Last year's NET rankings vs seed earned per team

[Sean Miller Fan]

1 seeds (by NET)
1. Houston
2. Alabama
3. UCLA (2 seed)
4. Tennessee (4 seed, 23-10 going in)

2 seeds
5. Purdue (1 seed)
6. Gonzaga (3 seed)
7. Texas
8. UConn (4 seed)

3 seeds
9. Kansas (1)
10. Arizona (2)
11. SMC (5)
12. Marquette (2)

4 seeds
13. FAU (9)
14. SDSU (5)
15. Baylor (3)
16. Duke (5)

5 seeds
17. Creighton (6)
18. Utah State (10)
19. Texas A&M (7)
20. Iowa State (6)

6 seeds
21. Arkansas (8)
22. Xavier (3)
23. Memphis (8)
24. KSt (3)

7 seeds
25. WVU (9)
26. Kentucky (6)
27. UVa (4)
28. TCU (6)

8 seeds
29. Boise (10)
30. Indiana (4)
31. Maryland
32. Auburn (9)

9 seeds
33. Mich St (7)
34. Illinois
35. Miami (5)
36. ORU (12)

10 seeds
37. Nevada (11 Dayton)
38. North Texas (NIT)
39. Iowa (8)
40. Rutgers (NIT, 19-14)

11 seeds
41. NW (7)
42. Missouri (7)
43. OK St (NIT, 18-15)
44. Liberty

12 seeds
45. NC State (11)
46. UNC (turned down NIT)
47. Oregon (NIT, 19-14)
48. Penn State (10)

13 seeds
49. Miss St (11 Dayton)
50. USC (10)
51. Charleston (12)
52. Ohio State (16-19)

The rest down to Pitt
53. VCU (12)
54. New Mexico (NIT)
55. Drake (12)
56. Prov (11)
57. UAB (NIT)
58. Iona (13)
59. Kent St (13)
60. Clem (NIT)
61. Mich (NIT, 17-15)
62 Florida (16-16)
63. TT (16-16)
64. Yale (NIT)
65. Sam Houston (NIT)
66. Arizona State (11 Dayton)
67. Pitt (11 Dayton)

As I have said, the committee starts with your NET rank, and you can generally move up or down 2 seed lines with some exceptions such as Quad 1/2 wins and Q4 losses. These were the exceptions


Tennessee - moved down 3 seed lines but NET was way over-inflated at 23-10

FAU - moved down 5 seed lines but always hard to seed these types of mid-majors

Utah State - moved down 5 seed lines, see above

Xavier - moved up 3 seed lines

Kansas State - moved up 3 seed lines

Virginia- moved up 3 seed lines

Indiana - moved up 4 seed lines

Miami - moved up 4 seed lines

ORU - moved down 3 seed lines

NW - moved up 4 seed lines

Missouri - moved up 4 seed lines

USC - moved up 3 seed lines

After that, you get into a ton of mid-majors or bad P6 teams not making it so this doesn't really apply.

Mid-majors are hard to seed. Of the P6s, there were only 8 who were moved up 3 or 4 seed lines. Tennessee was the only one moved down.

I think we all know that Pitt was dangerously close to not making it and that was 99% due to their NET rank (the worst NET to get an at-large). They basically made it by default as the teams ahead of them were mid-majors or P6s with terrible records. I did have Rutgers in. I was surprised they didnt make it. I think I had NC State out and they didnt even have to play in Dayton.

 

[Ski11585]

Please stop talking about NET.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Please stop talking about NET.

No. NET is everything.

 

[Ski11585]

No. NET is everything.

Maybe. But you don't need to post the exact same thing six times a day.

Just enjoy the actual games.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

1 seeds (by NET)
1. Houston
2. Alabama
3. UCLA (2 seed)
4. Tennessee (4 seed, 23-10 going in)

2 seeds
5. Purdue (1 seed)
6. Gonzaga (3 seed)
7. Texas
8. UConn (4 seed)

3 seeds
9. Kansas (1)
10. Arizona (2)
11. SMC (5)
12. Marquette (2)

4 seeds
13. FAU (9)
14. SDSU (5)
15. Baylor (3)
16. Duke (5)

5 seeds
17. Creighton (6)
18. Utah State (10)
19. Texas A&M (7)
20. Iowa State (6)

6 seeds
21. Arkansas (8)
22. Xavier (3)
23. Memphis (8)
24. KSt (3)

7 seeds
25. WVU (9)
26. Kentucky (6)
27. UVa (4)
28. TCU (6)

8 seeds
29. Boise (10)
30. Indiana (4)
31. Maryland
32. Auburn (9)

