ADVERTISEMENT

NET Rankings updated…

I think they should have jumped at least 10 spots to 50. They won the game by double digits against one of the hottest teams in the country that hasn’t lost at home in their last 23 games. These bracketologists better also get Pitt on their last 4 out or even better categories these next few days. Not too many teams on the bubble have road wins at Duke, Virginia, NC State, and a home win against Wake Forest who are among the last 4 in now. If Pitt goes 6-1 the last 7 games and splits the Wake and Clemson road games and wins their remaining 4 home games and their other road game at Boston College they are in the NCCA tournament. They would be 22-9 overall and 13-7 in the ACC having won 12 of their last 14 conference games with a 4 or 5 seed at worst in the ACC tournament. I don’t see how they don’t make the tournament at this point if that happens.
I get all that you’re saying here and that was definitely a very good road win but as far as the NET calc, it’s oblivious to the fact UVA was one of the hottest teams in the country and had a 23-game win streak.

As others have already said, big and important win for the resume more so than a big lift to the NET ranking.
 
I have to think with all the road wins against good teams and the way we are playing down the stretch that as long as we split at Wake and Clemson, don't loss to Louisvile or BC, and only lose one more game that we would be in.
 
Next goal - blow out Lville. This is the way. Part of lack of movement was likely not enough teams playing. So long as we they beat Lville, they still have a weeks worth of games for higher NET teams to lose before Wake.
 
Last edited:
I have to think with all the road wins against good teams and the way we are playing down the stretch that as long as we split at Wake and Clemson, don't loss to Louisvile or BC, and only lose one more game that we would be in.
We better be in if this is the scenario.

BUT

That would equate to a 4th place finish in the ACC (13-7) and a 12-2 record down the stretch to be 22-9. So I would say that would make us 23-10 overall if we win one/lose one in the ACC tournament.

Last year Clemson finished with that exact same record, tied for 3rd in the ACC, and was a first four out team.

What did Clemson ultimately do to get bumped down to the last 4 out? Losing to Louisville and BC down the stretch.

I think we might be allowed one L against wake or Clemson, but anything else will be fodder to keep Pitt out, based on how this conference is perceived nationally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gep Dawg
I have to think with all the road wins against good teams and the way we are playing down the stretch that as long as we split at Wake and Clemson, don't loss to Louisvile or BC, and only lose one more game that we would be in.

No. Losing to BC isnt that bad because its Q2 if we win the others. If I could rank which games are most important to win it would be:

1. @ Wake (Q1 and might put us higher than them with the sweep)

2. @ Clemson

3. Louisville

4. FSU

5. NC St

Have to win the Q1s and Q3/4s. The Q2s don't really help or hurt.

6. @ BC

7. VT
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gep Dawg
Because Virginia isn't a top team. Not even close. I'm still not convinced they are even a NCAA Tourney team. They still have to play Wake, and go on the road to VaTech, UNC, and Duke. I think they go either 1-3 or 0-4 in those games.
UVA reminds me of one of the classic Dixon teams (aside from 2009 and ‘11). Excellent defensive team and impossible to beat if they are controlling the game flow, but unable to match a hot shooting team shot for shot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FireballZ
UVA reminds me of one of the classic Dixon teams (aside from 2009 and ‘11). Excellent defensive team and impossible to beat if they are controlling the game flow, but unable to match a hot shooting team shot for shot.
Agree. UVA is fundamentally as good as it gets at both ends. When they have that special scorer or two and a great PG to go with their usual personnel mixture, they are FF contenders. When they don't, they are what they are this year--still very good, still going to win a lot, but they are vulnerable to athletic teams that have a good shooting night.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JD1976
That's what was said when this thing came out. However, that isnt how it works in practice. Your own NET ranking is the most important metric. Is it the only thing? No. But its really important.

