NET Update

[CatEye2010]

We dropped from 10 to 12, Bama moved up 1, 8 to 7.
Our Q line looks like this:

6-4 1-0 1-0 6-0. So one of our Q3 wins moved to a Q2.

Big move by Michigan from 15 to 11 to jump us, on the strength of a home win over Washington by 16 and a road loss to Minnesota by 3 in OT. Very puzzling.🤨

 

[Digger-Cat]

We dropped from 10 to 12, Bama moved up 1, 8 to 7.
Our Q line looks like this:

6-4 1-0 1-0 6-0. So one of our Q3 wins moved to a Q2.

Big move by Michigan from 15 to 11 to jump us, on the strength of a home win over Washington by 16 and a road loss to Minnesota by 3 in OT. Very puzzling.🤨

The Michigan and Gonzaga rankings make zero sense to me. It makes me not trust the metrics.

Throw Houston in there too. No quad 1 wins and damn near lost to UCF yesterday.

 

[FtWorthCat]

Barring a total collapse, meaning we finish somewhere between 10-8 and 12-6 in the SEC, we will be a 2 or 3 seed. I just hope that we are put in a region where the teams higher than us are not SEC teams. I would much rather be in a region with Iowa State or Duke than Auburn or Alabama.

 

[TucsonCat]

There's no great mystery here.
10, 11, 12, and 13 all lost yesterday and they filled the vacuum.

I don't necessarily care.
The committee doesn't care what you're net is.
They look at what your opponents' is.

 

[HenryMuto]

The sites I value still have Kentucky as a 2 seed. I thought maybe we would drop to a 3 seed but since many of the 1/2/3 seeds fell we stayed put. Need to beat Vandy or we will drop to a 3 seed for sure.

 

[TheDude73]

The sites I value still have Kentucky as a 2 seed. I thought maybe we would drop to a 3 seed but since many of the 1/2/3 seeds fell we stayed put. Need to beat Vandy or we will drop to a 3 seed for sure.

3 seed or better will be way beyond my wildest expectations for this year. That Pope may well slap together a 2-5 seed in his very first year at UK with an entirely new team has got to be fodder for coach of the year. Not just SEC, but national.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

20 to 23 wins this year, folks.
9-9 in the SEC.
4 seed when it's all said and done.

A good season for year #1 on the rebuild.

 

[TucsonCat]

We dropped from 10 to 12, Bama moved up 1, 8 to 7.
Our Q line looks like this:

6-4 1-0 1-0 6-0. So one of our Q3 wins moved to a Q2.

Big move by Michigan from 15 to 11 to jump us, on the strength of a home win over Washington by 16 and a road loss to Minnesota by 3 in OT. Very puzzling.🤨

Michigan won on Sunday.
They dropped 1 spot for their trouble.
Kentucky jumped them.
Won by 4 in overtime.
Scoring margin matters.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Michigan won on Sunday.
They dropped 1 spot for their trouble.
Kentucky jumped them.
Won by 4 in overtime.
Scoring margin matters.

Yep. Which explains Houston who is just throttling teams (think last game was the only game they not won by double digits all season long).

 

[The_Answer1313]

The NET can be explained like this.

Human polls mostly set the line at games at zero. You win, you move up. You lose, you move down.

NET and Efficiency metrics it's all about what you were expected to do given your rank and your opponent's rank. So say you were supposed to beat a team by 10 based on the skill level of each team and you only win by say 5. You might move down. Because that might mean maybe you were overrated, your opponent was underrated or a bit of both. It's a constant moving scale.


Human polls and seeding is still largely based on resume. Despite plastering the NET numbers all over the Team Sheets the committee uses to make these decisions. It's very much who did you beat which a lot of people like.

Teams with the best resume and teams that are simply the best correlate well but it's not exact. You could be a very good team with a poor resume especially if you play in a conference where resume building win opportunities are lacking. I think this is the whole purpose of even having the NET. To put everything on a more level playing field. To be able to compare the teams that say played 15 Q1 games vs the team that played 3 Q1 games.