ADVERTISEMENT

NET Ranking: On March 17, Iowa is #43. How NET is Determined & What's a QUAD 1, 2, 3 & 4 Win/Loss

Franisdaman

Franisdaman

HB King
Nov 3, 2012
102,179
139,337
113
Heaven, Iowa
Interesting graphic on the NET ranking (see below).

The very latest NET rankings for all 353 teams can be found here: https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-net-rankings

Also, what follows is some more good info on how teams will be selected for the NCAA Tournament. Go here to read more: https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketbal...-what-know-about-college-basketballs-new-tool

As a reminder:

* 32 teams receive automatic bids to the NCAA tournament by winning their conference tournament.

* The NCAA Selection committee only selects the 36 teams who receive at-large bids.


Today (March 17) Iowa is #43 in the NET Rankings. Right now are we looking at an 8, 9, or 10 (?!?) seed for the NCAA Tournament?

TWO things will be used by the NCAA Selection Committee when selecting the NCAA Tournament Teams & then seeding them:

(1) The NET ranking, an index that incorporates the most current evaluation measures; and

(2) A tighter definition of a quality win, classifying wins as Quad 1, Quad 2, Quad 3 and Quad 4.

The hope is that by using (1) and (2) we will have a more accurate selection and seeding procedure.


The quadrant system will still be used on team sheets, which sort results in the following manner:

To date, WHAT FOLLOWS are the Iowa (22-11) Quadrant WINS & LOSSES. NOTE that:

* The date of the opponent's NET Ranking is listed.

* Similar to the NET ranking, a Quad 1 win on the date listed might not be a Quad 1 win TODAY or in mid March (there has been fluidity). Time will tell.


SORTING OF #43 (NET Rank) IOWA'S RESULTS (22-11) INTO THE 4 QUADS:


Quadrant 1 (4-10): Home vs a 1-30 team, Neutral site vs 1-50, Away vs 1-75.

WINS
# 24 on Jan 16 (H) Iowa State
#60 on Feb 23; #84 on Jan 17 (A) Penn State
#2 on Jan 17 Michigan (H)
#54 on Feb 23; #30 on Jan 17 Indiana (A)

LOSSES
# 20 on Jan 16 (H) Wisconsin
#7 on Jan 16 (A) Michigan State
#17 on Jan 16 (A) Purdue
#6 on Jan 17 Michigan State (H)
#63 on Jan 17 Minnesota (A)
#21 on Jan 17 Maryland (H)
#36 on Jan 17 Ohio State (A)
#22 on Jan 17 Wisconsin (A)
#46 on Feb 23; #11 on Jan 17 Nebraska (A)
#9 on March 16 Michigan (B1G Tourney, Neutral site)

Quadrant 2 (7-0): Home vs a 31-75, Neutral site vs 51-100, Away vs 76-135.

WINS
#77 on Jan 16 (N) Oregon
#88 on Jan 16 (N) UConn
#85 on Feb 23; # 58 on Jan 16 (A) Northwestern
# 36 on Jan 16 (H) Ohio State
#46 on Feb 23; # 10 on Jan 16 (H) Nebraska
#109 on Feb 23; #136 on Jan 17 Rutgers (A)
#54 on Feb 23; #30 on Jan 17 Indiana (H)


Quadrant 3 (5-1): Home vs a 76-160, Neutral site vs 101-200, Away vs 135-240.

WINS
#112 on Feb 23; #53 on Jan 16 (H) Pittsburgh
#169 on Feb 23; #217 on Jan 16 (N) UNI
#99 on Jan 17 Illinois (H)
#85 on Feb 23; #59 on Jan 17 Northwestern (H)
#109 on March 15 Illinois (B1G Tourney, Neutral site)

LOSSES
#94 on March 3; #109 on Feb 23; #136 on Jan 17 Rutgers (H)


Quadrant 4 (6-0): Home vs a 161-353, Neutral vs 201-353, Away vs 241-353

WINS
#234 on Jan 16 (H) UMKC
#192 on Jan 16 (H) Green Bay
#324 on Jan 16 (H) Alabama State
#269 on Jan 16 (H) Western Carolina
#343 on Jan 16 (H) Savannah State
#316 on Jan 16 (H) Bryant


0 games left on the reg season schedule:

Quadrant 1 (0 games): Home vs a 1-30 team, Neutral site vs 1-50, Away vs 1-75

NONE LEFT ON THE SCHEDULE

.
Quadrant 2 (0 games): Home vs a 31-75, Neutral site vs 51-100, Away vs 76-135.

