I took a look into the net rankings today to see if there really is some truth behind Pitt being behind all these other teams. I looked at some stats among different teams, and here’s a few things I found.
Regarding Pitt: NET(44) - 21-10, (12-8), 2-6 in QUAD I, no significant Non Con wins, 1 BAD loss to Missouri.
Colorado State: NET(36) - 22-9 (10-9), 5-6 QUAD 1, good non con wins vs Creighton, Colorado, beat BC by 8. pretty bad loss to Wyoming
St. John’s: NET(38) - 19-12 (11-9), 3-9 in QUAD 1. Like Pitt, no significant non con wins with losses to Michigan and BC, both of which are bottom teams in their conference.
Mississippi State: NET(42) - 19-12 (9-11) 4-8 QUAD 1, good win against Washington State, NW, loss against GTech. 1 QUAD 4 loss
New Mexico: NET(29) - 22-8 (11-9) 2-6 QUAD 1, best win is San Diego State and they beat Nevada. Lost to QUAD 4 Air Force
Of all 4 teams here, Colorado state is the 1 team, in my opinion, who has a better resume than Pitt. One more win, only one bad loss, beat other teams who they needed to beat. But take a look at NM, who is 29. They have an identical QUAD 1 record to Pitt, and they have a loss 5x worse than a Nov. 28 loss to Missouri: Air Force. Mississippi state and St. John’s both have more games against Q1, but neither have strong records (very close if not identical win percentages) and like Pitt, both have one BAD loss, and they both also lost to an ACC team that is in the bottom half of the ACC.
I’m definitely a biased fan, but I also like to think I know my basketball. Even when I look at the rankings using NET, I still don’t see how some of these teams are ranked ahead of Pitt. The Missouri loss really does hurt, because if they win that one, they don’t have a single loss where you can look and say “oh that’s a really bad one” but I still think this is some total bs. The 29th overall NET team lost to Air Force in February, while our bad loss was in November. It’s just infuriating to see other conference’s teams lose a game and then move down 1-3 spots, yet when Pitt lost 2 QUAD 1 games, they moved down about 15 spots according to Lunardi and some other bracketologists. hopefully, some of these other teams finally drop to where they should be if they go one and done in their conference tourneys.
Pitt feels a lot like Clemson from last year. Good season but lack of non con wins and bad bad loss or 2 did them in. That Clemson team won game 1 against the 6 seed and then lost in the ACC semi’s to UVA. Pitt will be in this same situation, and I think the road to the tourney is to win 2 games. Based off past precedent, one won’t be enough, but getting the first and then beating a top 10 team in the country should be a large enough boost, especially when they’ve been playing so well.
We will see what happens, but just win 2 games, and they have no argument to keep you out. In the end, it’s as simple as that.
Regarding Pitt: NET(44) - 21-10, (12-8), 2-6 in QUAD I, no significant Non Con wins, 1 BAD loss to Missouri.
Colorado State: NET(36) - 22-9 (10-9), 5-6 QUAD 1, good non con wins vs Creighton, Colorado, beat BC by 8. pretty bad loss to Wyoming
St. John’s: NET(38) - 19-12 (11-9), 3-9 in QUAD 1. Like Pitt, no significant non con wins with losses to Michigan and BC, both of which are bottom teams in their conference.
Mississippi State: NET(42) - 19-12 (9-11) 4-8 QUAD 1, good win against Washington State, NW, loss against GTech. 1 QUAD 4 loss
New Mexico: NET(29) - 22-8 (11-9) 2-6 QUAD 1, best win is San Diego State and they beat Nevada. Lost to QUAD 4 Air Force
Of all 4 teams here, Colorado state is the 1 team, in my opinion, who has a better resume than Pitt. One more win, only one bad loss, beat other teams who they needed to beat. But take a look at NM, who is 29. They have an identical QUAD 1 record to Pitt, and they have a loss 5x worse than a Nov. 28 loss to Missouri: Air Force. Mississippi state and St. John’s both have more games against Q1, but neither have strong records (very close if not identical win percentages) and like Pitt, both have one BAD loss, and they both also lost to an ACC team that is in the bottom half of the ACC.
I’m definitely a biased fan, but I also like to think I know my basketball. Even when I look at the rankings using NET, I still don’t see how some of these teams are ranked ahead of Pitt. The Missouri loss really does hurt, because if they win that one, they don’t have a single loss where you can look and say “oh that’s a really bad one” but I still think this is some total bs. The 29th overall NET team lost to Air Force in February, while our bad loss was in November. It’s just infuriating to see other conference’s teams lose a game and then move down 1-3 spots, yet when Pitt lost 2 QUAD 1 games, they moved down about 15 spots according to Lunardi and some other bracketologists. hopefully, some of these other teams finally drop to where they should be if they go one and done in their conference tourneys.
Pitt feels a lot like Clemson from last year. Good season but lack of non con wins and bad bad loss or 2 did them in. That Clemson team won game 1 against the 6 seed and then lost in the ACC semi’s to UVA. Pitt will be in this same situation, and I think the road to the tourney is to win 2 games. Based off past precedent, one won’t be enough, but getting the first and then beating a top 10 team in the country should be a large enough boost, especially when they’ve been playing so well.
We will see what happens, but just win 2 games, and they have no argument to keep you out. In the end, it’s as simple as that.
