Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)
Open TigerLinks
 

Post Reply 
The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
msu35 Offline
Observing Reality
*

Posts: 2,331
Joined: Dec 2021
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Truffles
Location: Tennessee
Post: #41
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-16-2023 12:46 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  But don't they claim the margin of victory is capped at 10 or 15 points, to prevent intentional blowouts?

Supposedly it's capped, but we have two teams here that are rated far above where they should be, and they both have a propensity for blowing out opponents. It wouldn't be the first time I'm wrong and it's certainly not a smoking gun, but there is some correlation.
01-16-2023 01:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stammers Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,212
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1673
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Montreal, Canada
Post: #42
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-16-2023 12:46 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  
(01-16-2023 12:30 PM)msu35 Wrote:  
(01-16-2023 11:55 AM)Stammers Wrote:  
(01-15-2023 01:32 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(01-15-2023 01:07 PM)msu35 Wrote:  As with all analytic systems for basketball, it's a push/pull dynamic. Our rating is influenced by not only our games but also our opponents. We could go down even if we won a game, which has already happened this year, therefore it's highly possible and even likely that we could go up after a loss.

I get that. About 14 years ago I wrote an RPI calculator program that would live game results and generate rpi's for the teams in real time. So I could see how the different metrics played out.

And NET has the RPI component in it. But its got some other special sauce in it as well. And some of that special sauce doesnt make sense.

To demonstrate how screwed the NET is as compared to the RPI, Ohio St's NET currently sits at 21. You look at number, and wonder how the hell that is even possible, when the following is also true:

1. They have no quad 3 wins, because they stuffed their schedule with Quad 4 teams

2. They lost to a quad 4 team AT HOME

3. Their non-conference schedule is #204 and their overall sos is 77. Quite ugly.

4. They have a single road win.

5. They are sitting at 10-6

6. Their RPI is 94


The RPI over-punishes for losing at home to extremely great teams. Which is one of its flaws. (The other is rewarding away wins against crappy teams.) But for its flaw, it appears they jacked with some calcs in the NET that overcompensates to the ridiculous degree. While Ohio St is not the #94 team as the RPI says, they are also nowhere near the #21 the NET seems to think they are.

Creighton's is even worse...

24 CREIGHTON 9-8
Q1: 1-6
Q2: 3-1
Q3: 2-1
Q4: 4-0

46 MEMPHIS 13-5
Q1: 1-2
Q2: 3-3
Q3: 5-0
Q4: 4-0

Q1 - Q2
4-7 CREIGHTON
4-5 MEMPHIS

Q1 - Q3
6-8 CREIGHTON
9-5 MEMPHIS

Q3 - Q4
6-1 CREIGHTON
9-0 MEMPHIS

The only reasonable conclusion is as I suggested. The "secret" component with the NET is that it gives disproportionate weight to the pure number of Q1 games. There is no other

I'm going to be a dissenting voice and throw a spanner in the works. Take a look at the margin of victory. It has to play a significant role in the calculations. This year, we've been unable to "blow" teams out to the degree the aforementioned teams have, and our rating has suffered.

But don't they claim the margin of victory is capped at 10 or 15 points, to prevent intentional blowouts?

Here is a very good article that answers all of our questions. Spoiler alert. Non G5 conferences get completely screwed over.

Quote:Scoring Margin
Simply the difference between a team’s score and its opponent’s score. However, the point differential is capped at 10 points, and all overtime games are capped at 1 point.

Quote:Team Value Index
The Team Value Index component of the NET is a results-oriented algorithm designed to reward teams for beating other good teams. The man remains mysterious behind the curtain, but the NCAA has said that this component includes factors such as who won, the opponent, and the location.

Scoring Margin is straightforward. A cap of 10 points, and 1 point for all overtime games. That means that even if we haven't been blowing out many teams, our 5 losses are by a combined 18 points, and we fall below the 10 point threshold in every loss. We have two wins by 9 points, one win by 8 points, and one win by 7 points. Presumably, we don't get maximum value in 4 of our wins because of a point here or there. It should also be noted that P5 teams play a much higher percentage of non P5 teams at home, which gives them greater opportunities to win by 10 or more points.

