I think we should be concerned at least. This team has shown some flaws thus far, defense, rebounding, 3 point shooting. The defense and rebounding showed some better signs, Ace became more involved with getting boards and we actually outrebounded a good rebounding team in Vegas (A&M). However, the 3 losses last week has reduced our margin for error against the remaining OOC teams and did not give us any high quality wins to bolster the resume. If we win out in the OOC games and go 12-8 in the BIG, our record is 20-11 and we are in the tournament. But, if we lose two crazy heartbreakers or get the RU screw from the refs in a couple games we go 10-10 in the BIG and sit at 18-13 and could easily be out of the tourney. The concern at the moment is that we have a thin margin of error right now, especially with the 3 OOC games still remaining. Lose one of those and now we have to likely win EVEN MORE BIG 10 games than 12. Maybe a great month of December for RU can help provide them a bigger margin for error, but at the moment the margins are pretty tight. It’s still early so we have that on our side, but I think it’s ok to have concern right now about stacking enough wins, getting Q1 wins, avoiding bad losses, etc..
THE OFFICIAL 2024-2025 NET RANKINGS THREAD
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
Have to root for our non conf opponents to have big years in their conf so they finish in the lower 200s and not near 300 rankings. IE- Wagner, Merrimack, Columbia or Princeton win their leagues…also helps a resume in the Wins Vs Field category.
With the NET being almost 100% adjusted efficiency it's ALL about points scored. If we beat Wagner and Saint Peter's by 60 points and lost to Monmouth and Merrimack by 1 point we would have a much better NET. If we had beaten Kennesaw by 1 instead of losing by 2 it would have had very little impact on the NET.
I am not convinced they are using the NET for actual tournament selection at all. I looked the one year (23 after we got snubbed I think) and there was basically no rhyme or season to it beyond the fact that better teams tend to have better NETs. I think they are literally only using it to assess your opponents.
Reminds me of a thread we had about this a couple years ago. I believe only wins and strength of schedule should matter — not losses and not margin of victory. Not gonna rehash all the reasons again here, but that’s the gist of it.
I'm with you on margin of victory (for these purposes; if you want to build a predictor that's a different story) but what do you mean by losses not mattering?
What does this mean? SOS here is some kind of multiplication factor? Going 15-0 is worse than going 16-3?
I believe we were 30 or low 30s when snubbed. I do agree NET isnt a predictor of selection but may be used for seeding. However if you are big outlier either way it tends to be in your favor or not.
It is early on with the NET and apparently this must be leading to huge swings. Washington was 128, they played UCLA on the road last night and lost 69-58. They went from 128 to 106, moved up 22 spots…..once again they lost by 11 to UCLA. Who knows what will really happen with the NET as there are so many moving parts with a team’s own ranking plus other teams that may be ahead of that team who happen to drop in their ranking which helps move a team up, etc. It seems like the NET is much more predictable after the midway point of the season. In other words, if RU gets a win on the road later in the year we may be able to estimate a 5-8 ranking bump in the NET, maybe even more depending on the quality of the team they beat. However, if they beat OSU this Saturday, I have no clue how much they would move up in the NET based upon these unpredictable early movements in the NET.
Huh? You have to compare for same number of games played and SOS.
If one team is 15-4 and another team is 16-3, and they both played the same strength of schedule, then obviously the 16 win team should be rated higher.
If two teams have 16 wins then the one with a stronger SOS should be rated higher.
If both teams have the same number of wins and the same SOS, then the tiebreaker would be record against common opponents.
Why? Not every team plays the same number of games. You should be able to compare at 15-1 team with a 14-0 team etc.
Maybe I am still not understanding what you mean by "not counting losses".
I’d have to research it but I think most teams play a 31-game regular season.
My point about losses is they should count for nothing (positive or negative), when calculating ratings for the NCAA tournament.
I think too much credit is given for close losses against good teams, and if you lose to a bad team you get dinged twice, even though it’s still only one loss.