NONE LEFT ON THE SCHEDULE


Quadrant 3 (0 games): Home vs a 76-160, Neutral site vs 101-200, Away vs 135-240.

NONE LEFT ON THE SCHEDULE


Quadrant 4 (0 games): Home vs a 161-353, Neutral vs 201-353, Away vs 241-353

NONE LEFT ON THE SCHEDULE

_______________________________

Previous NET Rankings for Iowa (notice the fluidity):

#43 on March 17 (SELECTION SUNDAY) after TWO TEAMS IOWA BEAT (Iowa State & Oregon) won their conf championship AND Michigan & Mich State (IOWA was 1-3 vs them) advanced to the BTT Championship

#44 on March 16 (after losing to #9 Michigan in BTT)
#41 on March 15 (after beating #109 Illinois in BTT)
#43 on March 14
#42 on March 11 (day after loss AT Nebraska)
#43 on March 10
#45 on March 8
#41 on March 7
#40 on March 5
#41 on March 3 & 4
#33 on Feb 28 (was idle)
#32 on Feb 27 (day after loss AT Ohio St)
#30 on Feb 22, 23 and 24
#29 on Feb 13 & 14
#26 on Feb 10, 11 & 12
#24 on Feb 7
#22 on Feb 2 (after Feb 1's 15 pt home win vs Michigan)
#27 on Jan 30 & Jan 31
#28 on Jan 29
#30 on Jan 28
#25 on Jan 27
#24 on Jan 26
#22 on Jan 23
#25 on Jan 22
#25 on Jan 19
#24 on Jan 18
#29 on Jan 13
#35 on Jan 12

_______________________________


To see all teams' NET Rankings & quadrant results, open the link that follows, scroll down on the page that comes up & on the far right you will see NET Team Sheets - Games through [date]. Click on the most recent link or a previous date.

LINK: https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/SitePages/Home.aspx


_______________________________

ALL B1G TEAMS' CURRENT (MARCH 17) NET RANKINGS:

Rank..Previous..Road..Neutral..Home..Non Div 1
8 8 Michigan St. Big Ten 27-6 8-4 4-1 15-1 0-0
9 9 Michigan Big Ten 28-5 7-4 4-0 17-1 0-0
12 12 Purdue Big Ten 23-9 6-6 2-3 15-0 0-0
17 17 Wisconsin Big Ten 23-10 8-5 3-2 12-3 0-0
27 27 Maryland Big Ten 22-10 6-5 1-2 15-3 0-0
43 44 Iowa Big Ten 22-11 4-6 4-1 14-4 0-0
48 48 Nebraska Big Ten 18-16 2-9 4-2 11-5 1-0
50 49 Penn St. Big Ten 14-18 4-9 1-3 9-6 0-0
54 53 Indiana Big Ten 17-15 3-9 1-1 13-5 0-0
55 55 Ohio St. Big Ten 19-14 5-7 2-1 12-6 0-0
61 57 Minnesota Big Ten 21-13 2-9 6-1 13-3 0-0
89 88 Northwestern Big Ten 13-19 1-9 2-2 10-8 0-0
101 100 Rutgers Big Ten 14-17 4-9 0-1 10-7 0-0
109 109 Illinois Big Ten 12-21 1-9 2-5 9-7 0-0
_______________________________


CLICK ON IMAGE FOR LARGER VIEW

DrH3eRmX0AEDOiK.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba, BirdistheWord, SDHN2013 and 1 other person
How the N'western win affects Iowa's NET:



Chad Leistikow‏Verified account@ChadLeistikow 2h2 hours ago

Another minor thing from last night's Iowa win at Northwestern. It maxed out NET points (the NCAA's new RPI), which takes into account margin of victory but caps it at 10 points. Iowa's final margin was 10 (73-63). Road wins also carry more weight in adjusted win % category.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SDHN2013, Hawkfan_08, BirdistheWord and 2 others
I had not seen that infographic before, thanks.

