NET Rankings are out: - 2/11 update
https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball...t-rankings
2-10 / 2-11
5 / 5 Houston
57 / 57 SMU
60 / 61 Memphis
78 / 73 WSU
109 / 113 UCF
103 / 114 Tulsa
118 / 121 Cincy
125 / 133 South Florida
142 / 143 ECU
157 / 154 Temple
178 / 160 Tulane
Who knew Cincinnati and Temple would be a drag on NET for the conference?
We're not a NET drag. it just so happens that we haven't won any of our games yet.
Not really surprising. I was wondering why people were getting excited over beating us, even on the road, we aren't even a Q2 game.
This year is basically a throwaway for us.
(01-04-2021 09:47 AM)mustangxc Wrote: [ -> ]Who knew Cincinnati and Temple would be a drag on NET for the conference?
I predicted Temple would be dead last in the conference. I haven’t see anything that makes me second guess that pick. Unless Cincy keeps stinking the gym up. They look terrible.
(01-04-2021 10:12 AM)Joprior23 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-04-2021 09:47 AM)mustangxc Wrote: [ -> ]Who knew Cincinnati and Temple would be a drag on NET for the conference?
I predicted Temple would be dead last in the conference. I haven’t see anything that makes me second guess that pick. Unless Cincy keeps stinking the gym up. They look terrible.
Oh we all knew Temple was in for a rebuilding year. My comment was more in reference to the conference perception and when the league was formed.
meanwhile at UCLA a team that was 17-16 is now...
7-2 with a NET of 54.
i do miss regular season Cronin.
Frankly surprised Memphis made the top 100. Sadly we're a 1-2 bid league.
Wait, I thought the only reason we haven’t been getting more bids was because ECU and Tulane were in the 300’s? [/sarcasm]
Lot of gloom and doom here lol.
Temple and Tulsa will probably squeeze in one or two more OOC and every team should end up 150 or better, eight or nine in the top 120, and with seven maybe eight finishing in the top 100.
It's a three bid league minimum and probably four. Five might of be out of reach depends on other conferences and any of the missed ooc games getting made up and being decent.
I would say this pretty accurate rank of the conference right now.
I would have guessed we were lower. Top 150 is within reach! (if we ever play another game)
Interesting tidbit
Lowest 10 Rated NET teams from Major 7 (P5 + AAC + BE)
160 Tulane (AAC)
169 Notre Dame (ACC)
170 Butler (BE)
177 Vanderbilt (SEC)
186 Nebraska (Big 10)
193 California (Pac 12)
198 Oregon St (Pac 12)
203 K-State (Big 12)
209 Iowa St (Big 12)
237 Washington (Pac 12)
Every major conference has at least one team lower than our worst team (Tulane). Pac 12 has 3.
(01-04-2021 12:07 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting tidbit
Lowest 10 Rated NET teams from Major 7 (P5 + AAC + BE)
160 Tulane (AAC)
169 Notre Dame (ACC)
170 Butler (BE)
177 Vanderbilt (SEC)
186 Nebraska (Big 10)
193 California (Pac 12)
198 Oregon St (Pac 12)
203 K-State (Big 12)
209 Iowa St (Big 12)
237 Washington (Pac 12)
Every major conference has at least one team lower than our worst team (Tulane). Pac 12 has 3.
This is what excites me, it means next season in what will hopefully be a full season ooc and in conference, with both Tulane and Temple expected improve, ECU at peak Gardner, UCF more experienced should be a crazy fun year. This is an in between step, our top isn't quite as good as some previous years, but our bottom is much stronger.
This year looks pretty ho hum although it could still turn out quite well, next year could be massive.
(01-04-2021 09:47 AM)mustangxc Wrote: [ -> ]Who knew Cincinnati and Temple would be a drag on NET for the conference?
I did, that is what a bad coaching hire will do in any sport.
(01-04-2021 11:58 AM)Foreverandever Wrote: [ -> ]Lot of gloom and doom here lol.
Temple and Tulsa will probably squeeze in one or two more OOC and every team should end up 150 or better, eight or nine in the top 120, and with seven maybe eight finishing in the top 100.
