Illinois #10 in NET Rankings

Status
Not open for further replies.
#4      
ChiefGritty
This thread title

College Accuse GIF
 
#7      
Calvin
Eleven Big Ten teams in the top 50. The rest:

54 - Iowa
71 - Indiana
73 - NW
86 - Rutgers (they have two 5 star, possibly both NBA lottery, so probably more dangerous than this ranking)
116 - Washington
155 - Minn
169 - USC
 
#8      
Fighter of the Nightman
lstewart53x3 said:
We’re all Arkansas fans now.
Click to expand...
Yep! Besides, I always think it is fun to have a reason to root for a given team while I am just watching college hoops, and I think it adds an interesting quirk to the (relatively) new world of college sports when you are watching a team you beat/lost to slide in and out of a given Quad category, haha. Speaking of, these are our remaining non-conference opportunities, as well as our two Big Ten opportunities before the new year begins in January:

Quad 1
vs. #1 Tennessee
vs. #4 Duke (New York, NY)
vs. #17 Wisconsin
vs. #46 Missouri (St. Louis, MO)
at #73 Northwestern

Quad 4
vs. #359 Chicago State ... 5 spots from the worst team in the land! :oops:

So while things will obviously change a lot, it appears safe to say that we will have multiple resume-building opportunities before the grind of Big Ten play really gets going. I'm really skeptical that Mizzou (neutral) and Northwestern (away) will remain Quad 1 opportunities for long, so it would be really nice to knock off Tennessee in Champaign. That also seems like one of the most important games for "fan psychology" and perception, as the scene will no-doubt be crazy in Champaign on national TV. It has sucked in recent years seeing some of our most elite home court atmospheres (e.g., Arizona in 2021-22 or Purdue last year) end in close losses.
 
#10      
BDMAN
As a card-carrying die-hard member of the Illini Conspiracy Group, what was Arkansas's net before playing the beloved their NET ranking now is highly dubious in that they were ranked 19th prior to playing us. Then, after we put the beat down on them the initial NET ranks are released, and they are 51. Methinks something is afoot here???? :unsure:
 
#11      
HereSoIDontGetFined
These NET ratings are weird, and I don't know why they bothered to release them early. No way we should be 10th with Alabama having more Q1+Q2 wins is sitting 13th.

Edit: apparently they have the #312 scoring defense which is really the most glaring remark against them. Imagine outscoring opponents by 9-10 points but getting docked a seed because both numbers are high. That's effectively what is happening.
 
Last edited:
#12      
Homecoming 2019
HereSoIDontGetFined said:
These NET ratings are weird, and I don't know why they bothered to release them early. No way we should be 10th with Alabama having more Q1+Q2 wins is sitting 13th.

Edit: apparently they have the #312 scoring defense which is really the most glaring remark against them. Imagine outscoring opponents by 9-10 points but getting docked a seed because both numbers are high. That's effectively what is happening.
Click to expand...
This ranking isn't seeding.
 
#13      
Second place is 1st loser
To have a top 10 NET ranking when our strength of schedule, to date, isn't very strong ....it sure seems that how we win is potentially better than who we win against? We absolutely crushed the majority of our "weaker" opponents and it sure seems to have mattered.

It also seems like a coach, who has a great grasp of the system, can really manipulate their schedule to enhance the outcome. It's really just a matter of avoiding one terrible loss and sprinkling in some solid, but not necessarily elite, wins to the resume.

MY interpretation could be way off. That said, I'm sure that it was all "normalize" as schools get into conference play and losses start piling up and the SOS for each school starts to flatten out.
 
#15      
Illinicpa14
Second place is 1st loser said:
To have a top 10 NET ranking when our strength of schedule, to date, isn't very strong ....it sure seems that how we win is potentially better than who we win against? We absolutely crushed the majority of our "weaker" opponents and it sure seems to have mattered.

It also seems like a coach, who has a great grasp of the system, can really manipulate their schedule to enhance the outcome. It's really just a matter of avoiding one terrible loss and sprinkling in some solid, but not necessarily elite, wins to the resume.

MY interpretation could be way off. That said, I'm sure that it was all "normalize" as schools get into conference play and losses start piling up and the SOS for each school starts to flatten out.
Click to expand...
We take this for granted but Brad has been great at not dropping early home upsets and having most be large blowouts. We haven’t had too many “escapes” in his tenure.
 