I’m trying to sort this out. Aren’t they effectively double if not triple counting location of games?
 
L. Wade Childress said:
I had not seen that infographic before, thanks.

I’m trying to sort this out. Aren’t they effectively double if not triple counting location of games?
Click to expand...

Yes because the models dictate it statistically. Tournament teams that have success in the tourney win on the road.
 
Thanks for posting that. I hadn't seen anything that detailed, yet. Obviously they are keeping some pieces of it under wraps, but at least that provides a better understanding of the components.
 
Assuming NW stays in the top 75 of the net rankings, last night's win could be the biggest for the Hawks from a NET points contribution standpoint. How I understand the net rankings, the committee will be looking more closely at winning percentage numbers based on 4 QUADS. A road win, over a team ranked in the top 75, is considered Quad 1. Given that we won by 10, the max point distribution was achieved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kwicasso, showtime641, unIowa and 2 others
Can someone with more time and brain power explain in simple terms how Nebbie is 13. Neb has fewer top 100 wins than us. 44 is the best win for Neb. Iowa has 2 top 20. We both have the same number of 300+ wins. 3 of their 4 losses have higher NET than all 3 of Iowa’s losses. I don’t think Iowa is too far off, but don’t see at all what Nebraska as done to deserve a 13 ranking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SDHN2013
HawkLand said:
Can someone with more time and brain power explain in simple terms how Nebbie is 13. Neb has fewer top 100 wins than us. 44 is the best win for Neb. Iowa has 2 top 20. We both have the same number of 300+ wins. 3 of their 4 losses have higher NET than all 3 of Iowa’s losses. I don’t think Iowa is too far off, but don’t see at all what Nebraska as done to deserve a 13 ranking.
Click to expand...

Margin of victory???
 
blockm2 said:
Margin of victory???
Click to expand...

Margin of victory is the lowest influence. I would venture to guess it's a combination of two things:

Efficiency (#2 criterion...defense obviously hurting Hawks) and SoS (aka "opponent" part of criterion#1)

Kenpom likes Iowa and Nebraska essentially the same as the NET rankings.
 
IowaPride95 said:
These rankings defy logic. Iowa went up 2 spots after a road win. ISU went up 3 spots while not playing. Really not a fan of this metric yet.
Click to expand...

Iowa State had two key opponents win last night: Kansas and Iowa. RPI was volatile too. All ranking schemes will fluctuate based off how your opponents do.

Edit: Auburn lost too as L Wade mentioned
 
  • Like
Reactions: icantfindausernamethatisntused
dawgs_04 said:
Margin of victory is the lowest influence. I would venture to guess it's a combination of two things:

Efficiency (#2 criterion...defense obviously hurting Hawks) and SoS (aka "opponent" part of criterion#1)

Kenpom likes Iowa and Nebraska essentially the same as the NET rankings.
Click to expand...

I've been digging into Nebraska vs. Iowa, and quite honestly, I can't figure it out.

Quad 1, Quad 2, Quad 3, Quad 4, All
Iowa 3-3 2-0 1-0 7-0 13-3
Nebraska 1-4 3-0 2-0 5-0 11-4

Iowa has better efficiency metrics. Iowa won head to head. Iowa has more wins against first 2 quads. The only thing i can think of is how the NET rankings take into consideration non-Division 1 teams. Nebraska played SW Minnesota State before Big Ten play. I put that win in quad 4 above, but I'm wondering if it doesn't get factored. Once again, I think our quad 4 number will hurt us overall, which we've all talked about time and time again with the scheduling.
 
