ADVERTISEMENT

The thing I hate most about the NCAA NET rankings might be...

PhilipVU94

Admiral
Gold Member
Jul 24, 2001
28,706
10,583
113
that it's become conflated with the entire NCAA tournament résumé.

The NET is adjusted for strength of schedule. Playing tougher teams or easier teams won't help you game the NET -- for example, if you're 50th in the NET and play only top 10 teams, you'll need to get semi-respectable stats to stay 50th. If you're playing only 300th+ teams, you'll need to get crushing stats.

If I'm understanding from the convo with @Bighornsheep the other day, I think there are certain cutoffs where a good enough NET will get you into the committee's conversation -- but that's it, and it could be a short conversation if you haven't won some tough games. (It's not clear to me whether a gaudy record or a decent record on a brutal schedule can also get you into the conversation.) And the Q1, Q2, etc. seem to be determined by NET, which makes some sense. You shouldn't get a huge reward for beating a team whose luck has run good all season but not played very well.

So it seems like your opponents' intra-game stats are actually really important to your tournament résumé, but it's pretty unimportant whether you're crushing terrible opponents by 30 or 40.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT

Go Big.
Get Premium.

Join Rivals to access this premium section.

  • Say your piece in exclusive fan communities.
  • Unlock Premium news from the largest network of experts.
  • Dominate with stats, athlete data, Rivals250 rankings, and more.
Log in or subscribe today Go Back