Team Value Index is where the real screwing takes places. Look into this component carefully. As "a results-oriented algorithm designed to reward teams for beating other good teams."

So just as I suspected, the P5 conferences get to double dip. They get rewarded/not punished for good losses as everyone else does, BUT they get disproportionately rewarded for beating good teams. The short story is that 6-12 in Q1 gets you rewarded more than 4-5, because there is a premium reward based on the pure number of wins. This 100% creates the inequities, end of story.


We only had 2 optimal chances at a Q1 win. Neutral against 41 Iowa State and home against 29 Murray State. All of our other games were a real grind. We only had two Q1 opportunities at home, and 3 out of our 7 Q1 games were against #2 Houston, with 1 at home, 1 on the road and 1 a de facto road game in Texas.

3 out of our 7 games were against the #2 team in the NET. 5 of our 7 games were against teams in the top 30.

Memphis 2022
Q1 3-4
W 22 Virginia Tech - N
L 41 Iowa State - N
L 29 Murray State -H
W 2 Houston - A
L 53 SMU - A
W 2 Houston - H
L 2 Houston - N

Compare this to UConn. They were 5-8 in Q1, and had a whopping 10 of their Q1 games against teams that were outside of the top 10 of the NET. In fact, 8 of their games were against teams outside of the top 30.

Key UConn Losses
38 Michigan State - N
73 West Virginia - A
48 Seton Hall - A
37 Xavier - A
51 Creighton - A

Easy Q1 Wins
50 Marquette - A
64 St. John's - A
48 Seton Hall - N

Their two best wins, #6 Villanova and #13 Auburn both at neutral sites, don't have the value of our best wins against Houston.

So not only did UConn have infinitely easier Q1 games than we did, they also got rewarded for 5 Q1 wins compared to our 4 despite having a worse record. UConn was rewarded with a #5 seed, while we got a #9 seed.

Sorry for the long post. The very very short summary, is that the NET puts a premium on the pure number of Q1 wins. IF you are a P5 team that goes 6-12 in Q1 with multiple games outside of the top 25, you get much more value than a non P5 team that goes 3-4, with multiple games against the top 10. It is complete bull****.

Partial Explanation Of NET Rankings
(This post was last modified: 01-16-2023 03:19 PM by Stammers.)
01-16-2023 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msu35 Offline
Observing Reality
*

Posts: 2,331
Joined: Dec 2021
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Truffles
Location: Tennessee
Post: #43
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
Ah, well there you go. That effectively explains the disparity. Hopefully Penny will double-down on his strategy to schedule a tough OOC.
01-16-2023 03:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stammers Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,212
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1673
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Montreal, Canada
Post: #44
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-16-2023 03:28 PM)msu35 Wrote:  Ah, well there you go. That effectively explains the disparity. Hopefully Penny will double-down on his strategy to schedule a tough OOC.

It is still going to be a losing battle. It's very difficult to schedule a Q1 opponent at home.
01-16-2023 04:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tigerspartan Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,590
Joined: Mar 2018
Reputation: 75
I Root For: Tigers
Location:
Post: #45
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
On lunardis update today we are off the play in line. One of the last 4 byes group. UCF is not listed on last 4 in or first 4 out.

Texas a and m up to first 4 out. Would benefit us for them to keep winning.
01-16-2023 04:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msu35 Offline
Observing Reality
*

Posts: 2,331
Joined: Dec 2021
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Truffles
Location: Tennessee
Post: #46
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-16-2023 04:19 PM)Tigerspartan Wrote:  On lunardis update today we are off the play in line. One of the last 4 byes group. UCF is not listed on last 4 in or first 4 out.

Texas a and m up to first 4 out. Would benefit us for them to keep winning.

They've been on a tear. I wouldn't be surprised if they do.
01-16-2023 04:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hoots Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,225
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 180
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Michigan
Post: #47
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-14-2023 08:38 PM)msu35 Wrote:  
(01-14-2023 08:35 PM)Alcalde2 Wrote:  Losing to Wofford was perhaps the punch in the mouth Texas A&M needed. They seemed to turn the corner, now winners of 6 in a row including beating ranked Missouri, LSU and on the road at Florida. They were up 40 at South Carolina just minutes ago. Looking like thats becoming more and more of the quality win we hoped for.

Also Vanderbilt just upset Arkansas and is above .500.

All of this goes to show why it's too early in the season to gnash teeth, crying that the sky is falling.

Yes, exactly. There's a heckuva lot of season remaining and to crunch numbers to death as to what might happen after each game is very premature.
01-16-2023 07:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
memphis mania Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,026
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 153
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #48
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-16-2023 03:12 PM)Stammers Wrote:  
(01-16-2023 12:46 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  
(01-16-2023 12:30 PM)msu35 Wrote:  
(01-16-2023 11:55 AM)Stammers Wrote:  
(01-15-2023 01:32 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  I get that. About 14 years ago I wrote an RPI calculator program that would live game results and generate rpi's for the teams in real time. So I could see how the different metrics played out.

And NET has the RPI component in it. But its got some other special sauce in it as well. And some of that special sauce doesnt make sense.

To demonstrate how screwed the NET is as compared to the RPI, Ohio St's NET currently sits at 21. You look at number, and wonder how the hell that is even possible, when the following is also true:

1. They have no quad 3 wins, because they stuffed their schedule with Quad 4 teams

2. They lost to a quad 4 team AT HOME

3. Their non-conference schedule is #204 and their overall sos is 77. Quite ugly.

4. They have a single road win.

5. They are sitting at 10-6

6. Their RPI is 94


The RPI over-punishes for losing at home to extremely great teams. Which is one of its flaws. (The other is rewarding away wins against crappy teams.) But for its flaw, it appears they jacked with some calcs in the NET that overcompensates to the ridiculous degree. While Ohio St is not the #94 team as the RPI says, they are also nowhere near the #21 the NET seems to think they are.

Creighton's is even worse...

24 CREIGHTON 9-8
Q1: 1-6
Q2: 3-1
Q3: 2-1
Q4: 4-0

46 MEMPHIS 13-5
Q1: 1-2
Q2: 3-3
Q3: 5-0
Q4: 4-0

Q1 - Q2
4-7 CREIGHTON
4-5 MEMPHIS

Q1 - Q3
6-8 CREIGHTON
9-5 MEMPHIS

Q3 - Q4
6-1 CREIGHTON
9-0 MEMPHIS

The only reasonable conclusion is as I suggested. The "secret" component with the NET is that it gives disproportionate weight to the pure number of Q1 games. There is no other

I'm going to be a dissenting voice and throw a spanner in the works. Take a look at the margin of victory. It has to play a significant role in the calculations. This year, we've been unable to "blow" teams out to the degree the aforementioned teams have, and our rating has suffered.

But don't they claim the margin of victory is capped at 10 or 15 points, to prevent intentional blowouts?

Here is a very good article that answers all of our questions. Spoiler alert. Non G5 conferences get completely screwed over.

Quote:Scoring Margin
Simply the difference between a team’s score and its opponent’s score. However, the point differential is capped at 10 points, and all overtime games are capped at 1 point.

Quote:Team Value Index
The Team Value Index component of the NET is a results-oriented algorithm designed to reward teams for beating other good teams. The man remains mysterious behind the curtain, but the NCAA has said that this component includes factors such as who won, the opponent, and the location.

Scoring Margin is straightforward. A cap of 10 points, and 1 point for all overtime games. That means that even if we haven't been blowing out many teams, our 5 losses are by a combined 18 points, and we fall below the 10 point threshold in every loss. We have two wins by 9 points, one win by 8 points, and one win by 7 points. Presumably, we don't get maximum value in 4 of our wins because of a point here or there. It should also be noted that P5 teams play a much higher percentage of non P5 teams at home, which gives them greater opportunities to win by 10 or more points.

Team Value Index is where the real screwing takes places. Look into this component carefully. As "a results-oriented algorithm designed to reward teams for beating other good teams."

