NET rankings

[OLDIUFAN]

Why are some of these teams ranked higher then IU, with worse records? 

[5fouls]

18 minutes ago, 13th&Jackson said:

Fortunately Penn St only dropped from 24 to 25 with the loss yesterday, so it is still solidly a Quad 1 win for the Hoosiers.

IU now 6-7 Quad 1. Only team outside the NET top 30 with 6 or more Q1 wins. Only other teams with 6 or more: Kansas, Baylor, Creighton, Maryland, Villanova, Seton Hall, Colorado, Oregon, KY, Michigan, Butler, Penn St, Iowa, WI.

Here are some notable Quad 1 comparisons:

13 MSU 5-8

16 Tx Tech 3-8

19 OSU 5-8

26 Marquette 5-8

30 LSU 4-6

31 Stanford 2-5

33 Florida 4-7

34 Rutgers 3-8

35 Illinois 5-7

36 Purdue 4-11

37 Rhode Island 1-4

38 Utah St 2-4

40 Alabama 2-6

42 Minnesota 5-9

44 Xavier 3-9

45 Arkansas 2-6

47 So Cal 2-7

So, NET is telling me that Alabama, with fewer overall wins, fewer Quad 1 wins, a lower KenPom rating, and a weaker overall schedule, is better than Indiana.

So, based on that, we may not be sure what matters to the NET, but we know what does NOT matter.

• Winning does not matter
• Beating good teams does not matter
• Being efficient does not matter
• Playing tough competition does not matter

Makes perfect sense to me.  

[13th&Jackson]

10 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

So, NET is telling me that Alabama, with fewer overall wins, fewer Quad 1 wins, a lower KenPom rating, and a weaker overall schedule, is better than Indiana.

So, based on that, we may not be sure what matters to the NET, but we know what does NOT matter.

• Winning does not matter
• Beating good teams does not matter
• Being efficient does not matter
• Playing tough competition does not matter

Makes perfect sense to me.  

Alabama seems to be getting a lot of love for winning four road games even though they are #90 GA, #94 Ole Miss, #145 Vandy and #319 Samford. They are benefiting from having weak teams at the bottom of the SEC for potential road wins. Odd as it seems, IU was probably hurt by not having a road game at NW.

[Lizard]

Beat the rest of our schedule and see what the NET says about Indiana then

[NotIThatLives]

58 minutes ago, BobSaccamanno said:

I’d agree in the sense that the first ten games or so, the ranking can be somewhat arbitrary.  But once a certain number of games are in, the quality of play of any particular team may fluctuate.  Teams get on a roll, or nosedive at the precise moment you play them.  Guys get banged up, they get healthy later.  After you play them, it can be like a different team.  Some coaches will say, it’s not who you play but when you play them.  

If the NCAA is determined to overthink and overweight minutiae this seems like a pretty big flaw.  

You may be misunderstanding me or me you.  

If Virginia starts the year ranked 3rd and gets smoked by Purdue.  Virginia finishes the year ranked 45th.  Purdue gets credit for beating the 45th best team not the 3rd when all the dust settles.  

[madmax]

 

[BGleas]

None of this makes any sense. I look at teams that the so-called "experts" have as 5, 6 and 7 seeds, complete locks in the tournament, and I don't see how their resumes are any better than IU's? 

Caveat, I'm not a bracketologist guy that goes and breaks down the team sheet, I'm just looking at records and best win, etc., but just looking at Lunardi's bracket, and I know he's one of the worst rated, but he has Arizona as a 6 seed. They're 19-8 and their best two wins are Colorado and Illinois. How are they a 6 and IU is a 10!?!? 

He has Iowa as a 6 seed. They're 19-8 and have losses to DePaul and Nebraska. They definitely have some good wins as well, and I'm not even saying we should be ranked above them, but there certainly isn't a 4-seed gap between Iowa and Indiana!?!?

Ohio State is a 6 seed. We have the exact same record (both overall and in conference) and we split our head-to-head games. Again, maybe their resume is a little better, but a 4 seed difference?

He's got Marquette, Butler and Texas Tech as 7 seeds. Again, not saying our resume is better than all of them, but we're all right in the same neighborhood in terms of record, and Indiana has some of the best wins of the group. I don't see how those 3 are 7 seeds and Indiana is a 10/bubble team?!?!

None of this makes any sense?

 

[DWB]

I think we're being punished for our non-conf schedule, esp in Nov. Also, we never left the hall until we went to Wisconsin and got our ass handed to us, then struggled big time against U-Conn, and Neb (at home yet). Then go to Indy (not a real road trip) and beat ND @ the buzzer, and get beat at home by Ark.

We may have dug ourselves a "Net" hole, so deep that we can't crawl out of.

Main thing (to me) is make the Tourney, play great ball, and let the chips fall where they will.

One of my fears in the tourney is that we're so used to playing so physical, that the whistles we heard against PSU will be NOTHING like we'll hear in the tourney, when they won't let the guys bang. By our definition, the calls will all be "tickey-tackey" based on B1G standards.