9 seeds
33. Mich St (7)
34. Illinois
35. Miami (5)
36. ORU (12)

10 seeds
37. Nevada (11 Dayton)
38. North Texas (NIT)
39. Iowa (8)
40. Rutgers (NIT, 19-14)

11 seeds
41. NW (7)
42. Missouri (7)
43. OK St (NIT, 18-15)
44. Liberty

12 seeds
45. NC State (11)
46. UNC (turned down NIT)
47. Oregon (NIT, 19-14)
48. Penn State (10)

13 seeds
49. Miss St (11 Dayton)
50. USC (10)
51. Charleston (12)
52. Ohio State (16-19)

The rest down to Pitt
53. VCU (12)
54. New Mexico (NIT)
55. Drake (12)
56. Prov (11)
57. UAB (NIT)
58. Iona (13)
59. Kent St (13)
60. Clem (NIT)
61. Mich (NIT, 17-15)
62 Florida (16-16)
63. TT (16-16)
64. Yale (NIT)
65. Sam Houston (NIT)
66. Arizona State (11 Dayton)
67. Pitt (11 Dayton)

As I have said, the committee starts with your NET rank, and you can generally move up or down 2 seed lines with some exceptions such as Quad 1/2 wins and Q4 losses. These were the exceptions


Tennessee - moved down 3 seed lines but NET was way over-inflated at 23-10

FAU - moved down 5 seed lines but always hard to seed these types of mid-majors

Utah State - moved down 5 seed lines, see above

Xavier - moved up 3 seed lines

Kansas State - moved up 3 seed lines

Virginia- moved up 3 seed lines

Indiana - moved up 4 seed lines

Miami - moved up 4 seed lines

ORU - moved down 3 seed lines

NW - moved up 4 seed lines

Missouri - moved up 4 seed lines

USC - moved up 3 seed lines

After that, you get into a ton of mid-majors or bad P6 teams not making it so this doesn't really apply.

Mid-majors are hard to seed. Of the P6s, there were only 8 who were moved up 3 or 4 seed lines. Tennessee was the only one moved down.

I think we all know that Pitt was dangerously close to not making it and that was 99% due to their NET rank (the worst NET to get an at-large). They basically made it by default as the teams ahead of them were mid-majors or P6s with terrible records. I did have Rutgers in. I was surprised they didnt make it. I think I had NC State out and they didnt even have to play in Dayton.

This is just a long winded way of admitting the the NCAA does not use the NET to select the tournament, and it does not use it to seed the tournament.

But as we all know, you can't actually bring yourself to say it.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

This is just a long winded way of admitting the the NCAA does not use the NET to select the tournament, and it does not use it to seed the tournament.

But as we all know, you can't actually bring yourself to say it.

+/- 2 seed lines unless you have some really great (or bad) Q1/2 record. NET is the base. They start with that and you can only move up or down so much.

 

[King Of All Message Boards]

Maybe. But you don't need to post the exact same thing six times a day.

Just enjoy the actual games.

Actually it’s pretty clear he does. He has an absolute need. Where it comes from who knows. But I really believe he can’t help himself.

And some of it is some degree of trolling.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Actually it’s pretty clear he does. He has an absolute need. Where it comes from who knows. But I really believe he can’t help himself.

And some of it is some degree of trolling.

I resemble that remark

 

[Pitt2006]

I resemble that remark

The Sean miller fan is emotionally invested in Pitt athletics, more than the average fan. It results in an increase in anxiety. The Net is something out of our control, which causes anxiety, so we seek to control the uncontrollable and lessen our anxiety by preaching something that possibly is controllable (running up the scores to improve net).

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

+/- 2 seed lines unless you have some really great (or bad) Q1/2 record. NET is the base. They start with that and you can only move up or down so much.

That's a fancy way to admit that you have been wrong all along.

And the hilarious thing is that you really don't seem to even understand what the post you started this thread off with means.

I mean you claim that teams can only move +/- two seed lines right after you made a post that listed 12 teams that moved more than two, and then added that there are even more than that but you have decided that they don't count.

Count up ALL the teams that moved more than two seed lines. Then add in all the teams that shouldn't have even been in the tournament if all they did was go by the NET (like us, for one). Tell us what that number is. And that will be even further evidence that the NCAA does not select the field based on a team's NET ranking, and they do not seed the field using the team's NET rankings.

It's so obvious that even you have figured it out, even though you have no idea that you have figured it out.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

That's a fancy way to admit that you have been wrong all along.

And the hilarious thing is that you really don't seem to even understand what the post you started this thread off with means.

