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)

(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.

The NCAA created the NET. And the NCAA claim they cap margin of victory, so you don't get extra credit for blowouts. That would seem to be good for us, since we haven't really blown anyone out. But something doesn't add up, for sure...

I Think this is where SOS from the RPI comes in

(01-11-2023 10:41 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  The NCAA created the NET. And the NCAA claim they cap margin of victory, so you don't get extra credit for blowouts. That would seem to be good for us, since we haven't really blown anyone out. But something doesn't add up, for sure...

I think it changed but they used to “fake” cap blowouts. It was set up so the extra points from margin of victory stopped at 10. But since it still accounts for efficiency separately it’s better to blow out the other team.

All those great SEC teams we beat actually suck. So much for scheduling the power 5. Drop the Ole Miss game for sure. They are rarely any good. Does nothing for us when we win and kills us when we lose. Plus it’s not like the crowd is big for it.

moved from 54 to 50 last night

and i dont see what would make that change

houston has played 10 quad 4 games, weak

(01-11-2023 05:23 PM)Eagleonpar Wrote:  All those great SEC teams we beat actually suck. So much for scheduling the power 5. Drop the Ole Miss game for sure. They are rarely any good. Does nothing for us when we win and kills us when we lose. Plus it’s not like the crowd is big for it.

Is this trolling?

(01-13-2023 12:13 PM)Unionman76 Wrote:  moved from 54 to 50 last night

and i dont see what would make that change

houston has played 10 quad 4 games, weak

Our opponents either won, or our opponents' opponents won, and won with a high margin of victory or lost, but lost by a narrow margin.

(01-13-2023 12:16 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-11-2023 05:23 PM)Eagleonpar Wrote:  All those great SEC teams we beat actually suck. So much for scheduling the power 5. Drop the Ole Miss game for sure. They are rarely any good. Does nothing for us when we win and kills us when we lose. Plus it’s not like the crowd is big for it.

Is this trolling?

has to be, or uninformed

Alabama 6
Auburn 28
A&M 72
Ole Miss 98
Vanderbilt 107

Houston 1
UCF 35
Memphis 50
Cincinnati 87
Tulane 105

(01-13-2023 12:18 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-13-2023 12:13 PM)Unionman76 Wrote:  moved from 54 to 50 last night

and i dont see what would make that change

houston has played 10 quad 4 games, weak

Our opponents either won, or our opponents' opponents won, and won with a high margin of victory or lost, but lost by a narrow margin.

Yep and I'm not surprised by the move. We have been criminally under-ranked by the NET so far when comparing it to literally every other metric out there. Seems to be finally coming back to the mean.

vandy by 13 over arkansas (#15)

that should help

arkansas now 1 -4 in sec

Eric Musselman is an arrogant POS,,,,,go Dores

Tulane beat UCF. They were a combined 14-51 from 3.

(01-13-2023 12:16 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-11-2023 05:23 PM)Eagleonpar Wrote:  All those great SEC teams we beat actually suck. So much for scheduling the power 5. Drop the Ole Miss game for sure. They are rarely any good. Does nothing for us when we win and kills us when we lose. Plus it’s not like the crowd is big for it.

Is this trolling?

The first part is. The Ole Miss part is real. It does us nothing to play them. They lost at home to Georgia today.

(01-14-2023 04:42 PM)Eagleonpar Wrote:  

(01-13-2023 12:16 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-11-2023 05:23 PM)Eagleonpar Wrote:  All those great SEC teams we beat actually suck. So much for scheduling the power 5. Drop the Ole Miss game for sure. They are rarely any good. Does nothing for us when we win and kills us when we lose. Plus it’s not like the crowd is big for it.

Is this trolling?

The first part is. The Ole Miss part is real. It does us nothing to play them. They lost at home to Georgia today.

Clearly very wrong, then.

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.

(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.

(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.

I agree 100%. Ive said on here that if we had beaten UCF, alot of the lower IQ posters on the board would be talking 5/6 seed and darkhorse dreams. 4 points separates in their minds a seed high enough to avoid a 1 or 2 early, and never making another NCAA tourney again. Thats the expected result of the emotions of passionate but unintelligent sports fans

(01-14-2023 08:42 PM)Alcalde2 Wrote:  

(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.

I agree 100%. Ive said on here that if we had beaten UCF, alot of the lower IQ posters on the board would be talking 5/6 seed and darkhorse dreams. 4 points separates in their minds a seed high enough to avoid a 1 or 2 early, and never making another NCAA tourney again. Thats the expected result of the emotions of passionate but unintelligent sports fans

You forgot to mention that it's all Lomax's fault except when it's Penny's. No one else can do any wrong, and if you support the coach and anyone who played for him at East, you're wearing blue-tinted glasses.