So just as I suspected, the P5 conferences get to double dip. They get rewarded/not punished for good losses as everyone else does, BUT they get disproportionately rewarded for beating good teams. The short story is that 6-12 in Q1 gets you rewarded more than 4-5, because there is a premium reward based on the pure number of wins. This 100% creates the inequities, end of story.


We only had 2 optimal chances at a Q1 win. Neutral against 41 Iowa State and home against 29 Murray State. All of our other games were a real grind. We only had two Q1 opportunities at home, and 3 out of our 7 Q1 games were against #2 Houston, with 1 at home, 1 on the road and 1 a de facto road game in Texas.

3 out of our 7 games were against the #2 team in the NET. 5 of our 7 games were against teams in the top 30.

Memphis 2022
Q1 3-4
W 22 Virginia Tech - N
L 41 Iowa State - N
L 29 Murray State -H
W 2 Houston - A
L 53 SMU - A
W 2 Houston - H
L 2 Houston - N

Compare this to UConn. They were 5-8 in Q1, and had a whopping 10 of their Q1 games against teams that were outside of the top 10 of the NET. In fact, 8 of their games were against teams outside of the top 30.

Key UConn Losses
38 Michigan State - N
73 West Virginia - A
48 Seton Hall - A
37 Xavier - A
51 Creighton - A

Easy Q1 Wins
50 Marquette - A
64 St. John's - A
48 Seton Hall - N

Their two best wins, #6 Villanova and #13 Auburn both at neutral sites, don't have the value of our best wins against Houston.

So not only did UConn have infinitely easier Q1 games than we did, they also got rewarded for 5 Q1 wins compared to our 4 despite having a worse record. UConn was rewarded with a #5 seed, while we got a #9 seed.

Sorry for the long post. The very very short summary, is that the NET puts a premium on the pure number of Q1 wins. IF you are a P5 team that goes 6-12 in Q1 with multiple games outside of the top 25, you get much more value than a non P5 team that goes 3-4, with multiple games against the top 10. It is complete bull****.

Partial Explanation Of NET Rankings

That's what I always suspected. Having more games against Quad 1 opponents will always help you. As much as they say that they are going to start focusing more on "bad" losses never believe it. Everyone always puts "good wins" at a higher emphasis than "bad losses"
01-16-2023 08:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UofMstateU Online
Legend
*

Posts: 35,780
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 3123
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #49
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
It may be Q1 games, but it looks like its something else as well.

Take Sam Houston St. Their net is 45, despite being 9-5. (They also have 4 games against non div1 opponents. More on that in a sec)

They have 2 Q1 wins, no Q2 wins, and a Q3 loss. Their SOS is 127 and nonconf sos is 124. So what the literal f*ck.

Well, it turns out they demolished those no div1 teams. They beat Arlington Baptist 107-26. So I have a feeling those beat downs, even against non div1, are factored in.

One more thing to watch is that both of their Q1 wins are away. But Utah is on the cusp of not being a Q1 win for them. If Utah drops below 70 in the net, and Sam Houston state plummets in the net, it could be that Q1 away wins are heavily factored.

It does seem like the teams that the net is overrating have 3 or 4 beatdowns of Q4/non div 1 teams in their schedule.
(This post was last modified: 01-16-2023 09:44 PM by UofMstateU.)
01-16-2023 09:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msu35 Offline
Observing Reality
*

Posts: 2,331
Joined: Dec 2021
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Truffles
Location: Tennessee
Post: #50
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-16-2023 09:42 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  It may be Q1 games, but it looks like its something else as well.

Take Sam Houston St. Their net is 45, despite being 9-5. (They also have 4 games against non div1 opponents. More on that in a sec)

They have 2 Q1 wins, no Q2 wins, and a Q3 loss. Their SOS is 127 and nonconf sos is 124. So what the literal f*ck.

Well, it turns out they demolished those no div1 teams. They beat Arlington Baptist 107-26. So I have a feeling those beat downs, even against non div1, are factored in.

One more thing to watch is that both of their Q1 wins are away. But Utah is on the cusp of not being a Q1 win for them. If Utah drops below 70 in the net, and Sam Houston state plummets in the net, it could be that Q1 away wins are heavily factored.

It does seem like the teams that the net is overrating have 3 or 4 beatdowns of Q4/non div 1 teams in their schedule.

The claim is that blowouts are capped at 10 points. I personally didn't believe it until I read Stammers's post, but this seems to show they don't. The one thing all of those teams have in common are huge blowout wins. Perhaps it's a wait and see. If Utah drops, and Sam Houston doesn't, I would say there's enough smoke to take pause.
01-16-2023 10:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BamaTigerCub Offline
Living the dream.
*

Posts: 1,594
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation: 43
I Root For: MEMPHIS
Location: Midwest
Post: #51
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-11-2023 10:15 AM)gusrob Wrote:  
(01-11-2023 10:06 AM)memphis mania Wrote:  For comparison:

36 KenPom
27 Torvik
28 RPI
32 ELO
31 Average - equates to a 7.69 seed

57 NET
(Equates to a 14.25 seed/aka missed tournament)

I've done some pretty extensive research on this, and we seem to be the only outlier when it comes to this degree of discrepancy between the NET vs. all other metrics. This is extremely unlucky.

It's not a conspiracy before anyone starts with that. It's literally a very unlucky situation with the way the numbers work out so far, and could be the reason we miss the tournament vs making it any other year prior to the NET. (Hope not)

Oh yeah? Tell me more.

This is the world we live in where people have to disprove conspiracy theories.
01-16-2023 10:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stammers Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,212
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1673
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Montreal, Canada
Post: #52
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-16-2023 10:36 PM)BamaTigerCub Wrote:  
(01-11-2023 10:15 AM)gusrob Wrote:  
(01-11-2023 10:06 AM)memphis mania Wrote:  For comparison:

36 KenPom
27 Torvik
28 RPI
32 ELO
31 Average - equates to a 7.69 seed

57 NET
(Equates to a 14.25 seed/aka missed tournament)

I've done some pretty extensive research on this, and we seem to be the only outlier when it comes to this degree of discrepancy between the NET vs. all other metrics. This is extremely unlucky.

It's not a conspiracy before anyone starts with that. It's literally a very unlucky situation with the way the numbers work out so far, and could be the reason we miss the tournament vs making it any other year prior to the NET. (Hope not)

Oh yeah? Tell me more.

This is the world we live in where people have to disprove conspiracy theories.

It turns out, this isn't one. It really is rigged against non P5.
01-17-2023 12:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tiger87 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,862
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 1138
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #53
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-16-2023 08:36 PM)memphis mania Wrote:  That's what I always suspected. Having more games against Quad 1 opponents will always help you. As much as they say that they are going to start focusing more on "bad" losses never believe it. Everyone always puts "good wins" at a higher emphasis than "bad losses"

Not just "good wins", but evidently "good losses" are better than "bad wins". You're getting next to no credit for a Q3-Q4 win. But you're getting real credit just for playing a Q1 game - even if you get beat by 25 points - it's capped at 10 points.

It's rigged for power conferences. They have inherent Q1 games built into their schedules. So what if you only go 10-10 in conference games? If those 10 losses are "good losses", you move up.

Power conferences have more fans. Fans drive TV ratings on the NCAA tourney. The tourney provides the funding for the NCAA...
01-17-2023 09:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msu35 Offline
Observing Reality
*

Posts: 2,331
Joined: Dec 2021
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Truffles
Location: Tennessee
Post: #54
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-17-2023 09:06 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Power conferences have more fans. Fans drive TV ratings on the NCAA tourney. The tourney provides the funding for the NCAA...

...and we have the winner. The NCAA has the same motivations as the conferences. That would be increased revenue from media rights contracts and making more money. Such is life. Quite hypocritical that they wave the banner of amateurism while exploiting their product for maximum profit.
01-17-2023 10:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UofMstateU Online
Legend
*

Posts: 35,780
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 3123
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #55
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-17-2023 12:04 AM)Stammers Wrote:  
(01-16-2023 10:36 PM)BamaTigerCub Wrote:  
(01-11-2023 10:15 AM)gusrob Wrote:  
(01-11-2023 10:06 AM)memphis mania Wrote:  For comparison:

36 KenPom
27 Torvik
28 RPI
32 ELO
31 Average - equates to a 7.69 seed

57 NET
(Equates to a 14.25 seed/aka missed tournament)

I've done some pretty extensive research on this, and we seem to be the only outlier when it comes to this degree of discrepancy between the NET vs. all other metrics. This is extremely unlucky.

It's not a conspiracy before anyone starts with that. It's literally a very unlucky situation with the way the numbers work out so far, and could be the reason we miss the tournament vs making it any other year prior to the NET. (Hope not)

Oh yeah? Tell me more.

This is the world we live in where people have to disprove conspiracy theories.

It turns out, this isn't one. It really is rigged against non P5.

Except it appears certain conferences have figured out what the special sauce is, and is taking advantage of it. The mountain west is a conference that makes no sense how they got as many teams in the tournament last year, other than their nets were all in the range of being included and seeded where they were. I believe they got 5 teams in, with 4 teams favored to win their first game, only for all 4 of those teams to lose. The one team to win was a low seed in an upset. Failing to get more than one team thru the first game is not anything new for them. The MWC has failed to get multiple teams past the first game since 2014.

So I believe they have figured out what the sauce is, and have configured their schedules to take advantage of it. Which gives them the ability of getting many multiple Q1 opportunities in conference play, which boosts them even further. And even though they get a lot of teams in and get overseeded, in reality they suck so bad that their ncaa performance overall is putrid. So they look good in the net. And they look like sh*t on the court against teams with a pulse.
01-17-2023 12:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stammers Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,212
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 1673
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Montreal, Canada
Post: #56
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-17-2023 12:51 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(01-17-2023 12:04 AM)Stammers Wrote:  
(01-16-2023 10:36 PM)BamaTigerCub Wrote:  
(01-11-2023 10:15 AM)gusrob Wrote:  
(01-11-2023 10:06 AM)memphis mania Wrote:  For comparison:

36 KenPom
27 Torvik
28 RPI
32 ELO
31 Average - equates to a 7.69 seed

57 NET
(Equates to a 14.25 seed/aka missed tournament)

I've done some pretty extensive research on this, and we seem to be the only outlier when it comes to this degree of discrepancy between the NET vs. all other metrics. This is extremely unlucky.

It's not a conspiracy before anyone starts with that. It's literally a very unlucky situation with the way the numbers work out so far, and could be the reason we miss the tournament vs making it any other year prior to the NET. (Hope not)

Oh yeah? Tell me more.

This is the world we live in where people have to disprove conspiracy theories.

It turns out, this isn't one. It really is rigged against non P5.

Except it appears certain conferences have figured out what the special sauce is, and is taking advantage of it. The mountain west is a conference that makes no sense how they got as many teams in the tournament last year, other than their nets were all in the range of being included and seeded where they were. I believe they got 5 teams in, with 4 teams favored to win their first game, only for all 4 of those teams to lose. The one team to win was a low seed in an upset. Failing to get more than one team thru the first game is not anything new for them. The MWC has failed to get multiple teams past the first game since 2014.

So I believe they have figured out what the sauce is, and have configured their schedules to take advantage of it. Which gives them the ability of getting many multiple Q1 opportunities in conference play, which boosts them even further. And even though they get a lot of teams in and get overseeded, in reality they suck so bad that their ncaa performance overall is putrid. So they look good in the net. And they look like sh*t on the court against teams with a pulse.

They are doing it again. No signature wins OOC and 5 schools in the top 36. It's crazy.
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2023 01:09 PM by Stammers.)
01-17-2023 01:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tiger87 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,862
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 1138
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #57
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
NET #34 Utah State (14-4):
#46 in KenPom and #66 in Sagarin.
0-2 in Quad 1 games.
3-2 in Quads 1/2.
Two Quad 4 losses.
Played 12 Quad 3/4 games.
Best win - #61 Oral Roberts @ home.
Worst loss - #228 Weber State @ home.

