Cyclonepride
Thought Police
Andy Katz has FOUR Big Ten teams in his top 10. Embarrassing, hope that Big Ten Network paycheck gets a bump
2025-2026 MBB computer projections thread
- Thread starter Sigmapolis
- Start date
The updated NET formula has absolutely bastardized Q1 resumes. The number of dog nuts B1G teams that are considered a Q1 road win is gross. NET has turned into a joke.
I was just looking up some of these atrocious NET rankings.
The worst is Northwestern: 13-18 overall, Q1 1-13, Q2 2-4, Q3 5-1, Q4 5-0. NET 70. They have more Q2 losses than wins Q1 AND Q2 wins combined.
Washington isn't much better: 15-16 overall, Q1 2-10, Q2 3-4, Q3 5-2, Q4 5-0. NET 61.
Minnesota is NET 74, and is very similar to Washington, but 1-3 in Q3.
Now the big12 has some bad ones too, ASU is NET 67 despite being 16-15, and Baylor is 48 somehow even though they are 15-15, but they both have 8 Q1 + Q2 wins so more than the B1G teams.
Either way, NET may have been good when it started, and the root of what it's trying to do is still probably good, but it doesn't feel like a relevant system anymore.
and the people who religiously quote quad 1 wins as the holy grail, saying Michigan state and Illinois deserve to be ahead of us. Illinois has northwestern counting as a quad 1 win and Michigan state has Minnesota. Both terrible teams.
I think the main thing hurting ISU right now is strength of schedule, especially in the non-con, compared to Michigan State and Illinois.
But again, the difference between a 2 and 3 seed right now only matters to who you get in the 2nd round, which this year there is not much difference in those teams. Really is going to come down to matchup. If you can tell me we get a 3 seed in the same region that has UConn as the 2 seed, give me the 3 seed. I think out of all the 2 and 3 seed right now, UConn would be my first choice.
But again, the difference between a 2 and 3 seed right now only matters to who you get in the 2nd round, which this year there is not much difference in those teams. Really is going to come down to matchup. If you can tell me we get a 3 seed in the same region that has UConn as the 2 seed, give me the 3 seed. I think out of all the 2 and 3 seed right now, UConn would be my first choice.
I think the chances are low of UNI being are opponent in the first round. I think they will be a 12 or 13 seed most likely. A team I could see us facing is a North Dakota State in a 14x3 game.
Bingo. So many posters on here said it doesn't matter, well it does when the other variables are similar. Quick Google search brought up multiple "bracketologists" in recent years stating this as a differentiator in seed lines.
other things.
Bracketologists are not the committee. Our SOS didn't plummet since the one seed reveal
I hate when they use non-conference strength of schedule. It wasn't like ISU avoided playing quality P5 schools. ISU played six teams that were expected to be tournament teams before the season started. Everyone expected Miss. St, Creighton, and Syracus to be Q1 wins. It just turned out those teams weren't very good this year after all. I could see if ISU had lost some of those games, but ISU took care of business. Why penalize a team because some of the teams they beat early in the season fell flat the rest of the year?
The Big 12 is by far the deepest conference this year. Baylor is a very talented, well-coached team that starts two players projected to be first round picks. They went 6-12 in conference games. I think they at least finish 0.500 in the Big 10 or SEC this year. The only teams that weren't very good in the conference were Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Utah. And even OSU beat Texas A&M (who finished 4th in the SEC) by 24 points. Honestly, I think there are 13 teams in the Big 12 that are good enough to play in the tournament. I'm not saying the conference should get 13 bids, but had those teams played in another conference they may have won enough to earn a bid. (13 out of 16 Big 12 teams are in top 64 of the KenPom as compared to the Big 10 with 10 out of 18)
The ONLY thing that should matter SOS-wise is the overall SOS. Looking at it for the entire season INCLUDES the non-con. All these appeals to non con SOS are just a farce, really.
The best bracketologists do not have biases. And they are the best because they recognize what the committee emphasizes every year. One of the big ones is SOS. The reason they do is because they want top teams to schedule other top teams. They want marquee matchups in Nov and Dec.
For the record I totally agree with you.
If I was trying to explain why the Non Con SOS COULD actually matter.... is this an attempt to even out the giant O and D efficiency metrics bump you get when playing horrible teams? As I understand, those metrics are per possession, and not "capped" or something when you are up 40 points against Alcorn State.
Or are those metrics already adjusted for the strength of the opponent too?
I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying, but I'm telling you, the good bracketologists, who understand what the committee emphasizes, have Iowa St as a 3.
Nebraska, Illinois, and MSU are all benefitting from NW (70) and Minny (74) falling just under that 75/76 cut line while ISU has Okie State (twice) just over it (79).
That means one less Q1 for ISU with the same number of Q2.
MSU's Minny loss barely stays Q1 and the NW win stays Q2 rather than Q3.
Ill's road NW win stays Q1 while home NW and Minny wins stay Q2 rather than Q3.
kNU's road NW and MInny wins stay Q1 while the NW home win stays Q2.
Just a few spots in the NET for those opponents makes a huge difference on paper for these team's resume.
They could offer to play for free and they wouldn't get games. I don't think people have any idea how hard scheduling is at the mid major plus level.
That's nuts, thanks for looking. That's why, as things stand, I don't get Illinois being firmly ahead of Iowa State. one more Q1 win because of fairly arbitrary NET designations, equally average play the last two+ weeks. I suppose their load-bearing win is at Nebraska. If I could talk to the committee behind closed doors and they said Iowa State is basically tied at this point and to disregard who's being projected as the 2 in most brackets I'd be okay, but
Somewhat...but even the ones that 'know what they're doing' didn't have Iowa State as the 4th number 1 seed when the committee top 16 reveal came out.
I have no idea what the committee will do. We very well could be a 3 and if that's the case so be it.
Duke/Michigan/AZ/Florida = 1 seeds
Iowa State/Houston/UCONN/Michigan State/Illinois = fighting for 2 seeds. I don't think anyone else has a 2 seed resume than those 5.
When the reveal was released on Feb. 21:
- Iowa State 4
- UCONN 5
- Houston 6
- Illinois 7
- Michigan State 14
- Iowa State: 2-3 with losses to AZ/BYU/Texas Tech and wins over Utah/ASU
- UCONN: 3-1 with loss to Marquette and wins over SJU/Vill/SH
- Houston: 3-2 with losses to AZ/KU and wins over OSU/Bay/Colo
- Illinois: 2-2 with losses to UCLA/Mich and wins over Oregon/Maryland
- Michigan State: 4-1 with loss to Mich and wins over OSU/Rut/Pur/Ind
Now...I do also think it's splitting hairs...if it's ISU as 8 overall and Illinois 9 overall, the S curve would say we'd be in the same region. And if that's the case, I can see the committee pretty easily being able to flip flop the two teams based on how they do in their conference tourneys and whoever does better/has better wins gets the 2.
Agree. Or they decide to make a point of Illinois having the stronger schedule, especially in the non-con, and put them as the 2.
