Updated NET Rankings

[flsportsfan83]

Still at 105. I thought we would atleast jump up a few spots. Should hit top 100 soon. 

Going to need to win the conference for at atlarge. All of our games matter, but a loss is not going to kill us. Biggest goal needs to be a top 4 seed in the Conference Tourney. That double bye will be huge. 

 

DI Men's Basketball Rankings - NCAA Men's Basketball NET Rankings | NCAA.com

WWW.NCAA.COM

---

Get NCAA college basketball rankings from the Associated Press, USA Today Coaches poll and the NCAA NET Rankings.

 

[BULLSHTR]

It’s getting absurd. The cards are stacked against us. I think I’ll not watch the tourney. Just like every other year.

[USF_Bullsharks]

Couldn't believe Charlotte is ranked so low. That was a **** good team last night, and well coached. 

[John Lewis]

5 minutes ago, USF_Bullsharks said:

Couldn't believe Charlotte is ranked so low. That was a **** good team last night, and well coached. 

Agreed. They are a very good team.

[SilverBull]

9 minutes ago, BULLSHTR said:

It’s getting absurd. The cards are stacked against us. I think I’ll not watch the tourney. Just like every other year.

Fear not.  We only need to win all of our remaining regular season wins in convincing fashion, run the table in the Conference Tourney and then hop in the DeLorean, travel back in time and erase the Maine, Hofstra and UMass losses.

I'm sure then we will get the respect you crave.

[John Lewis]

Did they update this before our game ended?

Seems like the Auburn FB game all over again.

[USFBulls12]

This is an extreme comparison but for those who are having difficulty understanding why this NET ranking is so finicky and difficult for USF to move up in, try this on for size. Imagine if all levels of college basketball were considered a part of the NET. The D3 teams are clearly inferior teams when compared to the D1 programs. Sometimes there is an amazing lower level team and terrible higher level team, but that's not the norm. Well, if all the teams played for the same NET rankings, obviously the higher level teams would hog all the top spots because the NET takes into consideration the ranking of your opponents and the result of that matchup. If we are, for this comparison, a D3 school, we will NEVER obtain a high enough NET ranking to be considered for the NCAA tournament because it's impossible to ever play the higher level teams if we just haven't scheduled them before the season began. No matter how many times we beat our lower level opponents, the games don't mean anything in terms of moving up the NET, because the opponents we are beating are also low in the NET. The way to be successful in the NET is to 1. have a good team, 2. make a strong schedule made up of teams with good NET rankings, 3. beat those teams. If you schedule weak teams and beat them, or even worse, lose to them, you're doing your program a huge disservice when the team is good when trying to achieve a better NET ranking.

[aroth]

I don’t think it’s confusion as much as it is frustration. Obviously the early season losses are preventing our upward movement, but it starts to seem illogical when you see Memphis, UNT, and Charlotte above us or SMU at 49. 

[USFBulls12]

45 minutes ago, aroth said:

I don’t think it’s confusion as much as it is frustration. Obviously the early season losses are preventing our upward movement, but it starts to seem illogical when you see Memphis, UNT, and Charlotte above us or SMU at 49. 

Again, the early season losses did not help but when we don't have high NET games on the schedule after those games, we have weights on our feet.

[BULLSHTR]

It's not football. A few early losses shouldn't matter as much as they seem to. Clearly a flaw in the way NET rankings are calculated.