Football Home Game
Sat, August 31, 2024
Sat, August 31, 2024
Basketball Home Game
Fri, November 1, 2024
Fri, November 1, 2024
NET rankings
-
- Posts: 3844
- Joined: November 9th, 2010, 5:04 pm
- Has thanked: 1227 times
- Been thanked: 1084 times
NET rankings
Kinda ridiculous that you can win 3 straight games including the #5 team in the country and a championship and actually fall a point in the NET rankings from 39 last week to 40 today. And SDSU loses to us and they stay at 4. I get why (Wyoming) but that just reveals a flaw in the ranking system IMO.
- Agzrule
- Posts: 1025
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:16 am
- Has thanked: 51 times
- Been thanked: 171 times
Re: NET rankings
NCAA needs to be transparent with the NET. I was surprised to see us get passed by East Tennessee. Why doesn’t basketball follow football in how teams are selected, if panel is allowing teams in with low NET, what is the purpose of it???
- aceofspadeskb
- Posts: 4486
- Joined: September 10th, 2012, 12:50 pm
- Has thanked: 313 times
- Been thanked: 296 times
Re: NET rankings
You have to remember that this late in the season, what the teams you played do has greater influence on your NET than what you do. Among other things, SDSU got a bump from Creighton who beat #8 Seton Hall by double digits.
-
- Posts: 7646
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:07 pm
- Has thanked: 396 times
- Been thanked: 4609 times
Re: NET rankings
I think this is true. It’s a little silly we didn’t get more of a bump for beating a Top 5 NET team. I was expecting to jump up to 35 or so.aceofspadeskb wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 10:58 amYou have to remember that this late in the season, what the teams you played do has greater influence on your NET than what you do. Among other things, SDSU got a bump from Creighton who beat #8 Seton Hall by double digits.
What I don’t really understand is why BYU is getting so much mileage out of their Gonzaga win when we are getting almost nothing NET-wise out of our comparable SDSU win.
-
- Posts: 12435
- Joined: November 3rd, 2016, 8:47 pm
- Has thanked: 1186 times
- Been thanked: 2226 times
Re: NET rankings
I mention what is wrong with the NET rankings in December.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=51778 my post about the NET rankings
The whole focus on scoring efficiency element messed up the NET rankings.
It does not take account injuries (teams like us) and coaches' like Craig Smith who really play their bench players (who would not play in games for many teams) when they are ahead by a good margin. Award teams teams like Utah who run up the score.
We have fallen in the NET rankings and winning at the same time.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=51778 my post about the NET rankings
The whole focus on scoring efficiency element messed up the NET rankings.
It does not take account injuries (teams like us) and coaches' like Craig Smith who really play their bench players (who would not play in games for many teams) when they are ahead by a good margin. Award teams teams like Utah who run up the score.
We have fallen in the NET rankings and winning at the same time.
- aceofspadeskb
- Posts: 4486
- Joined: September 10th, 2012, 12:50 pm
- Has thanked: 313 times
- Been thanked: 296 times
Re: NET rankings
They have 0 losses to Q3 teams. We have 2. Just my guess.ineptimusprime wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:13 amI think this is true. It’s a little silly we didn’t get more of a bump for beating a Top 5 NET team. I was expecting to jump up to 35 or so.aceofspadeskb wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 10:58 amYou have to remember that this late in the season, what the teams you played do has greater influence on your NET than what you do. Among other things, SDSU got a bump from Creighton who beat #8 Seton Hall by double digits.
What I don’t really understand is why BYU is getting so much mileage out of their Gonzaga win when we are getting almost nothing NET-wise out of our comparable SDSU win.
-
- Posts: 12435
- Joined: November 3rd, 2016, 8:47 pm
- Has thanked: 1186 times
- Been thanked: 2226 times
Re: NET rankings
Stat breakdownaceofspadeskb wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:21 amThey have 0 losses to Q3 teams. We have 2. Just my guess.ineptimusprime wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:13 amI think this is true. It’s a little silly we didn’t get more of a bump for beating a Top 5 NET team. I was expecting to jump up to 35 or so.aceofspadeskb wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 10:58 amYou have to remember that this late in the season, what the teams you played do has greater influence on your NET than what you do. Among other things, SDSU got a bump from Creighton who beat #8 Seton Hall by double digits.
