricky. Any tournament level team is going to beat 200+ and 300+ teams, but scheduling that many 300+ level teams is a huge detriment to your schedule. I would know as a gophers fan because we've played 5 I think it is.
Click to expand...

Again... My argument is not about Purdue's ranking. They have some very good wins... Albeit either on a neutral court or at home.

I gave what I believe to be a good example of how New Mexico can be ranked ahead of Nebraska in NET when they have ZERO Quad 1 wins and ZERO Quad 2 wins.

Who have they beaten?

I see a (72-58) loss to #23 St Mary's who is no longer ranked at (11-6).
I see a (76-68) loss to #13 Colorado St who is now ranked #17.
I see a loss to unranked UNLV who is (8-6).
 
For that matter, Nebraska has more Quad 1 wins and the same Quad 2 record as Michigan St.
Nebraska even beat Michigan St and has arguably a better win (Purdue).

Yet Michigan St is #27 on NET and Nebraska is #46.

There just seems to be human elements involved in these rankings. i.e. The Izzo factor.
 
ericd7633 said:
I think you'll get there. Getting a road split of the next two is important though.
Click to expand...

So basically these rankings (KenPom, BPI, RPI, NET) are.....

"We're gonna put you where we're gonna put you based on history. To hell with current data, you're gonna need to prove yourself over the long haul".
 
Red_Alert said:
Again... My argument is not about Purdue's ranking. They have some very good wins... Albeit either on a neutral court or at home.

I gave what I believe to be a good example of how New Mexico can be ranked ahead of Nebraska in NET when they have ZERO Quad 1 wins and ZERO Quad 2 wins.

Who have they beaten?

I see a (72-58) loss to #23 St Mary's who is no longer ranked at (11-6).
I see a (76-68) loss to #13 Colorado St who is now ranked #17.
I see a loss to unranked UNLV who is (8-6).
Click to expand...

They don't have any good wins. But 4/5 of the formula they are either equal to or better than Nebraska. They have a better adjusted winning % and better MOV. The NET Efficiency's are probably about the same(probably slight edge Nebraska), based on what I've seem from other metrics. Same with winning %. Nebraska probably has a pretty sizable lead in TVI.
 
Mississippi St has ZERO Quad 1 wins, four Quad 2 wins, one Quad 3 loss, and 1 Quad 4 loss.

Yet they're #34 in NET rankings.

1704920712291.png
 
So basically Nebraska gets punished for losing @ Wisconsin, but Purdue and Michigan St do not get punished for losing @ Nebraska.

Makes perfect sense.
 
What is the purpose of putting Quad 1 thru Quad 4 results (like they mean something) in your rankings if they carry little to no weight on your actual rankings?

1704922081102.png
 
Red_Alert said:
So basically Nebraska gets punished for losing @ Wisconsin, but Purdue and Michigan St do not get punished for losing @ Nebraska.

Makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...

No. What's killing Nebraska is the fact you have lost by an avg of almost 19 ppg. With one of them coming at home. MSU was punished. But they have since won by an avg of 26 ppg that includes wins over 2 top 40 teams. Purdue was also punished, but they've been so dominant(along with Houston), one loss isn't going to drop them. This isn't the AP poll.
 
ericd7633 said:
No. What's killing Nebraska is the fact you have lost by an avg of almost 19 ppg. With one of them coming at home. MSU was punished. But they have since won by an avg of 26 ppg that includes wins over 2 top 40 teams. Purdue was also punished, but they've been so dominant(along with Houston), one loss isn't going to drop them. This isn't the AP poll.
Click to expand...

ericd7633 said:
Miss St avg MOD is 5 ppg. They have six wins away from home.
Click to expand...

OK. So what is the purpose of putting Quad 1 thru Quad 4 W/Ls up there like they're some kind of priority, when you have to dig deep and use mental gymnastics to figure out what the rankings REALLY mean?

confused-wtf.gif
 
Red_Alert said:
OK. So what is the purpose of putting Quad 1 thru Quad 4 W/Ls up there like they're some kind of priority, when you have to dig deep and use mental gymnastics to figure out what the rankings REALLY mean?

confused-wtf.gif
Click to expand...

