Still 38th in NET Rankings

[SUMG]

Pleasantly surprised by how high we still are.

Don't think we have a chance to go Dancin'. But what will hack me off....is we will see numerous P5s with lower NET rankings than us.....get in as At Larges.

Love this team.....looking forward to them doing some damage....in whatever postseason tourney we're in. (most likely the NIT). 

[CMJ]

I don't think the committee should only use the NET.  It's one tool among several to look at.  Still it sucks when schools that have 8-10 league records get in.

[glick1980]

I still see some P5’s with NET’s in the 60’s worse resumes and worse quality than UNT predicted to make the field.

[Andrew]

45 minutes ago, glick1980 said:

I still see some P5’s with NET’s in the 60’s worse resumes and worse quality than UNT predicted to make the field.

Because it’s all a joke…..

[MeanGreen22]

They’ll point to our lack of Q1 games and completely turn a blind eye to the fact that these same teams they’re putting in the dance wanted no part of scheduling us. It’s frustrating. 

Edited March 12, 2023 by MeanGreen22

[emmitt01]

1 hour ago, MeanGreen22 said:

They’ll point to our lack of Q1 games and completely turn a blind eye to the fact that these same teams they’re putting in the dance wanted no part of scheduling us. It’s frustrating. 

Never forget how NCAA logic works.

Why is Team A ranked despite their losses? 
 

“Because they play in such a tough conference”

 

And what makes that conference so tough? 
 

“Because it’s filled with ranked teams”

[NorthTexasWeLove]

2 hours ago, glick1980 said:

I still see some P5’s with NET’s in the 60’s worse resumes and worse quality than UNT predicted to make the field.

[NorthTexasWeLove]

12 minutes ago, emmitt01 said:

Never forget how NCAA logic works.

Why is Team A ranked despite their losses? 
 

“Because they play in such a tough conference”

 

And what makes that conference so tough? 
 

“Because it’s filled with ranked teams”

And thus the man-made analytics like Kenpom and NET and whatever other BS out there sucks. It all has human data points and those data points are always going to be skewed in favor of the "bigger" conferences. 

There has to be concrete data points that create a true cut line. And like I said yesterday, I truly think it has to be at MINIMUM 20+ regular season wins AND .500 or better in league play. We can keep the tourney AQ for everyone. Otherwise, it's all BS

[Andrew]

1 minute ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

And thus the man-made analytics like Kenpom and NET and whatever other BS out there sucks. It all has human data points and those data points are always going to be skewed in favor of the "bigger" conferences. 

There has to be concrete data points that create a true cut line. And like I said yesterday, I truly think it has to be at MINIMUM 20+ regular season wins AND .500 or better in league play. We can keep the tourney AQ for everyone. Otherwise, it's all BS

Agreed. More and more things like Ken Pom, Net, Sagrin, schedule difficulty etc… are “taken into consideration” but more often than not it screws over the smaller conferences. 

[CMJ]

18 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

And thus the man-made analytics like Kenpom and NET and whatever other BS out there sucks. It all has human data points and those data points are always going to be skewed in favor of the "bigger" conferences. 

There has to be concrete data points that create a true cut line. And like I said yesterday, I truly think it has to be at MINIMUM 20+ regular season wins AND .500 or better in league play. We can keep the tourney AQ for everyone. Otherwise, it's all BS

Well, the metrics are also out there to reward teams for scheduling tougher games, because when it was straight wins teams like Syracuse (I remember Boeheim specifically because Vitale would point it out) would schedule about 5 cupcakes during OOC so they'd have sparkling records.  So then about 15-20 years ago there started to be more and more emphasis on SOS.  It was there before that that - Tom Pender made the NCAA tournament at Texas a couple of times with pretty mediocre records because he scheduled so tough in non conference, but that was the exception.

[GMG_Dallas]

21 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

And thus the man-made analytics like Kenpom and NET and whatever other BS out there sucks. It all has human data points and those data points are always going to be skewed in favor of the "bigger" conferences. 

There has to be concrete data points that create a true cut line. And like I said yesterday, I truly think it has to be at MINIMUM 20+ regular season wins AND .500 or better in league play. We can keep the tourney AQ for everyone. Otherwise, it's all BS

I'd argue the data points aren't terrible. They just aren't being followed. If NET says UNT is number 38 in the country, why is UNT being passed over for teams in the 60s? That's the problem.

Anyways, this is all speculation until the actual brackets are out. I doubt it'll be any different than previous years.

Edited March 12, 2023 by GMG_Dallas

[Cooke County Kid]

We are also rated well in the KenPom rankings (45) we have a couple of bad loses in Rice and Charlotte but still are ranked pretty high.  We shall see how it plays out, this team is good just no more hiccups!

[greenminer]

The NET is a "primary tool" for team evaluation by NCAA.  I don't take that to mean it is the end-all, be-all ranking of level of play.

you still need the human element to make judgement calls.