IMO, teams should be judged on number of wins times a strength of schedule factor.
A team with 20 wins and 1.0 SOS (toughest schedule in the country) has a ratings score of 20. If another team has 20 wins and a SOS of .90 then their ratings score is 18, and so on and everywhere in between.
Losses don’t factor into this formula, since losses imo have no value at all (again, for NCAA tournament ratings purposes only).
You could make the argument that losses should have negative value, but the way I see it, they’re already accounted for in the lower number of wins. And, losses against really good teams are already accounted for in the higher SOS.
My point about losses is they should count for nothing (positive or negative), when calculating ratings for the NCAA tournament.
I think too much credit is given for close losses against good teams, and if you lose to a bad team you get dinged twice, even though it’s still only one loss.
IMO, teams should be judged on number of wins times a strength of schedule factor.
A team with 20 wins and 1.0 SOS (toughest schedule in the country) has a ratings score of 20. If another team has 20 wins and a SOS of .90 then their ratings score is 18, and so on and everywhere in between.
Losses don’t factor into this formula, since losses imo have no value at all (again, for NCAA tournament ratings purposes only).
You could make the argument that losses should have negative value, but the way I see it, they’re already accounted for in the lower number of wins. And, losses against really good teams are already accounted for in the higher SOS.
You don't get "dinged twice" if you use something like winning percentage or whatever instead of "number of wins", I think there is maye some misunderstanding here.
31 is probably the most common season length but I think you need to play a MTE to be allowed to play that many so many schools will have a couple less. They will also play different numbers of games in their conference tourneys, some will play games against non-D1 schools that generally don't really count, etc. By the time Selection Sunday rolls around it is definitely not the case that everyone has played the same number of games.
RU moves up 2 spots to 84
Big 10 has 6 schools in the top 20 and 11 in the top 40.
Columbia's loss to Albany pushed them all the way down to 107
Ohio State fell from 12 to 20 despite being wacked by Maryland. Thought they would fall worse. Unless they totally tank the season like they have in the past this should be a Q1 win opportunity for RU this weekend
Take note....winning on the road by large margins against a higher ranked teams will move you up ALOT...Ole Miss won at Louisville by 23 and moved up 31 spots to 24, so lets do this Rutgers
Notre Dame and Kennesaw State are currently Quad 3 games albeit just by a few spots each
UC Irvine at 25 seem to the midmajor early season surprise in the NET at 7-0. They have 2 Q1 wins plus a Quad 3 over Kennessaw
Big 10 has 6 schools in the top 20 and 11 in the top 40.
Columbia's loss to Albany pushed them all the way down to 107
Ohio State fell from 12 to 20 despite being wacked by Maryland. Thought they would fall worse. Unless they totally tank the season like they have in the past this should be a Q1 win opportunity for RU this weekend
Take note....winning on the road by large margins against a higher ranked teams will move you up ALOT...Ole Miss won at Louisville by 23 and moved up 31 spots to 24, so lets do this Rutgers
Notre Dame and Kennesaw State are currently Quad 3 games albeit just by a few spots each
UC Irvine at 25 seem to the midmajor early season surprise in the NET at 7-0. They have 2 Q1 wins plus a Quad 3 over Kennessaw
Last edited:
Another move up for idle RU. If we don’t play another game this year we’ll be in the Top 10 by March.
Rutgers up to 82
Penn State moves up to 23. Ohio State is 19. Purdue falls to 31. Illinois is the top Big 10 school at 7. Oregon is 11 and Maryland is 14. UCLA is 18. Michigan at 23. In all 7 Big 10 schools are inside the top 25. 11 schools are inside the top 50.
By annexing 2 Quad 1 wins in the next week, Rutgers can move significantly up the NET rankings.
Penn State moves up to 23. Ohio State is 19. Purdue falls to 31. Illinois is the top Big 10 school at 7. Oregon is 11 and Maryland is 14. UCLA is 18. Michigan at 23. In all 7 Big 10 schools are inside the top 25. 11 schools are inside the top 50.