 

 

[BGleas]

Again, I know Lunardi isn't the guy to look at, but he has Florida as a 9 seed. They're freaking 17-10 and play in the SEC. They have losses to Florida State and UConn, who IU beat, and a loss to Utah State. Their only ranked opponent wins are Auburn and Xavier. 

[SawatchHoosier]

5 hours ago, rico said:

I would take that bracket in a heart beat.

Wouldn’t that be sweet sweet music for Indiana to beat Butler and Dayton on the way to a sweet 16. 

[Seeking6]

7 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Again, I know Lunardi isn't the guy to look at, but he has Florida as a 9 seed. They're freaking 17-10 and play in the SEC. They have losses to Florida State and UConn, who IU beat, and a loss to Utah State. Their only ranked opponent wins are Auburn and Xavier. 

Yep. I think this is one of the benefits of twitter and social media. So many fans are making comments to the experts/tv guys/etc....they are forced to look at the numbers and know they don't make sense. Donny Marshall all but said it yesterday during game when they showed IU's resume. Lunardi is being made a fool of each time he posts. 

[5fouls]

20 minutes ago, DWB said:

I think we're being punished for our non-conf schedule, esp in Nov. Also, we never left the hall until we went to Wisconsin and got our ass handed to us, then struggled big time against U-Conn, and Neb (at home yet). Then go to Indy (not a real road trip) and beat ND @ the buzzer, and get beat at home by Ark.

We may have dug ourselves a "Net" hole, so deep that we can't crawl out of.

Main thing (to me) is make the Tourney, play great ball, and let the chips fall where they will.

One of my fears in the tourney is that we're so used to playing so physical, that the whistles we heard against PSU will be NOTHING like we'll hear in the tourney, when they won't let the guys bang. By our definition, the calls will all be "tickey-tackey" based on B1G standards.

 

 

According to KenPom, there are 10-12 teams with worse non-conference schedules ahead of us in the ratings.  I personally think winning on the road, regardless of the competition, is heavily influencing the NET ratings.  Beating Incarnate Word on the road seems to be worth more than beating Kansas at home.  

[5fouls]

9 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

Yep. I think this is one of the benefits of twitter and social media. So many fans are making comments to the experts/tv guys/etc....they are forced to look at the numbers and know they don't make sense. Donny Marshall all but said it yesterday during game when they showed IU's resume. Lunardi is being made a fool of each time he posts. 

I missed the last 3/4ths of yesterday's game.  What did Marshall say?

[13th&Jackson]

25 minutes ago, DWB said:

I think we're being punished for our non-conf schedule, esp in Nov. Also, we never left the hall until we went to Wisconsin and got our ass handed to us, then struggled big time against U-Conn, and Neb (at home yet). Then go to Indy (not a real road trip) and beat ND @ the buzzer, and get beat at home by Ark.

We may have dug ourselves a "Net" hole, so deep that we can't crawl out of.

Main thing (to me) is make the Tourney, play great ball, and let the chips fall where they will.

One of my fears in the tourney is that we're so used to playing so physical, that the whistles we heard against PSU will be NOTHING like we'll hear in the tourney, when they won't let the guys bang. By our definition, the calls will all be "tickey-tackey" based on B1G standards.

 

 

Actually the weakness of the non-con schedule for IU is a myth. Unfortunately, it kind of got perpetuated by commentators early in the year. "cupcake city baby". IU's non-con schedule is rated 73. And of course, IU only had one non-con loss, to #45 ARK. Of the 51 teams ahead of IU in the NET, only 22 have non-con schedules rated stronger. Here are some notably weak non-con schedules for teams ranked higher than IU:

Baylor 193

Gonzaga 266

Creighton 110

FLA St   122

Tx Tech 170 ( 9-4 non con)

KY 150 ( 10-3 non con)

Butler 218

Houston 228 (10-3)

Penn St 327

IA 217 (9-2)

Stanford 214 (11-2)

Illinois 237 ( 7-3)

Minnesota 146 (6-4)

Providence 141 (7-6)

VA 207 (8-2)

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats Library/NET Nitty Gritty - Feb. 23, 2020.pdf

[DWB]

Thanx 13th. Your stats make perfect sense. But the Net still doesn't make any sense to me.

[rogue3542]

 

It's a metric that's beyond broken. It's seemingly the most misleading sports statistic ever devised. It would be a monumental travesty for the selection committee to use this, but they will.

 

[IU878176]

NET rankings are GREAT if you like the unknown/inexplicable.

I was critical of our early season schedule but give me a break....Ohio State is still 19th, Purdue 36th, Minnesota is 42nd and we are 52nd????

Who knows, we might get smoked at Purdue and go up a few spots. This metric just seems whacky.

