Football Home Game
Sat, August 31, 2024
Sat, August 31, 2024
Basketball Home Game
Fri, November 1, 2024
Fri, November 1, 2024
USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
-
- Posts: 14255
- Joined: December 15th, 2010, 6:29 pm
- Has thanked: 4440 times
- Been thanked: 4079 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
How much better would our net be if we played in the big 10. You know we would beat the mid level teams in Logan and a lot of the top teams In Logan as well.
- ThunderAggie
- Posts: 1817
- Joined: November 20th, 2017, 7:52 pm
- Location: Logan
- Has thanked: 434 times
- Been thanked: 780 times
- ProvoAggie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: June 14th, 2010, 1:00 am
- Location: Provo, Utah
- Has thanked: 1484 times
- Been thanked: 2938 times
- Contact:
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
They are 15-14 but they have 13 quality losses this year so that helps them out quite a bit. Looks like they still have 2 more opportunities for quality losses before their conference tournament starts.
https://bracketologists.com/teamsheet/p ... ilermakers
- These users thanked the author ProvoAggie for the post (total 4):
- pablohoney • USU78 • OKAggie • treesap32
-
- Posts: 1931
- Joined: January 26th, 2019, 6:27 pm
- Has thanked: 495 times
- Been thanked: 919 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
This might interest those that are questioning the Big10 ratings.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... onference/
https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... onference/
- These users thanked the author Bank Shot for the post:
- Real Life Aggie
-
- Posts: 8376
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 1003 times
- Been thanked: 875 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
What a great web site! It’s interesting to see the bracket based only on NET. We would be on a collision course with SDS in a second round game. Lunardi may still have Indiana as a favored child but they are now well below the NET cut-line at 58.ProvoAggie wrote: ↑February 28th, 2020, 9:13 amThey are 15-14 but they have 13 quality losses this year so that helps them out quite a bit. Looks like they still have 2 more opportunities for quality losses before their conference tournament starts.
https://bracketologists.com/teamsheet/p ... ilermakers
- ThunderAggie
- Posts: 1817
- Joined: November 20th, 2017, 7:52 pm
- Location: Logan
- Has thanked: 434 times
- Been thanked: 780 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
If they lose those 2 there should be no way they make the tourney unless they win their conference tourney or at least make the finals. If they are 15-16 regular season they have no business being in the tourney.utaggies wrote: ↑February 28th, 2020, 9:48 amWhat a great web site! It’s interesting to see the bracket based only on NET. We would be on a collision course with SDS in a second round game. Lunardi may still have Indiana as a favored child but they are now well below the NET cut-line at 58.ProvoAggie wrote: ↑February 28th, 2020, 9:13 amThey are 15-14 but they have 13 quality losses this year so that helps them out quite a bit. Looks like they still have 2 more opportunities for quality losses before their conference tournament starts.
https://bracketologists.com/teamsheet/p ... ilermakers
-
- Posts: 8376
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 1003 times
- Been thanked: 875 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
That was an interesting article. Does anyone remember a few years back when the Missouri Valley Conference effectively gamed the RPI system? Well, the Big 10 is not necessarily gaming the NET system but it understands that substituting out Quadrant 3 and Quadrant 4 teams in order to play home games against Quadrant 1 Big 10 teams, even if that makes a 20 game unbalanced conference schedule, is beneficial to the NCAA prospects of the middling to lower conference teams. Right now, based on NET, they are projected to get 11 teams into the tourney — including a 15-14 Purdue team that is 8-10 in conference games. Last year they only got 4 in. That is a huge revenue bump.Bank Shot wrote: ↑February 28th, 2020, 9:24 amThis might interest those that are questioning the Big10 ratings.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... onference/
The MWC should consider something to bolster its chances of sending multiple teams to the NCAAs. For instance allowing the projected better teams to play each other twice. If that were the case we would have played Nevada twice this year and perhaps Wyoming or SJS only once. Granted nobody saw us doing as well as we did last year so outliers would be hard to project. Certainly USU needs to keep a few teams like Florida, LSU, and St. mary’s on its schedule and look for even more OOC opportunities against good teams, hopefully home-and-home or on a neutral site.
-
- Posts: 1931
- Joined: January 26th, 2019, 6:27 pm
- Has thanked: 495 times
- Been thanked: 919 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
Pretty much along the lines of Gonzaga working the MWC to get the WCC to go to unbalanced schedule. It's not at all gaming the system...it's knowing what the system is and how to make it work for your school or conference.
- ProvoAggie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: June 14th, 2010, 1:00 am
- Location: Provo, Utah
- Has thanked: 1484 times
- Been thanked: 2938 times
- Contact:
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
The Mountain West was the first to game the RPI system. There was that one year that the MWC was ranked #1 in RPI.
- USU78
- Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
- Posts: 15412
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
- Location: Sandy
- Has thanked: 7169 times
- Been thanked: 2087 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
# 31 in Sagarin today.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
-
- Posts: 1007
- Joined: August 26th, 2011, 11:54 pm
- Has thanked: 279 times
- Been thanked: 599 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
I thought that "making the system work for you" was the definition of gaming the system.
Aggies All the Way!
- frankiesaysrelax
- Posts: 639
- Joined: August 15th, 2014, 8:15 pm
- Has thanked: 125 times
- Been thanked: 194 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
MWC is still paying the price for that year. They had around 5 or 6 teams make the tournament that year and I think all but one of them lost in the first round. Ever since then it seems like we always start the season as a one-bid league and it almost feels like it's punishment for pulling one over on the system.ProvoAggie wrote: ↑February 28th, 2020, 10:46 amThe Mountain West was the first to game the RPI system. There was that one year that the MWC was ranked #1 in RPI.
- These users thanked the author frankiesaysrelax for the post (total 2):
- hipsterdoofus21 • Zaggie07
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
With the loss last night, the Aggies dropped only one spot from 37 to 38. I’m a little surprised that a Quad 3 loss didn’t affect the NET ranking more. But I guess any team at this level loses a few games. And late in the season, any single game doesn’t move the needle too much, because it’s just one of 30+ games that have already been played.
-
- Posts: 7814
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:07 pm
- Has thanked: 407 times
- Been thanked: 4835 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
Wow, we only dropped one spot in the NET after taking that Q3 loss in the shorts. It would appear we are very much still in the hunt.
This team has been given a long leash. I think two wins in the conference tourney may still get it done.
This team has been given a long leash. I think two wins in the conference tourney may still get it done.
- Dwigt
- Pick'em Champ - '20,'21 Weekly; '21 WTHCG
- Posts: 1860
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:23 am
- Has thanked: 99 times
- Been thanked: 578 times
Re: USU up to 35 on Net Ratings after SJSU win
We may have only dropped one spot in the NET but I guarantee we dropped much further in the eyes of the selection committee.
- These users thanked the author Dwigt for the post:
- hipsterdoofus21
Presumptuous and ill-informed.