Ranking players based on who you want back
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
I'd say a team with a NET ranking of 44 out of 350+ teams should be considered good.
I'll second this.
I would hold onto Burton, but everyone other than Hugley is (at best) basically a replacement level player in the ACC. Now, I don't need to be told that Capel could indeed find ways to engineer a net downgrade of the roster through the transfer portal. I'm all too aware of that possibility. But other than Hugley, if you're desperate to keep anybody else, you might as well just pack it up.
If they make the NCAA Tournament, you can consider them good. Good teams dont miss the NCAAT. If you arent in the top 45 or so (at-large plus conf champs who would have gotten an at-large anyway), you arent good.
Johnson and the Hoosiers have a golden opportunity tomorrow. Beat a coach-less Michigan team and they get a Tuesday night in Dayton!
Nobody agrees with you. If you go 9-11 in your league and cant make the NCAAT, nobody would think that's a good team.
I think they’re probably in with the Wake loss. They have 3 Quad 1 wins, Wake has 1.
I think all of the Big 10 teams are in right now, Michigan, Indiana, Rutgers. You could absolutely see two of them in Dayton though. I think the winner of the game tomorrow is on the 10/11 line, loser in Dayton.
Maybe but they better win 2 to be sure. If they lose or win 1, they are sweating it out. Plus, there's always a few bid stealers. It would be funny if a 9-11 team from the B10 made it over a 13-7 team from the ACC who went 23-9. The ACC has issues.
Sure
Then let’s bring back Justin , Dejuan , Sam young , and levance
Phil Martelli is probably a better head coach than Howard will ever be. They can’t use Howard’s absence as an excuse to lose that one.
No he’s not. The NIT is for 65th place and below. Think about the position you’re taking here. That a 9-11 9th place conference team is good. Does that sound reasonable to you? NET rankings aside.
If that’s good, I’d hate to see bad. Wait……
The Xavier loss really helps Wake.
It’s a bad bubble this year, really not many plausible teams. Wake has to really pull for Davidson in the A10. That could be a bid stealing league. I suppose Wake would also like SMU/Wyoming to lose early as well.
After looking at it, Wake might be in better shape than I gave them credit for. Their NET ranking is in the mid 30sz And VT is a win away from being very close to in, a win over ND tomorrow and they are right there. Could the ACC somehow get 6? Probably not.
Also, Pitino goes out in Rd 1. That’s got to be a massive disappointment. That team imploded late. The 1 bid leagues aren’t so fun when this happens, wonder if it causes him to look around.
The MAAC not being in that 7PM Monday slot is wrong. I always enjoyed that MAAC Championship game. Raft doing the game, it was like a JV Big East
Yes, he's very wrong. Syracuse was 8-10 and finished 10th in the ACC in 2018. They won 3 games in the NCAA tournament. If you think all the teams from the small conferences that make the tournament are better than every team that doesn't get invited then I have some beans you'll be interested in acquiring.
I didn't say they were a great team, or an elite team, I said good. There's 358 teams playing division 1 ball, if you think only the top 17% are good then I don't know what to tell you. Most every team in the NIT is a good team, not great, not elite, just good.
That would be considered an awesome season by Pitt fans, I'd salivate for a 17-14 (7-11) 10th place ACC, NIT Bid season! That would feel phenomenal!!!
Similar threads
