UofToledoFans
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13,698
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 127
I Root For: Toledo and G5
Location: |
RE: 8pm WBB selection show
(03-17-2024 05:14 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: (03-17-2024 04:46 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote: (03-17-2024 04:34 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: (03-17-2024 04:08 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote: (03-17-2024 03:41 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote: Yeah, no, not a chance. NETs are here:
https://stats.ncaa.org/selection_ranking...mit=Submit
After taking away the auto qualifiers, if you fill in the rest purely by NET, the last in is Auburn at 45. Toledo has NET 67.
The only teams above Auburn at risk of being overlooked are Arizona (17-15) and Washington (16-14), and they both have top 20 SOS, so likely still get in. Everyone else is a shoe in.
Between Auburn and Toledo are:
TCU, Miss St, Michigan, Illinois, Miami FL, Villanova, Vanderbilt, Columbia, Oklahoma St, Cal, Florida, Virginia, St. Joe's, George Mason, Seton Hall & Minnesota.
Of those, the only teams UT beats out for sure are Illinois (14-15), Oklahoma St (14-16), Virginia (15-15). Possibly George Mason, Florida & Minnesota. That still leaves 10 teams ahead of UT and the NCAA would probably get sued by the name leagues if they took UT over any of those schools.
They do not only use NET. It's a sorting tool and actually prefer the quad system from the NET over total score.
No real bad losses. 2 very good wins. Lots of decent wins like KSU x2, SMU, UB, NDSU etc.
Please understand the quad system is ONLY used by the Men. The women do not use that. You keep referring to the quad system when talking WBB and they do not use that. They don't. Look at the Nitty-Gritty pages - the MBB ones sort games by quads, the WBB ones don't.
For WBB they do give weight to top 25, top 50 and top 100 wins and penalize bottom 150 losses, but that is ONLY after sorting by NET, so if you are 10-15 teams away from making it by NET, you are NOT going to get in ahead of the teams ahead of you unless you have beaten South Carolina, Stanford and Notre Dame (for example) ... and if you did that, you will already be in by your NET ranking - like Gonzaga is.
Note that Toledo has 2 top 100 wins this year. Two. Just two. Of the teams ahead of them for at-large bids, all have at least 4 top 100 wins, most have between 7 and 12 top 100 wins. Toledo has 1 bad loss. Most of the teams ahead of UT have 0 bad losses.
Again, I have reported this like 6 times here, but last year, Columbia had 7 top 100 wins and 2 top 50 wins, were well within the NET sorting to make it, and the NCAA STILL SELECTED P6 teams with worse resume's over them.
Then Tricia Cullop is totally correct. Why can't we call out the system for being bull? The system not 5 years ago used a metric (RPI) which had Toledo in the conversation as this season stands. Now all of the sudden we are 10 spots out? If we won the MAC the NET would have gone up 2 spots? You know how effing mad that would make another 5 seed like Iowa State to Play a team by RPI only a couple spots behind them? It doesn't make sense. The NET sucks eggs for women in particular as the top 5 teams in the nation are 20 points better than the next couple seed lines. If you play those 5 teams in your league you get a WHALE of help just by playing teams no one has a chance to beat.
Yep, now you are getting it. I am convinced that the NCAA developed NET specifically because RPI was letting too many non-P6 teams into the tournament. Remember, the tourney is big dollars and the P6s want all of that money all to themselves. Just recently someone from the SEC was quoted as saying that it's time to stop giving auto-bids, because it was keeping the bottom-level SEC teams our of the tournament.
Look at the numbers. This year, of the top 68 NET teams, only 14 are non-P6s. That means that 68% of P6 teams are in that top 68, but only 5% of non-P6s. And as a non-P6, you have to be pretty darn near perfect even to get that, as those 14 teams had a combined win percentage of 0.853, while the P6s, only 0.695.
That's why you get a team like Minnesota in the top 68 which was 5-13 in the big 10 with many of those losses by 15-20+ points. Heck Toledo or Ball State could lose to Iowa by 20 just as easily as Minnesota did, in which case they would get credit for that in NET, but since they can't get 16-20 games a year against those teams, the mid-majors cannot hope to get a high NET ranking for the most part.
Of course, the biggest problem is that so many MAC teams schedule cupcake OOC schedules so their teams can win some games. That would have be beneficial under RPI, but it hurts the conference overall under NET, because then the few top teams end up playing lousy schedules.
I fully expect that within the next 5 years or so, there will be a proposal where the tourney includes every B10, SEC and B12 team and the top 10 teams from the other Ps as autobids. The remaining 5-10 slots will be graciously given to the mid-majors, as long as the mid-majors only get 15/16 seeds.
I get it, you get it. The petition needs to be louder to call out the committee. It's a travesty and it's only punishing our great fans and fans of schools a like with no hope and little reward for their following of the sport.
|
|