What I don’t really understand is why BYU is getting so much mileage out of their Gonzaga win when we are getting almost nothing NET-wise out of our comparable SDSU win.
BYU played Gonzaga (twice), San Diego State (home game), Utah State (neutral court), St. Mary's (twice), Kansas (neutral court), Utah (road game), and a number of decently ranked opponents.
Last edited by SLB on March 9th, 2020, 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Roy McAvoy
- Posts: 7435
- Joined: November 2nd, 2011, 1:30 pm
- Has thanked: 1150 times
- Been thanked: 2853 times
Re: NET rankings
There's two things really affecting it.
#1 - The efficiency part of it. We went wire to wire with the #269 team in the nation. That really brought us down doing that this late in the year. While we did beat SDSU, it was also on a buzzer beater so that didn't give us quite as much of a boost as we maybe thought. I have to think that had we played Nevada instead of Wyoming and then beat SDSU, our Net ranking would be about 5 spots higher.
#2 - What's happening to other teams we've beat throughout the year. We'll see our Net ranking fluctuate even though we're not playing now depending on what the teams we played in pre-conference play do.
#1 - The efficiency part of it. We went wire to wire with the #269 team in the nation. That really brought us down doing that this late in the year. While we did beat SDSU, it was also on a buzzer beater so that didn't give us quite as much of a boost as we maybe thought. I have to think that had we played Nevada instead of Wyoming and then beat SDSU, our Net ranking would be about 5 spots higher.
#2 - What's happening to other teams we've beat throughout the year. We'll see our Net ranking fluctuate even though we're not playing now depending on what the teams we played in pre-conference play do.
-
- Posts: 12435
- Joined: November 3rd, 2016, 8:47 pm
- Has thanked: 1186 times
- Been thanked: 2226 times
Re: NET rankings
Another thing that the NET rankings that does account is that MWC tournament Wyoming was good and saved up all of their 3s for the MWC tournament. If Wyoming played like that for most of the season, they would have a good record.Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:34 amThere's two things really affecting it.
#1 - The efficiency part of it. We went wire to wire with the #269 team in the nation. That really brought us down doing that this late in the year. While we did beat SDSU, it was also on a buzzer beater so that didn't give us quite as much of a boost as we maybe thought. I have to think that had we played Nevada instead of Wyoming and then beat SDSU, our Net ranking would be about 5 spots higher.
#2 - What's happening to other teams we've beat throughout the year. We'll see our Net ranking fluctuate even though we're not playing now depending on what the teams we played in pre-conference play do.
-
- Posts: 8367
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 992 times
- Been thanked: 870 times
Re: NET rankings
Could someone translate this for me?SLB wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:38 amAnother thing that the NET rankings that does account is that MWC tournament Wyoming was good and saved up all of their 3s for the MWC tournament. If Wyoming played like that for most of the season, they would have a good record.Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:34 amThere's two things really affecting it.
#1 - The efficiency part of it. We went wire to wire with the #269 team in the nation. That really brought us down doing that this late in the year. While we did beat SDSU, it was also on a buzzer beater so that didn't give us quite as much of a boost as we maybe thought. I have to think that had we played Nevada instead of Wyoming and then beat SDSU, our Net ranking would be about 5 spots higher.
#2 - What's happening to other teams we've beat throughout the year. We'll see our Net ranking fluctuate even though we're not playing now depending on what the teams we played in pre-conference play do.
-
- Posts: 12435
- Joined: November 3rd, 2016, 8:47 pm
- Has thanked: 1186 times
- Been thanked: 2226 times
Re: NET rankings
I simply said Wyoming for most of season was bad, but Wyoming was good in MWC tournament. Net Rankings don't see that.utaggies wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:52 amCould someone translate this for me?SLB wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:38 amAnother thing that the NET rankings that does account is that MWC tournament Wyoming was good and saved up all of their 3s for the MWC tournament. If Wyoming played like that for most of the season, they would have a good record.Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:34 amThere's two things really affecting it.
