(01-14-2019 09:31 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(01-14-2019 08:56 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  From Jerry Palms bracket today:

Quote:

Quote:
No team is benefitting more from the new NET rankings that NC State. The Wolfpack ranks 113rd in the RPI because of a putrid non-conference schedule that features nine Quadrant 4 home games. However, NC State is 16th in the NET because it is one of the best teams at running up the score. The Wolfpack is No. 5 in Net Efficiency, which is essentially a measure of uncapped margin of victory.

Liberty and Murray State are the other two teams that are outside of the top 100 of the RPI, but in the top 50 of the NET. Florida, which is not in the bracket, but not terribly far off, is 96th in the RPI and 40th in the NET.

Teams from all walks of life in college basketball are represented among the teams benefitting most from the change from the RPI to the NET, but the teams that are most negatively affected are all from outside the power conferences. The 60 teams with the biggest negative difference in ranking from the RPI to the NET are all from non-power conferences.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...ville/amp/

Just a coincidence I suppose, NOT!!!!!!

Pretty much confirms my earlier suspicions. This change was made to pick up those Syracuse type P5 teams who play garbage out of conference (but run up the score) and never play a road game then turn in 7-11 or 8-12 conference record and sit just at 20 wins or so but claim the schedule was so hard.

We desperately need the "team must be at least .500 in their conference (including the conference tourney) to be eligible for an at large bid rule.

The sport would clean up nicely and the tourney would be a lot of fun to watch.

(01-14-2019 09:43 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Syracuse wins at Duke. Gimme them NET points.

Scheduling for the AAC just became huge. The fact that the eastern teams have traditional match ups with big east and acc teams, while the west tends to play sec and big 12 teams means we get the same bonus bumps to carry into conference play for us. It will take a few years for the NET to be outed for its flaws, in the mean time mandatory scheduling of the other major 6 conferences as a good portion of the AAC ooc opponents should be instituted. We could easily game the system with the natural rivalry schedules many aac teams carry. When playing lesser opponents running up the score, should unfortunately, become the norm.

(01-14-2019 10:44 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Pretty much confirms my earlier suspicions. This change was made to pick up those Syracuse type P5 teams who play garbage out of conference (but run up the score) and never play a road game then turn in 7-11 or 8-12 conference record and sit just at 20 wins or so but claim the schedule was so hard.

We desperately need the "team must be at least .500 in their conference (including the conference tourney) to be eligible for an at large bid rule.

The sport would clean up nicely and the tourney would be a lot of fun to watch.

That should be a no-brainer. If they're not performing well in the conference what makes anyone think that they will suddenly come to life in the NCAA tourney?

(01-14-2019 10:52 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(01-14-2019 10:44 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Pretty much confirms my earlier suspicions. This change was made to pick up those Syracuse type P5 teams who play garbage out of conference (but run up the score) and never play a road game then turn in 7-11 or 8-12 conference record and sit just at 20 wins or so but claim the schedule was so hard.

We desperately need the "team must be at least .500 in their conference (including the conference tourney) to be eligible for an at large bid rule.

The sport would clean up nicely and the tourney would be a lot of fun to watch.

That should be a no-brainer. If they're not performing well in the conference what makes anyone think that they will suddenly come to life in the NCAA tourney?

Go back and look and you will see teams with bad conference records still getting at large bids, happens every year, usually they end up as 11 seeds or in the 8/9 games. They beat out similar ranked teams who came in second or won their conference regular season but lost the tourney in a traditionally 1 bid league.

(01-14-2019 10:38 PM)UC-nati Wrote:  

(01-14-2019 09:43 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Syracuse wins at Duke. Gimme them NET points.

Yea. Then pass em back over here.

You only get a choco-taco.

Well, UCONN stayed the same and Cincinnati lost a spot. LOL.

(01-15-2019 11:42 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  Well, UCONN stayed the same and Cincinnati lost a spot. LOL.

Well, UConn was hurt by FSU losing to Pittsburgh. Pretty much totally negated the Syracuse win.

Updated for games through 1/14/19.....

(01-15-2019 11:52 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-15-2019 11:42 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  Well, UCONN stayed the same and Cincinnati lost a spot. LOL.

Well, UConn was hurt by FSU losing to Pittsburgh. Pretty much totally negated the Syracuse win.

Well, Stever should mind her own business.

