What a shameful

Unfair, ranking. Creditably is now shot in the Top 25.

The number of teams that could pull off what we have done is few if any. The reason I know this to be true is because we have beaten the ones that could. And all the others lost this week.

Tragic. So sorry for our team that ‘experts’ are not expert. What a shame. So sad.

4 Likes

Wednesday night the #7 Arkansas Razorbacks will
take on the LSU Tigers in BWA. Should be a great game. WOO! PIG!!!

True, but the experts are possibly thinking the Hogs are about to lose 2 in a row… And don’t want to look like they did when they moved the hogs up to 10… I imagine if we keep winning we will get to #1 regardless of what the experts say, right?

I’ve always liked to be a little bit disrespected. Keeps that chip on your shoulder… walk softly carry a big stick! And we’ve been carrying a big one lately. Just keep on doing what you doing, history will take care of the rest of it.

5 Likes

The polls and the Net ratings are not even close to right! I doubt half the voters even watched basketball this weekend! If they did they are blind, stupid or just plains idiots.
Our hogs are tied for 14th in the AP poll with Houston a team that is 0-3 in Q-1! They have a big whopping zero Q-1 wins! I would like to hear a voter justify putting them in the top 25! There’s a few more that don’t belong too!

Rankings don’t mean squat. As long as you’re in the top 25 your scores get reported and you get the extra exposure. That’s it. The committee doesn’t look at the polls at all. The only rankings that matter come out on the afternoon of March 13.

4 Likes

However, Houston is 8-4 against Q1 and Q2; while the Hogs are 8-5.

Swine is correct about this. What most don’t think about is how being/NOT being in the top 25 can have a significant affect on the next week’s rankings. As SF noted, IF you are ranked your score and your highlights are generally ALWAYS included in the day’s summary of scores/games. So, there is that exposure.

But even more significant, IMO, is that I believe most voters start with a list of LAST week’s top 25, and edit that when making out their new list (rather than starting from a blank sheet). If you’re ON the prior list, you’re “top of mind” and tend to get more consideration. And here’s where this comes into play…if you’re 26th or 31st in the prior week’s rankings, most don’t know/see that…they just know that you were not in the top 25.

This can be important, because - say - if you are number 19 and win, and the number 21 team has a nice win, they will rarely leap-frog you in the rankings (unless their win came over a top 5 team or something). However, if you were #26 and they were #31, the same rules don’t apply…you were both “unranked” and I’ve frequently seen teams that got the 33rd most votes (to our 27, for example) jump into the rankings while we won and stayed just outside the top 25; it’s somewhat of a “self-fulfilling prophecy” that if you’re in the top group, you tend to stay there unless you lose. But the same rules don’t apply if you’re just outside the top 25 that everyone notices and talks about.

Yes they do matter. Or they wouldn’t have them.

They don’t matter. The selection committee does not go by the Top 25 rankings. NET ranking is what matters. Q1 wins matter.

Gas, you give them way too much credit. They’ll have anything that gets people to click a link.

they don’t matter for the tourney, correct… they do matter in perception of your program and can have an impact on recruiting and other areas… it’s not critical but it does matter - just not to the selection committee probably… JMVHO

The experts have thought we were going to lose several in this long stretch of (all but one) wins.

I completely understand how someone could look at the standing like this week for instance and come to the conclusion… ‘ Obviously these don’t matter.’

Casey Kasem would do better.

1 Like

They matter. They just may not matter much in NCAAT seedling.

But they undoubtedly matter in terms of marketing a program (selling tickets and donations) recruiting and national buzz (all the lifeblood of a program).

And, if a team is right on a seed line, none of us know if a ranking (for example a Top 15 ranking versus a projected NET-influenced 6 seed) might make the difference between getting a 5 instead of a 6.

We can all say with certainty what we think but unless and until the NET is the automatic end-all-be-all in terms of seeding, you can’t say for sure that the rankings don’t matter.

I’ve heard Committee chairs reference “eye test” and “body of work” and “head to head” and “finishing strong” and “losses without key players” and “conference strength” to justify seeds, so I’m not sure how anyone can say with absolute certainty that T25 means nothing at all in terms of these factors, especially, for example, we end up T10 in the rankings but the NET calls for a 5 seed.

Someone correct me if I’m wrong. Is there a rule that says all seeds will be 100% based on NET?

If not, I’m skeptical of your absolute certainty that rankings do not matter at all.

It’s pretty clear that we are a T15 team, which would suggest a 4 seed is possible, if not likely, particularly if the NET is also solid.

Definitely something recruits look at, so they matter.

3 Likes

The absolute only thing that counts is that we earned a spot in the Dance. Once there, we earn what we shall reap. Not interested in polls. That will take care of itself by performance, not comparisons.

3 Likes

And fans

The conference likes them.