NET Rankings

[NorthCyd]

The Big XII looks to be the strongest conference top to bottom, at least as far as the NET is concerned cerned. All but one team is in the top 100, and TCU is just outside at 115. That's pretty crazy. It's also great because there won't be a lot of opportunit for bad losses. It almost removes the possibility of quad 4 losses in conference assuming nobody falls apart. Even if ISU loses to Iowa they will be in a great position if they can go undefeated through the rest of the non-con.

 

[HFCS]

The Big XII looks to be the strongest conference top to bottom, at least as far as the NET is concerned cerned. All but one team is in the top 100, and TCU is just outside at 115. That's pretty crazy. It's also great because there won't be a lot of opportunit for bad losses. It almost removes the possibility of quad 4 losses in conference assuming nobody falls apart. Even if ISU loses to Iowa they will be in a great position if they can go undefeated through the rest of the non-con.

We've been the strongest conference by quite a wide margin since the day dead weight Nebraska/CU left. Replacing them with WVU was a massive improvement, TCU improved pretty quickly as well.

Only having ten teams has made this reality hard for the math challenged national media to ever acknowledge.

Once again looking like 60-80% of the conference will be NCAA tourney teams.

Just imagine if the ACC or Big Ten were getting 10 or 11 teams in regularly which is what they'd need to be as deep as a typical Big 12 season.

 

[NoCreativity]

Starting with Iowa on Thursday. Honestly I'm not somebody that gets into the importance of beating them on some sort of emotional level, but this noncon schedule right now which I thought was going to be really tough just is pretty weak. That's our last chance for a statement win in the noncon. But again everything this team is accomplishing should be celebrated.

Jfc, we hadn't even beaten a Power 5 team in almost 2 years. Now we go 3-0 against them including a road win(which we haven't had I'm 2 years) along with beating the #9 team and that's not good enough for some people.

Nobody thought we would be undefeated at thai point and we've actually played a good non-conf schedule and people will still complain.

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

Pretty interesting. Iowa at number 9 is surprising, but they look like a great team using the eye test as well. Will be a tough tough challenge this week. Beat the hawks.

Got my ticket last week. I was already frothing at the mouth before we beat Creighton.

 

[LivntheCyLife]

I've read where the fact that all of the "scrub" teams are 300+ really hurts our SOS, but do ADs really know if Arkansas-Pine Bluff is going to be #326 or #251 before the season starts? That's always confused me.

AD/coach could probably do an average NET estimate by conference and gauge it informally. No way to pinpoint exact slot, but could get a reliable/expected range.

I'm not sure to what length they go for scheduling purposes, but if you're getting SWAC/Southland/MEAC level opponents you could expect mid-250s or lower ... exception might be if there's an outlier standout program (Gonzaga in WCC; New Mexico State in WAC, et. al.)

The SWAC, Southland, and MEAC are pretty consistently the 3 worst conferences. I'd be curious about the financials but man it seems like ISU schedules the SWAC way too much. Love to see more Horizon, Summit, or Ohio Valley teams.

 

[LivntheCyLife]

For NET purposes, beating them by 10 is better than 9, but no different than 50.

I'm pretty sure it still helps your offensive/defensive efficiency to beat a team by 50 as that goes into the NET.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

I'm pretty sure it still helps your offensive/defensive efficiency to beat a team by 50 as that goes into the NET.

The biggest problem with NET is that the NCAA won't release how it is calculated. We know that there are built in weights such as the 4 quadrants, road wins, and a +10 margin but the rest is a gigantic mystery.

 

[WhoISthis]

Iowa won at Virginia, played a close true road game against the current #1, and have blown the doors off all the other competition they have played. The teams ISU has beat haven't exactly been helping them out, and ISU has had a few close games at home to some bad teams. All that stuff is factored in to the score. As excited as we all were for the OSU win, they are turning out to be terrible and only beating them by 10 isn't doing us any favors in these rankings.

How close was that Purdue game?

I don't follow Iowa well enough to know whether #9 is too high, but that Purdue game wasn't close imo. Kind of a backdoor cover imo. Win probability for Purdue never below 75%.


Fran does a great job with that program though. And they'll play as though it for a trip to the Final Four when facing Iowa St.

 

[cyfan92]

We need Xavier, Creighton and Memphis to really turn it on and get all of those wins into Q1

 

[Pat]

I'm pretty sure it still helps your offensive/defensive efficiency to beat a team by 50 as that goes into the NET.

That’s fair, to a point. They use adjusted efficiency, so, in theory, beating up on a bad opponent doesn’t do as much, and a big margin in a high-possession game isn’t as valuable as a low possession game. How everything is calculated is a big mystery (presumably because the algorithm is built to give Duke an advantage), but the NCAA has said that margin of victory is a favor, but only up to 10 points.

