NET Ranking: On March 17, Iowa is #43. How NET is Determined & What's a QUAD 1, 2, 3 & 4 Win/Loss
- Thread starter Franisdaman
- Start date
Luckily @TheTruthTheWholeTruth studies NET rankings several hours a day and since he (unlike us) has common sense and is not ignorant, I am sure he will talk down to us & explain this to all of us dumb folk
How kind of you to tag me, Fran. I had to unblock you the other day when I couldn’t find the game thread and, rookie mistake, forgot to put you back on ignore.
I’ve explained multiple times why Iowa is lower than the kind folks here think they should be in the NET rankings. I’m sure you’ve used the search function before, yes? The condensed version is:
Actual outcome vs Expexted outcome
Defensive efficiency
NCOS
I sure hope you errrr Fran has the boys ready to play Tuesday. Tell me all about your errrr Fran’s buyout again. LOL, your schtick will never get old. I’m sure others thinks it’s top notch entertainment as well.
LOL; keep me on ignore, snow flake. As you can see, I care A LOT!
How many hours did you spend on NET & your own personal "the truth" bracketology yesterday? How about today?
LOL; you are a clown.
Just so you all know what @TheTruthTheWholeTruth thinks about you, I quote him twice below.
Both of these posts are from page 11 of this thread.
As you can see from what I highlight in red, he thinks we all lack common sense. He thinks we have no clue when it comes to NET rankings. He also thinks we are ignorant.
As you can also see, he thinks he is "the expert" on NET rankings. Why? Because he claims he puts hours of research into this...daily.
I called him out on this; he told me to F off and said he would put me on ignore. I am fine with that.
But as you can see directly above, he can't even keep his word! Where's THE TRUTH in that?
I am sure he will be hyperventilating (again) when reading this post but I am simply pointing out what he thinks about us and MORE IMPORTANTLY, what he thinks about himself. Can he handle the whole truth? Ironically, I am guessing not.
LINK to these 2 posts: https://iowa.forums.rivals.com/thre...-whats-a-quad-1-2-3-4-win-loss.258444/page-11
Both of these posts are from page 11 of this thread.
As you can see from what I highlight in red, he thinks we all lack common sense. He thinks we have no clue when it comes to NET rankings. He also thinks we are ignorant.
As you can also see, he thinks he is "the expert" on NET rankings. Why? Because he claims he puts hours of research into this...daily.
I called him out on this; he told me to F off and said he would put me on ignore. I am fine with that.
But as you can see directly above, he can't even keep his word! Where's THE TRUTH in that?
I am sure he will be hyperventilating (again) when reading this post but I am simply pointing out what he thinks about us and MORE IMPORTANTLY, what he thinks about himself. Can he handle the whole truth? Ironically, I am guessing not.
LINK to these 2 posts: https://iowa.forums.rivals.com/thre...-whats-a-quad-1-2-3-4-win-loss.258444/page-11
I don't think it's strange in either case. It's taking 25 data points into consideration at this point. I highly doubt we see much fluctuation until the end of the year. We're probably looking at what the final rankings will be now barring some crazy outcomes. And it's pretty consistent across all metrics - KP, BPI, NET, SAG, all basically have ISU ~#15 and Iowa ~#30.
I believe in the wisdom of the crowd, so I use bracketmatrix. That said, I think all of that stuff will be moot after this year. IMO the committee is going to stick pretty close to NET ratings and all of that will be pretty much window dressing in the future. We'll find out in a few weeks.
No fluctuation would be great. Iowa has gone from 22 to 30 since the Michigan win.
I should have clarified, Bryce. I meant those that participate in the matrix should use their own formulas, ideas, and rating systems as opposed to following the crowd.
The thing that stands out to me is how our ranking has steadily declined. Do we have sufficient Quad 1's or should I be concerned?
Indiana going 0-3 to finish the season would be the only concern in losing one of our Q1's.
I still think they're in already without any more wins, but wouldn't surprise me if the NET fell further.
I think they can beat rutgers. Most likely lose to wisky. Toss up with nebby, leaning toward loss.
If that plays out, the NET probably falls some but not enough to affect their making it. May drop them a seed line. Hoping they can stay out of the 8-9 game. 7 seed would be OK.
I think they can beat rutgers. Most likely lose to wisky. Toss up with nebby, leaning toward loss.
If that plays out, the NET probably falls some but not enough to affect their making it. May drop them a seed line. Hoping they can stay out of the 8-9 game. 7 seed would be OK.
