NET Rankings updated…
- Thread starter Blair_45
- Start date
It's still humans making these decisions. No way they just take straight a computer print out to make all of the decisions.
Scott Barnes is on the committee. He will make sure they don’t consider Pitt’s late season surge. Lol.
They might say it, but I don't believe they actually do it. Because the teams that are usually kept out (especially P5 teams) with high NET are the ones who struggle down the stretch. It could be because that somehow hurts their metrics (since conference play usually provides more road opportunities for most teams) but I think it does matter because humans go beyond the metrics to see that with all the movement these days it takes time for teams to gel.
It does make the end of games more interesting. Like I was legit pissed when they ended on that run because I knew it cost us a few spots. On the other hand, its really ridiculous seeing starters play the last few minutes in these blowouts. Some starter is going to get injured in the final 2 minutes of a 30 point blowout eventually but the NCAA is telling you that every possession of the game is equally important.
Pitt stays at 44 in the NET and doesn’t move even though they won a game by 15 points last night. I think it should have moved up at least 2-3 spots to maybe 41 or 42. Meanwhile, Wake Forest NET drops 10 from 31 to 41 after losing to Georgia Tech at home. These two are neck and neck right now and it could very come down to that 4 vs 5 matchup on Thursday afternoon being a play in game for a spot in the NCAA tournament. Pitt deserves it more at this point their resume is better then Wake’s overall.
It’s easier to move up when you are outside the top 50. Also, not as many teams ahead of them in action. The bigger concern is Mizz dropped from 151 to 158. 160 is Q4 territory. GT should likely stay a Q2. Hate to root for WVU, but a blow out upset of TCU tonight could get them close to Q2 for Pitt as well. A TCU loss tonight would also allow Pitt to move up to 43 most likely.
Missouri really pisses me off. They arent that bad of a team. What happened there? They beat Minnesota, who is 9-9 in the B10, before playing us. Were respectable in losses to SHU and Kansas. They dont have an 0-18 talent level. This isnt Stallings Pitt or even Ewing Georgetown. They were picked 9th in the SEC, which is right around the bubble and were in Lunardi's preseason bracketolgy. Their tank job could cost us the NCAA Tournament.
They are 0-17 in the SEC and 8-23 overall. Yeah, the beat Minnesota before they played us. They also lost to Jackson State at home before they played us. They've lost to Memphis by 15 at home. They've lost to Illinois on a neutral court by 24. Alabama by 18. A&M at home by 19. Mississippi State at home by 24. Arkansas by 15. Auburn at home by 27. In other words, they've got a whole bunch of games similar to the beat down that Duke put on us at the Pete. And no conference wins at all.
The fact that people didn't think they were going to be this bad doesn't mean that they aren't bad, it means that people were wrong.
I didnt realize they lost Caleb Grill for the season a week after beating us. Not saying he is an all-league type but he is a solid P6 player. He was 6 seed Iowa State's 3rd leading scorer last season. They returned 2 starters and 6th man, Sean East (who BTW, I'd target as a replacement for Bub). They also added good portal players Caleb Grill and the 8 footer from ORU. They were in Lunardi's preseason bracketology and picked 9th in the SEC. This isnt Stallings Pitt. This isnt DePaul. They should not be anywhere close to 0-18.
Washington St lost and fell behind us. The Net is wacky. WSU should be much further ahead of us. 6-3 Q1 vs 2-6. 14-1 Q3/Q4vs 13-2. 23-8 overall. 6 road wins.
Then you have wake, ISU and FAU ahead of both
Pitt WSU ISU FAU
Road 7-4 6-4 9-4 5-5
Q1 2-6 6-3 1-3 2-3
Q3/Q4 13-2 14-1 20-1 15-2
Overall 20-10 23-8 25-5 23-7
Then you have wake, ISU and FAU ahead of both
Pitt WSU ISU FAU
Road 7-4 6-4 9-4 5-5
Q1 2-6 6-3 1-3 2-3
Q3/Q4 13-2 14-1 20-1 15-2
Overall 20-10 23-8 25-5 23-7
| 43 | 44 | Pittsburgh | ACC | 20-10 | 7-4 | 1-1 | 12-5 | 2-6 | 5-2 | 6-2 | 7-0 |
| 44 | 40 | Washington St. | Pac-12 | 23-8 | 6-4 | 2-2 | 15-2 | 6-3 | 3-4 | 7-1 | 7-0 |
| 41 | 42 | Wake Forest | ACC | 18-12 | 2-9 | 1-2 | 15-1 | 2-6 | 5-5 | 5-1 | 6-0 |
| 33 | 34 | Fla. Atlantic | AAC | 23-7 | 5-5 | 6-1 | 12-1 | 2-3 | 6-2 | 9-0 | 6-2 |
| 30 | 30 | Indiana St. | MVC | 25-5 | 9-4 | 4-0 | 12-1 | 1-3 | 4-1 | 8-0 | 12-1 |
Probably has something to do with point differential in games against scrub teams, which is stupid.
I was optimistic when I started this thread on Jan 20th after Pitt beat Duke but I didn’t think that 7 weeks later they would have a chance to win 12 of their last 15 games and have a chance of getting a double bye in the ACC Tournament when they are were 1-5 in the conference. Just a remarkable turnaround and I think it will be rewarded by Pitt earning a 2nd straight trip to the NCAA Tournament if they beat NC State tonight at home.
I hope you are right. I would like to see Pitt showing up on more brackets though.
Anybody have all the brackets that are out there that Pitt is currently showing up on. I know someone posted this a few weeks back but I can’t find it. I think there are 100 some bracket projections. If anybody has the link for this and where it can be found please share.