Hawkfan_in_GoopherLand said:
I've been digging into Nebraska vs. Iowa, and quite honestly, I can't figure it out.

Quad 1, Quad 2, Quad 3, Quad 4, All
Iowa 3-3 2-0 1-0 7-0 13-3
Nebraska 1-4 3-0 2-0 5-0 11-4

Iowa has better efficiency metrics. Iowa won head to head. Iowa has more wins against first 2 quads. The only thing i can think of is how the NET rankings take into consideration non-Division 1 teams. Nebraska played SW Minnesota State before Big Ten play. I put that win in quad 4 above, but I'm wondering if it doesn't get factored. Once again, I think our quad 4 number will hurt us overall, which we've all talked about time and time again with the scheduling.
Click to expand...
SMSU won’t be factored in but it still shouldn’t matter that much. Overall I’ve liked the system but some of the one offs are wild..
 
Hawkfan_in_GoopherLand said:
I've been digging into Nebraska vs. Iowa, and quite honestly, I can't figure it out.

Quad 1, Quad 2, Quad 3, Quad 4, All
Iowa 3-3 2-0 1-0 7-0 13-3
Nebraska 1-4 3-0 2-0 5-0 11-4

Iowa has better efficiency metrics. Iowa won head to head. Iowa has more wins against first 2 quads. The only thing i can think of is how the NET rankings take into consideration non-Division 1 teams. Nebraska played SW Minnesota State before Big Ten play. I put that win in quad 4 above, but I'm wondering if it doesn't get factored. Once again, I think our quad 4 number will hurt us overall, which we've all talked about time and time again with the scheduling.
Click to expand...

Iowa's efficiency metrics are not better. Nebraska's offense is 10th in the country by adjusted efficiency from Pomeroy, and it's defense is 45th. Iowa has the 11th offense and 106th ranked defense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dawgs_04
HeRKeYHoPeFuL said:
Thanks for posting that. I hadn't seen anything that detailed, yet. Obviously they are keeping some pieces of it under wraps, but at least that provides a better understanding of the components.
Click to expand...

It's a step in the right direction. I would like to seem them use adjusted efficiency rankings (account for who you played for that level of efficiency) rather than raw efficiency rankings. My guess is that is at the request of the non-P5 teams. It's still better than the RPI.
 
dawgs_04 said:
Iowa State had two key opponents win last night: Kansas and Iowa. RPI was volatile too. All ranking schemes will fluctuate based off how your opponents do.

Edit: Auburn lost too as L Wade mentioned
Click to expand...
Iowa State actually had three key opponents win when you toss in Arizona as well, but ISU moved from 22 to 19, jumping past Marquette who moved from 21 to 20 while winning on the road at #52 Creighton. Just seems strange that a team not playing can move past a team that plays and wins on the road at a top 50 team based on what three former opponents, two of which ISU lost to, did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LaQuintaHawkeye
Some things that would made a big difference for Iowa would be UCONN, Oregon, and Pitt all being and staying in quadrant 2 wins and then UNI and Green Bay moving up to quadrant 3..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Underscore2
For folks wondering about movement... the NET Rankings have a score behind them. Changes in rank are not always reflective of the change in score.

If teams are bunched together with close scores, a small score change can significantly impact your rank. If there is a big gap in scores, changes in score won't necessarily affect the rank.
 
dawgs_04 said:
Margin of victory is the lowest influence. I would venture to guess it's a combination of two things:

Efficiency (#2 criterion...defense obviously hurting Hawks) and SoS (aka "opponent" part of criterion#1)

Kenpom likes Iowa and Nebraska essentially the same as the NET rankings.
Click to expand...

