|
Replies: 13
| visibility 107
|
National Champion [7584]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
NET said Big 12 was super this year.
2
Mar 19, 2023, 10:56 PM
|
|
What a joke.
|
|
|
|
 |
Top TigerNet [30711]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 13167
Joined: 1998
|
It said the acc was bad.... and....
1
Mar 19, 2023, 11:05 PM
|
|
it was correct on that account. It also said we didn't belong..... we know that story unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18202]
TigerPulse: 94%
52
Posts: 28130
Joined: 2003
|
Where did it have Purdue?***
2
Mar 20, 2023, 1:01 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7584]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
NET had 7 Big 12 teams in the top 28 and the worst
1
Mar 20, 2023, 2:47 PM
[ in reply to It said the acc was bad.... and.... ] |
|
was at 68. Seems like a self-licking ice cream cone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10902]
TigerPulse: 60%
45
Posts: 13963
Joined: 2006
|
Re: NET said Big 12 was super this year.
1
Mar 19, 2023, 11:13 PM
|
|
One day you will learn the NET does not measure heart of decide when 3 point shots go in. So far the Sweet 16 will be without 2 #1's, 2 #2's, 1 #3, and 2 # 4's so does the NET figure that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [26485]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
|
Re: NET said Big 12 was super this year.
1
Mar 20, 2023, 2:16 PM
|
|
Good lord coot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1501]
TigerPulse: 76%
30
|
Ikr, nobody else ever has poor shooting nights.
1
Mar 20, 2023, 3:15 PM
[ in reply to Re: NET said Big 12 was super this year. ] |
|
Oh wait, they do. Good teams have less, and they make adjustments when they do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8217]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
Posts: 16089
Joined: 2001
|
B12 has won the last 2 NCs. They may add a 3rd
1
Mar 19, 2023, 11:40 PM
|
|
Team to the Sweet 16 pending the outcome of this last game. I don’t consider that a bad showing. The B10 - that’s another story - that conference continues to get rewarded based off their NET with 8 or 9 bids every year. Bids that could and should go to more deserving teams/conferences. The ACC has been getting jobbed on number of teams and seeding with move toward the NET. Yet last year it outperformed everyone in # of wins and % while be held to just 5 bids. This year the ACC has already met expectations the NCAA placed on them with the seeding. In fact I’d say they actually already slight exceeded expectations as Pitt came from a First 4 game which is considered a 50/50 game. The ACC had 1 seed in the Top 16 and they have that. I would not be shocked if Miami is able to advance further though that region held intact a lot better than others so it will be challenging. More bids = more chances at wins and the B10 is gifted this opportunity every year unjustly. Most folks don’t realize that the NCAAT conference payouts are based on wins by conference in the tourney. It’s a multi year payout based on wins over the past several years. Again, more wins/more $. More bids/more chances at Ws. Better seeding, better chances at more Ws. The selection process needs to be fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18467]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11997
Joined: 2007
|
Re: B12 has won the last 2 NCs. They may add a 3rd
1
Mar 20, 2023, 8:05 AM
|
|
The old system (RPI) would have only slightly favored the ACC over the PAC 12 versus the NET System. We would have been next to last versus last amongst P5 conferences. The SEC would have swapped places with the Big10 in the RPI versus NET. There would not have been some major reshuffling of the deck. Clemson, particularly, was outside the unofficial, but long established RPI cut line. All time - the Final Four is comprised of 70% top 3 seeds. I’d say they do a pretty good job seeding the tournament. The bigger that number gets, the less upsets you’re getting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3159]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
The Mountain West was even viewed better than the ACC…
2
Mar 20, 2023, 9:49 AM
|
|
by the committee, judging by Nevada, Utah St & Boise all getting in (and being swiftly eliminated.)
I still maintain Clemson would have been a better choice than Nevada or Utah St…but I’m not a computer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18467]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11997
Joined: 2007
|
Re: The Mountain West was even viewed better than the ACC…
Mar 20, 2023, 10:06 AM
|
|
The RPI liked Mountain West even better than the NET, so NET isn’t the culprit. The culprit is Brad Brownell going out and losing not once, not twice, but FOUR TIMES to absolute garbage teams. As a fan you might want to throw those out of the computation but the committee can’t go through 360+ teams and throw out certain games. They may as well throw out our best wins since they’re equally outliers (and mostly just NC state). If we beat South Carolina and Loyola-C not only are we definitely in, the ACC probably gets at least one more team and better seeds all around. Brad should trying doing his job every game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [508]
TigerPulse: 90%
19
|
Re: NET said Big 12 was super this year.
1
Mar 20, 2023, 10:15 AM
|
|
The system used is a joke. It should favor who you beat not who you lost too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18467]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 11997
Joined: 2007
|
Re: NET said Big 12 was super this year.
Mar 20, 2023, 10:29 AM
|
|
So only Louisville’s wins should count and they should be in the tourney?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8217]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
Posts: 16089
Joined: 2001
|
Exactly - who you lost to should not matter at all
1
Mar 20, 2023, 10:37 AM
[ in reply to Re: NET said Big 12 was super this year. ] |
|
That is what the L column is for
You go on the road - you’re subjecting yourself to a possible L no matter who you are or who you are playing. It’s basketball too - any team can have a great night or a #### poor one. It’s much more subjected to upsets vs a sport like football.
The NCAA committee used to watch games and did a much better job. Now they use flawed analytics with garbage in/garbage out data. A system that that is being gamed by some conferences. The CFP committee is not perfect but the job they do ranking teams is light years ahead of the NCAA selection committee
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 13
| visibility 107
|
|
|
50
