NCAA NET 23-24

[13th&Jackson]

I know this has been posted in several threads, but this should have it's own thread for the rest of the season. IU checks in at #137 in first ranking. 

https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-net-rankings

All about who you play and how close you played them. TN at #17 is 4-3, 1-3 in Quad 1, but have single digit losses to Purdue, Kansas and UNC, with a win over #26 WI. 

 

[FKIM01]

Just win and the NET will eventually take care of itself.

[13th&Jackson]

3 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

Just win and the NET will eventually take care of itself.

True, but it doesn't help that a road game at MI is currently a Quad 2 game and a home win over MD was a Quad 4 win!

[Drroogh]

10 minutes ago, 13th&Jackson said:

True, but it doesn't help that a road game at MI is currently a Quad 2 game and a home win over MD was a Quad 4 win!

Honest Question, last year UNC started #1 and then nosedived. Did the teams playing them as Quad 1 at the beginning of the season still get credit for Quad 1 at the end of season??

[13th&Jackson]

2 minutes ago, Drroogh said:

Honest Question, last year UNC started #1 and then nosedived. Did the teams playing them as Quad 1 at the beginning of the season still get credit for Quad 1 at the end of season??

As I understand it, it re-rates daily. So, If a team that was rated highly tanks, the quality of the win goes down. Would be the same in reverse. 

[IUJoe]

6 minutes ago, Drroogh said:

Honest Question, last year UNC started #1 and then nosedived. Did the teams playing them as Quad 1 at the beginning of the season still get credit for Quad 1 at the end of season??

No, the quad records use current rankings all season.

[IUFLA]

Too bad basketball courts aren't made with this...

Then we could play them ALL on paper  

[13th&Jackson]

11 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

Too bad basketball courts aren't made with this...

Then we could play them ALL on paper  

Florida St. just got a very harsh lesson about football games being played on paper and in file servers

[BGleas]

🤣🤣

 

 

[bluegrassIU]

1 hour ago, 13th&Jackson said:

True, but it doesn't help that a road game at MI is currently a Quad 2 game and a home win over MD was a Quad 4 win!

I would expect that will change as the season goes on. 

Maryland has talent, surely they can win some darn games.  Lol

[13th&Jackson]

4 minutes ago, bluegrassIU said:

I would expect that will change as the season goes on. 

Maryland has talent, surely they can win some darn games.  Lol

[bluegrassIU]

Well, than seriously Maryland can win some games?

[rogue3542]

I hate how the quads re-arrange themselves every day.  It's a very disingenuous feature of the NET.  You should get credit for how good that team was when you played them - and I understand that can be challenging to rank teams with these advanced statistical models earlier than halfway through the season.

Take for example football.  If you played Maryland in September this year (or any year really), it's more akin to playing Ohio State.  Play them later in October, not so much.

Same thing in basketball.  Playing Purdue in November vs late February.

A team that lost it's star players and plummeted down the rankings by the end of the season shouldn't negate how great a win over them early in the season was.

[Kdug]

6 minutes ago, rogue3542 said:

I hate how the quads re-arrange themselves every day.  It's a very disingenuous feature of the NET.  You should get credit for how good that team was when you played them - and I understand that can be challenging to rank teams with these advanced statistical models earlier than halfway through the season.

Take for example football.  If you played Maryland in September this year (or any year really), it's more akin to playing Ohio State.  Play them later in October, not so much.

Same thing in basketball.  Playing Purdue in November vs late February.

A team that lost it's star players and plummeted down the rankings by the end of the season shouldn't negate how great a win over them early in the season was.

In theory I agree with you. But it’s incredibly difficult to quantify how good a team is in a particular moment vs a whole season. We’re already working with a relatively small sample of 35 or so games for each team, you start filtering that down into smaller chunks and saying team X was the #1 team in 7 early season games, but the number #22 team in 7 late season games and you’d start getting a lot of randomness.

[13th&Jackson]

This is a good article from The Atlantic regarding the NET:

https://theathletic.com/5096436/2023/12/01/net-ncaa-basketball-tournament-rankings-selection/?amp=1

The following is where I don’t think the IU athletic department and coaching staff have been strategic with their scheduling and the approach to games. It’s a fine line between developing a team early and posting big wins. I understand CMW’s philosophy, which has an NBA element, that a win is a win, but CBB is a different animal. I’ve argued in favor of scheduling winnable  neutral court and road games that will be Quad 1 games. Nothing statistically is gained from playing a neutral court game against UConn or a home game against Kansas. A neutral court game against Missouri would be a better strategic option. 

“The Mountain West, for example, changed its scheduling philosophy to avoid playing Quad 4 games and strengthen the league’s resumes so that once conference games began, all boats would be lifted. It worked brilliantly last season, as the conference got three at-large bids. Many coaches privately say that they instruct their teams to play hard until the end of blowouts, sometimes leaving starters in longer than necessary, to protect their efficiency numbers. Of course, there’s one formula that remains tried and true no matter what rankings system is in place: schedule hard and perform well.”

“You’ve got to win games, but you have to win the right games, too,” Wake Forest coach Steve Forbes says. “The metric has changed the whole thing over the last five years, and I’ve noticed it. You try to do the best that you can do.”

[BruceDouglas]

NET has no preseason starting point, it's all done from scratch so will take even more time than pomeroy, etc to make sense. Don't know why they even bother to release this before January.

 

1 hour ago, rogue3542 said:

I hate how the quads re-arrange themselves every day.  It's a very disingenuous feature of the NET.  You should get credit for how good that team was when you played them - and I understand that can be challenging to rank teams with these advanced statistical models earlier than halfway through the season.

Take for example football.  If you played Maryland in September this year (or any year really), it's more akin to playing Ohio State.  Play them later in October, not so much.

Same thing in basketball.  Playing Purdue in November vs late February.

A team that lost it's star players and plummeted down the rankings by the end of the season shouldn't negate how great a win over them early in the season was.

Well you really can't do that. How would you rank the very first games of the season?

My only complaint is the arbitrary nature of the quadrants, i.e. beating a top 30 team at home is a Q1 win, beating #32 is Q2. Not to mention beating #1 is the same as beating #30? I know they've tried to do this with the Q1 "A" and Q1 "B" tiers, but that just points out the problem. The NCAA wants to hang on to this "resume" type comparison for the committee to have something to do I guess.

[IUCrazy2]

4 hours ago, 13th&Jackson said:

This is a good article from The Atlantic regarding the NET:

https://theathletic.com/5096436/2023/12/01/net-ncaa-basketball-tournament-rankings-selection/?amp=1

The following is where I don’t think the IU athletic department and coaching staff have been strategic with their scheduling and the approach to games. It’s a fine line between developing a team early and posting big wins. I understand CMW’s philosophy, which has an NBA element, that a win is a win, but CBB is a different animal. I’ve argued in favor of scheduling winnable  neutral court and road games that will be Quad 1 games. Nothing statistically is gained from playing a neutral court game against UConn or a home game against Kansas. A neutral court game against Missouri would be a better strategic option. 

“The Mountain West, for example, changed its scheduling philosophy to avoid playing Quad 4 games and strengthen the league’s resumes so that once conference games began, all boats would be lifted. It worked brilliantly last season, as the conference got three at-large bids. Many coaches privately say that they instruct their teams to play hard until the end of blowouts, sometimes leaving starters in longer than necessary, to protect their efficiency numbers. Of course, there’s one formula that remains tried and true no matter what rankings system is in place: schedule hard and perform well.”

“You’ve got to win games, but you have to win the right games, too,” Wake Forest coach Steve Forbes says. “The metric has changed the whole thing over the last five years, and I’ve noticed it. You try to do the best that you can do.”

It may be good for NET but no one gives a shhh about a neutral site game against Missouri...

[13th&Jackson]

9 hours ago, IUCrazy2 said:

It may be good for NET but no one gives a shhh about a neutral site game against Missouri...

Oh, I think you’d get a much bigger crowd against MO in Chicago or St Louis than the 8k who showed up in Indy for Harvard

Or, how about W VA in Cinci or Columbus?

Those would be good neutral site games

Edited December 5, 2023 by 13th&Jackson

[IUCrazy2]

1 hour ago, 13th&Jackson said:

Oh, I think you’d get a much bigger crowd against MO in Chicago or St Louis than the 8k who showed up in Indy for Harvard

Or, how about W VA in Cinci or Columbus?

Those would be good neutral site games

Harvard was bad scheduling in Indianapolis.  Any neutral sire game I would do would be there.  You want to replace that Harvard game with a Missouri, fine.  However, the UConn game was part of a tournament so we had no control over that.  The Kansas game rewards season ticket holders with a team that has a pulse in the preseason.  A #90 NET Northwest Southeastern State isn't a draw.

The other issue you have is that those types of teams are often unicorns.  You cannot gauge from year to year how good they are going to be.  So setting those games up beforehand becomes a crap shoot.  It is easier for a non-P5 team to go out and get those games because they are the roadkill that P5 teams are usually looking for.  Almost anyone they play is going to be a positive for their NET.

Just win games.  That takes care of everything.

Edited December 5, 2023 by IUCrazy2

[go_iu_bb]

15 hours ago, rogue3542 said:

I hate how the quads re-arrange themselves every day.  It's a very disingenuous feature of the NET.  You should get credit for how good that team was when you played them - and I understand that can be challenging to rank teams with these advanced statistical models earlier than halfway through the season.

Take for example football.  If you played Maryland in September this year (or any year really), it's more akin to playing Ohio State.  Play them later in October, not so much.

Same thing in basketball.  Playing Purdue in November vs late February.

A team that lost it's star players and plummeted down the rankings by the end of the season shouldn't negate how great a win over them early in the season was.

It works both ways. It hurts if you beat a team that is thought to be good then the wheels come off on their season and they end up with a terrible record. It helps if you beat a team that isn't thought to be good at the time which then ends up having a great season.

Early in the season especially it's hard to say if it's a good win or not. It's not uncommon for a team to start out ranked and then miss the tournament nor is it uncommon for a team thought to be terrible have a great season and make the tournament.

Should teams really get credit for beating a bad team just because it was thought at the time to be a good team? Should they be penalized for beating a good team that was thought to be bad?

Yes, injuries happen that can drastically change a team. How would you differentiate between that and teams who just don't play well?

[13th&Jackson]

10 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

Harvard was bad scheduling in Indianapolis.  Any neutral sire game I would do would be there.  You want to replace that Harvard game with a Missouri, fine.  However, the UConn game was part of a tournament so we had no control over that.  The Kansas game rewards season ticket holders with a team that has a pulse in the preseason.  A #90 NET Northwest Southeastern State isn't a draw.

The other issue you have is that those types of teams are often unicorns.  You cannot gauge from year to year how good they are going to be.  So setting those games up beforehand becomes a crap shoot.  It is easier for a non-P5 team to go out and get those games because they are the roadkill that P5 teams are usually looking for.  Almost anyone they play is going to be a positive for their NET.

Just win games.  That takes care of everything.

The problem with Indy games is that the NET considers those to be home games. The Harvard game is being counted as home, 

[Reacher]

2 hours ago, 13th&Jackson said:

Oh, I think you’d get a much bigger crowd against MO in Chicago or St Louis than the 8k who showed up in Indy for Harvard

Or, how about W VA in Cinci or Columbus?

Those would be good neutral site games

Living in IL, I would love a neutral court game in Chicago. Especially in years where IU doesn't play at Northwestern or Chicago doesn't host the BTT, there should be a game for Chicago area alumni and exposure to Chicago media and recruits. If the tickets are priced fairly, it would sell out easily.

[Parakeet Jones]

54 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

 A #90 NET Northwest Southeastern State isn't a draw.

 

Dang, they are higher in the NET than we are.  

[KoB2011]

2 hours ago, 13th&Jackson said:

The problem with Indy games is that the NET considers those to be home games. The Harvard game is being counted as home, 

That's not true of all Indy games. The Harvard game was considered a home game because it was a home game that IU opted to play in Indy, but the Crossroads Classic games were always considered neutral, even for Butler. 

 

[IUCrazy2]

3 hours ago, 13th&Jackson said:

The problem with Indy games is that the NET considers those to be home games. The Harvard game is being counted as home, 

Which is dumb IMO.

Just selfishly, IU is an Indiana state school.  I don't like the idea of giving away games (and the economic benefits around them) to Illinois or Ohio just to try and game the NCAA's stupid system.  

If another school wants to invite us somewhere to play neutral, whatever, but I would be pissy if we played Missouri in Chicago and gave all the economic benefits of that game from our traveling fan base to Illinois.  I believe the school still has some responsibility to the state.