NET Rating System & Other Complaints

[DC_Area_Panther]

Heard Two Complaints Yesterday on TV by sports talking heads (one was Boeheim on AACCN) the oother was someone on ESPN about Selection of Teams for the NCAA Tourney and a disloke of the NET system.

(1) ESPN guy ( I believe) --Too many league games being played and not enough OOC games to allow a fair comparison of relative strength of various leagues -- this leads to leagues like the ACC being under-rated since you cannot schedule enough quality OOC opponents. He favored teams playing at least 15 games OOC.

(2) Boeheim-- Tourney field should be chosen based only on teams' last 20 games to get the best at end-of season teams in the tourney rather than including teams whose ratings are skewed upward by early season blowout wins. The objective should be to put the true best (at end of season) teams in the tourney.

Fantasy right now--but thoughts welcomed on these? Personally, I think there is some merit to these ideas--which means rejecting the heavy weighting on the NET system. I particularly dislike the 20 game ACC season--would like it shortened.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Heard Two Complaints Yesterday on TV by sports talking heads (one was Boeheim on AACCN) the oother was someone on ESPN about Selection of Teams for the NCAA Tourney and a disloke of the NET system.

(1) ESPN guy ( I believe) --Too many league games being played and not enough OOC games to allow a fair comparison of relative strength of various leagues -- this leads to leagues like the ACC being under-rated since you cannot schedule enough quality OOC opponents. He favored teams playing at least 15 games OOC.

(2) Boeheim-- Tourney field should be chosen based only on teams' last 20 games to get the best at end-of season teams in the tourney rather than including teams whose ratings are skewed upward by early season blowout wins. The objective should be to put the true best (at end of season) teams in the tourney.

Fantasy right now--but thoughts welcomed on these? Personally, I think there is some merit to these ideas--which means rejecting the heavy weighting on the NET system. I particularly dislike the 20 game ACC season--would like it shortened.

The first point has merit but if they decreased the league schedule to 18, guess who the coaches are going to replace those 2 games with? If you guessed P6 teams, you'd be wrong. If they did drop to 18 but mandated that the ACC has to play like 6 P6 teams including holiday tournaments, then I'd be ok with it. In my other post, I said they need to start the season playing ACC games to get the teams prepared for the holiday tournaments and ACC/SEC Challenge.

The 2nd point doesn't even warrant a reply.

 

[Gep Dawg]

How about they do it like european soccer does for the Champions League? Weight each conference based on a rolling average of their performance in the tournament the past 2-3 years and take the top teams according to rankings? So if ACC has the best average performance the past few years they get 8 bids and that goes to top teams in standings that year. If one team wins the ACCT and didn't finish in the Top 8 they get in as well just like if a team wins the national cup does but didn't finish in the top 4-5 of their top division.