 

[HFCS]

Jfc, we hadn't even beaten a Power 5 team in almost 2 years. Now we go 3-0 against them including a road win(which we haven't had I'm 2 years) along with beating the #9 team and that's not good enough for some people.

Nobody thought we would be undefeated at thai point and we've actually played a good non-conf schedule and people will still complain.

big 12 round robin guarantees a strong sos, beating Iowa would be great but we’ve done exactly what is needed inour non conf, getting that true road win at Creighton was big.

 

[BryceC]

The biggest problem with NET is that the NCAA won't release how it is calculated. We know that there are built in weights such as the 4 quadrants, road wins, and a +10 margin but the rest is a gigantic mystery.

There is a reason for that, they don’t want people gaming the system like they did with the RPI. I think they are much more open about it than things like Kenpom and everything.

College basketball's NET rankings, explained

Here's everything you need to know about college basketball's NET ranking system.

www.ncaa.com

That said, it's pretty easy to see what it is. It's a predictive model for sure, but it includes actual results which I like.

NET ranking for ISU is 20. Massey is #27. Torvik without Preseason rankings is #28. These things are all pretty close honestly.

 

[MartyFine]

 

[cyclones500]

The SWAC, Southland, and MEAC are pretty consistently the 3 worst conferences. I'd be curious about the financials but man it seems like ISU schedules the SWAC way too much. Love to see more Horizon, Summit, or Ohio Valley teams.

Even if we scheduled some typically low-end schools from those leagues and SOS didn't rise much, scheduling from those conferences at least brings some variety of opponents. Doesn't seem like even a lot of variance within SWAC, for example -- a lot of Mississippi Valley, Jackson State, UAPB in recent seasons (as well as Chicago State from WAC), it seems (without glancing at schedules, off the top of my head).

I wonder if ISU (and other schools) have some sort of open-ended agreement for X number of games within a specified # of years(?) Total guess. I'm curious.

There are plenty of leagues just above low-level that could be tapped - Northeast, Big Sky, and such.

 

[HFCS]

Sagarin is slow to remove last year’s data like Kenpom but we are #10 in its “recent” component. (62 overall including some data from last year still)

I actually think Sagarin is a better indicator of resume/results than kenpom which wasn’t intended to be that but is typically used as such.

 

[Gunnerclone]

Jfc, we hadn't even beaten a Power 5 team in almost 2 years. Now we go 3-0 against them including a road win(which we haven't had I'm 2 years) along with beating the #9 team and that's not good enough for some people.

Nobody thought we would be undefeated at thai point and we've actually played a good non-conf schedule and people will still complain.

And would we have those bigger wins without the smaller wins? If we’re a 7 seed instead of a 6 seed (just for example) because of our NET quadrant wins then so ******* be it. I know some people will melt down but those are the same people that melt down when their McDonalds cheeseburger comes with pickles when they explicitly asked for no pickles.

 

[dahliaclone]

How close was that Purdue game?

I don't follow Iowa well enough to know whether #9 is too high, but that Purdue game wasn't close imo. Kind of a backdoor cover imo. Win probability for Purdue never below 75%.


Fran does a great job with that program though. And they'll play as though it for a trip to the Final Four when facing Iowa St.

Iowa cut a 19 (or maybe it was 21?) point second half lead down to 2 late. I think Iowa went on a like 30-7 run in the final 8 minutes. I watched most of it...once Purdue got up nearly 20 they kind of went into coast mode. Credit Iowa for not giving up.

Very interested to see how they do against Illinois in Carver tonight. Illinois was out key players earlier but they are looking salty now.

 

[cyclones500]

And would we have those bigger wins without the smaller wins? If we’re a 7 seed instead of a 6 seed (just for example) because of our NET quadrant wins then so ******* be it. I know some people will melt down but those are the same people that melt down when their McDonalds cheeseburger comes with pickles when they explicitly asked for no pickles.

It would only become a "worry" if we wind up in bubble territory and the XII results aren't enough. Obviously you'd want to boost the resume wherever possible along the way, but the Memphis/Oregon State details will become less and less essential in the big picture.

 

[Cydkar]

For NET purposes, beating them by 10 is better than 9, but no different than 50.

Which is so dumb.

 

[bawbie]

How close was that Purdue game?

I don't follow Iowa well enough to know whether #9 is too high, but that Purdue game wasn't close imo. Kind of a backdoor cover imo. Win probability for Purdue never below 75%.

Iowa went on a big run and cut the Purdue lead to 2 with just under 3 minutes left. The win probability was down to 67% at that point. I was watching it live, it was very close.