(03-13-2019 08:27 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 06:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  I like the distinction of Power, Major, Mid-Major, and Small. Power is pretty obvious, it’s sending over half the league to the Dance. Major conferences have teams like UConn with multiple Final 4’s and National Titles. Mid-Major is more like C-USA, a league with some tradition like Western Kentucky and UAB, etc. UAB helped form the Great Midwest, they’ve fallen hard btw. Mid-Majors like C-USA, the MAC, and the MVC sometimes have great seasons and send multiple teams where Small conferences are routinely one bid leagues and play in small gymnasiums.

Should not matter.

St. Joe’s plays in a Major conference and in a small gym, just like Tulane. So you’re right. I apologize to all those great teams out there in small gyms. And anybody else with small gym syndrome.

(03-13-2019 08:29 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 06:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  I like the distinction of Power, Major, Mid-Major, and Small. Power is pretty obvious, it’s sending over half the league to the Dance. Major conferences have teams like UConn with multiple Final 4’s and National Titles. Mid-Major is more like C-USA, a league with some tradition like Western Kentucky and UAB, etc. UAB helped form the Great Midwest, they’ve fallen hard btw. Mid-Majors like C-USA, the MAC, and the MVC sometimes have great seasons and send multiple teams where Small conferences are routinely one bid leagues and play in small gymnasiums.

Look... "Power" means only one real thing: $$$$$

The "Power" conferences...even in BB...have something that no other conferences have: HUGE $$$. Like by a magnitude of 10. That's the obvious dividing line. If you're in the "Power" world, you are in a completely different world. You can pay your Head Coach a huge salary; you can hire a gazillion "Analysts" to study the game from a gazillion perspectives; you can afford marble training facilities and fancy arenas, etc...

If you aren't in the "Power" world...well...you aren't. You have to subsidize your athletic department to the tune of +50%, and even then you can't afford a HC salary that won't get poached at the first sign of success. You might have a "Practice Facility," but you're just as likely to be practicing on your home floor and sharing that between the men, the women, and the volleyball team. Your training facilities aren't going to be posh...you can't afford it.

And yeah...when it comes to "Selection Time," your "runner-up" isn't going to be in the Big Dance...because the TV networks want the fancy, splashy "Name" programs with their pricey HC's.

But the "Power" thing is only about one thing: access to huge sums of money. And you're either "In" or you're not.

I would specify that it is really putting the money towards the sport. Princeton and Rice aren’t hurting for money Tiny Tim style, they just choose not to put it towards shooty hoops.

(03-13-2019 06:53 PM)leofrog Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 06:33 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 11:22 AM)leofrog Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 11:07 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  I'm not exactly sure why we have a selection committee picking teams. Who you beat and where you beat them is already built into the NET rankings as I understand it. The system should be you take the 32 auto-bids and then the 36 at-large bids should go to the 36 highest remaining NET ranked teams. From there is you want to have a committee to intervene with seeding, I'd be okay with that. Having human involves just allows people to manipulate data however they want to get whatever team they feel is deserving in.

And the human element is what I like about the selection committees. Teams will learn how to game the NET like they did with the RPI before. Plus, the NET doesn’t take everything into account, like Quadrants and SOS.

Sure it does. If you beat Gonzaga by 5 it's going to boost your rating, meanwhile, if you beat Chicago State by 5 it would lower your rating.

If you want to argue that NET is a faulty formula then just have them tweak it so that it's better.

It can get better, but it will never be close to perfect. Human element still needs to be a part of the selection process.

With the human element its not close to perfect. At least a formula method would provide transparency and eliminate biases.

(03-11-2019 10:11 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(03-11-2019 10:59 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(03-10-2019 11:52 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  Here is an example why NET is kind of a BS.
UGA- 112th NET, 170 RPI (11-20, 13th SEC)
GSU- 126th NET, 59 RPI (22-9, 1st SBC)

but hey, let's look at the head-to-head matchup (neutral site)


Georgia State actually has beaten as many SEC schools during OOC play as UGA during its conference schedule (2-16). Yet, somehow UGA is ranked higher on NET. The system is rigged.