4 out of 105 have us in
x.com
twitter.com
Bracketology 2024 - NCAA Tournament / NIT Projections
Our Bracketology for 2024! We list projections for all of NCAA Basketball tournament seeds as well as the NIT tournament in March.
www.dratings.com
2 are people. 2 are metrics based. Humans dont like us. Our quads arent good.
Most brackets I've seen have Pitt as last 4 out, or first 4 out. There might be an outlier out there somewhere where Pitt is in the field.
Pitt has some work to do yet to even be on the bubble. First, we obviously have to beat NCState today, and by a substantial margin. Then if we can get the double bye for the ACCT, we'll need at least 1 win there. If we don't get the double bye, we'll need at least 2 more wins in the ACCT to be on the bubble. Not that it's fair or correct. Pitt deserves to be in right now. But these nerds keep talking about NET or whatever that doesn't take into account late season trends.
Pitt has some work to do yet to even be on the bubble. First, we obviously have to beat NCState today, and by a substantial margin. Then if we can get the double bye for the ACCT, we'll need at least 1 win there. If we don't get the double bye, we'll need at least 2 more wins in the ACCT to be on the bubble. Not that it's fair or correct. Pitt deserves to be in right now. But these nerds keep talking about NET or whatever that doesn't take into account late season trends.
To be fair, the people on the committee don't take into account late season trends either. I wonder, does that make them all nerds too?
The NCAA dropped what you did in your last ten games as one of the criteria something like 15 years ago. They simply do not want late season games counting more than early season ones. We can debate if that's a good way to do it or not, but that is how they decided a long time ago to do it.
It’s more than just ‘Pitt has some work to do yet’. We need a good bit of cooperation from some competing schools needing to lose and, unfortunately, not many are cooperating very well.
I’m afraid we may need 2 ACC tourney wins even with the double bye.
Pitino has been highly successful coaching at every level of college basketball. Whether you like him or not—and there are plenty of reasons not to like him—he’s unquestionably one of the best college basketball coaches ever.
So, not really the same point. LOL
Bubble teams are losing like crazy, including today. They are cooperating about as well as they always do.
NET Rankings go down 1 from 43 to 44 after the win over NC State. Ken Pom Ranking is at 46. I think Pitt is in right now but if they play Wake on Thursday and win that game and get to the Semi’s on Friday night there should be no doubts what so ever. There NET would most likely jump into the high 30’s and they would be 12-3 in their last 15 games. I don’t see how when you factor in the human element of the committee looking at all these teams and not the computers how you keep Pitt out.
Cincy with a jump because of a 30 point home win over WVU. Had we held on to win by 17-20 we likely would have gained a spot
What the heck explains the South Carolina situation? Finished regular season #17 in the AP poll and are #49 in NET.
Their splits are 4-4, 7-0, 5-2, 9-0.
Bad efficiency ratings? Too many home wins?
Their splits are 4-4, 7-0, 5-2, 9-0.
Bad efficiency ratings? Too many home wins?
Beat 358 by 10
322 by 5
315 by 4
178 by 10
186 by 6
All at home
Also lost to Bama and Auburn by a combined 67 points.
It's a resume that would have gotten them like a 2 seed not too long ago. Now they'll probably be a 5, at best.
If they win the SECT, they'd have a case for a 1 seed if they had more blowouts of Q4 teams.
If this was like 2010, they'd have a 2-seed all but locked up right now. Maybe as long as they didn't lose their first game in the SEC tournament. And then, yeah, they would be playing for a 1-seed.
In 2024, I see them being no higher than a 5, and I could see the committee doing something wild like making them a 7 if they lose early this week. Can't be beating bad teams by only ten in this fashion show.
Actually South Carolina's RPI is currently 30, so if this was 2010 they'd have no chance at a one or two seed.
Of course if you want another example of why they had to get rid of the RPI, right now Dayton is 4th in the RPI, Utah State is 7 and Drake is 9, San Diego State 10, FAU 16, Colorado State 18, Princeton 19. So according to the RPI, all of those teams are better than the second best ACC team.
No, not Duke. Clemson.
I honestly just picked a random year, haha. Does my logic check out if I would have said 1995? Find me a year when it checks out, and I will say I meant that. But you can't tell me there wasn't a time when a power conference team with that record and wins at Tennessee and against some other tournament teams wouldn't have been in consideration for a 1 seed.
I think South Carolina is just proving to be an outlier this year. It will be interesting to see how the committee handles them.
NC State and Syr flipped so its 79 NC St vs 80 Syracuse tonight. If NC State were to somehow beat Syracuse and Duke, it would give us another Q1 win, which could be the difference in getting in or not. Seems kinda silly that beating a team ranked 79 or 75 would make that big of a difference but its a silly process. They need Horne back though.
I said this before, the committee should create a visual for each bubble team with data points placed relative to their opponents NET and also color coded to denote home, away and neutral court games won and lost to provide a visual continuous spectrum of whether a team has quadrant wins higher or lower within that quadrant And also highlight road wins. Pitt has 4 games with teams hovering just above 75 which is much different than 4 games near 135 or 160. I think this type of scatter plot would provide a fascinating and more valuable view of the same data than simply the quad cutoff based metrics that are used.
The team sheets split the games out by quadrants, and they also split the games out by home and road games within the quadrants. So they pretty much are already doing what you are asking for.
This one is a few years old, so it still refers to the RPI rather than the NET, so it's not exactly what they use today, but the principle is the same. I guess you can't embed a pdf, so here is a link:
Sample Team Sheet
Pitt’s dropped below Oklahoma to 45 but their team sheet is much improved due to Nc State cracking the Top 75. BC up to 80. Missouri is now finished at 158.
