Whar Big10? Such an elite conference, must be a mistake with nothing included.
They don't drop or move even when they lose. You have enough good teams in a league and it makes the bad ones rise in their formula by just playing the games. Last Big Ten had it too. There was like 7-17 type teams in the top 100.
Quad 1 wins are based off Net Rankings which you believe to be flawed is my point. I agree Iowa State should be higher in any rankings/seeding right nowIowa State has dropped at least two or three spots every time they've lost. Hell last night they picked up a Q1 road win and only moved up two spots. Iowa State has 6 Q1 wins and zero bad losses and that should matter more.
Hopefully it will. They highlight the quad wins and losses for a reason. This is from the NCAAs own web page:Iowa State has dropped at least two or three spots every time they've lost. Hell last night they picked up a Q1 road win and only moved up two spots. Iowa State has 6 Q1 wins and zero bad losses and that should matter more.
Hopefully it will. They highlight the quad wins and losses for a reason. This is from the NCAAs own web page:
"The number of Quadrant 1 wins and Quadrant 3/4 losses will be incredibly important when it comes time for NCAA tournament selection and seeding."
So in a way, we should want Iowa's # to remain fairly high -- the fact the relative placement seems skewed right now is mainly just an annoyance.
And that's what people need to keep in mind -- the actual ranking should become more and more reflective as season progresses (it'll have some flaws, I'm sure) ... Quadrant results have more impact.
So in a way, we should want Iowa's # to remain fairly high -- the fact the relative placement seems skewed right now is mainly just an annoyance.
You won't see big swings in the model now, there are too many data points.
How about Houston at #3 when they're 0-2 in Quad 1. NET seems completely worthless to me.
If you look at the actual calculations, the OE number always comes out higher than the DE number. For some reason, the calculation gives more weight to the OE number. To be honest, ISU being around 26 seems to be just about right for tourney seeding...a 6-7. Their OE is crap, by the DE and quad 1 wins raise the seed.ISU and Wisconsin are the major underranked outliers. Iowa and Texas have been major ovverranked outliers.
Why I'm not sure. I don't think it's even net efficiency, as these are not different enough between the four teams to overtake the massive difference in Q1 performance.
The only explanation can be that it has a huge over weighting in offensive efficiency, still has a preseason bias built in or both. Either way, those are stupid things. Favoring a specific style of play to this extent is of course idiotic. Having preseason bias baked in 20 games into the season in a sport where massive turnover occurs is also idiotic.
In general I like the NET rankings, but there are some details of it that are clearly causing outliers. And that's OK, provided those outliers are treated as such by the committees. In the past it seems they have, but I do get annoyed when AP voters do things like interchangeably tweet about the #X BEST team then use overall KP rankings while there is a big preseason bias still included, a heavy weighting on how efficient you were in beating Jackson State, and it cares that you beat a terrible team ranked #230th instead of a terrible team ranked #340th.
Yeah, I just never understood why efficiency numbers have much weight at all as the season winds down. After conf. tournaments, some of these cross-conference challenges, you've got a hell of a lot of data on, you know, actual wins and losses and SoS. The fact that Iowa keeps playing starters to bloat their offensive efficiency vs. Western Michigan, or throws the press on with their starters vs. Wisconsin's walk-ons to salvage an ass-kicking doesn't seem like something that should be helping a team.If you look at the actual calculations, the OE number always comes out higher than the DE number. For some reason, the calculation gives more weight to the OE number. To be honest, ISU being around 26 seems to be just about right for tourney seeding...a 6-7. Their OE is crap, by the DE and quad 1 wins raise the seed.