These were the only P6 teams rated 67 or better with an over .500 record who didnt get in:

40 Rutgers 19-14 (4 Q3 losses)

43 OK St 18-15 (just too many losses and 6-12 vs Q1 means you are crediting them just for showing up)

46 UNC 20-13 (1 Q1 win)

47 Oregon 19-14 (2 Q1 wins)

60 Clemson 23-10 (4 Q3/4 losses)

61 Michigan 17-15 (2 Q1 wins and 1 Q4 loss)

I think you could make really good cases for Rutgers and Clemson but they were omitted due to too many Q3/4 losses. This is where Pitt has to be careful. We already have 2. Was hoping Syracuse would get a big bump for beating UNC but they didnt. Went from 91 to 85. UNC only dropped 1 to 11. NET expects you to win home games so you cant make up too much ground there. We absolutely cannot afford a 3rd Q3 loss and have to hope Syracuse can find its way into the Top 75. We have 3 more left vs Lou, FSU, and NC St. A loss in any of those could eliminate us even if we win the rest.
I think 5-2 I like my chances. So long as we don’t lose a Q4. And they win one ACCT game.

Pitt is just a pretty unique resume, and the road record will stick out.
 
No. Losing to BC isnt that bad because its Q2 if we win the others. If I could rank which games are most important to win it would be:

1. @ Wake (Q1 and might put us higher than them with the sweep)

2. @ Clemson

3. Louisville

4. FSU

5. NC St

Have to win the Q1s and Q3/4s. The Q2s don't really help or hurt.

6. @ BC

7. VT
I fear Pitt beating Wake three times and Wake getting in. A la NCST over Clemson last year…I don’t think that happens, but… It helps to have national support and Vitale and Rothstein highlighting Pitts win last night helps.
 
Saw Lunardi last night on ESPN, and he was pretty dismissive towards Pitt. Basically said we're one of a bunch of teams fighting to get into the conversation. Blasted our non-conference schedule.

Can't really argue that much because we made our own bed. But, I thought he came across as pretty negative when the studio guys were pushing Pitt's road wins.
 
Saw Lunardi last night on ESPN, and he was pretty dismissive towards Pitt. Basically said we're one of a bunch of teams fighting to get into the conversation. Blasted our non-conference schedule.

Can't really argue that much because we made our own bed. But, I thought he came across as pretty negative when the studio guys were pushing Pitt's road wins.
I mean they have 3 quality wins right now (@duke, @uva, wake). 7-3 road/neutral. OOC sos in the 300s will need to be overcome. Mizz loss in December won’t be awful as long as they continue to get hot. The rest of the bubble has more Q1 wins right now and less Q3 losses. Pitt still has a lot of work to do and could use some help (GT, Cuse, and Mizz winning). But not impossible. Once the teams above them start to trend back, Pitt will continue to rise, but based on net and current resumes, they are still a few wins away from being in the conversation. Beat Wake and they are in the first four/next four out group. If they stay hot, I think they can avoid Dayton. It may be controversial, but the committee wants tv ratings and Hinson and future NBa pick Bub can provide that.
 