By annexing 2 Quad 1 wins in the next week, Rutgers can move significantly up the NET rankings.
We moved up again? Wow. And here I was worried about RU not scheduling any games this week. Our no-contest strategy is working like a charm!
It is early but its EXTREMELY competitive in the Big 10.
Its likely 15 schools out of 18 are competing for NCAA bids. Pretty much ruling out Washington, USC and Minnesota.
Its likely 15 schools out of 18 are competing for NCAA bids. Pretty much ruling out Washington, USC and Minnesota.
If we win at OSU, we likely become a Quad 1 for PSU, I’m guessing (that we’d be a top 75 road game for them).
Or employ Washington’s strategy. They were at 128, lost by 11 on the road to UCLA, then moved up to 106, then did not play and moved up to 99, then did not play and moved to current 92. Lose a game and move up 36 spots in a week, move up 14 spots when you don’t play for 2 days, this kind of thing happens to Rutgers all the time 😂! Looks like we have to be ND fans this year (however they are not good) so that ND win adds on to the RU Q1/Q2 total wins, they are currently 102 and need to be under 100 for Q2.
Rutgers holds at 82
Kennesaw moves to 133 and is a Quad 2 loss for now
Northwestern's home win over Illinois only moved them to 67 while the Illini fell to 12
Kennesaw moves to 133 and is a Quad 2 loss for now
Northwestern's home win over Illinois only moved them to 67 while the Illini fell to 12
NET drops to 85
Notre Dame up to 95 so its a Quad 2 win for now and Kennesaw at 135 barely clings as Quad 2 loss
Notre Dame up to 95 so its a Quad 2 win for now and Kennesaw at 135 barely clings as Quad 2 loss
That is the only possible positive to come up with regarding the resume right now……that is not much of a positive. 4-0 record rest of December is now mandatory, then need to go 5-3 in January, 5-3 in February, 1-1 in March and they get to 20 wins. Piece of cake, right?? It feels impossible right now but just trying to show how mandatory it is to start right now with going 4-0 in December.
on the bright side of things...RU is basically only one game off of where "most" predicted they would be. I think Vegas was always going to be a 1-2 despite the hope of pulling a quality win out. OSU I think realistically was going to be more of a loss than win. The issue is the level of play yesterday in combination with how some of the other games have trended. The team identity to me is one that just cannot get stops and its plagued them even against some of the sisters of the poor and those games were way too close. We led Monmouth 47-30 at half and then played them 51 all the rest of the game...that is pathetic basketball and Pike and everyone here knows it except for a few pollyannas
But yeah as bad as we feel today, a home win over Penn State changes that. We get them off their high from last week so thats a plus and like OSU did and bounced back from their horror show at Maryland, I expect finally getting back home and we see a much better effort...but yeah probably dogfight to the wire. Win and we breath and live for the next game. 4-0 is certainly possible. If we can get to 9-4 there is some confidence built and we can reassess things for the coming year but if they dont beat Penn State I think the season is hangin on by a fingernail.
Agreed, feels dumb to say a December game is must win but it sure feels like PSU is a must win to me, as are the three remaining OOC games due to the bad Kennesaw loss, the fact that Seton Hall is so bad this year and the lack of Q1/Q2 wins makes it so important to grab one against PSU. Still have to go 5-3 Jan., 5-3 Feb., 1-1 March to get to 20 wins, which is very possible when it’s just in a vacuum, but factor in this team’s defense and it’s hard to picture them pulling off those 5-3 months. Lose to PSU and one of the OOC games and that means even MORE work to do in Jan and Feb (6-2 record needed). They do lack identity and don’t do anything particularly well as you said in the recap, only thing I see them do well is they are a good free throw shooting team. I would exchange that for some real defense in a heartbeat.
again we can look back at the team that lost to Lafayette and De Paul and then beat Purdue. Teams can change alot over a month, we still have 2 incredible offensive talents yet Pike has not figured out how to utilize them as a strength and to our advantage. If SHU is a dogfight with their dogshit offense that has not scored over 69 once this year.....
Love the optimism but this group unfortunately is not that group that had Ron, Geo, Caleb, etc.. we may have two great talents, but that Ron, Geo, Caleb led team had way more talent in the areas of cohesion, connectivity and team defense. Maybe this group can finish 2-2 for December and then flip a switch in January and February (that’s what they will have to do). Ron’s team did not have lottery picks, but when it came to playing winning, tough, team basketball they are miles ahead of the newly assembled group. They were experienced veterans who had been through many battles in the BIG. This is a new team whose only prior experience is HS/AAU basketball, lower quality conference college basketball, and then 3 guys who have some sort of BIG basketball experience. This group may have to start turning a corner now, have a good rest of December, things start to click and they set themselves up for winning records in January and February, they just have to go 5-3 both months (not that impossible), but in order to do that they need to play better team basketball and team defense starting now. Teams can be vastly different and change over a season, but they are giving away a lot of opportunities right now that if a change does come it may be too late.
if it was last years big 10 conference i would feel better...this year looks like certain teams are deeper across the board and even teams with lesser talent like Northwestern seem to be looking solid.
right now the bottom group looks like Minnesota, Washington and probably USC and hard to argue Rutgers isnt in that bottom 4 based on actual early results. I do not think Ohio State is a NCAA team so thats why yesterday should be jarring. It was an opportunity to pick off a road game early on in the season against a bottom half Big 10 school.
right now the bottom group looks like Minnesota, Washington and probably USC and hard to argue Rutgers isnt in that bottom 4 based on actual early results. I do not think Ohio State is a NCAA team so thats why yesterday should be jarring. It was an opportunity to pick off a road game early on in the season against a bottom half Big 10 school.
Still cannot believe what I saw yesterday. Almost every one of Ohio State baskets were uncontested. The failure to even move one’s feet or keep a guy in front of you was the worst I have ever seen a Pike team have in his 9th year. After watching Ohio State drive past our guys like there were not there , the lack of shot blockers , and even more damning the total lack of effort and intensity going to get a rebound , a loose ball , a deflection, or anything. That was shocking for the stakes involved and losing 3-4. One chance in the game when it was 63-56 when Ohio State missed a shot and turned the ball over 3 more times. But what do we do , miss a layup and turn the ball over 3 times. Do the one chance to get the game tied or get it to 1 possession , we messed up as well .
I agree this Penn State is a really important game. For our young team psyche but more importantly whether they can muster the requisite effort , playing defense , rebounding and limiting turnovers as I have to get that sick feeling of our lack of defense and effort out of my mind.
I agree this Penn State is a really important game. For our young team psyche but more importantly whether they can muster the requisite effort , playing defense , rebounding and limiting turnovers as I have to get that sick feeling of our lack of defense and effort out of my mind.
seemed as if we are only down 5-7 points most of the 2nd half but it felt like it was 15-20
Not saying I thought we were ever going to win that game , unlike Alabama and Texas A&M which we should have won , but the failure of the defensive and rebounding side of things was startling. Team did not come out with the right mindset and that is on Pike. He failed. To let one guy Royal get like 8 straight buckets and have a career high of 21 points when it was obvious Ohio State kept on going to him and not doubling or pressuring Ohio state so they couldn’t get into their offense , was also a coaching failure. And you know me, I love Pike. Just very very disappointed in yesterday as a whole.
What concerns me is that the coaching staff has recognized the defensive problems and had a week to prepare for the Ohio State game.There is no way to sugar coach the abysmal performance allowing so many easy baskets and offensive rebounds.The offense only scoring 66 points is equally concerning because future opponents will be double teaming Harper and there are too many players not scoring any or enough points.
NET moves up a notch to 84.
Kennesaw slides back to a Quad 3 loss
9 Big 10 schools are in the NET Top 30
Kennesaw slides back to a Quad 3 loss
9 Big 10 schools are in the NET Top 30
Similar threads
