First one was released today.Don’t they only update once a week?
Ohio state with more losses, fewer wins, and a 1-3 record vs quad 1Lol!!!
NET rankings don't pass the eye test!
No doubt MSU and OSU are ranked higher than the Gophers as well.
That is maybe true. It doesn’t mean this is a good metric. The fact that it is used at all is a joke.Doesn't matter. If the season ended today, Gophers are probably a 4 or 5 seed and that's a fact.
Penn state currently higher in the NET than Minnesota.
I guess they Are more efficient or something
All you need to know is that St Louis is 12 and Minnesota is in the 50s.
We should have a metric where winning games is more important than how close you lose and how much you win by.
Yup.We do. It's called RPI and it was the preferred method of picking team strength for many years.
I really don't like NET (regardless of where the Gophers are ranked). We could have emptied the bench with at least 5 minutes left against Michigan State but can't do that because of NET concerns. We could have thrown in the towel and let the subs play for the last three minutes against Wisconsin but, again, had to consider NET.
I demand a full and complete audit! Our RPI is #10.Lol!!!
NET rankings don't pass the eye test!
No doubt MSU and OSU are ranked higher than the Gophers as well.
This says MSU is #7?I will give NET credit for something: at least that metric doesn't have Duke in the top 25 like the polls still do. Duke is currently #115 in the NET rankings.
The fact that we are behind Penn State does seem kind of crazy but that probably is a feature of environmental factors this season and our lopsided 2 losses. Because of cancellations, Penn State has only 7 games overall with zero games against Quad 3&4 teams. We have 12 games with 7 against Quad 3&4 teams which, as someone else mentioned, apparently includes Michigan State at this point of the season.
Team | W/L | Conf | SoS Rank | NET 1-50 | 51-100 | 101-150 | 151-200 | 200+ | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. |
| Dixie State | 4-2 | Western Athletic | 209 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 2-0 |
. | Bellarmine | 3-3 | Atlantic Sun | 235 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 1-0 | |
. | UC San Diego | 2-0 | Big West | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | ||
. | Tarleton State | 2-2 | Western Athletic | 25 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 0-0 | |
1. | Gonzaga | 10-0 | West Coast | 63 | 5-0 | 1-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 3-0 | |
2. | Kansas | 8-2 | Big 12 | 40 | 4-1 | 0-1 | 1-0 | 0-0 | 2-0 | |
3. | Dayton | 5-2 | Atlantic 10 | 54 | 1-0 | 1-1 | 1-0 | 1-1 | 1-0 | |
4. | San Diego State | 6-2 | Mountain West | 16 | 1-1 | 2-0 | 2-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 | |
5. | Baylor | 9-0 | Big 12 | 228 | 1-0 | 4-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 4-0 | |
6. | Duke | 3-2 | Atlantic Coast | 229 | 0-2 | 1-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 1-0 | |
7. | Michigan State | 7-3 | Big Ten | 231 | 1-2 | 1-0 | 0-0 | 2-1 | 3-0 |
Not sure who is doing data entry at yahoo. But the ncaa official net on their website has MSU at 119This says MSU is #7?
Week 7
Poll Date : January 03, 2021
NET Rankings
Team W/L Conf SoS Rank NET 1-50 51-100 101-150 151-200 200+ . Dixie State 4-2 Western Athletic 209 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 2-0 . Bellarmine 3-3 Atlantic Sun 235 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-1 1-0 . UC San Diego 2-0 Big West 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 . Tarleton State 2-2 Western Athletic 25 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 1. Gonzaga 10-0 West Coast 63 5-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 3-0 2. Kansas 8-2 Big 12 40 4-1 0-1 1-0 0-0 2-0 3. Dayton 5-2 Atlantic 10 54 1-0 1-1 1-0 1-1 1-0 4. San Diego State 6-2 Mountain West 16 1-1 2-0 2-1 0-0 0-0 5. Baylor 9-0 Big 12 228 1-0 4-0 0-0 0-0 4-0 6. Duke 3-2 Atlantic Coast 229 0-2 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 7. Michigan State 7-3 Big Ten 231 1-2 1-0 0-0 2-1 3-0
This says MSU is #7?
Week 7
Poll Date : January 03, 2021
NET Rankings
Team W/L Conf SoS Rank NET 1-50 51-100 101-150 151-200 200+ . Dixie State 4-2 Western Athletic 209 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 2-0 . Bellarmine 3-3 Atlantic Sun 235 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-1 1-0 . UC San Diego 2-0 Big West 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 . Tarleton State 2-2 Western Athletic 25 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 1. Gonzaga 10-0 West Coast 63 5-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 3-0 2. Kansas 8-2 Big 12 40 4-1 0-1 1-0 0-0 2-0 3. Dayton 5-2 Atlantic 10 54 1-0 1-1 1-0 1-1 1-0 4. San Diego State 6-2 Mountain West 16 1-1 2-0 2-1 0-0 0-0 5. Baylor 9-0 Big 12 228 1-0 4-0 0-0 0-0 4-0 6. Duke 3-2 Atlantic Coast 229 0-2 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 7. Michigan State 7-3 Big Ten 231 1-2 1-0 0-0 2-1 3-0
Spot onThe complaint about the NET rankings is they measure which team SHOULD win, not which team actually wins. So, if you play efficiently and lose you don't get docked for the loss. But, if a highly-talented inefficient team wins, they don't get credit for the wins. It is great for gamblers to figure out which teams to bet on, but should only be one small factor in determining the Field of 68.
That's not what I'm seeing.
DI Men's Basketball Rankings - NCAA Men's Basketball NET Rankings | NCAA.com
Get NCAA college basketball rankings from the Associated Press, USA Today Coaches poll and the NCAA NET Rankings.www.ncaa.com
It would be interesting to measure how accurate the NET ranking is in predicting wins. Isn't that they purpose? To determine which team would do better in a game? I would bet that the NET is awful in predicting the winner in those obvious game where it look wrong.KenPom and Net do some things better than RPI
RPi is a better measure of achievement.
Once you have a large enough sample of games (I’d argue you never have a large enough sample when you only play 30 games and there are 300+ teams) at some point efficiency based metrics become better predictors than RPI.
I think we should measure teams based on achievement rather than based on how we think they might hypothetically achieve moving forward
I think Kenpom and other efficiency rankings are meant to be predictive.It would be interesting to measure how accurate the NET ranking is in predicting wins. Isn't that they purpose? To determine which team would do better in a game? I would bet that the NET is awful in predicting the winner in those obvious game where it look wrong.
Well they are 119 when I click the link...so you're drunk?
No, I said they were #119 and posted that source. You must have me confused with someone else.
The complaint about the NET rankings is they measure which team SHOULD win, not which team actually wins. So, if you play efficiently and lose you don't get docked for the loss. But, if a highly-talented inefficient team wins, they don't get credit for the wins. It is great for gamblers to figure out which teams to bet on, but should only be one small factor in determining the Field of 68.
I see that. Yahoo is way off but right for some teams...Not sure who is doing data entry at yahoo. But the ncaa official net on their website has MSU at 119
duke at 115
I blame alcoholI see that. Yahoo is way off but right for some teams...