2019 North Carolina State???

[Sean Miller Fan]

Ruh roh

Came across this.

22-11, 9-9 in ACC
NET 33

3-9
5-1
6-2
10-0
Road 4-6

SOS 128
Non-con SOS 343

NIT

Very similar to Pitt this year but I didn't look any deeper. That SOS is really low though. Pitt's is 83 though our non-con is 342.

 

[whirlybird optio]

Ruh roh

Came across this.

22-11, 9-9 in ACC
NET 33

3-9
5-1
6-2
10-0
Road 4-6

SOS 128
Non-con SOS 343

NIT

Very similar to Pitt this year but I didn't look any deeper. That SOS is really low though. Pitt's is 83 though our non-con is 342.

Road record and conference record pretty different I would say.

also, our BPI is like 33. That’s really good. It’s on the team sheet. A number like that stands out against other bubble teams. By contrast, NC St was mid 40s in 2019.

 

[upj87]

Ruh roh

Came across this.

22-11, 9-9 in ACC
NET 33

3-9
5-1
6-2
10-0
Road 4-6

SOS 128
Non-con SOS 343

NIT

Very similar to Pitt this year but I didn't look any deeper. That SOS is really low though. Pitt's is 83 though our non-con is 342.

16-2, 16-2, 14-4, 13,5, 12-6, 10-8, 10-8.... you left out the conference records of 7 teams ahead of them in the ACC that year where they finished tied for 8th...

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Road record and conference record pretty different I would say.

also, our BPI is like 33. That’s really good. It’s on the team sheet. A number like that stands out against other bubble teams. By contrast, NC St was mid 40s in 2019.

Road record, yes. But conference record isnt even looked at. I mean they are human so they may know what a team did in their conference but its not on the sheet and not supposed to be considered. I just listed it to give you a comparison to this year's Pitt team. That NET seemed awfully good for their record/quads, which wasnt that good.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

16-2, 16-2, 14-4, 13,5, 12-6, 10-8, 10-8.... you left out the conference records of 7 teams ahead of them in the ACC that year where they finished tied for 8th...

It doesn't make sense that their overall SOS was so low

 

[bayardstreet]

That committee is going to focus on our road record and the over all quality of play in the last 8 weeks. If they do I think we get in. If they don’t the. We will be just like 5 other teams this year that won’t get in and the reasons will be justified

 

[upj87]

That committee is going to focus on our road record and the over all quality of play in the last 8 weeks. If they do I think we get in. If they don’t the. We will be just like 5 other teams this year that won’t get in and the reasons will be justified

uh, yep. Lose on Thursday and everyone should just shut up...Win on Thursday then whining is back on the table..

 

[ChiefJusticeMarshall]

Ruh roh

Came across this.

22-11, 9-9 in ACC
NET 33

3-9
5-1
6-2
10-0
Road 4-6

SOS 128
Non-con SOS 343

NIT

Very similar to Pitt this year but I didn't look any deeper. That SOS is really low though. Pitt's is 83 though our non-con is 342.

Well.......though on the other hand.....the ACC had 6 other teams that had bids that year. Duke, UNC, UVa were 1 seeds, VT was a 4 seed, Louisville was a 7 seed, and Syracuse an 8 seed. So........I am thinking the ACC gets 5 bids. And Pitt/Wake is a play in game.

 

[nycpanther98]

The committee's focus on road wins is the key to our getting in over another bubble team IMO.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

It doesn't make sense that their overall SOS was so low

Here’s something to chew on…we are playing two less OOC games now and replacing them with 2 conference games. And since our 2 extra conference games this year were against top of the ACC teams, that should be mentioned and considered in lieu of just OOC strength alone.

The conference grind is tough enough. We had 4 P5 schools on top of it. We really shouldn’t get dinged by our OOC schedule. But we will.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Here’s something to chew on…we are playing two less OOC games now and replacing them with 2 conference games. And since our 2 extra conference games this year were against top of the ACC teams, that should be mentioned and considered in lieu of just OOC strength alone.

The conference grind is tough enough. We had 4 P5 schools on top of it. We really shouldn’t get dinged by our OOC schedule. But we will.

We needed to predict Huggy drunk driving, Mizzou losing Caleb Grill and tanking after they beat Minnesota, and Oregon State sucking a few years removed from the Elite 8 (well, this one, ok, we shoulda known).

You make a good point about the number of non-cons. We only play 11 now so if you get unlucky with a few of the P6s, you are f*****

But there's a reason why our overall SOS isnt too bad

 

[whirlybird optio]

We needed to predict Huggy drunk driving, Mizzou losing Caleb Grill and tanking after they beat Minnesota, and Oregon State sucking a few years removed from the Elite 8 (well, this one, ok, we shoulda known).

You make a good point about the number of non-cons. We only play 11 now so if you get unlucky with a few of the P6s, you are f*****

But there's a reason why our overall SOS isnt too bad

Our in-league schedule is relatively pretty hard. Played seeds 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10 twice.

