We were projected to be solidly in with 2 road wins in the Covid year. Our wins were better but the loss to St Bonnies probably worse than their worst loss?
Will be funny to see where Palm has them in that case.
Daily Tracking the NET: now 102
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
Will be funny to see where Palm has them in that case.
The Big Ten was also stupid good that COVID year, with 11 (!!) teams in the top 30 of KenPom plus Indiana at 34, so Rutgers' only bad road loss was @Pitt. Huskers, conversely, have five road losses against teams outside the top 45
the Big 10 wins are not valued like years past...there are only 3 very good teams and wisconsin might be playing their way out of that top 3
The bottom seems better than usual though too. Worst NET right now is 104.
This is the worst year in general top to bottom in the Big 10 in like 6-7 years. There is no one , and I include Purdue in this equation , that any top 30 team in the country fears any Big 10 team or thinks they cannot beat them. That was not the case 4, 3 , 2 ., or even last year , which is when the decline started. Yes , the large sold out home venues make it difficult for road teams to win in the Big 10 but nothing overwhelming. Rutgers was almost unbeatable at home 2 and 3 years ago. The end of last year started the decline in winning home games. It appears to be league wide.
The ACC and Big East have super-duper cupcakes at the bottom of those leagues, aiding those other contender resumes with wins, those wins don't exist in this year's B1G. When Michigan cooks St John's at MSG and St John's is in the middle of the Big East standings, that's all I need to see. Michigan, as bad as they're playing is still more talented than a lot of rosters and capable of winning 3 to 4 games in a row at any time. They're not DePaul, Georgetown etc.
The initial thought of where the B1G was supposed to be, never actually happened. People and media assumed Penn State would be bad, because they had a 1st year coach and lost a lot of seniors.....media also assumed that Minnesota would clearly be last, but they also overcame departures like Jamison Battle to Ohio State......Minnesota is actually well ahead of Ohio State in the standings and in contention for a NCAA bid.
I see all 14 B1G teams finishing in the Top 100, once everything is said and done. The B1G will get their standard 7 bids, once the other overrated leagues (Big 12, ACC, Big East) get a closer examination.
The initial thought of where the B1G was supposed to be, never actually happened. People and media assumed Penn State would be bad, because they had a 1st year coach and lost a lot of seniors.....media also assumed that Minnesota would clearly be last, but they also overcame departures like Jamison Battle to Ohio State......Minnesota is actually well ahead of Ohio State in the standings and in contention for a NCAA bid.
I see all 14 B1G teams finishing in the Top 100, once everything is said and done. The B1G will get their standard 7 bids, once the other overrated leagues (Big 12, ACC, Big East) get a closer examination.
the big 10 is looking at 6 at best..very well could get 5....7 where is that coming from...Iowa would have to do alot of work and no one else is in contention
bottom half is mediocre thats for sure...so its better but honestly the whole league is sort of dragged down.
Not a good thing when a team who lost 10 of 11 is beating a predicted 2 seed...its not because Michigan is good either
104 UoM(8-15) 3-6(6) 1-5(2) 3-3(0) 1-1, Q1/2 4-11(8), 23/31
100 PSU(11-11) 1-4(5) 3-4(2) 2-2(2) 5-1, Q1/2 4-8(7), 19
x98 RU(12-10) 1-8(4) 3-1(3) 2-1(2) 6-0, Q1/2 4-9(7), 20
x97 IND(14-9) 1-7(3) 3-1(5) 5-1(0) 5-0, Q1/2 4-8(8), 20
x83 MN(15-7) 1-3(5) 4-3(1) 1-1(3) 9-0, Q1/2 5-6(6), 17
82 MD(13-10) 2-5(3) 2-2(4) 2-3(1) 7-0, Q1/2 4-7(7), 18
72 OSU(13-10) 1-5(3) 0-4(3) 7-1(2) 5-0, Q1/2 1-9(6), 16
60 Iowa(13-9) 0-6(5) 5-1(2) 1-2(2) 7-0, Q1/2 5-7(7), 19
57 Neb(15-7) 3-5(1) 3-3(2) 3-0(4) 7-0, Q1/2 6-8(3), 17
55 NW(16-8) 4-5(1) 3-1(4) 3-0(3) 6-1, Q1/2 7-6(5), 18
24 MSU(14-9) 2-7(2) 2-2(6) 6-0(0) 4-0, Q1/2 4-9(8)
Teams in the worst positions are Michigan 0% chance even if they win out(16-15), Ohio St won't be near 0.500 even if they won out, (Q1/2 7-9), Minnesota 347 & 361/362 OOC SOS and Nebraska only Q1 left is @ Ohio St won't be a Q1 much longer, the 2 Q2s @ Mich, @ IND with a 1-7 road record, 8 games left can only hurt their resume. The Ohio St losses and wins(3-9), lost 8 of 9, that are Q1s and Q2s will become Q2s and Q3s soon will hurt even more team resumes, next 3, vs MD, @ Wisc, vs Purdue until another team puts a few wins together to get above 75.
