A truly good team... #25 Fla Atlantic
- Thread starter Dewey Eye
- Start date
There are not many truly scary teams in college this year. Maybe Alabama, Houston. I dont know
This pitt team can make the Sweet 16
This pitt team can make the Sweet 16
I think the coolest thing.....I am watching college basketball again!!!! I love how we are in the. mix and all of these games mean something now.
Dont know him but winning at a place like that in a decent mid-major league is impressive. Things will get tougher in the American next year though it will be a watered down American. Basically Memphis + a bunch of mid-majors. Not even sure I could categorize it as a high major league anymore.
There is all this talk about how terrible being 8 or 9 seed is ... Bama and Houston and Purdue are good (who else is even in contention for a #1 seed? UCLA, Kansas, Texas, UVA I guess?) but I think they all could be beat.
At this point, my attitude is just keep the disrespect coming and we will continue to prove everyone wrong.
We beat Wake at home so if they hold 75 or higher it's quad 2 win for us instead of quad 3 which is nice.
LOL
OK, losing by 31 to 12-14 South Alabama is really bad but 1 blowout vs a bad team causing you to drop 18 spots this late is so stupid. I am just shocked they've been using this for years while we haven't been paying attention. This is so bad.
Lets say Pitt has a bad game vs GT. They shoot 13-21 from 3. We shoot 3 for 25 and they beat us by 30. That puts us out of the tournament for the time being because our NET would fall 15 spots. If we lost by 1, it probably falls by 3-4.
Also, I swear college basketball people have to be the dumbest on the planet. I've paid more attention to college basketball this season than any time post-Dixon and I hear all the talking heads complaining about NET and saying they dont understand it. It took us a week to figure it out. Its scoring margins. I think if these guys knew that or could figure that out, there would be riots at the NCAA Headquarters. They are making NCAAT decisions based on scoring margins and not win/loss results.
To be a little more precise, they're making NCAAT decisions on both, but placing more emphasis on margin of victory/defeat than many of us think is appropriate.
I hate it because it has changed the way a knowledgeable college basketball fan has to follow the sport. The win/loss result isnt as important as it used to be and is less important than any other American sport. Moral victories are pretty close to being real actual victories. A close loss against an elite team should be celebrated now. A buzzer beater win vs a really bad team should cause a message board meltdown like its a loss. This so un-American. We need someone to Make College Basketball Great Again.
Would of course prefer that they shared the criteria that went into the model and were open to review and comment in order to improve that model, but I don't think it's nefarious or un-American. I think it's much closer to something along the lines of them wanting to select a field of the most deserving teams using a reasonable set of criteria. NET seems reasonably good, but certainly not perfect which is why I'm glad other criteria are taken into consideration.
I dont think scoring margin should factor in at all. All that should matter is whether you won or lost.
Haven't thought it through, but probably agree. How do you measure the significance of a 1 point win/loss vs a >1 point win/loss? Should there be a difference b/t 10 and 20? 10 and 30? How much of a difference? If a player was hurt at the time how should that be taken into account? It seems difficult to come up with something that is better than simply wins/losses. But again, not a statistician and have not thought about it for longer than it took to type this response. Other perspectives welcomed.
I still remember years ago when Herbstreit brought a laptop onto Gameday and threw it in the trash. If I recall correctly, it was because of issues with factoring in margin of victory. At the time, I believe BCS standings were determined 50% by polls and 50% by a mixture of a few of the computer rankings, or something along those lines. I think after this, the computer rankings were ordered to no longer factor in margin of victory. Sounds eerily similar to the problems with NET in college basketball right now.
Of course, I think eliminating all consideration of margin of victory for the BCS computers ended being problematic as well. There needs to be some sort of system that better evaluates end-of-game scenarios.
Of course, I think eliminating all consideration of margin of victory for the BCS computers ended being problematic as well. There needs to be some sort of system that better evaluates end-of-game scenarios.
I don’t think “most deserving” should be based on how good a formula or a human thinks a team is. I think it should only be based on winning. Losing a close game should be worth zero. No other sports organization in the world (that I know of) rewards moral victories. And any system that encourages blowouts, and therefore not playing your bench players and walk-ons should be abhorrent to college sports.