So while margin of victory alone is not what would set Nebraska apart, the margin of victory indirectly conributes to the efficiency rankings. Nebraska absolutely killed some of their weaker opponents this year:
  • MVSU - won by 69 points (nice)
  • SE Louisiana - won by 52 points
  • SW Minnesota State - won by 41 points
They also had big wins against some of their better opponents:
  • Seton Hall - won by 23
  • Creighton - won by 19
  • Oklahoma State - won by 23
On the other hand, Iowa struggled with some of the weaker teams on its schedule. Games against UMKC, Green Bay, Western Carolina, and Bryant should have all been 20-30+ point wins, but the largest margin in any of those games was 18, and we only be Bryant by 5. The Bryant game is basically a loss from an efficiency standpoint.

For reference, the old RPI ranking has Iowa #37 and Nebraska #48.
 
The biggest factor right now is probably efficiency. Nebraska is at +20.53 while we're at +15.53. Team value index is likely similar (NCAA hasn't released the details of that algorithm that I've seen). We're slightly ahead on winning percentage, and adjusted winning percentage, and we're likely behind on margin of victory (but note that the largest impact from any game is +/- 10 points).
 
SotaHawk87 said:
Some things that would made a big difference for Iowa would be UCONN, Oregon, and Pitt all being and staying in quadrant 2 wins and then UNI and Green Bay moving up to quadrant 3..
Click to expand...

All things that can still happen.

UCONN needs to jump 6 spots to be considered a Quad 2 win. Oregon is #82 now and needs to stay at or better than #100 to stay in Quad 2. Green Bay needs to move up 13 spots and UNI needs to jump up 29 spots to move to Quad 3 wins.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unoHawkeye and SotaHawk87
Thanks for all of the input and to the people that enjoy breaking it down. To be clear I wasn’t complaining about Iowa as I think they are about where they should be. Just looking at Nebraska on the surface appeared to be odd.

Without digging into little details it was just hard to grasp that a team with top wins that weren’t as good and losses that were worse according to NET rankings could be ranked so much higher. My initial thought was Iowa had more 300+ games, but they had the same number. Then throw in a worse record and head to head loss(I realize it doesn’t matter).

Again, thanks for some detailed insight.
 
Why do the majority of the Bracketologists have ISU as a higher seed than Iowa if the NET ratings mean something? What other component am I missing that would give ISU a 6 seed average and Iowa a 10 seed average in bracket matrix.

Iowa 3-3 1-0 2-0 7-0
ISU 2-2 1-1 3-0 6-0
 
TheTruthTheWholeTruth said:
Why do the majority of the Bracketologists have ISU as a higher seed than Iowa if the NET ratings mean something? What other component am I missing that would give ISU a 6 seed average and Iowa a 10 seed average in bracket matrix.

Iowa 3-3 1-0 2-0 7-0
ISU 2-2 1-1 3-0 6-0
Click to expand...

Because the major models have ISU in Top 25 and Iowa Top 40.

The rankings help rank teams. The committee looks at the quads based on the ranking metrics. The quads are just another tool/metric, they don't determine the rankings.
 
IowaPride95 said:
So Marquette went down for winning on the road at Creighton? I understand Auburn moving down for losing, but ISU moving past Marquette when Marquette logs a top 50 road win just seems strange.
Click to expand...

I was being facetious but it really shouldn’t be that hard to believe with any multivariate model. The rankings aren’t trying to provide an absolute metric; it’s all relative to other teams.
 
As of this morning (1-12), the B1G has 9 teams in the NCAA NET top 40; 5 teams in the NCAA NET top 20. Iowa checks in as #8 in the B1G at #35 . . . one spot above OSU.
 
icantfindausernamethatisntused said:
So while margin of victory alone is not what would set Nebraska apart, the margin of victory indirectly conributes to the efficiency rankings. Nebraska absolutely killed some of their weaker opponents this year:
  • MVSU - won by 69 points (nice)
  • SE Louisiana - won by 52 points
  • SW Minnesota State - won by 41 points
They also had big wins against some of their better opponents:
  • Seton Hall - won by 23
  • Creighton - won by 19
  • Oklahoma State - won by 23
On the other hand, Iowa struggled with some of the weaker teams on its schedule. Games against UMKC, Green Bay, Western Carolina, and Bryant should have all been 20-30+ point wins, but the largest margin in any of those games was 18, and we only be Bryant by 5. The Bryant game is basically a loss from an efficiency standpoint.

For reference, the old RPI ranking has Iowa #37 and Nebraska #48.
Click to expand...

Margin of victory shouldn’t carry so much weight since there could be underlying reasons for it.
Which is why some of these ranking piss me off. They in turn should not be given way too much weight in tourney evaluation.

Consider a team like Virginia. They play consistently elite defense over and over again. Then they face a team like say Bryant. Virginia plays their usual stellar defense yet Bryant shoots like the basket is the Pacific Ocean randomly this game DESPITE the stellar defense. The game is close but Virginia still wins because they get stops when it matters and the intangible measures such as talent disparity and depth. How do we measure that? And why in hell should Virginia be punished for it?
 
Last edited:
A loss to either PSU or Illinois this week would really suck.

All 14 B1G teams' NET ranking:


Rank..Previous..Road..Neutral..Home..Non Div 1
3 3 Michigan Big Ten 16-0 3-0 2-0 11-0 0-0
7 7 Michigan St. Big Ten 14-2 3-1 2-1 9-0 0-0
13 13 Nebraska Big Ten 12-4 1-3 2-1 8-0 1-0
18 18 Purdue Big Ten 10-6 1-4 2-2 7-0 0-0
19 23 Indiana Big Ten 12-4 1-4 1-0 10-0 0-0
21 22 Wisconsin Big Ten 11-5 3-2 2-1 6-2 0-0
22 20 Maryland Big Ten 14-3 3-1 1-0 10-2 0-0
29 35 Iowa Big Ten 14-3 1-2 3-0 10-1 0-0
36 36 Ohio St. Big Ten 12-4 3-2 1-0 8-2 0-0
47 56 Minnesota Big Ten 13-3 1-2 4-0 8-1 0-0
55 61 Northwestern Big Ten 10-6 0-2 2-1 8-3 0-0
72 75 Penn St. Big Ten 7-9 1-5 1-2 5-2 0-0
113 106 Rutgers Big Ten 8-7 1-4 0-0 7-3 0-0
125 117 Illinois Big Ten 4-12 0-4 0-4 4-4 0-0


LINK: https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-net-rankings
 
Last edited:
Here is some more good info on how teams will be selected for the NCAA Tournament.

Two things will be used by the NCAA Selection Committee when selecting the teams & then seeding them:

(1) The NET ranking, an index that incorporates the most current evaluation measures

The NET rankings can be found here: https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-net-rankings

(2) A tighter definition of a quality win, classifying wins as Quad 1, Quad 2, Quad 3 and Quad 4.

The hope is that by using (1) and (2) we will have a more accurate selection and seeding procedure.

The quadrant system will still be used on team sheets, which sort results in the following manner:

Quadrant 1 win: Home vs a 1-30 team, Neutral site vs 1-50, Away vs 1-75.
Quadrant 2 win: Home vs a 31-75, Neutral site vs 51-100, Away vs 76-135.
Quadrant 3 win: Home vs a 76-160, Neutral site vs 101-200, Away vs 135-240.
Quadrant 4 win: Home vs a 161-353, Neutral vs 201-353, Away vs 241-353

LINK:
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketbal...-what-know-about-college-basketballs-new-tool
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A

Men's Top 25 Polls & NET (2/3)

Replies
0
Views
267
Iowa Men's Basketball
Alum-Ni
A
A

Men's Top 25 Polls & NET (1/27)

Replies
0
Views
258
Iowa Men's Basketball
Alum-Ni
A
A

Men's Top 25 Polls & NET (2/10)

Replies
0
Views
280
Iowa Men's Basketball
Alum-Ni
A
A

Men's Top 25 Polls & NET (1/20)

Replies
0
Views
329
Iowa Men's Basketball
Alum-Ni
A
A

Men's Top 25 Polls & NET (1/13)

Replies
2
Views
900
Iowa Men's Basketball
GeorgePeeples
G
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back