Because the more quality wins you have the better chance you have of making the tournament.
 
Red_Alert said:
New Mexico says "Nuh Huh".
Click to expand...

Dude, if the tournament started today, they wouldn't be getting in, and Nebraska would. It's not the like selection committee just picks teams based off of the NET. It's a sorting tool.
 
Every single year this is a discussion. Ill cut some slack here since its fun to see Nebraska relevant and its asked by them.

NET is simple concept with a exact formula that is purposely not revealed because it can then be cheated like the RPI was. But even now its very very simple

1. Kick the shit out of your opponents. Seriously, its that simple. Be efficient. You can play 9 Q4 games so long as you win each by 40+(See Iowa State being top 10 NET like all year)

2. Play and beat good teams. Obviously

3. Road wins.

4. All of the above.

There really is no deep thinking needed for it. Obliterate bad teams or beat good teams. Hammer good teams and even better.

As Eric said, NET is a tool that is it. Its great for sorting teams(as good as possible) to be able to give "good wins" and "bad losses" but thats really where it ends. The committee has already proven many times they do not use the NET as some exact sorting tool. Ex. 15 in the NET is not guaranteed a 4 seed. They could be a 6 they could be a 3.

Get Q1 and Q2 wins. Avoid 3 and 4 losses. Try and get some Q1 on the road. Avoid losing at home. Sorts itself out.

If you play shitty ass BIG10 teams, cover the spread at all costs.
 
ericd7633 said:
Dude, if the tournament started today, they wouldn't be getting in, and Nebraska would. It's not the like selection committee just picks teams based off of the NET. It's a sorting tool.
Click to expand...

NET replaced RPI and is a 'primary selection tool' for the committee.

I have yet to see anyone explain how New Mexico can be ranked ahead of Nebraska in NET.

New Mexico's best road win is (7-9) #275 New Mexico St. by 1 point.
Nebraska's best road win is (12-3) #74 Kansas St. by 16 points

New Mexico has ZERO Quad 1 or Quad 2 wins.
Nebraska has three Quad 1 wins.

Nebraska has beaten #27 Michigan St and #3 Purdue in Lincoln. Purdue by 16 points.
Nebraska also has a 16 point home win against (11-5) #103 Indiana.

New Mexico's home wins are

#306 Texas Southern
#216 UT Arlington
#133 Toledo
#267 Rice
#241 Pepperdine
#95 Louisiana Tech
#275 New Mexico St
#212 Santa Barbara
#106 Santa Clara
#77 UC Irvine
(Unranked) E. New Mexico
#205 Wyoming
 
Again....

Why put Quad 1 thru Quad 4 rankings up there like they mean something when they don't mean jack fucking shit?

1704931002067.png
 
"Something Something offensive points and defensive points" - Against scrubs?

"Something Something Home wins and Away wins" - NOPE
 
Red_Alert said:
NET replaced RPI and is a 'primary selection tool' for the committee.

I have yet to see anyone explain how New Mexico can be ranked ahead of Nebraska in NET.

New Mexico's best road win is (7-9) #275 New Mexico St. by 1 point.
Nebraska's best road win is (12-3) #74 Kansas St. by 16 points

New Mexico has ZERO Quad 1 or Quad 2 wins.
Nebraska has three Quad 1 wins.

Nebraska has beaten #27 Michigan St and #3 Purdue in Lincoln. Purdue by 16 points.
Nebraska also has a 16 point home win against (11-5) #103 Indiana.

New Mexico's home wins are

#306 Texas Southern
#216 UT Arlington
#133 Toledo
#267 Rice
#241 Pepperdine
#95 Louisiana Tech
#275 New Mexico St
#212 Santa Barbara
#106 Santa Clara
#77 UC Irvine
(Unranked) E. New Mexico
#205 Wyoming
Click to expand...

I have explained it to you. I even included a graphic of exactly what the NET is and what its compromised of. If you think it's a shitty tool, THAT'S FINE, but to say I haven't explained it to you is pretty disingenuous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top