North Texas beat SMU. Nice win for us
Printable View
North Texas beat SMU. Nice win for us
So we currently sit at 43 in the NET with 12 games remaining. 6 of those are Q1 opportunities. The issue is that only two of them are at home(Auburn and Kentucky). We somehow need to find a way to win 2-3 of those Q1 games and win the rest, which is not an easy task since 2 of the Q2 games are road games, and we play like hot garbage on the road.
7-5 or better coming home in SEC play and we are in safely. 6-6 and we are sweating but probably still in the play in. Anything worse, hello NIT.
Well, we're about to drop these next 3. Hope we can finish strong again but hard to see it.
#38 up 5 spots
NW #61. They have a shot at becoming a Q1 win.
Washington st now #41. This one is getting more solid as a Q1.
Be great if Arizona st (#118) and Tulane (#117) would start winning games to get in top 100 to make these wins Q2.
Games to watch today...
Purdue (-10.5) at Rutgers (#101)
North Texas (#71) at fau (-9.5)
The whole quad thing is interesting and in many ways I like it. Wonder why football don't pick that up?Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
I know one reason why - it would take out all the bias for blue bloods and the favorite eye test.
If we just win enough SEC games, we in. We are a NCACCT team, no doubt.
A split this week would be huge, but tough to get. After bama next Saturday, this is our February schedule...Quote:
Originally Posted by R2Dawg
Georgia
At mizzou
Ark
OM
At lsu
Kentucky
We should rack up some wins in this stretch.
Agree we got a better schedule upcoming. OM and UK at home, Hump gonna be rockin.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
In some ways though it seems a little silly. For example, why should beating the #50 in the Net be worth significantly more than beating the #51 team in the Net. Bottom line is it shouldn't be.Quote:
Originally Posted by R2Dawg
I would support reforming it so that the 20 or so ranks on the edges of the Quadrants are allocated.
So a home game over #25 could be 0.75 Q1 games and 0.25 Q2 games. A home game against #30 could be 0.5 Q1 and 0.5 Q2, etc.
I don't think it makes a lot of difference to NET; but humans look at resumes, and a Q1 win looks better than Q2Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
A win this week erases the USC and UF losses and basically puts you in position to make a run at seeding. Going 2-0 and you?ve started the run. 0-2 and we?re back to holding serve at home and looking for a couple of road wins in February.
Oops!Quote:
Originally Posted by klong-dog
There just has to be a cut off somewhere. It is unavoidable.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
Turns out the South Carolina loss wasn't all that bad after they handled Kentucky. Beating Tennessee and Auburn should more than make up for that loss and the one to Southern.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawdawg
Maybe but just like the NCAAT field, you have to cut it off somewhere. I do like the real in season evaluations of how teams do not just an eye test pass on teams that the selection group favor like we do in football.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
I'm fine to use a team's Net ranking as an evaluation for the tourney. That, to me, is just another form of an RPI. But to say a team does or doesn't get in the tourney because of their Quad 1 record or Quad 2 record etc. I'm not real crazy about. Not all Quadrant records are equal. If a team beats 3 top 10 teams that's a heck of a lot different that if a team has 3 wins over teams in the 40s and so forth and so on. Breaking everything into quadrants to evaluate teams seems artificial.
NET accounts for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
Looks like our Net Ranking is back up to #38 after the Auburn win.
Agree the Q1 & Q2 is tricky. You can only play who you play but that is where conf record can make or break you.Quote:
Originally Posted by maroonmania
The NET doesn't utilize quadrants at all, correct? That's just what talking heads and the committee do to have an easy way to identify "good" wins and how teams do against tournament quality teams, correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
I do think it's absurd how wide the range is for teams that can give you a quad 1 win. I would assume the 30th best team is generally a lot closer to the 60th best team than the top 5. Certainly not as pronounced as in football but I think there are still a pretty good drop off from the truly top teams to the second tier.
NET explained
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball...ng-replace-rpi
#37 (no change)
Need some wins from NW. They're currently #59. Need them in the top 50 for a Q1 win.
Big games today...
NW at Purdue (-12.5)
Penn st at Rutgers (-6.5)
UAB at north Texas (-7.5)
GT beating North Carolina helped out some. They need to keep winning. They have home wins over Duke and Carolina now, so that loss while not good looks better
#44 (down 7)
Here's sec...
#5 bama
#6 Tenn
#8 auburn
#26 Kentucky
#38 South Carolina
#39 Florida
#49 aTm
#61 OM
#85 Georgia
#93 lsu
#130 ark
#137 mizzou
#226 vandy
My God we would rip the football team apart if they played like this bunch does and getting excited to pat them on the back about beating teams ranked 85 and belowQuote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
When was the last time the football team didn't play like this on the road against a likely top 10 team / SEC champion?Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
There's a factQuote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
2020 vs UGA. Took like 45 scholarship players and make UGA fight for that WQuote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
So 4 seasons ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by the_real_MSU_is_us
We do have wins against 2 top 8 teams so there's that too.Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
The takeaway from the NET ratings is "we're still on track to be one of the 68 teams to make the tournament."
This will be the first time we've done it in back-to-back years since 2008 and 2009. People will complain about anything.
If we do make it, it will be only the 6th time in our history to go back-to-back. It would be 2/2 for Jans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
That?s fair points. But all I was saying was no one would be talking about how we save the season by beating bad teams and not even getting off the bus on the road.
Maybe it will change with no saban, but as long as I see Saban and oats on their sidelines, I knew we were beat. They own usQuote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
At this point in our program, I define seasons like this:
- Good season - make the NCAA Tournament
- Meh season - make the NIT
- Bad season - don't make either
Obviously I want us to become a more prestigious program that gets high seeds and makes the 2nd (or 3rd) weekend more often, but I just don't think that's a realistic expectation of the program today. If Jans gets us into the Tournament again this year (which isn't guaranteed but still 80% according to Torvik), I would say he's 2/2 on having a good season.
We celebrated a bowl streak with multiple.500 and sub .500 seasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
And we are celebrating this team beating Vandy at home to put us at 3-6 in conference playQuote:
Originally Posted by LC Dawg
Funny you didn't mention the 2 top 10 wins at home.Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
NIT bound at best. This team is hot garbage.
No one is celebrating anything. We are 3-6 against the toughest conference schedule in the country so far and have wins over the #6 and #8 NET teams (along with the Vandy win that you mentioned).Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
We haven't yet played the five worst teams in the conference.
Our schedule gets easier now and we have to win the easier games if we want to make the NCAA tournament.
That's just starting facts.
3 seasons yeah.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
For football, we only have 1 (maybe 2) road top 10 games a year, and the talent gap is quite wide between us and them. So yes, you have to go back a few season to find a time our team played well at a top 10 team. That's the criteria of my comment; "when was the last time our football team played well on the road vs a top 10 team?"