Edited March 12, 2023 by greenminer

[NorthTexasWeLove]

33 minutes ago, greenminer said:

The NET is a "primary tool" for team evaluation by NCAA.  I don't take that to mean it is the end-all, be-all ranking of level of play.

you still need the human element to make judgement calls.

I disagree. Just like we don't need human judgment in the CFB playoff, we don't need it for the NCAA tourney. Human element in these instances are always going to lean to bigger brand for more eyeballs, always. 

[CMJ]

8 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

I disagree. Just like we don't need human judgment in the CFB playoff, we don't need it for the NCAA tourney. Human element in these instances are always going to lean to bigger brand for more eyeballs, always. 

I guess the deal is there is no analytic that is 100% fair.  Hell, even in pro leagues where it's much smaller and more representative of who the best are, you still get Division champs that have worse records, etc..

Edited March 12, 2023 by CMJ

[NorthTexasWeLove]

32 minutes ago, CMJ said:

I guess the deal is there is no analytic that is 100% fair.  Hell, even in pro leagues where it's much smaller and more representative of who the best are, you still get Division champs that have worse records, etc..

True. But the parameters are set and widely known and there is no pulling strings behind closed doors making sure X team makes the playoffs from Y division. They either do or they don't. 

[GMG_Dallas]

45 minutes ago, CMJ said:

I guess the deal is there is no analytic that is 100% fair.  Hell, even in pro leagues where it's much smaller and more representative of who the best are, you still get Division champs that have worse records, etc..

But in the pros, say the NFL where all division winners get in the playoffs, you wouldn't put the 2nd best team from a division in the playoffs simply because you view their division and/or schedule as tougher. You win the games in front of you and after the division winners, whoever has the best record gets in. You don't get the benefit of your division-mates being good.

[CMJ]

7 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:

But in the pros, say the NFL where all division winners get in the playoffs, you wouldn't put the 2nd best team from a division in the playoffs simply because you view their division and/or schedule as tougher. You win the games in front of you and after the division winners, whoever has the best record gets in. You don't get the benefit of your division-mates being good.

Well, that's largely because there are so much fewer divisions.  When there are 30 something conferences that simply isn't reasonable.

[NorthTexasWeLove]

7 minutes ago, CMJ said:

Well, that's largely because there are so much fewer divisions.  When there are 30 something conferences that simply isn't reasonable.

But it could be tweaked, to fit that narrative. Should 25-26-27 win teams really be on the outside looking in, regardless of conference affiliation? In my eyes, a 27 win team should never be sitting at home. 

[greenminer]

I think we are starting to get into the realm of the "why" the human element isn't liked by some of y'all.

I get it.  You have to deal with bias.  And, it seems like 99% of the time that bias is working against us/mid majors.

Having said that, I would rather frame this conversation around that bias, how we can better (and more fairly) handle it.  Rather than conversations about getting rid of the human element.

[NorthTexasWeLove]

7 minutes ago, greenminer said:

I think we are starting to get into the realm of the "why" the human element isn't liked by some of y'all.

I get it.  You have to deal with bias.  And, it seems like 99% of the time that bias is working against us/mid majors.

Having said that, I would rather frame this conversation around that bias, how we can better (and more fairly) handle it.  Rather than conversations about getting rid of the human element.

I understand the idea of needing to worry about US and how to shape US to be where we want to be. But there is no way to handle it in our position outside of running the table during tourney time and, if not, hoping for the best. Then, settling for 2nd tiered tournaments. If concrete watermarks were created,  we could keep our players home, too, if they knew 25/26 wins gets them to the real dance. That's instant built-in exposure and conference money rolling in. It would bolster our NIL and recruiting. Now, granted, elitst know-it-all mouthpieces like Jay Bilas would have on-set aneurysms if fair processes were actually streamlined and implemented. 

[emmitt01]

Here is where the “big school” versus “small school” argument will never be truly fair.  
 

If I put the NBA Western Conference All-Star team in North Texas jerseys and had them play our current schedule, they would go 34-0 and win every game by a minimum of 30 points.   And the selection committee would put them in the NCAA tournament with a worse seed than the champion of several “power 5” leagues.  
 

Granted, we’d pull off a couple “upsets” on our way to the title, but the rankings/seedings would be a joke.  

Edited March 12, 2023 by emmitt01

[GMG_Dallas]

31 minutes ago, CMJ said:

Well, that's largely because there are so much fewer divisions.  When there are 30 something conferences that simply isn't reasonable.

Anything is reasonable when greed isn't a factor.

[NT80]

NCAA NET rankings (thru yesterday).  Our record shows as only 24-7. 

I assume that is D-1 games played only?  We need to stop scheduling lower division games.

https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-net-rankings

[GMG_Dallas]

38th and it doesn't matter. Let's have teams in the 60s in.