Iowa's recent fortunes are currently depriving Michigan State, Purdue, Minnesota, Ohio State of what they probably thought would be a Quad 1 win on their home courts.
From Feb 2nd, we have gone from 22 to 33.
I think your only concern should be if we lose 2 of our last 3 and then go 0-1 in the BTT because that might put us on the 8/9 line for the NCAA Tournament.
Just looked at Lunardi's Bracketology to see where we stand with him and he's got us in that dreaded 7-10 matchup out West. We're the #7 seed facing #10 Oklahoma. I'd Sooner have a #6 seed or higher.
to get a 6 or better, I think we need to go 2-1 to finish the reg season and win at least one game in the BTT
Nebby is basically an automatic win. They've folded up their tent. Can't lose tomorrow or that game. Of course a BTT run changes many things.
nothing is guaranteed in the B1G this year.
Am I right in saying that once Copeland went down that their slide began? And if so, what does that say about Miles? Is that acceptable or should he be canned?
To be fair, I said "basically". No wins are guarantees. I think his injury started the slide but couldn't be sure.
I mean, their slide started when we got into conference play.
They were already 3-5 in the 8 full games he played (3-6 including the injury game). Their wins were Illinois, Indiana, and Penn St...
I don't think he gets a pass for that.
They were already 3-5 in the 8 full games he played (3-6 including the injury game). Their wins were Illinois, Indiana, and Penn St...
I don't think he gets a pass for that.
I went to bed certain we would be #32 after Washington lost to #275 last night. No such luck. Washington must have been pretty efficient in the loss.
LOL!!!! You finally have NET figured out!
Yeah, Washington dropping just 3 spots to a horrible Cal team does not make much sense.
Washington (#32) being ranked higher than Iowa (#33) makes even less sense.
Rank..Previous..Road..Neutral..Home..Non Div 1
32 29 Washington Pac-12 22-6 6-4 2-2 14-0 0-0
253 275 California Pac-12 6-22 0-10 0-3 6-9 0-0
And my goodness. Who saw PSU cracking the Top50 this year? As far as NET is concerned that is starting to become a nice win. They have had some huge jumps the past 2-3 weeks.
Hopefully we only take a Washington like tumble. Not sure how the teams behind us did though. Sigh, this kind of sucks, Fran.
We have been heading in one direction since our Feb 2 peak.
Check it out:
Previous NET Rankings for Iowa:
#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)
No. #41.
Rank..Previous..Road..Neutral..Home..Non Div 1
8 6 Michigan St. Big Ten 23-6 8-4 2-1 13-1 0-0
9 9 Michigan Big Ten 25-4 6-3 2-0 17-1 0-0
11 12 Purdue Big Ten 22-7 5-5 2-2 15-0 0-0
17 15 Wisconsin Big Ten 20-9 7-5 2-1 11-3 0-0
27 26 Maryland Big Ten 21-8 6-5 1-1 14-2 0-0
41 33 Iowa Big Ten 21-8 4-4 3-0 14-4 0-0
43 40 Ohio St. Big Ten 18-11 5-6 1-0 12-5 0-0
49 50 Penn St. Big Ten 12-17 3-9 1-2 8-6 0-0
51 48 Nebraska Big Ten 15-14 2-8 2-1 10-5 1-0
54 58 Indiana Big Ten 15-14 2-9 1-0 12-5 0-0
56 54 Minnesota Big Ten 18-11 2-8 4-0 12-3 0-0
91 93 Northwestern Big Ten 12-16 1-8 2-1 9-7 0-0
92 94 Illinois Big Ten 10-18 1-8 1-4 8-6 0-0
94 104 Rutgers Big Ten 14-14 4-8 0-0 10-6 0-0
A breakdown of Penn State's record:
NET: 49
KPI: 64
BPI: 50
POM: 43
SAG: 45
03-12 Quad 1
03-03 Quad 2
04-02 Quad 3
02-00 Quad 4
________________
12-17 Overall
Compared to Iowa:
NET: 41
KPI: 33
BPI: 35
POM: 39
SAG: 37
04-07 Quad 1
07-00 Quad 2
04-01 Quad 3
06-00 Quad 4
________________
21-08 Overall
Would rather be a 11 seed than an 8 or 9.
0-3 gets us to that 10/11 line. Anything better than that and we are squarely on the 8/9 line. This stinks.
Last edited:
