Started By
Message
re: Tide Hoops | Recruiting
Posted on 1/3/25 at 10:58 am to TideCPA
Posted on 1/3/25 at 10:58 am to TideCPA
Didn’t they move up 10+ places in KenPom after the game last night? Just seems weird to me with nearly half a season completed that one awesome game can skyrocket your metrics like that. Hopefully we can do the same Saturday 
1
Posted on 1/3/25 at 11:11 am to Bryant91092
quote:That type of beatdown can really move the needle. Oregon went from 11 in NET to 23.
Didn’t they move up 10+ places in KenPom after the game last night? Just seems weird to me with nearly half a season completed that one awesome game can skyrocket your metrics like that. Hopefully we can do the same Saturday
We don't really have the same opportunity tomorrow since OU is 42 in NET.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 11:19 am to TideCPA
quote:
I mean, they account for opponent strength. Playing Q4 teams is risky in that regard - if you don't destroy them they will kill your statistical rankings (and if you lose to them they'll torpedo your at-large chances). Illinois has also played 1 more quad 1 game than we have.
The logic just seems backwards to me. Illinois has played 6 Q4 games to our 2. The fact that they have played 3 times as many Q4 opponents was supposed to come with a punishment when compared to teams who stepped up the scheduling and played Q2/Q3 teams. We are 6-0 vs Q2 & Q3, they are 1-0 vs the same. Shouldn't those Q2 and Q3 games carry far more weight than mercilessly beating 6 Q2 teams ?
Aside from that, I respect that Illinois won at Eugene and we lost to Oregon. We also beat Illinois by double digits on a neutral court. Im not trying to reduce them because to be honest it looks like a huge win on our resume the higher they are ranked.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 11:21 am to TideCPA
quote:
We don't really have the same opportunity tomorrow since OU is 42 in NET.
Im just hopeful we come to play. They have loved beating us in all sports as healthy dogs the past handful of years.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 11:27 am to GoodTalkRuss
quote:
Im just hopeful we come to play. They have loved beating us in all sports as healthy dogs the past handful of years.
Exactly this. I'm so tired of us losing to them in virtually every sport. I'm starting to really dislike them
Posted on 1/3/25 at 11:32 am to cdur86
Oddly it started in the Saban Era in the Sugar Bowl. We did get them once in basketball in recent history (Trae Young/Sexton Matchup). The recent basketball losses have been pretty inexplicable beatdowns though. Still don't know how they absolutely throttled two of our best basketball teams ever and both of those OU teams were pretty marginal.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 11:39 am to GoodTalkRuss
quote:
Still don't know how they absolutely throttled two of our best basketball teams ever and both of those OU teams were pretty marginal.
Its not only the basketball and football games, but every woman sport they dominate us in too. To be fair they dominate everyone in gymnastics and softball but we seem to get the brunt of it more than most teams. It seems like the SEC is trying to generate a rivalry with them
Posted on 1/3/25 at 12:42 pm to GoodTalkRuss
quote:When it comes to seeding the tournament, if two teams are roughly equivalent, they're absolutely going to favor the teams who scheduled tougher. From a statistical standpoint (which is what the NET is based on), a 40-point beatdown of a Q4 opponent isn't worth much more (if any) than a 10-15 point win over a Q3 opponent.
The logic just seems backwards to me. Illinois has played 6 Q4 games to our 2. The fact that they have played 3 times as many Q4 opponents was supposed to come with a punishment when compared to teams who stepped up the scheduling and played Q2/Q3 teams. We are 6-0 vs Q2 & Q3, they are 1-0 vs the same. Shouldn't those Q2 and Q3 games carry far more weight than mercilessly beating 6 Q2 teams ?
Oklahoma is a good example. They've had 7 Q4 games but their margin is 23 ppg in those (vs. Illinois' 40+). That makes a big difference. You can absolutely play Q4 opponents and have a high NET but you need to run them out of the gym. However, that's risky, which is why Oats chooses not to play them. We're good enough not to get blown out by Q1/Q2 opponents, so why risk a lazy 15 point win over a Q4 opponent when a close loss to a Q1/Q2 team is better statistically?
This post was edited on 1/3/25 at 12:45 pm
Posted on 1/3/25 at 2:18 pm to GoodTalkRuss
quote:
The logic just seems backwards to me. Illinois has played 6 Q4 games to our 2. The fact that they have played 3 times as many Q4 opponents was supposed to come with a punishment when compared to teams who stepped up the scheduling and played Q2/Q3 teams. We are 6-0 vs Q2 & Q3, they are 1-0 vs the same. Shouldn't those Q2 and Q3 games carry far more weight than mercilessly beating 6 Q2 teams ?
Aside from that, I respect that Illinois won at Eugene and we lost to Oregon. We also beat Illinois by double digits on a neutral court. Im not trying to reduce them because to be honest it looks like a huge win on our resume the higher they are ranked.
It seems that you may be conflating NET rankings with QUAD Based Resumes.
Seriously, forgive me if I misunderstood your post but NET is not based on QUADS. NET is calculated before based on raw comparative stats. Then, the games are divided into QUADS based on the NET rankings.
QUAD resumes are an additional tool created to address the exact points you are making:
Committee member: "Team X may only be 12 in NET but I think they should be a 2 seed because they played a lot more Q1 games than some teams above them and went an impressive 10-5 in those Q1 games. Their NET numbers likely skew lower because they allowed some bad teams to shoot high % against them early in the season but have since played more solid defense against the top teams on their schedule"
This post was edited on 1/3/25 at 4:07 pm
Posted on 1/3/25 at 4:22 pm to Glorious
quote:
Burnett
He's actually playing well this year. Just under 10 ppg shooting 45% from 3 starting on a good Michigan team. Honestly this season, pretty similar to Wrightsell until he got injured.
Bradley is starting to be a good player. But Arizona isn't very good this year. He was overrated coming from high school, but could have a career playing pro somewhere. That said, I like who we have.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 4:51 pm to CCTider
So I didn’t know basketball also had to do the availability reports this year.
As a Guy who routinely lies about when guys are coming back and always brings them back a week or 2 before he says he would….I bet Nate hates this.
As a Guy who routinely lies about when guys are coming back and always brings them back a week or 2 before he says he would….I bet Nate hates this.
Posted on 1/3/25 at 4:59 pm to pioneerbasketball
Pio - hoping you guys can pull off a stunning road win to kick off your conference play.
Can’t believe we start tomorrow with a 10am CT top 10 matchup of the last 2 SEC programs to win NCs. I may never understand ESPN programming and time slots (maybe trying to avoid NFL games?).
Can’t believe we start tomorrow with a 10am CT top 10 matchup of the last 2 SEC programs to win NCs. I may never understand ESPN programming and time slots (maybe trying to avoid NFL games?).
Posted on 1/3/25 at 6:06 pm to BamaBravesPackers
12.5 for tomorrow currently
Posted on 1/4/25 at 8:17 am to Bryant91092
Let the games begin!! This SEC season is going to be crazy.
Posted on 1/4/25 at 8:33 am to BamaBravesPackers
Just to illustrate how good the SEC is even at the bottom, here is the 2nd to last team for each power league (worst team in parenthesis) according to the NET. I did 2nd to last to account for a potential outlier at the bottom.
ACC - #195 Boston College (#197 VT)
B12 - #116 Kansas St (#118 OK St)
Big East - #90 DePaul (#199 Seton Hall)
Big10 - #95 Washington (#165 Minn)
SEC - #52 LSU (#85 USCe)
The bottom of the SEC is so much more dangerous than every other league, and it’s not close. Our worst team is better than every other P5 league 2nd worst team, and our 2nd worst team is over #35 spots higher than everyone else’s 2nd worst team.
Nate said yesterday that of the top 16 remaining SOS, all 16 are SEC schools. Not surprising, but that’s insane compared to where the SEC has been since I started watching SEC Bball 25 years ago. There’s going to be carnage in conference play this year.
ACC - #195 Boston College (#197 VT)
B12 - #116 Kansas St (#118 OK St)
Big East - #90 DePaul (#199 Seton Hall)
Big10 - #95 Washington (#165 Minn)
SEC - #52 LSU (#85 USCe)
The bottom of the SEC is so much more dangerous than every other league, and it’s not close. Our worst team is better than every other P5 league 2nd worst team, and our 2nd worst team is over #35 spots higher than everyone else’s 2nd worst team.
Nate said yesterday that of the top 16 remaining SOS, all 16 are SEC schools. Not surprising, but that’s insane compared to where the SEC has been since I started watching SEC Bball 25 years ago. There’s going to be carnage in conference play this year.
Posted on 1/4/25 at 8:55 am to BamaBravesPackers
Rebound!!
RTR
RTR
Posted on 1/4/25 at 10:56 am to Bryant91092
They playing games at 10am now? I thought the UK/UF game was at 11. I turn the TV on and it’s halftime
Posted on 1/4/25 at 11:03 am to mistaken4193
11 ET
But yeah, I don’t remember SEC games ever starting this early.
ETA: you missed a good first half. UK turned it on big time the last 10 minutes.
But yeah, I don’t remember SEC games ever starting this early.
ETA: you missed a good first half. UK turned it on big time the last 10 minutes.
This post was edited on 1/4/25 at 11:04 am
Posted on 1/5/25 at 4:28 pm to Bryant91092
Ladies won again to move to 15-1
Posted on 1/5/25 at 5:02 pm to Bryant91092
Illinois imploding
Page 1244 of 1405
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News