It's a three bid league minimum and probably four. Five might of be out of reach depends on other conferences and any of the missed ooc games getting made up and being decent.
I would say this pretty accurate rank of the conference right now.
Still early but if you had to rank resumes right now vs just raw NET, we have several pretty decent ones
Houston: Q1: 4-1, Q2: 0-0, Q3: 2-0, Q4: 2-0, Road 2-1
Wichita: Q1: 2-1, Q2: 1-1, Q3: 1-0, Q4: 0-0, Road 3-0
SMU: Q1: 0-1, Q2: 1-0, Q3: 2-0, Q4: 3-0, Road 2-0
Tulsa: Q1: 1-0, Q2: 1-2, Q3: 1-1, Q4: 2-0, Road 2-0
UCF: Q1: 1-2, Q2: 0-1, Q3: 2-0, Q4: 0-0, Road 1-2
So I'd say Houston and Wichita have Good resumes ... SMU/Tulsa have ok resumes ... UCF has a resume with work to do but has that Q1 road win which will help
(01-04-2021 12:20 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-04-2021 11:58 AM)Foreverandever Wrote: [ -> ]Lot of gloom and doom here lol.
Temple and Tulsa will probably squeeze in one or two more OOC and every team should end up 150 or better, eight or nine in the top 120, and with seven maybe eight finishing in the top 100.
It's a three bid league minimum and probably four. Five might of be out of reach depends on other conferences and any of the missed ooc games getting made up and being decent.
I would say this pretty accurate rank of the conference right now.
Still early but if you had to rank resumes right now vs just raw NET, we have several pretty decent ones
Houston: Q1: 4-1, Q2: 0-0, Q3: 2-0, Q4: 2-0, Road 2-1
Wichita: Q1: 2-1, Q2: 1-1, Q3: 1-0, Q4: 0-0, Road 3-0
SMU: Q1: 0-1, Q2: 1-0, Q3: 2-0, Q4: 3-0, Road 2-0
Tulsa: Q1: 1-0, Q2: 1-2, Q3: 1-1, Q4: 2-0, Road 2-0
UCF: Q1: 1-2, Q2: 0-1, Q3: 2-0, Q4: 0-0, Road 1-2
So I'd say Houston and Wichita have Good resumes ... SMU/Tulsa have ok resumes ... UCF has a resume with work to do but has that Q1 road win which will help
That's how I see it. Right now Houston and then either SMU/Wichita is in. Then it's a matter of numbers, unless it all goes horribly wrong, one of the other three is likely to get another bid. We need some things to go right to get a fourth and the right kind of crazy to get five. Pretty hard not to see three bids there.
Would be nice if Memphis was even close to being as good as the hype they receive each offseason.
(01-04-2021 09:47 AM)mustangxc Wrote: [ -> ]Who knew Cincinnati and Temple would be a drag on NET for the conference?
When Colgate has played two games and is in the top 20, it's a worthless metric at the moment. We are much better than last year.
(01-04-2021 10:12 AM)Joprior23 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-04-2021 09:47 AM)mustangxc Wrote: [ -> ]Who knew Cincinnati and Temple would be a drag on NET for the conference?
I predicted Temple would be dead last in the conference. I haven’t see anything that makes me second guess that pick. Unless Cincy keeps stinking the gym up. They look terrible.
We've played 3 games with 6 new players, soon to be 7 if/when Battle is healthy. We look better than last year, but I'm not sure how you can come to that conclusion so soon.
(01-04-2021 12:13 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-04-2021 09:47 AM)mustangxc Wrote: [ -> ]Who knew Cincinnati and Temple would be a drag on NET for the conference?
I did, that is what a bad coaching hire will do in any sport.
I think it is way early to say McKie was a bad hire. Year 1 started great, playing over their heads a bit, but collapsed due in part to injuries, team dissension and change of culture. McKie will get at least 2 more years to prove himself. If by then things aren’t changing, or are changing too slowly, then I might agree. But Temple basketball is in rebuild/re-culture mode, and additionally, doing so in a pandemic.