[BobSaccamanno]

I think its flaws compound on each other because you take their flawed base and then make further analysis off a flawed predicate.  I also don't think the math has been handled or weighted properly.  They needed a far more rigorous analysis when they put it together.  This would never pass Daubert in Court.

The NET should be taken out back and shot.  

[Hoosierhoopster]

2 minutes ago, BobSaccamanno said:

I think its flaws compound on each other because you take their flawed base and then make further analysis off a flawed predicate.  I also don't think the math has been handled or weighted properly.  They needed a far more rigorous analysis when they put it together.  This would never pass Daubert in Court.

The NET should be taken out back and shot.  

Maybe 3 guys on here get the Daubert reference, lol, but, yeah.

[5fouls]

Here's a good one from a conference down in the trenches.

From the Sun Belt.

Little Rock vs. UT Arlington

Overall Record  LR (18-9)  UTA (11-16)

Quad 1 Records  LR 0-2    UTA 0-3

Quad 2 Records  LR 1-4  UTA 1-3

Quad 3 Records  LR 8-1  UTA 5-6

Quad 4 Records  LR 9-2  UTA 5-4

Road record  LR 8-7  UTA 5-9

RPI - LR 85  UTA 163

Head to Head (Each team won at home)

So, Little Rock wins or ties every one of those metrics.

Net Ranking    Little Rock - 138   UTA - 130

Now, according to KenPom, UTA played a tougher Non-Conference schedule.  But, in looking at the number of games each team played in each Quad, the schedule discrepancy can't be too great.  

 

 

 

[13th&Jackson]

11 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Maybe 3 guys on here get the Daubert reference, lol, but, yeah.

[5fouls]

I found this site and really like the information.  

One of the metrics they have is Strength of Record (SOR).  IU ranks 23rd, ahead of a whole slew of teams that are projected to get higher seeds by all of the bracketologists.

https://bracketresearch.com/projected-ncaa-tournament-team-comparison/

 

[SawatchHoosier]

47 minutes ago, BobSaccamanno said:

The NET should be taken out back and shot.  

It is a perfect example of “garbage in garbage out.”

[MPM]

1 hour ago, 5fouls said:

Here's a good one from a conference down in the trenches.

From the Sun Belt.

Little Rock vs. UT Arlington

Overall Record  LR (18-9)  UTA (11-16)

Quad 1 Records  LR 0-2    UTA 0-3

Quad 2 Records  LR 1-4  UTA 1-3

Quad 3 Records  LR 8-1  UTA 5-6

Quad 4 Records  LR 9-2  UTA 5-4

Road record  LR 8-7  UTA 5-9

RPI - LR 85  UTA 163

Head to Head (Each team won at home)

So, Little Rock wins or ties every one of those metrics.

Net Ranking    Little Rock - 138   UTA - 130

Now, according to KenPom, UTA played a tougher Non-Conference schedule.  But, in looking at the number of games each team played in each Quad, the schedule discrepancy can't be too great.  

 

 

 

I’d say UTA had just a little more difficult schedule with Sagarin ratings next to each. One team played 1 top 50 team and a total 3 top 100 teams. The other played 3 top 25 teams and a total of 6 top 100 teams.

Little Rock

@: Missouri St (119), Illinois St (209), C Arkansas (247), Memphis (52), NC State (41), N Texas (101)

H: SW Baptist (NR), St. Francis-NY (320) Alcorn St (338), E Tennessee St (51), Tennessee St (257)

UT Arlington 

@: Nevada (65), Oregon (24), Gonzaga (3), Elon (255), Houston (19)

H: TX Dallas (NR), Tulsa (81), Arkansas Tech (NR), N Texas (101), UC Santa Barbara (143)

N: Furman (77)

Based off Sagarin strength:

UALR: 41,51,52,101,119,209,247,257,320,338

UTA: 3,19,24,65,77,81,101,143,255

[5fouls]

3 minutes ago, MPM said:

I’d say UTA had just a little more difficult schedule with Sagarin ratings next to each. One team played 1 top 50 team and a total 3 top 100 teams. The other played 3 top 25 teams and a total of 6 top 100 teams.

Little Rock

@: Missouri St (119), Illinois St (209), C Arkansas (247), Memphis (52), NC State (41), N Texas (101)

H: SW Baptist (NR), St. Francis-NY (320) Alcorn St (338), E Tennessee St (51), Tennessee St (257)

UT Arlington 

@: Nevada (65), Oregon (24), Gonzaga (3), Elon (255), Houston (19)

H: TX Dallas (NR), Tulsa (81), Arkansas Tech (NR), N Texas (101), UC Santa Barbara (143)

N: Furman (77)

Based off Sagarin strength:

UALR: 41,51,52,101,119,209,247,257,320,338

UTA: 3,19,24,65,77,81,101,143,255

Is that enough to rate an 11-16 team ahead of a 18-9 one?  Also, they play in the same conference,. where they presumable play a very similar schedule.  One team is 13-4 (LR) and the other is 9-9 (UTA).