DATEOPPONENTH/A/NNET RankingQuadrantRESULTConferenceWL
Mon, Nov 6North Carolina A&TH
339​
4​
W100-52CAA
1​
0​
Fri, Nov 10BinghamtonH
278​
4​
W89-60America East
2​
0​
Mon, Nov 13Florida Gulf CoastH
259​
4​
W86-74ASUN
3​
0​
Fri, Nov 17JacksonvilleH
281​
4​
W107-56ASUN
4​
0​
Wed, Nov 22Florida *N
33​
1​
L86-71SEC
4​
1​
Fri Nov 24Oregon StN
170​
3​
W76-51P12
5​
1​
Tue, Nov 28MissouriH
153​
3​
L71-64SEC
5​
2​
Sun, Dec 3ClemsonH
29​
1​
L79-70ACC
5​
3​
Wed, Dec 6West VirginiaA
154​
3​
W80-63B12
6​
3​
Sat, Dec 9CanisiusH
252​
4​
W82-71MAAC
7​
3​
Sat, Dec 16South Carolina StateH
304​
4​
W86-50MEAC
8​
3​
Wed, Dec 20Purdue Fort WayneH
159​
3​
W62-48Horizon
9​
3​
Sat, Dec 30SyracuseA
85​
2​
L81-73ACC
9​
4​
Tue, Jan 2North CarolinaH
11​
1​
L71-57ACC
9​
5​
Sat, Jan 6LouisvilleA
178​
3​
W83-70ACC
10​
5​
Tue, Jan 9DukeH
16​
1​
L75-53ACC
10​
6​
Tue, Jan 16SyracuseH
85​
3​
L69-58ACC
10​
7​
Sat, Jan 20DukeA
16​
1​
W80-76ACC
11​
7​
Tue, Jan 23Georgia TechA
141​
2​
W72-64ACC
12​
7​
Sat, Jan 27MiamiA
69​
1​
L72-68ACC
12​
8​
Wed, Jan 31Wake ForestH
37​
2​
W77-72ACC
13​
8​
Sat, Feb 3Notre DameH
157​
3​
W70-60ACC
14​
8​
Wed, Feb 7NC StateA
80​
2​
W67-64ACC
15​
8​
Tue, Feb 13VirginiaA
41​
1​
W74-63ACC
16​
8​
Sat, Feb 17LouisvilleH
178​
4​
6:30 PM​
ACC
Tue, Feb 20Wake ForestA
37​
1​
9:00 PM​
ACC
Sat, Feb 24Virginia TechH
63​
2​
5:30 PM​
ACC
Tue, Feb 27ClemsonA
29​
1​
7:00 PM​
ACC
Sat, Mar 2Boston CollegeA
90​
2​
6:00 PM​
ACC
Tue, Mar 5Florida StateH
98​
3​
9:00 PM​
ACC
Sat, Mar 9NC StateH
80​
3​
7:45 PM​
ACC
Quadrant 1: Home 1-30, Neutral 1-50, Away 1-75
Quadrant 2: Home 31-75, Neutral 51-100, Away 76-135
Quadrant 3: Home 76-160, Neutral 101-200, Away 135-240
Quadrant 4: Home 161-353, Neutral 201-353, Away 241-353
 
I mean they have 3 quality wins right now (@duke, @uva, wake). 7-3 road/neutral. OOC sos in the 300s will need to be overcome. Mizz loss in December won’t be awful as long as they continue to get hot. The rest of the bubble has more Q1 wins right now and less Q3 losses. Pitt still has a lot of work to do and could use some help (GT, Cuse, and Mizz winning). But not impossible. Once the teams above them start to trend back, Pitt will continue to rise, but based on net and current resumes, they are still a few wins away from being in the conversation. Beat Wake and they are in the first four/next four out group. If they stay hot, I think they can avoid Dayton. It may be controversial, but the committee wants tv ratings and Hinson and future NBa pick Bub can provide that.
I don’t think we’ll be in Dayton - the predictive metrics are good enough (especially compared to last year, because the predictive metrics never liked last year’s team) that if we’re in the field, we’ll get one of the last byes. I think it’s non-Dayton or NIT.
 
I don’t think we’ll be in Dayton - the predictive metrics are good enough (especially compared to last year, because the predictive metrics never liked last year’s team) that if we’re in the field, we’ll get one of the last byes. I think it’s non-Dayton or NIT.
Agreed.
 
I don’t think we’ll be in Dayton - the predictive metrics are good enough (especially compared to last year, because the predictive metrics never liked last year’s team) that if we’re in the field, we’ll get one of the last byes. I think it’s non-Dayton or NIT.

You cant say that, necessarily. We could very well be the last team in the whole field. Right now, we are probably "Next Four Out."
 
I don't go by the NET or metrics or any of that crap. We beat some very good teams on the road and road wins mean a lot. If we can take care of business as we should and beat the remaining teams we should beat, maybe just get 1 head scratcher loss, we're not in Dayton. I think very few teams would want to play Pitt in this tournament let alone play us in Dayton.
 
Saw Lunardi last night on ESPN, and he was pretty dismissive towards Pitt. Basically said we're one of a bunch of teams fighting to get into the conversation. Blasted our non-conference schedule.