100 PSU(11-11) 1-4(5) 3-4(2) 2-2(2) 5-1, Q1/2 4-8(7), 19
x98 RU(12-10) 1-8(4) 3-1(3) 2-1(2) 6-0, Q1/2 4-9(7), 20
x97 IND(14-9) 1-7(3) 3-1(5) 5-1(0) 5-0, Q1/2 4-8(8), 20
x83 MN(15-7) 1-3(5) 4-3(1) 1-1(3) 9-0, Q1/2 5-6(6), 17
82 MD(13-10) 2-5(3) 2-2(4) 2-3(1) 7-0, Q1/2 4-7(7), 18
72 OSU(13-10) 1-5(3) 0-4(3) 7-1(2) 5-0, Q1/2 1-9(6), 16
60 Iowa(13-9) 0-6(5) 5-1(2) 1-2(2) 7-0, Q1/2 5-7(7), 19
57 Neb(15-7) 3-5(1) 3-3(2) 3-0(4) 7-0, Q1/2 6-8(3), 17
55 NW(16-8) 4-5(1) 3-1(4) 3-0(3) 6-1, Q1/2 7-6(5), 18
24 MSU(14-9) 2-7(2) 2-2(6) 6-0(0) 4-0, Q1/2 4-9(8)
Teams in the worst positions are Michigan 0% chance even if they win out(16-15), Ohio St won't be near 0.500 even if they won out, (Q1/2 7-9), Minnesota 347 & 361/362 OOC SOS and Nebraska only Q1 left is @ Ohio St won't be a Q1 much longer, the 2 Q2s @ Mich, @ IND with a 1-7 road record, 8 games left can only hurt their resume. The Ohio St losses and wins(3-9), lost 8 of 9, that are Q1s and Q2s will become Q2s and Q3s soon will hurt even more team resumes, next 3, vs MD, @ Wisc, vs Purdue until another team puts a few wins together to get above 75.
Last edited:
They are taking at least the top 2 and its going by NET
Iowa...Nebby if they dont make have the edge here significantly
There is no real scenario where RU gets picked over these 2
Iowa...Nebby if they dont make have the edge here significantly
There is no real scenario where RU gets picked over these 2
Penn St beat Iowa
Iowa(13-10) 0-6 5-2 1-2 7-0
Q1/2 5-8, Q1/2/3 6-10
5 Q1s vs Wisc, @ Mich St, @ ILL, @ NW, vs ILL, Q2 @ MD,
2 Q3 vs Minn, vs PSU
I can't see 5-3 getting Iowa in.
They might have to win 2 or 3 road games if they slip in 1 of the home games
3-9 5-3 3-2 or 2-10 6-2 3-2 unless a really weak field.
Q1/2 8-12 Q1/2/3 11-13
Iowa(13-10) 0-6 5-2 1-2 7-0
Q1/2 5-8, Q1/2/3 6-10
5 Q1s vs Wisc, @ Mich St, @ ILL, @ NW, vs ILL, Q2 @ MD,
2 Q3 vs Minn, vs PSU
I can't see 5-3 getting Iowa in.
They might have to win 2 or 3 road games if they slip in 1 of the home games
3-9 5-3 3-2 or 2-10 6-2 3-2 unless a really weak field.
Q1/2 8-12 Q1/2/3 11-13
The NET is awful. Just watching Washington. Their NET ranking is 74. We beat them eight out of 10 times.
I think what hurts the Big 10 in the media is the lack of a final four, or maybe even elite eight caliber team. Also doesn’t help that your top seed gets knocked off in the first weekend by the Fairleigh Dickinson’s and St Peters of the world.
