Hope you didn't interpret my comment as a negative attack - I think this is my only post in this thread and I'm not trying to reignite the heat you were taking on this thread yesterday. And believe me, I don't have any hangups that you are a Badger supporter. I grew up in Wisconsin and earned my MS at UW, literally knocked on wood through the whole second half of the Sweet 16 in 2000 because I thought it was helping the comeback, and sweated through the Arizona victory to get to the final four in 2013 alone in my Madison apartment because I did not want to face a loss in public with friends who less emotionally invested. I've also been rooting for Tony Bennett simply because my dad loved Dick Bennett. I have equally as strong ties to the UMN and root for them during head to head matchups against UW - but I can relate your commitment to multiple programs, albeit not on the professional or financial level.
My main point in responding, was that in my opinion, this metric should not be judged on how well it characterizes the top or the bottom, but rather how well it characterizes the middle. I come from a statistics background, which doesn't validate my opinion, but that is the lens through which i view this. "We" don't need help determining who is the best, but we need help sorting out who the last 4-8 in the tournament deserves to be. That is where the stakes are the highest, both from a emotional standpoint for the fans, but also a financial perspective for the institutions. The NET is simply a model - and until the committee communicates how this model will weigh on seeding decisions, coaches will and should be changing the way they finish off games in order to maximize their statistical gains.