Can't really argue that much because we made our own bed. But, I thought he came across as pretty negative when the studio guys were pushing Pitt's road wins.
The Duke win was a good win. UVA was a must win, and Pitt won it. Pitt can put that feather in their cap, but I don't think that win is going to carry a lot of weight. This particular UVA team doesn't have any good home wins, and they still have to play at VaTech, UNC, and Duke. VaTech is a tough place to play for UVA. Not to say they can't win there, but that's going to be very difficult. Wake at home this Saturday. Wake blew the Wahoos out in WInston-Salem a month ago.
 
That's what was said when this thing came out. However, that isnt how it works in practice. Your own NET ranking is the most important metric. Is it the only thing? No. But its really important.

These were the only P6 teams rated 67 or better with an over .500 record who didnt get in:

40 Rutgers 19-14 (4 Q3 losses)

43 OK St 18-15 (just too many losses and 6-12 vs Q1 means you are crediting them just for showing up)

46 UNC 20-13 (1 Q1 win)

47 Oregon 19-14 (2 Q1 wins)

60 Clemson 23-10 (4 Q3/4 losses)

61 Michigan 17-15 (2 Q1 wins and 1 Q4 loss)

I think you could make really good cases for Rutgers and Clemson but they were omitted due to too many Q3/4 losses. This is where Pitt has to be careful. We already have 2. Was hoping Syracuse would get a big bump for beating UNC but they didnt. Went from 91 to 85. UNC only dropped 1 to 11. NET expects you to win home games so you cant make up too much ground there. We absolutely cannot afford a 3rd Q3 loss and have to hope Syracuse can find its way into the Top 75. We have 3 more left vs Lou, FSU, and NC St. A loss in any of those could eliminate us even if we win the rest.


And there it is!

So to recap, our record was better than some teams and we got in on that over them. And our schedule was better than some teams and we got in on that over them. And we did better against Q1s and Q2s than some teams, and we got in on that over them.

Or in other words, you have once again identified three things that were more important to us last year than our NET ranking was.

At this point you have to be trolling on this, because you simply cannot be this oblivious.
 
DATEOPPONENTH/A/NNET RankingQuadrantRESULTConferenceWL
Mon, Nov 6North Carolina A&TH
339​
4​
W100-52CAA
1​
0​
Fri, Nov 10BinghamtonH
278​
4​
W89-60America East
2​
0​
Mon, Nov 13Florida Gulf CoastH
259​
4​
W86-74ASUN
3​
0​
Fri, Nov 17JacksonvilleH
281​
4​
W107-56ASUN
4​
0​
Wed, Nov 22Florida *N
33​
1​
L86-71SEC
4​
1​
Fri Nov 24Oregon StN
170​
3​
W76-51P12
5​
1​
Tue, Nov 28MissouriH
153​
3​
L71-64SEC
5​
2​
Sun, Dec 3ClemsonH
29​
1​
L79-70ACC
5​
3​
Wed, Dec 6West VirginiaA
154​
3​
W80-63B12
6​
3​
Sat, Dec 9CanisiusH
252​
4​
W82-71MAAC
7​
3​
Sat, Dec 16South Carolina StateH
304​
4​
W86-50MEAC
8​
3​
Wed, Dec 20Purdue Fort WayneH
159​
3​
W62-48Horizon
9​
3​
Sat, Dec 30SyracuseA
85​
2​
L81-73ACC
9​
4​
Tue, Jan 2North CarolinaH
11​
1​
L71-57ACC
9​
5​
Sat, Jan 6LouisvilleA
178​
3​
W83-70ACC
10​
5​
Tue, Jan 9DukeH
16​
1​
L75-53ACC
10​
6​
Tue, Jan 16SyracuseH
85​
3​
L69-58ACC
10​
7​
Sat, Jan 20DukeA
16​
1​
W80-76ACC
11​
7​
Tue, Jan 23Georgia TechA
141​
2​
W72-64ACC
12​
7​
Sat, Jan 27MiamiA
69​
1​
L72-68ACC
12​
8​
Wed, Jan 31Wake ForestH
37​
2​
W77-72ACC
13​
8​
Sat, Feb 3Notre DameH
157​
3​
W70-60ACC
14​
8​
Wed, Feb 7NC StateA
80​
2​
W67-64ACC
15​
8​
Tue, Feb 13VirginiaA
41​
1​
W74-63ACC
16​
8​
Sat, Feb 17LouisvilleH
178​
4​
6:30 PM​
ACC
Tue, Feb 20Wake ForestA
37​
1​
9:00 PM​
ACC
Sat, Feb 24Virginia TechH
63​
2​
5:30 PM​
ACC
Tue, Feb 27ClemsonA
29​
1​
7:00 PM​
ACC
Sat, Mar 2Boston CollegeA
90​
2​
6:00 PM​
ACC
Tue, Mar 5Florida StateH
98​
3​
9:00 PM​
ACC
Sat, Mar 9NC StateH
80​
3​
7:45 PM​
ACC
Quadrant 1: Home 1-30, Neutral 1-50, Away 1-75
Quadrant 2: Home 31-75, Neutral 51-100, Away 76-135
Quadrant 3: Home 76-160, Neutral 101-200, Away 135-240
Quadrant 4: Home 161-353, Neutral 201-353, Away 241-353
Only in the NCAA is a loss to a team ranked 161st mathmatically equivalent to a loss to a team ranked 353rd, or that a win over a team ranked 75th is far superior to a win over one ranked 76th.
 
