NET Rankings

[stever20]

I totally disagree with you that your NET rating doesn't matter to your team- but only the opponents.....

The same thing could have been said about RPI- but the facts are that if you didn't have a certain RPI level- you weren't making the tourney. And the NET will be the same way, if not moreso quite frankly.....

And the problem that like using Providence last year- the BEST thing about them last year was their RPI- and their results based numbers overall- those were 31/29/32. But the predictive measures, which is a lot closer to what the NET is- had Providence at 66/63/55.

[billyjack]

The only thing that is keeping me from really trashing NET a bit is that an honest guy like Dan Gavitt is involved in the process. My fear is that someday "super attorney genius" Jay Bilas or others inside the ESPN-ACC-Duke-Crime-Families will eventually get involved and take it over. ESPN's BPI is an ACC special sauce which mixes Duke, UNC, ketchup and mayonnaise.

[stever20]

The thing I find so comical is folks trashing NET rankings using Kentucky as a reason why it's so messed up....

Like I asked over on CSN- what exactly has Kentucky done THIS year? Using another followup agreeing with me.....

they get murdered by Duke

Tennessee State has zero D1 wins, North Dakota and Winthrop have ONE D1 win, VMI has 2, , SIU is the cream of the crop with 3, including Tulsa.

So what exactly is wrong with them being #61 based on THIS YEAR?

[Savannah Jay]

ESPN's BPI is an ACC special sauce which mixes Duke, UNC, ketchup and mayonnaise.

And clearly no onions whatsoever.

[GoldenWarrior11]

Meh. It's the first week, and there are many games left to be played. Additionally, it will be very telling to see how (if at all) seeding is affecting for the teams. While RPI was used in determining teams, it was only one factor in the seeding process. I remember specifically that the committee utilized the "eye test" to support Syracuse not being in a play-in game since Boeheim was suspended for nine games. They ended up being a #10 seed and going all the way to the Final Four.

[adoraz]

The problem with the formula is it only marginally takes into account opponent, so undefeated teams like NC State and Pitt who've feasted on cupcakes are extremely overvalued.

NC State (6-0):
NET: #31
RPI: #210

Pitt (6-0):
NET: #23
RPI: #71

Any chance the NCAA changes the formula? As a SJU fan, so far it has not benefited us (RPI= #4, NET= #29), however our schedule is very easy in December.

[stever20]

Meh. It's the first week, and there are many games left to be played. Additionally, it will be very telling to see how (if at all) seeding is affecting for the teams. While RPI was used in determining teams, it was only one factor in the seeding process. I remember specifically that the committee utilized the "eye test" to support Syracuse not being in a play-in game since Boeheim was suspended for nine games. They ended up being a #10 seed and going all the way to the Final Four.

The one thing that it will impact is the setting of the tiers. It's the sorting mechanism for it. When you hear x number of tier 1 wins, that's based off of the NET now.

[kayako]

Ohio St has 2 games against top 50ish teams on the road vs Cincy and Creighton. won those by 8 and 9 points. Other 4 games by 10+ points- including a Samford team that is 6-1 vs D1 schools. They're #12 in the RPI right now....

Also why shouldn't Kentucky be 61 right now? They have the loss to Duke and 5 wins against bad teams. To argue they should be higher right now is frankly a joke.

I agree. This is what we get with no data from last season and 8 or less games in for most of the teams, and I like it. I know it looks like the RPI favors the Big East at the moment, I never want to go back to that abomination.

[stever20]

Ohio St has 2 games against top 50ish teams on the road vs Cincy and Creighton. won those by 8 and 9 points. Other 4 games by 10+ points- including a Samford team that is 6-1 vs D1 schools. They're #12 in the RPI right now....

Also why shouldn't Kentucky be 61 right now? They have the loss to Duke and 5 wins against bad teams. To argue they should be higher right now is frankly a joke.

I agree. This is what we get with no data from last season and 8 or less games in for most of the teams, and I like it. I know it looks like the RPI favors the Big East at the moment, I never want to go back to that abomination.

In the words of Frank Barone- Holy Crap, I think we've found something we're in complete agreement with.

I think the fact that the results are so what some would call bizarre is actually a plus. Seeing Kentucky at 61, seeing Syracuse at 92, seeing Nova at 38 even- shows folks that prior year matters zip. Which is exactly what it should matter. This year, and this year only should be rated....

And the thing is if you look at conferences- the conference rating right now seems very reasonable.

Big Ten 37.14 14 Ohio State (1)
ACC 62.27 15 Virginia (2)
Big 12 65.7 10 Texas Tech (3)
Big East 70.2 10 St. John's (29)
SEC 85.64 14 Auburn (16)
Pac-12 98.67 12 Arizona St. (28)

Big Ten right now totally deserves to be way out in front.

[stever20]

saw someone on twitter about the release of the NET rankings.....

how they looked yesterday is kind of akin to MLB after 1st day of season saying that someone who went 3-4 on opening day is batting .750 and is #7 in the league in batting. Don't hear folks complaining about that....