Page 3 of 7
Re: NET Rankings
Posted:
December 10th, 2023, 2:00 pmby tribecalledquest
The Valley is in a lot better place this season than the last few. To be honest, the league hasn't been real good of late. Finally it's back in the Top 10. It's not always a conspiracy. Sometimes you just have to play better.
Re: NET Rankings
Posted:
December 10th, 2023, 2:42 pmby BEARZ77
No conspiracy , it was done in plain sight and totally legal and with the NCAA's blessing. And while I agree the MVC hasn't earned extra bids many years, the point is how can you even measure that when you have such scheduling discrepancy. We lose games we shouldn't, but I'd argue so would the mid level p6 if they had to play true road games in the noncon as the rest of basketball does.
Re: NET Rankings
Posted:
December 10th, 2023, 2:49 pmby Kyle_Saluki_17
BEARZ77 wrote:The problem I see for both Drake and Indiana St is lack of Q1 games, let alone Q1 wins. Drake hasn't played 1 yet, and probably plays 3-4 at most the rest of the way. Indiana St has played 1 [Alabama /lost] and also plays maybe 3-4 at most .Their game at Michigan St is huge for them. For example, the team that beat Indiana St, Alabama, is probably fairly indicative of other SEC teams and they have already played 4 Q-1 games and have about 14 more on their schedule. Both Indiana St and Drake have to go probably no worse than 17-3 in the Valley to have a real shot .
As it stands right now, Indiana State would have 3 Q1 opportunities, while Drake would have 4 in conference. The difference being caused by the fact that since Indiana State is top 30, both home and away games for opponents will be Q1.
Re: NET Rankings
Posted:
December 11th, 2023, 3:17 amby SalukiWorld
I think the Valley is in a better place because a lot of the coaches that were either mediocre or settled for mediocrity are now gone. As an SIU fan, I know Barry Hinson was one of the coaches dragging down the league towards the end of his tenure here with poor scheduling and not showing up against better competition in non-con play.
Re: NET Rankings
Posted:
December 11th, 2023, 8:47 amby Bulldog4life24
The thing is, the Valley being this high isnt going to matter for NCAA, because of NET and quad wins, as previous posters alluded to. It might help for other tourneys, but they’ll just turn to quad resume wins and leave the composite conference net ranking behind when placing Iowa in over Drake, ISUb, etc. Iowa can go 1-10 and will still get in against our resume of 2-3 or 1-4
Re: NET Rankings
Posted:
December 11th, 2023, 9:05 amby Kyle_Saluki_17
Bulldog4life24 wrote:The thing is, the Valley being this high isnt going to matter for NCAA, because of NET and quad wins, as previous posters alluded to. It might help for other tourneys, but they’ll just turn to quad resume wins and leave the composite conference net ranking behind when placing Iowa in over Drake, ISUb, etc. Iowa can go 1-10 and will still get in against our resume of 2-3 or 1-4
The thing is, in recent years, when we’ve deserved an at large, we’ve gotten it (See Loyola and Drake). We haven’t really deserved any outside of that. I get the whining about the system in general, but I’m not sure I can provide an example of anyone here getting screwed in the last few years. Maybe the Illinois State team years back? That’s been a while now though.
Re: NET Rankings
Posted:
December 11th, 2023, 9:43 amby BEARZ77
Kyle_Saluki_17 wrote:Bulldog4life24 wrote:The thing is, the Valley being this high isnt going to matter for NCAA, because of NET and quad wins, as previous posters alluded to. It might help for other tourneys, but they’ll just turn to quad resume wins and leave the composite conference net ranking behind when placing Iowa in over Drake, ISUb, etc. Iowa can go 1-10 and will still get in against our resume of 2-3 or 1-4
The thing is, in recent years, when we’ve deserved an at large, we’ve gotten it (See Loyola and Drake). We haven’t really deserved any outside of that. I get the whining about the system in general, but I’m not sure I can provide an example of anyone here getting screwed in the last few years. Maybe the Illinois State team years back? That’s been a while now though.
You can't look at it in a vacuum and just consider season end results. Getting screwed starts when you can't schedule at a level that allows you to be competitive and have a chance to accumulate the type of resume necessary ; hard to get get those equality wins when you can't schedule those teams. This isn't about everybody starts with an equal opportunity game 1 , and then we don't measure up after game 30. This is about running a hundred yard dash and we start at the opposite goal line and they start at the 50.
Re: NET Rankings
Posted:
December 11th, 2023, 10:22 amby bradley_townie
Kyle_Saluki_17 wrote:Bulldog4life24 wrote:The thing is, the Valley being this high isnt going to matter for NCAA, because of NET and quad wins, as previous posters alluded to. It might help for other tourneys, but they’ll just turn to quad resume wins and leave the composite conference net ranking behind when placing Iowa in over Drake, ISUb, etc. Iowa can go 1-10 and will still get in against our resume of 2-3 or 1-4
The thing is, in recent years, when we’ve deserved an at large, we’ve gotten it (See Loyola and Drake). We haven’t really deserved any outside of that. I get the whining about the system in general, but I’m not sure I can provide an example of anyone here getting screwed in the last few years. Maybe the Illinois State team years back? That’s been a while now though.
A good barometer for success is whether our conference champion can secure an at-large bid if they fail to win Arch Madness. If that isn't happening, it's a conference-wide failure.
Re: NET Rankings
Posted:
December 11th, 2023, 10:28 amby tribecalledquest
bradley_townie wrote:Kyle_Saluki_17 wrote:Bulldog4life24 wrote:The thing is, the Valley being this high isnt going to matter for NCAA, because of NET and quad wins, as previous posters alluded to. It might help for other tourneys, but they’ll just turn to quad resume wins and leave the composite conference net ranking behind when placing Iowa in over Drake, ISUb, etc. Iowa can go 1-10 and will still get in against our resume of 2-3 or 1-4
The thing is, in recent years, when we’ve deserved an at large, we’ve gotten it (See Loyola and Drake). We haven’t really deserved any outside of that. I get the whining about the system in general, but I’m not sure I can provide an example of anyone here getting screwed in the last few years. Maybe the Illinois State team years back? That’s been a while now though.
A good barometer for success is whether our conference champion can secure an at-large bid if they fail to win Arch Madness. If that isn't happening, it's a conference-wide failure.
100%.
Re: NET Rankings
Posted:
December 11th, 2023, 11:26 amby Drakey
Some people just don't get it. I assume younger fans who weren't around much when these things were done more fairly. They just don't realize that every change that has been made in selection criteria has been for the sole purpose of including more P5 teams and excluding everybody else. Probably no reason to discuss further. You either understand or you don't.