THE OFFICIAL 2024-2025 NET RANKINGS THREAD
- By PSAL_Hoops
- Men's Basketball
- 1094 Replies
Wins and losses matter based on the strengths of the teams you beat or lost to, not the records of the teams you beat or lost to. That's why RPI isn't a great measurement.
Your raw NET score, in a similar vein, isn't especially meaningful for selection. It's just there to reflect your relative strength related to other programs. Selection is not based on strength, but on what you have accomplished, which is what the quadrants are for.
It's not perfect, no system will be for all teams, but adding in wins and losses to the ranking system would make it worse, not better, imo.
With RPI it was rare for a team outside the top 50 to get selected (and virtually impossible for midmajors). You could look at it for a quick and dirty picture. NET doesn’t seem to provide that. It cares a ton and punishes heavily for a bad day where a team finds a way to win.
SDSU for example is getting crucified for needing OT vs Air Force. Who cares? They won the game. We lost to Kennesaw. The two things are vastly different. On another day they beat Houston on a neutral floor. We didn’t beat Alabama. They are NET 50. We are NET 72. If they take a loss and we win another game we’d be close to even. There’s no way that should be the case. We’re right where we deserve to be IMO. SDSU should be in the low 30s.
For sorting at the bottom I do agree NET is likely a good deal better. In a pool comparing a collection of teams with bad records, RPI rewards the teams that lost to teams with better records point blank. This renders the bottom half of the pack rankings pretty worthless. My contention is that the systems that prioritize results do a better job at evaluating for all purposes (sorting included in the top 150 or so) which is really what’s most important.