(01-14-2019 10:52 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(01-14-2019 10:44 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Pretty much confirms my earlier suspicions. This change was made to pick up those Syracuse type P5 teams who play garbage out of conference (but run up the score) and never play a road game then turn in 7-11 or 8-12 conference record and sit just at 20 wins or so but claim the schedule was so hard.

We desperately need the "team must be at least .500 in their conference (including the conference tourney) to be eligible for an at large bid rule.

The sport would clean up nicely and the tourney would be a lot of fun to watch.

That should be a no-brainer. If they're not performing well in the conference what makes anyone think that they will suddenly come to life in the NCAA tourney?

UConn would like to talk top you....

Updated for games through 1/15/19.....

(01-16-2019 02:14 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Updated for games through 1/15/19.....

For those who look at the first unread post it might be easier if you link to the post that was actually updated from here, such as:

Updated click here --> 1/15/19.....

This way members reading click just click on the link.

(01-16-2019 03:34 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(01-16-2019 02:14 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Updated for games through 1/15/19.....

For those who look at the first unread post it might be easier if you link to the post that was actually updated from here, such as:

Updated click here --> 1/15/19.....

This way members reading click just click on the link.

No good deed goes unpunished.....

(01-16-2019 07:57 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-16-2019 03:34 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(01-16-2019 02:14 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Updated for games through 1/15/19.....

For those who look at the first unread post it might be easier if you link to the post that was actually updated from here, such as:

Updated click here --> 1/15/19.....

This way members reading click just click on the link.

No good deed goes unpunished.....

Wasn't meant as a criticism rather a suggestion, sorry. It's a good thread.

(01-16-2019 08:00 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(01-16-2019 07:57 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-16-2019 03:34 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(01-16-2019 02:14 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Updated for games through 1/15/19.....

For those who look at the first unread post it might be easier if you link to the post that was actually updated from here, such as:

Updated click here --> 1/15/19.....

This way members reading click just click on the link.

No good deed goes unpunished.....

Wasn't meant as a criticism rather a suggestion, sorry. It's a good thread.

No, it is a good suggestion. I will implement it tomorrow.

so looking at things from Jan 1(right before conference play started) to today:
team Jan 1/today
Houston 4/7 -3
Cincy 25/35 -10
UCF 41/38 -3
Temple 62/46 +16
Memphis 96/70 +26
UConn 91/90 +1
USF 102/98 +4
Tulsa 90/104 -14
Wichita 133/105 +28
SMU 137/111 +26
ECU 243/230 +13
Tulane 291/302 -11
109.58 Jan 1
102.67 today

(01-17-2019 11:35 AM)stever20 Wrote:  so looking at things from Jan 1(right before conference play started) to today:
team Jan 1/today
Houston 4/7 -3
Cincy 25/35 -10
UCF 41/38 -3
Temple 62/46 +16
Memphis 96/70 +26
UConn 91/90 +1
USF 102/98 +4
Tulsa 90/104 -14
Wichita 133/105 +28
SMU 137/111 +26
ECU 243/230 +13
Tulane 291/302 -11
109.58 Jan 1
102.67 today

The first 10 teams are actually respectable and a couple in that group are very good. The two anchors, East Carolina and Tulane, are a real handicap for this conference. Really bad net rankings.

Updated Through 1/16/19

(01-08-2019 01:10 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Due to the importance of the NET and to reduce board clutter, I created this new thread to track NET during the 2018-2019 season.

NET as of 1/16/19 / as of 1/15/19

Houston 7 /8
Cincy 35 /35
UCF 38 / 32
Temple 46 / 45
Memphis 70/ 74
UConn 90 / 88
USF 98 / 97
Tulsa 104 / 111
WSU 105 / 125
SMU 111 / 108
ECU 230 / 221
Tulane 302 / 302

https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball...t-rankings

For quadrant purporses, these are important numbers

Top 30 (vs Quad 1 at home)
Top 75 (Quad 1 away, Quad 2 home)
Top 135 (Quad 2 away)
Top 160 (Quad 3 home)
Top 240 (Quad 3 away)

Add in Top 50, Top 100 and Top 200 for conference tournament games on a neutral site.

Be nice if Cincy and UCF finish Top 30, Memphis stays Top 75 and one of UConn, Wichita, Tulsa, SMU or USF joins them.

A very big team to watch is Memphis can remain top 75. would make any conference tourney games vs them tier 1 games.