How can you say the bolded part when we have nine regular season games left?
Rutgers: 12-10 (4-7)
Iowa: 13-10 (5-7)
Nebraska: 16-8 (6-7)
Scenario: Rutgers goes 7-2 with losses at Wisconsin and at Purdue. Granted we have no BIG wins that way, but we finish 19-12 (11-9).
Iowa has a tough stretch coming up: Minnesota, at Maryland (who beat them in Iowa), Wisconsin, at Michigan State, at Illinois, Penn State, at Northwestern and Illinois. Is it unrealistic to think they could go 3-5 in that stretch to finish 16-15 (8-12)? Even if it is 4-4, that's 17-14 (9-11). Zero Q1 wins today (0-6). I think they need to go 5-3 minimum and maybe 6-2 to earn a bid.
Nebraska only has seven games left, which sounds crazy. If they lose at home to us and lose two more on the road, even sweep of their other games only gets them to 20-11 (10-10). Kansas State road win is less impressive in NET than the SHU road win.
So unless it is unreasonable for us to go 7-2 (which a neutral observer might say, but hey, I'm wearing scarlet colored glasses), we can still make a run at this.
The NET seems pretty reasonable to me for now. There are opportunities remaining to improve it. The best thing about our resume is that it’s a clean profile. At the moment, no losses to anyone behind us in the NET or outside the top 100. 3 road wins and 2 of 3 of them against teams ahead of us in the NET. Those are the positives. 4-3 against NET 51-100 is also solid considering only Nebraska and Indiana were home games.
The biggest issue is we’re 0-6 vs. NET top 50 team and we only have a few more chances to pick those up. Wisconsin game could be the last one at home.
Rutgers is 99, Nebraska is I believe 58 and Iowa is 65. They are taking the top 2 NET schools from each conference automatically....I dont think a REAL..OR REALISTIC scenario has RU jumping themHow can you say the bolded part when we have nine regular season games left?
Rutgers: 12-10 (4-7)
Iowa: 13-10 (5-7)
Nebraska: 16-8 (6-7)
Scenario: Rutgers goes 7-2 with losses at Wisconsin and at Purdue. Granted we have no BIG wins that way, but we finish 19-12 (11-9).
Iowa has a tough stretch coming up: Minnesota, at Maryland (who beat them in Iowa), Wisconsin, at Michigan State, at Illinois, Penn State, at Northwestern and Illinois. Is it unrealistic to think they could go 3-5 in that stretch to finish 16-15 (8-12)? Even if it is 4-4, that's 17-14 (9-11). Zero Q1 wins today (0-6). I think they need to go 5-3 minimum and maybe 6-2 to earn a bid.
Nebraska only has seven games left, which sounds crazy. If they lose at home to us and lose two more on the road, even sweep of their other games only gets them to 20-11 (10-10). Kansas State road win is less impressive in NET than the SHU road win.
So unless it is unreasonable for us to go 7-2 (which a neutral observer might say, but hey, I'm wearing scarlet colored glasses), we can still make a run at this.
I mean I get optimism but 2 wins over MD/Mich and all of sudden RU is running train over the rest of the league while everyone else is going to tank. You dont get huge movements in net this late. RU certainly would move up with wins over Wisc/NW but the other games really wont be moving the needle to much given those teams rankings.
now the NIT will take teams outside the top 2 in league that is for sure but I really dont see the top 2 thing considering that Minnesota, Maryland, Indiana are also ahead of us plus Penn State is lurking near us and have suddenly started to win games.
Do you need to be above 500 or is 16-16 fine? Looking at Iowa’s remaining schedule 4-4 seems far from a guarantee. They get Illinois twice, Wisconsin, @ NW, @ Michigan State. Also @ Maryland who they lost to at home.
dont have to be over 500 anymore
www.ncaa.com
NIT Board announces changes to NIT and use of experimental rules
The NIT has announced a number of changes to the tournament format, including the selection process, court regulations and timeout policy.
www.ncaa.com
Bac - I thought you were talking about the NCAA bubble pipe dream, where NET is not definitive. I am painting a scenario where we are more attractive as an NCAA bubble team than Iowa or Nebraska.