Much, much harder League schedules than Wake or UVA.

 

[upj87]

Our in-league schedule is relatively pretty hard. Played seeds 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10 twice.

Much, much harder League schedules than Wake or UVA.

much, much harder? They (Wake) played 2,3,4 twice...not to mention 10 but I'm not sure why that number made the hard list..kind of a wash..

 

[whirlybird optio]

much, much harder? They (Wake) played 2,3,4 twice...not to mention 10 but I'm not sure why that number made the hard list..kind of a wash..

I mean UVA. I shouldn’t have included Wake.

Wake’s Achilles heel, big time, is road record.

Also just interesting that we didn’t play a team from 11-15 twice.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

Our in-league schedule is relatively pretty hard. Played seeds 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10 twice.

Much, much harder League schedules than Wake or UVA.

Needs to be shouted by the rooftops.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Our in-league schedule is relatively pretty hard. Played seeds 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10 twice.

Much, much harder League schedules than Wake or UVA.

We played 15 twice, not 8. That actually hurt us though

 

[whirlybird optio]

We played 15 twice, not 8. That actually hurt us though

Ok I’m an idiot. That’s correct.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

OOC SOS is dumb, yes. Just use overall. However, road games are already factored into the quad records, so that's also kind of double counting.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

OOC SOS is dumb, yes. Just use overall. However, road games are already factored into the quad records, so that's also kind of double counting.

They use OOC SOS for the same reason that they count games in November and December as much as the ones in January and February. The only time a mid-major can schedule a good opponent, in many cases, is in the non-conference. So it's a way to put the mid-majors on a more even footing with the P6.

And there are a lot more mid-majors than there are P6s. So it's no surprise they do things to take away some of the advantages that the P6s have.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

They use OOC SOS for the same reason that they count games in November and December as much as the ones in January and February. The only time a mid-major can schedule a good opponent, in many cases, is in the non-conference. So it's a way to put the mid-majors on a more even footing with the P6.

And there are a lot more mid-majors than there are P6s. So it's no surprise they do things to take away some of the advantages that the P6s have.

I get the logic of only being able to play who's on your schedule once conference play hits, but this is still dumb. Why shouldn't their OOC schedules (1/3 the season) be tougher if, for 2/3 the season, the P6 teams have tougher schedules? If you're playing St. Louis, Rhode Island, Davidson, UMASS, VCU in conference play, then hell yeah your OOC schedule should be tougher than a team in the P6 - and by a lot. You should do everything you can to close the gap on overall SOS, because that should be all that means anything.

I'm not going to be considered for inclusion on the Olympic team because I run the 100 in 13.5 seconds but I work out on the weekends (chopping wood and flipping tires in short cut-off jean shorts and work boots while wearing a plaid flannel, in case anyone's asking), while the guys who run it in 10 seconds take off those days.

Pitt's overall SOS still has to be better, though. I acknowledge that. Though I have to wonder: Was losing to Michigan (blowout), WVU (blowout), VCU, and Vanderbilt while beating Northwestern (blowout) any more impressive than what they did this season? In the eyes of the committee it probably was, but I'm talking about through the lens of common sense.

 

[Pittisit4me]

Are you sure that NET number at 33 is correct? I thought that no team with NET of 37 or less has ever been left out of the NCAA tournament.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Are you sure that NET number at 33 is correct? I thought that no team with NET of 37 or less has ever been left out of the NCAA tournament.

That's what I thought too as I saw something earlier that said 37. But the CBS pod said it was 33 NC State and that checks out. Unless 33 was their post-NCAA/NIT NET which some of these sites list.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Unless 33 was their post-NCAA/NIT NET which some of these sites list.

Since the NCAA does not update the NET rankings after selection Sunday and the NCAA has never revealed the exact formula for figuring out the NET, how does one manage to do that?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I get the logic of only being able to play who's on your schedule once conference play hits, but this is still dumb. Why shouldn't their OOC schedules (1/3 the season) be tougher if, for 2/3 the season, the P6 teams have tougher schedules? If you're playing St. Louis, Rhode Island, Davidson, UMASS, VCU in conference play, then hell yeah your OOC schedule should be tougher than a team in the P6 - and by a lot. You should do everything you can to close the gap on overall SOS, because that should be all that means anything.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but the NCAA would say that they already take into account that you play in the tougher conference because you get a lot more Q1 and Q2 opportunities.

You can nit pick at every facet of what they consider and come up with reasons why that isn't the best metric. Which is why they don't just look at one thing, unlike what some people think. The NET matters. OOC schedule matters. Overall SOS matters. The Qs matter. Road wins matter. The eye test matters. Even though it is not an explicit criteria, I guarantee there are committee members who look at how you are playing at the end of the year versus at the beginning. Toss it all into a big pot, stir it all around, come up with a tournament field.