Holy crap. This singular scoring margin may send is to the NIT. Mothereffing NET, man. I'm watching this praying we can make a late run to only lose by 12.
NET is going to drop by 12
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
You are full of 💩.
I was going to say 15 but I was conservative. NET loves blowouts. For the love of God, we need Scheyer to send in the walk-ons so we can shave off 15.
I don’t think it really would have mattered since the double bye means we would have won the Miami game.
Sorry, off by 1. Dropped 11. What I can't understand is how NC State only dropped by 8, losing by 1 less point to a much worse team.
Clemson up 10.
NET LOVES and I mean LOVES blowouts.
Doesn't matter at all but our RPI only dropped 2
Clemson up 10.
NET LOVES and I mean LOVES blowouts.
Doesn't matter at all but our RPI only dropped 2
What’s even better is in Jerry Palm’s updated brackets he has Pitt down to an 11 seed, Clemson is still not on his brackets and NC State is still a 9 seed and they are a combined 0-4 against Pitt and Clemson and Nevada who lost to San Jose State is still in the last 4 in.
Yea, I can’t figure it out. Pitt and NC St each lost by the same amount.
A ton of teams we played lost yesterday. NC, NC St, WVU, Michigan etc. don’t know if that is it.
I think we are still OK but we can’t have 2 bid stealers (Oregon, CUSA). We can survive one.
Also, need at least 4 of these 6 teams to lose today: Clemson, Miss St, Rutgers, AZ St, Penn St (just in case they are still behind), Utah St.
Yea I believe we are still good for the 10 or 11 seed line without going to Dayton but that still doesn’t mean that us as fans aren’t gonna be sweating it out all day waiting for 6 o clock to get here on Sunday night. It will be a very very long day.
In retrospect, would it have been better for Pitt if:
1) We lose to GT at the buzzer?
2) We get the 4 seed, but Duke beats us by 30?
3) The way it happened, somewhat close win over GT and blowout loss.
I’m not even sure. It’s possible number 3 was the worst for us. What’s clear is the (IMO) asinine argument that we needed 1 more win was pretty stupid. We needed a win against a good team (or ND in regular season). The GT win did absolutely nothing for us.. nothing.
1) We lose to GT at the buzzer?
2) We get the 4 seed, but Duke beats us by 30?
3) The way it happened, somewhat close win over GT and blowout loss.
I’m not even sure. It’s possible number 3 was the worst for us. What’s clear is the (IMO) asinine argument that we needed 1 more win was pretty stupid. We needed a win against a good team (or ND in regular season). The GT win did absolutely nothing for us.. nothing.
To have scoring margins move teams this much this late in the season is insane. If Pitt doesn't make the NCAAT, it would be they lost by 15 points too many in their last game.
A blowout, I dont care if its by 70, shouldn't hurt you any more than losing by 1. Sometimes shit happens. 1 loss shouldn't count as 2. The Mich, WVU, and Duke blowouts literally cost us 30 seed lines. We would be 35-37 right now if we lost those by 1. So stupid.
This is Pitt’s best hope. The committee has a bracket. We came in as like a 10 seed, and they just don’t move us, just don’t care about conference tournaments at all. It’s happened before - frequently even.
So, maybe they agree with you. Rutgers got in with a 83 NET last year. It’s not everything.
You still have to factor in Quality wins and head to head I think more then the NET of you’re in that committee room. And if you do that there is no way you can keep Pitt out over other bubble teams that are right there with them.
Well, I'm not saying that's what they will do but that's what they should do. But, yes, I think it is realistic to think that they were safely in whatever preliminary brackets they had and though NET is used, it may not make sense to them to drop them down 6-8 spots due to a blowout vs a blue blood especially when other teams also hurt their causes.
Nope he is 100% correct. Unlike you and your Pollyanna takes.
You are wishing he is correct.
When a faux fan like you labels me a Pollyanna, I take that as a compliment.
Leopards NEVER change their spots. You are what you are.
Every possession matters. You cannot afford to play lesser players at end of games anymore. Clemson kept their starters in until there was 2 minutes left.
I honestly dont think these guys understand that. Jay Bilas and Dan Shulman were stumped as to why Brownell left his starters in last night. Of all people, Bilas should have known they needed to run up the score. I have never once heard any TV person mention that scoring margins matter. Its like they took an oath to not allow that to get out.
Get to know the NET rankings — and what they mean for the NCAA tournament
The primary component of the NET is the TVI, a results-based factor that considers the strength of the opponent and the location of the game. If you beat a team that you’re expected to beat then it doesn’t do as much for your ranking. Losing to teams that you were expected to beat will hurt your...
www.ncaa.com
@King Of All Message Boards do you (or anyone else) know if this excerpt from the document above about the NET has changed with regard to consideration of scoring margin since it was released?Get to know the NET rankings — and what they mean for the NCAA tournament
The primary component of the NET is the TVI, a results-based factor that considers the strength of the opponent and the location of the game. If you beat a team that you’re expected to beat then it doesn’t do as much for your ranking. Losing to teams that you were expected to beat will hurt your...
“So, too, is the winning percentage, the adjusted winning percentage (based on where the game is played — home, neutral or road) and the scoring margin with a cap at 10 per game.”
No clue. Just posted it because it stated it’s not used for the brackets just as @Joe the Panther Fan has stated a number of times.
Got it. It was a good find by you. Of course what is said and what is actually done by the selection committee could be different things.
Once the jury goes into the room and deliberates behind closed doors, it’s hard to tell what they’ll consider, and what they won’t. Regardless of what their instructions are.
It’s disingenuous for the NCAA to say it’s not used for brackets, when the NCAA definitely says the Quad system is a key component of the brackets, and the Quad system is 100% based on the NET.
Further, the “capping” at 10 only applies to the component related specifically to the score. The components that calculate offensive and defensive efficiency absolutely are affected by blowouts, with every possession counting.
Interesting. Is there somewhere where this is available in writing from the NCAA to be viewed as to the current interpretation and how it is applied as part of the criteria used by the selection committee?
I'm not going to look for it again, but somewhere on the NCAA web site is a page with a bunch of links that explain the whole process that I posted a few weeks ago. But people don't have time to read and understand what the NCAA puts on their web site, it's just a lot easier to say "hey, our NET ranking isn't as good as I wish it was, the NET sucks! And because it sucks, the NCAA uses it too much!"
If by "shill" you mean someone who understands the selection and seeding process as opposed to someone who loudly declares their disdain for a system that they simply do not understand, then yes, I guess I am a shill.
So wait…..
If we would have lost by 1 to Georgia Tech, our net drops a couple? But if we WIN and then lose the next game we drop 12??
C’mon now. We Are in. Eff these other squads
If we would have lost by 1 to Georgia Tech, our net drops a couple? But if we WIN and then lose the next game we drop 12??
C’mon now. We Are in. Eff these other squads
