ADVERTISEMENT

What a joke the NET is

The NET can be gamed, so to speak. It can also be very unforgiving if you lose to a team in the 300’s like Rutgers did. The knobs need tuned but that isn’t up to me.
 
once again I encourage everyone so upset to take the apathy approach, as I have this year.
Expect a loss but be pleasantly surprised when they win.
Tired of investing so much emotionally to be consistently kicked in the nutsack year after year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FWIW4922463
once again I encourage everyone so upset to take the apathy approach, as I have this year.
Expect a loss but be pleasantly surprised when they win.
Tired of investing so much emotionally to be consistently kicked in the nutsack year after year.
Maybe they to see it for what it is, entertainment.
Movies aren't always good either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EagleHawk
The NET can be gamed, so to speak. It can also be very unforgiving if you lose to a team in the 300’s like Rutgers did. The knobs need tuned but that isn’t up to me.
If it's performing the way its creator intended then Iowa is the example you would put forth to argue against its use. Shouldn't it be a somewhat close to reality in rank order of the teams in D-1 top to bottom? Hawks at #19 are at least 25 spots too high.
 
I said Rutgers was a tourney team weeks ago when they were nowhere near anyone's bracket. Now lots of people see why I was right.

Rutgers has some talent, but mostly they play with energy and enthusiasm every damn second. They rebound and play defense, and they play hard for 40 minutes every night out.

Iowa has played hard for 40 minutes too . . . spread over 25 games, so about like last night, 90 to 120 seconds per night. And EVERYONE had Iowa in the tourney for months.

I think a lot of people don't know squat about basketball.
 
The issue with NET and any metrics using “margin of victory” or “efficiency” (whatever the f*** that means) is played out in the example below.

Team A (2-0)
Beats Alabama State by 11
Beats Duke by 3

Team B (1-1)
Beats Alabama State by 33
Loses to Duke by 3

Team B comes out ahead in NET in this scenario IMO. Team B is Iowa’s resume almost to a tee, all the way down the line. It’s a totally flawed metric.
 
I concur that Rutgers is clearly in the tourney at this point and nowhere near the bubble (despite some really bad losses), however, have you taken a good look at the rest of the field and who's in or out? There's a lot of crap teams out there and we have perhaps the weakest national bubble group this year that I've seen in several decades. I don't care one bit if Iowa slips into the dance with some of the other ugly ducklings, you don't turn down an invite if it's offered.
 
So Fran is smart to play the system with a team he knew would struggle in the BIG? Play a bunch of crap teams and kick the shite out of them and then go 500 in the BIG and make the dance. Don't like it but it helps him so why wouldn't he do it?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT