Possible Q3 games
Mizz
@ WVU
@ Lou
Syr
@ GT
Wake
ND
Lou
@ BC
FSU
Not going 12-0 there. You know we'll have a few bad nights. The problem is we play so many of these games
Netscape - Daily discussion on scores and Net impact
- Thread starter Dointhatrag
- Start date
Possible Q3 games
Mizz
@ WVU
@ Lou
Syr
@ GT
Wake
ND
Lou
@ BC
FSU
Not going 12-0 there. You know we'll have a few bad nights. The problem is we play so many of these games
Acc has been suprisingly really good out of conference. I think we have ten teams in the top 82. Way better than last year. ND had beaten OK St. FSU beat Colorado. UNC took care of Arkansas. I think the ACC probably wins the SEC challenge due to the matchups.
Also, I don’t think that seems like a crazy high amount of Quad 3 games, even though you overestimated it a little bit.
Pitt will probably go like 9-1 against Quad 3, but the difference this year is the beatdowns we put on the Quad 3 and 4 wins. I expect a lot of love from the computers
If you play the #76 at home, that's a Q3 game. Considering the 76th best team is rated higher than 275 other teams, its ridiculous that that's a Q3 game. Heck, Pitt was 67 on Selection Sunday, not far from Q3 themselves
Actually Rutgers lost 4 Q3s, not 5. And they were also only 4-7 in Q1s (we were 6-6, by way of comparison). And they were 5-9 in road/neutrals, so that didn't really help them either. Which is why, even though their NET was 40 and ours was 56, we got in and they did not. Because the committee does not select the teams based on NET and it does not seed teams based on NET.
And yeah, Clemson lost 2 Q3 and 3 Q4. You know why that was? Because they weren't all that good. Which was reflected in their NET ranking of 67. Even though the committee does not select the teams based on NET, Clemson wasn't good enough to overcome some of the awful losses they had. And Clemson also gets dinged because their nonconference schedule was pathetic. South Carolina was probably their 4th toughest nonconference game. And you think, hey, South Carolina, SEC team, they must be pretty good. Their NET ranking was 235. They went 11-21.
And oh, yeah, they beat Clemson.
They beat NC State 3 times by a combined 65 points. Should they have gotten in over NC State?
No. It’s about a season of work. You could say Michigan should have gotten in over Pitt or Vanderbilt as well.
It's almost as if teams play somewhere in the mid-30s games. And that they all count.
Who knew?
Oh, wait, everyone knows. Except, apparently, for you.
Clemson and NC State resumes werent all that different. If Team X beats Team Y by 25 every time, I'd take Team X. I also dont care that they lost to Loyola Chicago on Halloween. That kept them out.
Pitt's only chances for Q1/2 wins
Clem
@ Syr
UNC
Duke
@ Duke
@ Miami
@ NC St
@ Wake
@ UVa
@ Clem
Maybe: Wake, Syr, VT
Better than I expected TBH
Interestingly we are ahead of Florida and way ahead of Mizzou (114th)
A famous person once said that the NeT loves blowouts, which Pitt has a few. Mizz also has a bad loss. Florida is odd. But if Pitt beats WVU, they should be able to creep up to high 40s/low 50s before resuming ACC play.
They probably wont even move up a spot by beating Q4 WVU. I would have guessed about 65 for Pitt so slightly better than I thought. Missouri is an absolute killer. I was hoping they'd be close to Q2 but they are closer to Q4 than Q2. They arent going to be Q4 but are going to stay a solid Q3 loss and we can only have 1 more the rest of the season. Wished we guarded Shawn East.
This doesn't change my opinion that we need to win 14 of the next 17 non-Duke ACC games. Impossible
Mizzou is 114....Q4 is 161 (47 away), Q2 is 75 (39 away). So.....technically closer to a Q2 loss.
I can live with 60. I think Pitt is in trouble if we can't win at least 4 of the next 5 games though before UNC and Duke.
Dang I know its early so there's more movement but winning a Q4 road game shouldn't move you up that much. I'll take it but NET is so effed up. We dropped 11 after the Duke blowout. Had we lost by 1, we would have been 1 seed line higher and not in Dayton. Stupid
Also, I may be sleep deprived but is Purdue Fort Wayne really 54 right now? Canisius at 150 is a decent opp too if they blow them out. Would be quad 3 and 2 at present but likely to drop to quad 4 and quad 3 over time or with Pitt blow out.
A few Big12 wins by them and they’ll move up to Q2, conference losses won’t hurt them much. Need them to not lose another “buy” game though.
Yea and once they get Kriisa back, I think they win a fair amount of those home games. 6-12 in B12. With the mental dude, they would have been 8-10/9-9 and NCAAT
Yea, definitely a NET glitch. They are 1-2 Q1/2 and 5-0 vs Q4 but their 3-1 true road record is worth a ton this early I guess. This makes me wonder if we should schedule some non-con road games at like RMU, YSU, St. Francis, etc. I was wondering why Auburn played at App St (and lost). Maybe this is the next NET hack.
And a lone loss to San Fran, which has been rolling. Torvik has them in 200s…and Pitt as an 18 point favorite. Curious how that would play out in the Net.
A few thoughts/questions: What was our NET entering ACC play last year?
Our current NET is already higher than anything we would have been last year too then, right?
So even with a few early Ls and some “eye test” concerns, are we in a more advantageous spot than last year at this moment in time?
Our current NET is already higher than anything we would have been last year too then, right?
So even with a few early Ls and some “eye test” concerns, are we in a more advantageous spot than last year at this moment in time?
73 on December 29, 2022, 1 day before we beat UNC. We were already 2-0 in the ACC at that time though. Blowouts skew the NET so much.
It's not a glitch, it's a small sample size. It's why the first year the NCAA didn't release the first NET rankings until sometime in January. But lots of people complained about that, so they pushed that up to early December. Probably assuming that people would understand small sample sizes.
Which just shows that they are foolish.
They are 9-1 (7-1 in games that count for NET) with a road win at Oakland who has a road win at Xavier. Pitt should win, but maybe take it seriously still.
NET loves road games to a weird extreme. I get trying to encourage teams to travel but it seems so overboard. Hence having Princeton as a top 10 team in the country based on being 6-0 on road/neutral court games even though they're mostly winning close ones against unranked teams.
This is something teams like Pitt are going to have to try to manipulate. I realize there is a really big risk in losing one of these games. But they also come with a pretty big reward too I guess.
This is bad too. I really dislike NET. I'm not a Pomeroy hater for instance, it's fine for gamblers. But we need a system that has the values of sportsmanship and resume comparison more than another predictive model that considers Princeton and Miami to be so exceptional for playing road games or running up the score.
Its really, really bad. I said before, they need to "turn off" the score once a certain win probability is reached. If Miami goes up 10-0 vs LIU and has a 99% win probability, cut it. Game over (for NET purposes). But I wouldn't use Vegas metrics at all. But I also didn't like RPI. I guess my reasoning for turning off the efficiency tracking is that none of that stuff matters when the game's outcome is no longer in doubt. Using a ridiculous analogy, if WVU beats Drexel by 90 on Saturday because all Drexel's players were suspended besides the walk-ons, their NET would go up by literally 100 spots. And are they 100 spots better simply due to a fluke game vs Drexel.
Coaches have to be aware of this. Every team needs a NET consultant or someone to reverse engineer it. You need to blow teams out and you need to win road games, even vs bad teams. You'll see these mid-majors with ridiculously good NETs, its because they are winning a ton of Q3 and Q4 road games.
And to recap, you don't think that they should use "Vegas metrics at all", but you think that Alabama should be in the football playoff because they are the "better" team (ie, Vegas says they are better) than Florida State.
Teams NETs are jumping the way that they are because of one thing, small sample sizes. That's it, that's the list. 30 games into the season that mythical WVU win over Drexel will count no more for them than their 17 point loss to us, or their 8 point loss to Monmouth, or their 4 point win over Bellarmine.
BTW, what if they turn off the score in that Miaim - LIU game when it is 10-0, and then LIU ends up winning the game? Ha, ha, ha, sucks to be you, LIU. We stopped counting anything from your game 36 minutes ago.
If LIU ends up winning the game, it never really "turned off" because the turning off function happens after the game. Miami up 10-0, 99% win probability. LIU comes back to go up to tie at 10 and the teams trade baskets until Miami makes a shot at the buzzer to win 72-70. Nothing counts for the game past the 10-0 score. In this case, that's actually good for Miami.
In a long line of dumb ideas, this one is close to the top of the list.
I mean not at the top, but close to it.
And no one is smart enough to figure out that efficiency metrics shouldn't count once the game's outcome has been decided.
"Turning off" efficiency metrics once the game has been decided is dumb? I think basically everyone agrees with me. In fact, if anyone disagrees with me on this or something similar, please show yourself.
Latest posts
-
New Pitt player on the College Football HOF ballot- Latest: LeftCoastPanther
-
Recruiting Article Pitt is first power-four offer for 2026 New Jersey OL
- Latest: TheSpecialSauce
-
-