#17      
Snoopy
HereSoIDontGetFined said:
I realize, which is what makes it all the more ridiculous. There are already enough aggregates out there, but the NCAA has a chance to make one that determines seeding and it just .. doesn't.
Click to expand...
The problem is that it possible to game nearly any fixed ranking system particularly in D1 basketball given the insane difference in quality of the best teams vs the worst. Then add in the impossibility of schedule balance given the differences in conferences. As much as I hate to admit the NCAA does anything right, not locking themselves into some formula is the right way to go
 
#18      
Fighter of the Nightman
So far, the following Big Ten teams are without a Quad 1 or Quad 2 win:

#16 UCLA (making their ranking a bit of a surprise)
#34 Penn State
#35 Michigan
#71 Indiana
#73 Northwestern
#116 Washington
#155 Minnesota
#169 USC

Fortunately, no Big Ten team has suffered a Quad 4 loss yet. However, of the teams listed above, Michigan, Minnesota and USC all have a Quad 3 loss. Given Michigan's pretty good NET Ranking, it appears that Minnesota and USC are the clear losers thus far. While Rutgers avoids being on that list thanks to one Quad 2 win, they also have a bad Quad 3 loss at #143 Kennesaw State.

These are the Quad 1 and Quad 2 wins for Big Ten teams so far:

QUAD 1
Oregon: 3
W vs. #13 Alabama (N - Paradise, NV)
W vs #43 Texas A&M (N - Paradise, NV)
W at #49 Oregon State

Wisconsin: 1
W vs. #5 Pitt (N - White Sulphur Springs, WV)

Purdue: 1
W vs. #13 Alabama

Michigan State: 1
W vs #26 North Carolina (N - Maui, HI)

Reminder before we get to the Quad 2 list, we would just need Arkansas to move up ONE spot to have a Quad 1 win.

QUAD 2
Purdue: 2
W vs. #55 Ole Miss (N - San Diego, CA)
W vs. #91 NC State (N - San Diego, CA)

Wisconsin: 2
W vs. #65 Arizona
W vs. #84 UCF (N - White Sulphur Springs, WV)

Illinois: 1
W vs. #51 Arkansas (N - Kansas City, MO)

Ohio State: 1
W vs. #56 Texas (N - Paradise, NV)

Oregon: 1
W vs. #60 San Diego State (N - Paradise, NV)

Iowa: 1
W vs. #87 Washington State (N - Moline, IL)

Maryland: 1
W vs. #92 Villanova (N - Newark, NJ)

Rutgers: 1
W vs. #97 Notre Dame (N - Paradise, NV)

Nebraska: 1
W at #99 Creighton
 
#19      
abchew2
I’m guessing we are so high because of so many big blowouts. Would have thought Purdue would be higher than us at this based on who they’ve played and beaten.
 
#21      
fuggles
I saw a bit of the Oregon Alabama game. The Oregon big was impressive. Apparently he was a top 20 prospect coming out of HS. Could be a good match up for Tomi.
 
#22      
TheodoreRex
I'm pretty sure the Illinois win over Arkansas is a quad 1 win since it was on a neutral court, am I wrong?
 
#23      
doowink
fuggles said:
I saw a bit of the Oregon Alabama game. The Oregon big was impressive. Apparently he was a top 20 prospect coming out of HS. Could be a good match up for Tomi.
Click to expand...
Yes, Oregon will be tough on their home floor...will not be able to turn it over multiple times and expect a win there...get 2 west coast wins after the first of the year then come home for PSU and USC before heading into Indiana for a showdown with the loosiers....go 4-1 or hopefully 5-0 over that stretch would have us positioned to challenge for the B10 title:hailtotheorange:
 
#24      
the juiceman cometh
HereSoIDontGetFined said:
These NET ratings are weird, and I don't know why they bothered to release them early. No way we should be 10th with Alabama having more Q1+Q2 wins is sitting 13th.

Edit: apparently they have the #312 scoring defense which is really the most glaring remark against them. Imagine outscoring opponents by 9-10 points but getting docked a seed because both numbers are high. That's effectively what is happening.
Click to expand...
I mean, they have 2 losses and some of their wins were relatively close against not that great competition. It's one thing to give up 83 to Oregon, and another thing entirely to give up 90 (#86) to Rutgers or 79 to Arkansas St. (#144).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back