#1 - The efficiency part of it. We went wire to wire with the #269 team in the nation. That really brought us down doing that this late in the year. While we did beat SDSU, it was also on a buzzer beater so that didn't give us quite as much of a boost as we maybe thought. I have to think that had we played Nevada instead of Wyoming and then beat SDSU, our Net ranking would be about 5 spots higher.
#2 - What's happening to other teams we've beat throughout the year. We'll see our Net ranking fluctuate even though we're not playing now depending on what the teams we played in pre-conference play do.
- Roy McAvoy
- Posts: 7435
- Joined: November 2nd, 2011, 1:30 pm
- Has thanked: 1150 times
- Been thanked: 2853 times
Re: NET rankings
He's saying that sure, we barely beat Wyoming, but that's because Wyoming just went off from the 3 point line in the conference tournament. The whole MWC was drug down in the NET ranking by Wyoming suddenly learning how to shoot in the conference tournament.utaggies wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:52 amCould someone translate this for me?SLB wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:38 amAnother thing that the NET rankings that does account is that MWC tournament Wyoming was good and saved up all of their 3s for the MWC tournament. If Wyoming played like that for most of the season, they would have a good record.Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 11:34 amThere's two things really affecting it.
#1 - The efficiency part of it. We went wire to wire with the #269 team in the nation. That really brought us down doing that this late in the year. While we did beat SDSU, it was also on a buzzer beater so that didn't give us quite as much of a boost as we maybe thought. I have to think that had we played Nevada instead of Wyoming and then beat SDSU, our Net ranking would be about 5 spots higher.
#2 - What's happening to other teams we've beat throughout the year. We'll see our Net ranking fluctuate even though we're not playing now depending on what the teams we played in pre-conference play do.
On the year, Wyoming was 32% from the 3 and made less than 8 threes per game. In the MWC tournament, they shot 44% from the 3 and made 12.7 threes per game.
Last edited by Roy McAvoy on March 9th, 2020, 12:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- These users thanked the author Roy McAvoy for the post:
- aggies22
-
- SJSU Ultimate Loser Award Winner - Given to someone that should probably give up but won't.
- Posts: 23328
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:09 am
- Location: Where the sagebrush grows!
- Has thanked: 1400 times
- Been thanked: 3128 times
Re: NET rankings
I don't care much about the NET Ranking right now. We are automatically in the tournament.
- Aggieiester
- Posts: 660
- Joined: November 18th, 2010, 10:11 pm
- Has thanked: 69 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
Re: NET rankings
There just seems to be too much weight on who you play.
Look at Marquette. 18-12 overall 3-8 on the road, 8-10 in conference, 2-8 against the top half of the Big East and they have lost 6 out of their last 7 games yet they have a 26 net ranking and bracketologists have them pretty safely in the dance. Unless they make a run in the Big east tournament they have no business getting an at-large bid.
Look at Marquette. 18-12 overall 3-8 on the road, 8-10 in conference, 2-8 against the top half of the Big East and they have lost 6 out of their last 7 games yet they have a 26 net ranking and bracketologists have them pretty safely in the dance. Unless they make a run in the Big east tournament they have no business getting an at-large bid.
- These users thanked the author Aggieiester for the post (total 2):
- aggies22 • USU78
-
- Posts: 7646
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:07 pm
- Has thanked: 396 times
- Been thanked: 4609 times
Re: NET rankings
Counterpoint — wouldn’t you love Marquette to be our first round matchup?Aggieiester wrote: ↑March 9th, 2020, 4:47 pmThere just seems to be too much weight on who you play.
Look at Marquette. 18-12 overall 3-8 on the road, 8-10 in conference, 2-8 against the top half of the Big East and they have lost 6 out of their last 7 games yet they have a 26 net ranking and bracketologists have them pretty safely in the dance. Unless they make a run in the Big east tournament they have no business getting an at-large bid.