I think it's clear Georgia State does not have enough quality losses.

Head to head from 4 months ago is irrelevant. The Net takes into account the totality of the season. Pitt beat FSU who is the #4 seed in the ACC tournament. FSU is going dancing while Pitt has a losing record for the year. Our victory over them 2 months ago is nice, but it does not mean that Pitt is a better team than FSU. If they played 10 times, FSU would probably win 9 of them. We caught them on the right night. They are still a far superior team.

Normally I agree, one game doesnt matter. However, this was the game that shattered perception versus reality for many media/fans in GA. At one point Georgia State was blowing out UGA by almost 40 points(!!!!!!!!), and the announcers just stopped defending UGA. In the 2nd half, the "mid-major" team in this match pulled its starter and let the bench & walk-ons play against "SEC" starters. There was no question which school had the better team. No "fair and unbiased" ranking system would place UGA above GSU . (Oh, and for yearsssss, both Georgia Tech and UGA watched the NCAA tourney from home...while GSU went dancing again...and again....)

Btw, I noticed that you are a Pitt fan. I think one of our bench players is a transfer from Pitt. Damon Wilson has provided solid depth for us with his capable shooting ability and lockdown defense. He certainly plays like a 4 star recruit whenever he gets some minutes to play. Why did he ever transfer out of Pitt???

(03-13-2019 08:57 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 08:27 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-13-2019 06:54 PM)esayem Wrote:  I like the distinction of Power, Major, Mid-Major, and Small. Power is pretty obvious, it’s sending over half the league to the Dance. Major conferences have teams like UConn with multiple Final 4’s and National Titles. Mid-Major is more like C-USA, a league with some tradition like Western Kentucky and UAB, etc. UAB helped form the Great Midwest, they’ve fallen hard btw. Mid-Majors like C-USA, the MAC, and the MVC sometimes have great seasons and send multiple teams where Small conferences are routinely one bid leagues and play in small gymnasiums.

Should not matter.

St. Joe’s plays in a Major conference and in a small gym, just like Tulane. So you’re right. I apologize to all those great teams out there in small gyms. And anybody else with small gym syndrome.

I root for UC, an all time top 15 program with a larger "gym".

(03-14-2019 02:41 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  

(03-11-2019 10:11 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(03-11-2019 10:59 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(03-10-2019 11:52 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  Here is an example why NET is kind of a BS.
UGA- 112th NET, 170 RPI (11-20, 13th SEC)
GSU- 126th NET, 59 RPI (22-9, 1st SBC)

but hey, let's look at the head-to-head matchup (neutral site)


Georgia State actually has beaten as many SEC schools during OOC play as UGA during its conference schedule (2-16). Yet, somehow UGA is ranked higher on NET. The system is rigged.

I think it's clear Georgia State does not have enough quality losses.

Head to head from 4 months ago is irrelevant. The Net takes into account the totality of the season. Pitt beat FSU who is the #4 seed in the ACC tournament. FSU is going dancing while Pitt has a losing record for the year. Our victory over them 2 months ago is nice, but it does not mean that Pitt is a better team than FSU. If they played 10 times, FSU would probably win 9 of them. We caught them on the right night. They are still a far superior team.

Normally I agree, one game doesnt matter. However, this was the game the shattered perception versus reality for many media/fans in GA. At one point Georgia State was blowing out UGA by almost 40 points(!!!!!!!!), and the announcers just stopped defending UGA. In the 2nd half, the "mid-major" team in this match pulled its starter and let the bench&walk-ons play against "SEC" starters. There was no question which school had the better team. No "fair" ranking system would place UGA above GSU. (Oh, and for yearsssss, both Georgia Tech and UGA watched the NCAA tourney from home...while GSU went dancing again...and again..)

Btw, I noticed that you are a Pitt fan. I think one of our bench players is a transfer from Pitt. Damon Wilson has provided solid depth for us with his capable shooting ability and lockdown defense. He certainly plays like a 4 star recruit whenever he gets some minutes to play. Why did he ever transfer out Pitt???

Wilson never fulfilled his potential at Pitt. He transferred when Jamie Dixon left for TCU and Kevin Stallings was hired. There were a bunch of transfers about that time.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(03-14-2019 06:38 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(03-14-2019 02:41 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  

(03-11-2019 10:11 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(03-11-2019 10:59 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(03-10-2019 11:52 PM)GSUALUM17 Wrote:  Here is an example why NET is kind of a BS.
UGA- 112th NET, 170 RPI (11-20, 13th SEC)
GSU- 126th NET, 59 RPI (22-9, 1st SBC)

but hey, let's look at the head-to-head matchup (neutral site)


Georgia State actually has beaten as many SEC schools during OOC play as UGA during its conference schedule (2-16). Yet, somehow UGA is ranked higher on NET. The system is rigged.

I think it's clear Georgia State does not have enough quality losses.

Head to head from 4 months ago is irrelevant. The Net takes into account the totality of the season. Pitt beat FSU who is the #4 seed in the ACC tournament. FSU is going dancing while Pitt has a losing record for the year. Our victory over them 2 months ago is nice, but it does not mean that Pitt is a better team than FSU. If they played 10 times, FSU would probably win 9 of them. We caught them on the right night. They are still a far superior team.

Normally I agree, one game doesnt matter. However, this was the game the shattered perception versus reality for many media/fans in GA. At one point Georgia State was blowing out UGA by almost 40 points(!!!!!!!!), and the announcers just stopped defending UGA. In the 2nd half, the "mid-major" team in this match pulled its starter and let the bench&walk-ons play against "SEC" starters. There was no question which school had the better team. No "fair" ranking system would place UGA above GSU. (Oh, and for yearsssss, both Georgia Tech and UGA watched the NCAA tourney from home...while GSU went dancing again...and again..)

Btw, I noticed that you are a Pitt fan. I think one of our bench players is a transfer from Pitt. Damon Wilson has provided solid depth for us with his capable shooting ability and lockdown defense. He certainly plays like a 4 star recruit whenever he gets some minutes to play. Why did he ever transfer out Pitt???

Wilson never fulfilled his potential at Pitt. He transferred when Jamie Dixon left for TCU and Kevin Stallings was hired. There were a bunch of transfers about that time.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

gotcha, thanks for the info.

Im sorry to hear that he didn't fulfill his potential at Pitt. Hopefully a new environment is what he needed. Hey if things go our way in the next few hours, maybe you will see him play again in the NCAA tourney

Trying to bolster your resume by claiming wins over ANY basketball program in the state of Georgia is like trying to reach the top shelf by having oompa loompas piggyback.

(03-18-2019 12:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Trying to bolster your resume by claiming wins over ANY basketball program in the state of Georgia is like trying to reach the top shelf by having oompa loompas piggyback.

Sounds like you just admitted that Georgia STATE runs this state. Hey man, it's not too late to join the bandwagon, along with the ATL media

Now we know NET means nothing.

(03-18-2019 05:46 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Now we know NET means nothing.

It means the same thing RPI did. It means *something* but it's not *everything*, just like RPI was.

(03-19-2019 10:22 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-18-2019 05:46 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Now we know NET means nothing.

It means the same thing RPI did. It means *something* but it's not *everything*, just like RPI was.

The NET did a pretty good job this year if you look at performance in the tournament. But before we give credit to the NET compared with RPI, let's not get carried away by what is essentially one data point. And that data point comes in a year when picking winners turns out to be pretty easy.

In the CBS bracket challenge, one player still has a perfect bracket - something that's never been done before. And a lot of people aren't too far behind him. Of the top 16 teams in the Massey Composite rankings at the start of the tournament, only one -Kansas - failed to make the Sweet Sixteen.

Let's see how this works out over time.