Only in the NCAA is a loss to a team ranked 161st mathmatically equivalent to a loss to a team ranked 353rd, or that a win over a team ranked 75th is far superior to a win over one ranked 76th.

They need to make a Quad 5. Losing to Missouri this year or FSU last year isnt the same as NC A&T
 
It wouldn't be a "quad" then. But I agree that there needs to be either more segments or more balance between the number of team in Q3 and Q4
Or Pitt could just avoid losing to Mizz at home like 11 SEC teams have done so far. Mizz is bad. May go 0-18. They lost to Jackson State at home and two teams above Pitt in the bubble (Memphis and Seton Hall) beat them on the road by 15 and 6, respectively.
 
Or Pitt could just avoid losing to Mizz at home like 11 SEC teams have done so far. Mizz is bad. May go 0-18. They lost to Jackson State at home and two teams above Pitt in the bubble (Memphis and Seton Hall) beat them on the road by 15 and 6, respectively.

Yea but NET pays no attention to when losses happen. Clemson's loss on Halloween to Loyola last year kept them out of the tournament. Clemson was a 5.5 point favorite and Loyola was seen as a team who could win the A10. They went into a tailspin and finished Q4 and it kept Clemson out. Pitt was a different team then and it was in November. You should beat them but it was a team picked 9th in the SEC which is right around the bubble line. Losing begins to snowball. Pitt's NCAA fortunes shouldn't be decided on whether Mizzou loses their next 7 or wins them. Its stupid. They really arent a Q4 team.
 
What they are is a bad basketball team. And they beat us. On our home court.

They arent NC A&T. They were picked 9th in the SEC and beat us in November in a game where we were a slight favorite. That game shouldn't be the decider on whether you make the NCAA Tournament. Same as Loyola last year for Clemson. Those arent Quad 4 teams.
 
Pitt can withstand the loss to Mizz. Had Clemson not lost at quad 4 300 ranked Lville last year on 2/18 in a game favored by 10, they would have made it. You can have one wtf game. Pitt needs to win this weekend on 2/17 in a game they will be favored by at least 10.
 
Pitt can withstand the loss to Mizz. Had Clemson not lost at quad 4 300 ranked Lville last year on 2/18 in a game favored by 10, they would have made it. You can have one wtf game. Pitt needs to win this weekend on 2/17 in a game they will be favored by at least 10.

Well yea. Clemson was 1 game away. Had they not lost to Louisville, they would have made it. Had they lost to Louisville but beat Loyola Chicago in an early November game in Atlanta where they were a slight favorite, they would have made it. Teams arent the same in November as in March.
 