NET #46 Memphis (13-5):
#36 in KenPom and #47 in Sagarin.
1-2 in Quad 1 games.
4-5 in Quads 1/2.
Zero Quad 4 losses.
Played 9 Quad 3/4 games.
Best win - #26 Auburn @ neutral court.
Worst loss - #88 SLU @ St Louis.

Quite a disparity. Makes no sense.

The ONLY thing they have the advantage on is a winning record in quads 1/2. We've played almost twice as many quad 1/2 games, but we are 4-5 whereas they are 3-2.
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2023 03:27 PM by Tiger87.)
01-17-2023 03:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msu35 Offline
Observing Reality
*

Posts: 2,331
Joined: Dec 2021
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Truffles
Location: Tennessee
Post: #58
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-17-2023 03:26 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  NET #34 Utah State (14-4):
#46 in KenPom and #66 in Sagarin.
0-2 in Quad 1 games.
3-2 in Quads 1/2.
Two Quad 4 losses.
Played 12 Quad 3/4 games.
Best win - #61 Oral Roberts @ home.
Worst loss - #228 Weber State @ home.

NET #46 Memphis (13-5):
#36 in KenPom and #47 in Sagarin.
1-2 in Quad 1 games.
4-5 in Quads 1/2.
Zero Quad 4 losses.
Played 9 Quad 3/4 games.
Best win - #26 Auburn @ neutral court.
Worst loss - #88 SLU @ St Louis.

Quite a disparity. Makes no sense.

The ONLY thing they have the advantage on is a winning record in quads 1/2. We've played almost twice as many quad 1/2 games, but we are 4-5 whereas they are 3-2.

Not really. It makes perfect sense if you look at how many blowout (20+ points) wins they've had compared to us. I know, I know. They cap the points to prevent this. I'm not so convinced as the circumstantial evidence continues to mount.
01-17-2023 03:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tiger87 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,862
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 1138
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #59
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-17-2023 03:35 PM)msu35 Wrote:  
(01-17-2023 03:26 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  NET #34 Utah State (14-4):
#46 in KenPom and #66 in Sagarin.
0-2 in Quad 1 games.
3-2 in Quads 1/2.
Two Quad 4 losses.
Played 12 Quad 3/4 games.
Best win - #61 Oral Roberts @ home.
Worst loss - #228 Weber State @ home.

NET #46 Memphis (13-5):
#36 in KenPom and #47 in Sagarin.
1-2 in Quad 1 games.
4-5 in Quads 1/2.
Zero Quad 4 losses.
Played 9 Quad 3/4 games.
Best win - #26 Auburn @ neutral court.
Worst loss - #88 SLU @ St Louis.

Quite a disparity. Makes no sense.

The ONLY thing they have the advantage on is a winning record in quads 1/2. We've played almost twice as many quad 1/2 games, but we are 4-5 whereas they are 3-2.

Not really. It makes perfect sense if you look at how many blowout (20+ points) wins they've had compared to us. I know, I know. They cap the points to prevent this. I'm not so convinced as the circumstantial evidence continues to mount.

So blowout wins against bad opponents, trump bad losses and lack of any good wins? It's the exact opposite of the narrative they put out.
01-18-2023 10:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msu35 Offline
Observing Reality
*

Posts: 2,331
Joined: Dec 2021
Reputation: 164
I Root For: Truffles
Location: Tennessee
Post: #60
RE: The NET rankings are very hard on the Tigers this year...
(01-18-2023 10:35 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  
(01-17-2023 03:35 PM)msu35 Wrote:  Not really. It makes perfect sense if you look at how many blowout (20+ points) wins they've had compared to us. I know, I know. They cap the points to prevent this. I'm not so convinced as the circumstantial evidence continues to mount.

So blowout wins against bad opponents, trump bad losses and lack of any good wins? It's the exact opposite of the narrative they put out.

I don't disagree, but at a cursory glance, the margin of victory seems to be the common factor among the teams being discussed. I could very well be wrong and I'm not saying that it is definitively margin of victory, but there is smoke. We more data points.
01-18-2023 10:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2023 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2023 MyBB Group.
MemphisTigers.org is the number one message board for Memphis Tigers sports.