I mean you claim that teams can only move +/- two seed lines right after you made a post that listed 12 teams that moved more than two, and then added that there are even more than that but you have decided that they don't count.

Count up ALL the teams that moved more than two seed lines. Then add in all the teams that shouldn't have even been in the tournament if all they did was go by the NET (like us, for one). Tell us what that number is. And that will be even further evidence that the NCAA does not select the field based on a team's NET ranking, and they do not seed the field using the team's NET rankings.

It's so obvious that even you have figured it out, even though you have no idea that you have figured it out.

You are NET's greatest defender. What I posted is proof that they take your NET and move you up or down 2 seed lines UNLESS you aren't in a P6 league (good NET but they move you down due to not enough Q1/2 wins) or your Q1/2 makes up for a bad NET like Pitt last year or your Q3/4 losses make up for a good NET (Rutgers).

I dont think you are comprehending what I am saying. Your NET rank is by far the most important thing when it comes to your tournament seeding because it establishes your baseline. You can only move up or down more than 2 seed lines if your Quad records are out of whack with your NET rank. And I know what you're going to say. "See, they don't just use NET ranking, you just admitted it." I know that. I'm saying its the most important factor.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

You are NET's greatest defender. What I posted is proof that they take your NET and move you up or down 2 seed lines UNLESS you aren't in a P6 league (good NET but they move you down due to not enough Q1/2 wins) or your Q1/2 makes up for a bad NET like Pitt last year or your Q3/4 losses make up for a good NET (Rutgers).

I dont think you are comprehending what I am saying. Your NET rank is by far the most important thing when it comes to your tournament seeding because it establishes your baseline. You can only move up or down more than 2 seed lines if your Quad records are out of whack with your NET rank. And I know what you're going to say. "See, they don't just use NET ranking, you just admitted it." I know that. I'm saying its the most important factor.

Two things. First of all, I'm not really defending the NET, other than when I point out that it's obviously better than the RPI. What I am trying to do is to explain to someone who does not understand math (that would be you) what the NET is and how it works and what it's measuring.

Secondly, I comprehend what you are saying exactly. The funny thing is that YOU don't understand what you are saying. You say that you can only move two spots from your NET. Except for the 12 teams that you listed that did last year. And all the other that you have decided that even though they moved more you weren't going to count for various reasons. And all the other teams that would have made it and yet didn't. And all the other teams that wouldn't have made it but did.

The old phrase is "the exception proves the rule". You argument is all exceptions. "This is the way that it is. Except for that team. And that one. And that one. And that one. And that one. And that one. And that one. And that one. And that one. And that one. And that one. And that one. And hey, don't forget them. And those guys over there too. And then that one there. And those other guys."

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

You say that you can only move two spots from your NET. Except for the 12 teams that you listed that did last year.

You and I both know why the 4 non-P6's in that 12 don't count. So its 8 and its because their Q1/2 record made up for a bad NET. I have said many times this is possible. But these are exceptions. Everyone knows what I'm saying and everyone agrees with me. They know NET is your baseline, your starting point.

Here's an wacky example. If we lost to NC A&T by 50, won the rest of our OOCs by 1. Went 15-5 with 15 1 point wins 5 50 point losses, our NET would be like 100, seriously despite being 25-6. We would get in the tournament due to our Q1/2 wins and overall awesome W/L record. And you'd say "I told you they dont use NET like you think they do." And I'd say that that bizarre Pitt season was an exception. You cannot plan to make an NCAAT by these "exceptions." You better have a good NET rank. Pitt made the NCAAT because of an exception and they nearly didnt. Their NET was out of whack due to the WVU, Mich, Duke blowouts. Lose those games by 1 and our NET is 38 and we're like an 8 seed.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

You and I both know why the 4 non-P6's in that 12 don't count.

Yes, we do.

Because counting them shows that you don't know what you are talking about.

Now, count up all the rest and tell us how many there actually are when you count them all. Then everyone can see that your notion that these are all just exceptions is silly.

Let's face it, this is the typical SMF argument. "If we completely ignore all the stuff I was wrong about then I got everything right!" And really, it's not even that because you can't hand wave away some of what you were wrong about. You just pretend it didn't happen.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Yes, we do.

Because counting them shows that you don't know what you are talking about.

Now, count up all the rest and tell us how many there actually are when you count them all. Then everyone can see that your notion that these are all just exceptions is silly.

Let's face it, this is the typical SMF argument. "If we completely ignore all the stuff I was wrong about then I got everything right!" And really, it's not even that because you can't hand wave away some of what you were wrong about. You just pretend it didn't happen.

We ignore non-P6s. They are hard to seed. You know this.