They arent NC A&T. They were picked 9th in the SEC and beat us in November in a game where we were a slight favorite. That game shouldn't be the decider on whether you make the NCAA Tournament. Same as Loyola last year for Clemson. Those arent Quad 4 teams.


Loyola last year finished 10-21 overall and 4-15 (counting the tournament) in the A10. And the A10 wasn't very good last season. That was an awful loss. The fact that people didn't know just how bad they were going to be in December doesn't mean that they weren't that bad, it just means that people didn't know it yet.

When you are the first or second team out you can argue that literally every game you lost was the one that made the difference. Moral of the story, don't lose to crappy teams unless you are good enough to be better than the bubble, or bad enough that it doesn't make a difference. Because yeah, one loss to a crappy team, or two losses, or three of them, or, well, four of them like Clemson had just might end up being one, or two, or three, or four, too many.

By the way, is the fact that Missouri was picked to finish in 9th in their conference somehow more important than what they actually are, which is the worst team in the SEC? In fact, one that is bad enough that they've already lost to the other two worst teams in the standings. Because that would be really weird if how good people thought someone was going to be before any of the games had been played was more important than how good a team actually was once the games were played.

Surely you can't actually think that, even though that's clearly what you are arguing. Because that would be a really dumb thing to think.
 
Loyola last year finished 10-21 overall and 4-15 (counting the tournament) in the A10. And the A10 wasn't very good last season. That was an awful loss. The fact that people didn't know just how bad they were going to be in December doesn't mean that they weren't that bad, it just means that people didn't know it yet.

When you are the first or second team out you can argue that literally every game you lost was the one that made the difference. Moral of the story, don't lose to crappy teams unless you are good enough to be better than the bubble, or bad enough that it doesn't make a difference. Because yeah, one loss to a crappy team, or two losses, or three of them, or, well, four of them like Clemson had just might end up being one, or two, or three, or four, too many.

By the way, is the fact that Missouri was picked to finish in 9th in their conference somehow more important than what they actually are, which is the worst team in the SEC? In fact, one that is bad enough that they've already lost to the other two worst teams in the standings. Because that would be really weird if how good people thought someone was going to be before any of the games had been played was more important than how good a team actually was once the games were played.

Surely you can't actually think that, even though that's clearly what you are arguing. Because that would be a really dumb thing to think.

Quad 4 is too big of a range. You watched Missouri play. You watched NC A&T play. Missouri has a number of legit P6 players. NC A&T does not. Same with FSU last year. The 2 arent the same.
 
Pitt falls 2 spots in the NET from 52 to 54 and flips with James Madison pretty much who was 54 yesterday and is now 52 today. James Madison blew out Georgia State by 20 last night which probably had a lot to do with the drop of 2 spots. Need to blow out Louisville at home on Saturday.
 
Pitt falls 2 spots in the NET from 52 to 54 and flips with James Madison pretty much who was 54 yesterday and is now 52 today. James Madison blew out Georgia State by 20 last night which probably had a lot to do with the drop of 2 spots. Need to blow out Louisville at home on Saturday.
Also having a few of their OOC opponents put up duds also did not help. But 4 other bubble teams did lose road games (Utah, Colorado, Memphis, NW) so not all bad.
 
Quad 4 is too big of a range. You watched Missouri play. You watched NC A&T play. Missouri has a number of legit P6 players. NC A&T does not. Same with FSU last year. The 2 arent the same.
So why did Mizz lose at home to 282 Jackson State… if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck…. Mizz is awful. Bad loss for Pitt, but early in the season.
 
So why did Mizz lose at home to 282 Jackson State… if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck…. Mizz is awful. Bad loss for Pitt, but early in the season.

Because they arent good. But they are not the same as NC A&T or even Jackson State. They would win those leagues easily.
 
Because they arent good. But they are not the same as NC A&T or even Jackson State. They would win those leagues easily.
So Southern, the same league as Jackson State has a win at Miss State this year, which beat Mizz by 24 on the road. So highly doubt they would win the league easily.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT