NET ranking slips down to 24

Passed by San Diego State. Aztecs didn’t play yesterday, or even Saturday, so I don’t know what happened to push us down. Maybe somebody SDSU has played did play and win Sunday which bumped up their strength of schedule a smidge. Anyway, just a snapshot and the ranking that matters is in about 25 days.

I just don’t understand NET ratings. I don’t know why prior to Missouri game, our NET rating was so high with no quality wins and weak non-conference schedule. And then why the rating didn’t improve significantly from where it was after a quality road win against Missouri.

So, I quit looking at NET rating and just focus on Quad 1 wins.

That’s probably a good approach. And that seems to be what the committee does. They use NET to set the quadrants and then look at good wins/bad losses from there. Certainly Misery’s NET in the 40s doesn’t match with them being a 4 seed Saturday morning/5 seed now.

We’ve moved up to the top 9 seed on Bracket Matrix by the way, which I guess would be the #33 team in the country. The guy at Stadium is the only one of 100 brackets who doesn’t have us in the field; his last update was Friday.

I see no point in even having a NET. Things were fine before and if they want one, tbey should hold off until the last three weeks or so of the season. I feel the only reason for it is the publicity they get.

They were? RPI sucks and everybody knew it. Even the NCAA knew it, which is why they got rid of it. It did nothing to evaluate teams; it was essentially a strength of schedule measure. NET is somewhat better but not perfect and I expect it will be tweaked further. And it’s just one data point among many.

And Jeff Goodman, who does his own Top 25, left us out. He is still anti-Arkansas even though we don’t have Mike Anderson anymore.

Gary Parrish, who is typically Pro-Arkansas, has us 26th. Andy Hatz has us 26th. Unranked isn’t unreasonable and I suspect we won’t be ranked today.

Possibly Wisconsin’s second half gag might get us in

I doubt if there is any perfect system, but automatic bids are okay for me to fill some spots, Past that I see no way to please everyone. But it makes sense to me to wait until the season is over to pick the rest of the field.

If we’re a borderline team, we’re going to be speculating in February (and January) if we will get in. If we’re safely in, we’re going to be speculating on our seeding. NET is just one piece of information for that speculation. The committee announcement Saturday was another piece but we weren’t included (although Misery was and we beat them).

Speaking of which, the women’s committee is going to reveal its top 16 tonight. Will be very interesting to see if beating UConn and Baylor is enough to get the Hogs in the top seeds, especially after getting swept by the Aggies.

Katz didn’t even have us on his bracket last Tuesday. Now we’re 26th. That’s quite a jump. Presumably we would be a 7 seed on his next bracket.

Speaking of that Wisky-Michigan game, I read that eight of the nine Wolverines in their rotation are seniors, or something like that. Speaks to the value of experience. However, I also read that everyone in Misery’s rotation is 21 years old or older except Pinson, who is 20, but that didn’t keep us from handling them in OT.

What publicity are they getting? You mean us talking about it? You think “they” spend this time on NET so message boards just talk about it? What publicity is there? What about 4-5 star recruits? I suppose maybe we get rid of that system. And seeding? My goodness, just put 64 teams in and let them figure it all out. It’s all relative, I guess. I actually like the NET to the RPI and find it to be surprisingly accurate. I cross reference it with the BPI on ESPN, which puts us right around the 25th best time. I think that is about right. I think we have to beat FL to get ranked. So, publicity or not, the NET and BPI seem to be good indicators of where your team stands against the field.

I have to admit I was much more enthused about such things 40 years ago

BPI is 24th right now. And I think that is on the list of computer indexes the committee looks at. Interestingly BPI projects that we have a 60% chance of not only making the tournament, but advancing past the first round. Sweet 16 chances fall off to 25.9%. It also projects that we’re a 4-point favorite over the Wallets.

sounds accurate to me

I computed the average of the 26 brackets on bracket matrix that were updated after our win on Sat and in those our average seed is 7.06.

Beating FL tmrw should put us firmly on the 7 line.

Noticed one guy there has us as a 3 seed. He’s projecting we finish 19-7, which obviously doesn’t take a potential makeup game into account.

Take out the high and the low and we are still a 7.17.

Just my opinion, so worth less than nothing, but if we did win all five games left (ignoring for now the possibility of a make up game), and win 2 games in the SECT, I think we end up a 5 or 6. Now, I don’t see us doing that.

If we go 4-1 (say beat UF, lose to Bama), and win 2 games in the SECT I think we are a 6 or 7. If only go 3-2, probably end up on the dreaded 8 or 9. Worse than that? Bubble.

I think that’s probably a reasonable guess, Greg.