Started By
Message
re: Tide Hoops | Please Anchor
Posted on 1/4/22 at 2:42 pm to Chadaristic
Posted on 1/4/22 at 2:42 pm to Chadaristic
quote:
Oats:
"Sometimes it's more satisfying to silence a road crowd than get the home crowd going."
0
Posted on 1/4/22 at 5:25 pm to Chadaristic
When we throttled Miami I assumed they would suck, but they're 11-3 and atop the ACC. That certainly won't hurt us if they continue to exceed expectations.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 5:58 pm to TideCPA
Posted on 1/4/22 at 6:00 pm to Alabama_Fan
Posted on 1/4/22 at 8:04 pm to Alabama_Fan
Looks like same Kentucky as last year. Cant finish games
Posted on 1/4/22 at 9:35 pm to mistaken4193
Have some mercy on us this year 
Posted on 1/4/22 at 9:56 pm to rockiee
That was one ugly finish. Vandy tried giving the game and Arkansas wouldn’t take it.
Posted on 1/4/22 at 10:03 pm to Bryant91092
quote:
Arkansas wouldn’t take it.
Story of the team, terribly inconsistent
Good individual players but bad fits
Posted on 1/5/22 at 7:21 am to rockiee
We are +2.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 8:40 am to Chadaristic
Missouri canceled with State
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:00 am to Allthatfades
quote:
Alabama is 11-12 in true road games under Nate Oats, and suffered its worst loss so far this season on the road at Memphis. Tide heads on the road twice this week to Florida and Missouri
quote:
Three of Alabama’s next four games will be on the road, with an in-state clash with currently-No. 9 Auburn scheduled in Coleman Coliseum next Tuesday night.
quote:
Alabama went 4-8 on the road in Oats’ first season, with one of the wins coming in front of a predominantly friendly crowd in Birmingham’s Legacy Arena against Samford. Last season’s team went 7-3, taking losses at Missouri, Oklahoma and Arkansas.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:02 am to Chadaristic
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:04 am to Chadaristic
Florida team sheet
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:21 am to Chadaristic
Still haven't figured out why we are so high in the NET.
Tennessee (9-3) (NET Rank: #9)
Q1: 2-3
Q2: 1-0
Q1+Q2: 3-3
Q3: 0-0
Q4: 6-0
Average NET win/loss: 177/18
Top 10 NET wins: 1
Bama (10-3) (Net Rank: #21)
Q1: 3-2
Q2: 3-1
Q1+Q2: 6-3
Q3: 4-0
Q4: 0-0 (hasn't even played a single Q4 game)
Average NET win/loss: 68/50
Top 10 NET wins: 3
Why in the hell are they 12 spots higher than us?
Tennessee (9-3) (NET Rank: #9)
Q1: 2-3
Q2: 1-0
Q1+Q2: 3-3
Q3: 0-0
Q4: 6-0
Average NET win/loss: 177/18
Top 10 NET wins: 1
Bama (10-3) (Net Rank: #21)
Q1: 3-2
Q2: 3-1
Q1+Q2: 6-3
Q3: 4-0
Q4: 0-0 (hasn't even played a single Q4 game)
Average NET win/loss: 68/50
Top 10 NET wins: 3
Why in the hell are they 12 spots higher than us?
This post was edited on 1/5/22 at 10:31 am
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:28 am to DLev45
quote:
Why in the hell are they 12 spots higher than us?
If I had to guess based on the way the Quad games are in Bama's favor, it must be efficiency numbers and some combination of scoring margins.
I'm a fan of the quad system in the sense of getting a good idea of where wins/losses are broken down but slowly we are seeing alot of issues with NET, just like RPI
I think the problem is that people want to find the end all be all metric but I don't think CBB will ever or should ever work that way.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:38 am to rockiee
quote:
If I had to guess based on the way the Quad games are in Bama's favor, it must be efficiency numbers and some combination of scoring margins.
I'm a fan of the quad system in the sense of getting a good idea of where wins/losses are broken down but slowly we are seeing alot of issues with NET, just like RPI
I think the problem is that people want to find the end all be all metric but I don't think CBB will ever or should ever work that way.
Yeah the NET seems to be the harshest on Bama's resume for some odd reason, despite being 6-3 in Q1/Q2 games, playing zero Q4 games, and having 3 wins v. Top 10 teams (#3 Houston, @ #4 Gonzaga, #9 Tennessee).
Bama is #2 in RPI, #16 in ELO, #17 in KemPom, but #21 in NET.
Tennessee is #31 in RPI, #22 in Elo, #14 in KenPom, but #9 in NET.
For some reason, NET really loves something UT has done compared to the others and I can't figure out what it is.
This post was edited on 1/5/22 at 10:40 am
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:45 am to DLev45
quote:
Still haven't figured out why we are so high in the NET.
The tweaks to the NET formula seem to have put a disproportionate amount of weight on efficiency and "quality losses". Like it literally seems as if it's better to lose to a top 10 team by 6 than it is to beat a top 50 team by 6. Maybe they're trying to promote better OOC scheduling, but if that's the case you'd think we'd be getting rewarded for playing the gauntlet we did instead of seemingly being punished for it due to the negative effect it had on our efficiency numbers.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:46 am to DLev45
Same with Kentucky.
UK (11-3) (NET Rank: 16)
Q1: 1-2
Q2: 0-1
Q1+2: 1-3
Q3: 2-0
Q4: 8-0
Average NET win/loss: 233/39
Bama (10-3) (NET Rank: 21)
Q1: 3-2
Q2: 2-1
Q1+2: 6-3
Q3: 4-0
Q4: 0-0 (hasn't played a Q4 game)
Average NET win/loss: 68/50
Kentucky's only Q1/Q2 win is #35 UNC. UK is #69 in RPI, and yet #15 in NET.
UK (11-3) (NET Rank: 16)
Q1: 1-2
Q2: 0-1
Q1+2: 1-3
Q3: 2-0
Q4: 8-0
Average NET win/loss: 233/39
Bama (10-3) (NET Rank: 21)
Q1: 3-2
Q2: 2-1
Q1+2: 6-3
Q3: 4-0
Q4: 0-0 (hasn't played a Q4 game)
Average NET win/loss: 68/50
Kentucky's only Q1/Q2 win is #35 UNC. UK is #69 in RPI, and yet #15 in NET.
This post was edited on 1/5/22 at 10:52 am
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:47 am to rockiee
quote:Florida’s offense runs entirely through Castleton in the post. Coming of age game for Bediako, I think he’ll give Castleton fits if the refs don’t call too tight of a whistle.
We are +2.
Posted on 1/5/22 at 10:54 am to DLev45
Here is a really goofy one for you guys:
Kentucky (11-3)
Q1: 1-2
Q2: 0-1
Q1+2: 1-3
Q3: 2-0
Q4: 8-0
Average NET win/loss: 233/39
Top 50 wins: 1 (#35 UNC)
Iowa State (12-1)
Q1: 3-1
Q2: 1-0
Q1+2: 4-1
Q3: 0-0
Q4: 8-0
Average NET win/loss: 202/1
Top 50 wins: 3 (#23 Xavier, #25 Iowa, @ #49 Creighton)
...
...
...
NET Ranks ... #15 Kentucky, #22 Iowa State
They must REALLY be leaning into the efficiency numbers with NET, far more than previously, because Iowa State's resume trounces Kentucky's in every possible way, and their only loss is by 5 to #1 Baylor.
Kentucky (11-3)
Q1: 1-2
Q2: 0-1
Q1+2: 1-3
Q3: 2-0
Q4: 8-0
Average NET win/loss: 233/39
Top 50 wins: 1 (#35 UNC)
Iowa State (12-1)
Q1: 3-1
Q2: 1-0
Q1+2: 4-1
Q3: 0-0
Q4: 8-0
Average NET win/loss: 202/1
Top 50 wins: 3 (#23 Xavier, #25 Iowa, @ #49 Creighton)
...
...
...
NET Ranks ... #15 Kentucky, #22 Iowa State
They must REALLY be leaning into the efficiency numbers with NET, far more than previously, because Iowa State's resume trounces Kentucky's in every possible way, and their only loss is by 5 to #1 Baylor.
This post was edited on 1/5/22 at 11:06 am
Page 399 of 1054
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News