Started By
Message
Can someone explain NET to me?
Posted on 3/5/23 at 1:50 pm
Posted on 3/5/23 at 1:50 pm
Specifically how Arkansas can have a NET of #18 and Auburn at #32?
Overall record:
AU: 20-11
Ark: 19-12
Q1 record:
AU: 3-9
Ark: 3-9
Q1+2 record:
AU: 9-10
Ark: 7-11
Q3 or Q4 Losses:
AU: 1 (at #154 UGA)
Ark: 1 (at #156 LSU)
NET SOS (out of 363 teams)
AU: #22
Ark: #21
The schedules are essentially equal. Auburn clearly has a slightly better resume, albeit close. How can the NET rankings produce a system that has Arkansas 14 slots ahead?
Overall record:
AU: 20-11
Ark: 19-12
Q1 record:
AU: 3-9
Ark: 3-9
Q1+2 record:
AU: 9-10
Ark: 7-11
Q3 or Q4 Losses:
AU: 1 (at #154 UGA)
Ark: 1 (at #156 LSU)
NET SOS (out of 363 teams)
AU: #22
Ark: #21
The schedules are essentially equal. Auburn clearly has a slightly better resume, albeit close. How can the NET rankings produce a system that has Arkansas 14 slots ahead?
6
Posted on 3/5/23 at 1:51 pm to AUTiger789
Because NET is heavily efficiency based and per KenPom
Arkansas - #19 Ovr, #54 off, #17 def
Auburn - #26 Ovr, #57 off, #25 def
It's silly, but that's the reason why. NET is far from just a resume measuring metric like RPI was.
Arkansas - #19 Ovr, #54 off, #17 def
Auburn - #26 Ovr, #57 off, #25 def
It's silly, but that's the reason why. NET is far from just a resume measuring metric like RPI was.
This post was edited on 3/5/23 at 1:52 pm
Posted on 3/5/23 at 1:53 pm to AUTiger789
NET rankings are sofa king we todd it. Last season, when we were on our 10 game win streak, kicking everyone's arse, AND even after we beat LSU, LSU was still ranked ahead of us in the NET.
I don't recall if we ever got out of the 20's in the NET rankings.
I don't recall if we ever got out of the 20's in the NET rankings.
Posted on 3/5/23 at 1:57 pm to Arkapigdiesel
Well your OOC schedule last year was garbage which was a big part of that
Posted on 3/5/23 at 2:00 pm to AUTiger789
NET is all fancy #'s driven and pretty much ignores any sort of eye test or common knowledge.
Posted on 3/5/23 at 2:02 pm to KCM0Tiger
I was about to say Missouri is another good example of efficiency numbers dragging teams down in NET.
It's silly. We have efficiency stats, and those are good for looking at, but RPI/NET should be about judging results. Who did you beat, where did you beat them. That's it.
It's silly. We have efficiency stats, and those are good for looking at, but RPI/NET should be about judging results. Who did you beat, where did you beat them. That's it.
Posted on 3/5/23 at 2:49 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Because NET is heavily efficiency based and per KenPom Arkansas - #19 Ovr, #54 off, #17 def Auburn - #26 Ovr, #57 off, #25 def
Even those efficiency numbers don’t really explain the gap in the NET. Overall efficiency gap of just 7 spots- #19 vs #26- is pretty close. Yet AU has a better record and is somehow 14 spots behind in the NET. Seems excessive.
Posted on 3/5/23 at 2:55 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
Can someone explain NET to me?
It's where you access secrant
Posted on 3/5/23 at 2:58 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
I was about to say Missouri is another good example of efficiency numbers dragging teams down in NET.
Except Missouri sucks
Posted on 3/5/23 at 3:15 pm to AUTiger789
Now add Vandy to the Auburn arky comparison. Slightly worse but very similar and Vandys net is 82
Posted on 3/5/23 at 3:34 pm to VandyTops17
Our NET was 36 last year, we didn’t get in. I don’t understand NET.
Posted on 3/5/23 at 3:53 pm to VandyTops17
quote:
Now add Vandy to the Auburn arky comparison. Slightly worse but very similar and Vandys net is 82
Vandy would have been an interesting bubble team had they beaten LSU. Potentially 10 straight wins in a top rated conference to end the year but a NET of around 80. Not sure how you reconcile those two extremes.
Posted on 3/5/23 at 4:20 pm to AUFANATL
quote:
Vandy would have been an interesting bubble team had they beaten LSU.
Was thinking about this last night. Vandy’s missing the Tournament will boil down to two losses- A 2-point loss to Grambling and a 7-point loss to LSU.
Had they won both of those, they’d be 20-11 with head to head wins over six likely Tournament teams: Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas, Auburn, Miss St, and Pitt. Not sure how you could keep them out with that resume.
Posted on 3/6/23 at 4:02 am to AUTiger789
Bama high, Auburn low
Posted on 3/6/23 at 5:52 am to AUTiger789
The usual insidious cabal designed to protect Blue Bloods by making it very hard to drop teams from their pre season rankings.
Posted on 3/6/23 at 6:03 am to Drydock
I think the NET also takes margin of victory into account. So, even though Vandy has won 8 out of their last nine and had a better or equal conference record than many tourney teams, they’ve played a lot of close games and that doesn’t help their NET rating. Right now, Vandy is definitely playing like a tourney team but early season miscues will doom them in the end. I think if they win at least one game in the SEC tourney they have a chance to get in the NCAA but it’s slim.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News