• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2023-2024 NCAA Men's Basketball Thread

In 2023, the NET ranked teams #38, 40, 43, 44, 46, 47, 52, and 54 did not get at-large bids. Meanwhile, NET ranked teams #67, 66, 56, 50, 49, 48, 45 all did get at-large bids.

The NET does not single-handedly decide which teams get in off the bubble. Each team’s individual resume outside of their NET ranking absolutely matters. This narrative that your bubble chances are fully and completely dependent on the NET just isn’t true. If Wake wins some big games and has the quality resume, they’ll be in even if the NET ranking is seemingly too low.
 
Deaconblue said:
I think there are reasons for this. It is the massive driver determining at-large bids for the NCAA Tournament. Used to be a bunch of guys did that after the season. NET is updated in near real time. So all the data from games across the country is rapidly compiled and the impacts on all teams are known quickly.

It's no longer about a particular team's resume. It's how where that resume stands with the resumes of 360+ other teams.
Click to expand...
But none of the NET stuff matters until the last week, and it has always been about a team's resume against everyone else. There is just more quantifiable data now, instead of having to look at a schedule to see the high points and low points and then do the same for 50 other teams and then having to figure out if a loss at Richmond is better or worse than a loss at JMU.
 
I just cannot believe that Clemson is ahead of us in the net and they have lost 4 out of their last 6. This net thing is ridiculous.
 
Haros said:
Counterpoint: It’ll give us a Q1 win when we win there in 10 days.
Click to expand...
They’ll drop down to Q2 (for us and Duke) after we beat them by 10.

In determining Q1 wins, we should calculate the ranking as of those two teams didn’t play (such that winning at the number 80 team could be a Q1 win for a team that pounded that #80 team, but not necessarily for a team that beat them by 1) but that’s another story
 
The Q1 movement is evidence that metrics don't count all games the same. It measures your team at the time of the game against the opponent as they end up in March.
 
I know it’s been brought up before but I hate how the metric crap is impacting games. Wake should have had the bench in with more than 2 minutes to go and won by 10-15. Instead Forbes has to leave in guys to boost the margin of victory. I do not blame him one bit but it is sad that this is where we are. At least they share a video talking about good sportsmanship before the games.
 
Memphis just took their second bad loss of the week (USF and Tulane).

Grand Canyon losing last night was an under the radar bog loss for bubble teams. Only their second of the season and they have a couple of real wins — so it’s good (for other bubble teams) that they lost the game they were most likely to lose and won’t finish WAC play undefeated.

Cal and Stanford beating the Washington’s should help.

Saint Mary’s beating San Francisco basically ends the Dons chances early. Good metrics but zero good wins and running out of chances.
 
Mt. Olive said:
I know it’s been brought up before but I hate how the metric crap is impacting games. Wake should have had the bench in with more than 2 minutes to go and won by 10-15. Instead Forbes has to leave in guys to boost the margin of victory. I do not blame him one bit but it is sad that this is where we are. At least they share a video talking about good sportsmanship before the games.
Click to expand...
Technically not boosting the margin of victory, but maintaining the offensive/defensive efficiency on a per possession basis.
 
FAU trailed at KP #282 UTSA by 3 with 16 seconds left. UTSA fouled a 3-point shooter for FAU, who converted all 3.

UTSA then jumped out to a 3-point lead in OT, before FAU woke up to win by 9 in OT.
 
I don’t understand what the problem is with Pitt’s NET improving after beating Duke on the road. Wake also has wins against lower ranked teams, and those previous wins would gain value if those opponents then defeated us later on, because that helps prove that opponent was more competitive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top