We still have 30% of our season to go so I think a STRONG finish could see us make a big net climb - if we truly are a different team with Williams and Ogbole, and if we avoid the injury bug. But you are right, it looks like a tall order to pass Nebraska in particular in the NET rankings. So we need to pass everyone else. You may be right that it is tough to see a path for that because with Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, and Ohio State all in the mix, there just aren't enough losses to go around to knock them all down in the NET even if we are climbing.
We still have 30% of our season to go so I think a STRONG finish could see us make a big net climb - if we truly are a different team with Williams and Ogbole, and if we avoid the injury bug. But you are right, it looks like a tall order to pass Nebraska in particular in the NET rankings. So we need to pass everyone else. You may be right that it is tough to see a path for that because with Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, and Ohio State all in the mix, there just aren't enough losses to go around to knock them all down in the NET even if we are climbing.
I dont think Iowa has any serious ncaa hopes but RU is pretty slim as well, nothing less than 7-2
In a weird twist - what happens to this experiment if the BE somehow ends up with 9 teams in the field? Georgetown and DePaul go to the NIT…dont have to be over 500 anymore
NIT Board announces changes to NIT and use of experimental rules
The NIT has announced a number of changes to the tournament format, including the selection process, court regulations and timeout policy.
They actually have 3 Q1 wins and 'should' be good. Their issue is that they don't play with any passion unless they are playing a good team.
Separate question:
Where do you think we have to get our NET to be a legit NIT candidate? Better than 85? If you had to take a wild ass guess, how many spots do you think we would jump if we win tomorrow? Could we be in the low 90s on Sunday?
hard to say...if RU gets to 17-14 we probably are in the 80s...maybe in the 70s at 18-13, 60s at 19-12. I think 17-14 puts us right there in contention for NIT but alot of games across the country and i havent even looked at the ncaa stuff so nit stuff is a boggle game right now
tomorrow could move us up to maybe 90-92
Look - I know the committee hasn’t looked that closely at conference tourney performance recently but a) every year is different and b) should we perform well down the stretch we would present them with a rather unique scenerio with the J William’s situation. It’s only 2 games, and Maryland and Michigan aren’t good teams. BUT - he now leads our team in ppg and is second in rpg. Suppose that holds through the remainder of the season and we finish strong?
I get that say 18-13 with our body of work wouldn’t be good enough at face value. But that would mean we’d have gone 8-3 following the addition of a player now leading the team in ppg and second in rpg. No doubt that would be discussed actively going into the BIG tourney. Especially with last year’s snub and the comment the committe made about us not being the same team without Mag. Somehow I have to think those tourney games might matter for us and they’d be watching if we finish strong.
Need to beat Wisconsin tomorrow obviously or any possiblity of this can probably be forgotten.
That’s the pickle. Same NCAA that tells you it’s the full body of work and that the last ten games don’t matter. By that logic if we went on a run shouldn’t we be in.
Then NCAA turns around and keeps you out for the last ten games even though you beat the same Michigan team on a neutral Court that previously beat you at home.
Same reason some fans would rather have as many wins as possible with a B1G schedule rather than give NCAA ammunition to screw you again.
Right. But the premise isn’t about the injury itself. It’s in the spirit of picking the best teams. That’s where the J William’s thing would be interesting if we do well from here. This potentially is even more blatant than Mag since Mag’s value didn’t light up the stat sheet and J William’s might stand out as a lead scorer - particularly because the rest of our team is so bad at offense.
Completely agree. The part that sucks is we have sooooo much work to do to get to being a true bubble team. If we were to get there, I think the committee looks favorable at RU this year in the exact opposite manner as last season
If we just found a way to do a bit better earlier...
The Penn State game to me looms large. Its only one game but totally eliminated any realistic margin of error
Its thread a needle time now
I know. The worst part is that our bad NET isn’t it’s not even about wins and losses. We took those two back to back 19 point poundings against the Illini and Wake. Even if we didn’t win - there’s no way we would’ve lost both games as badly with both J William’s and Mag. Nevermind Princeton.
It does - especially since it was at home. But one bad game wouldn’t be killing our NET if we had won Princeton and been more competitive in the Illinois and Wake games. Our computer numbers would be much better. This team is arguably a completely different group with those 2 guys.
How about if we just outrebounded them? We might be closing in on Houston on D efficiency. That game had to be our low point.
Agreed. The team was much different back then. It’s hard to play well without two of your best players.
