NET Ranking

[LanderPoke]

We went from 30 to 28 after last night's victory. utags went from 41 to 45. Now this is a good metric (logical) and thank goodness it's what the selection committee primarily uses for tourney selection purposes

28. Wyoming
32. Boise State
35. sheep
45. utags
54. SDSU
56. Fresno
111. UNLV

MWC is strong this year. I see three definite NCAA tourney teams. I just don't think they'll give us four.

 

[Bryoming]

We went from 30 to 28 after last night's victory. utags went from 41 to 45. Now this is a good metric (logical) and thank goodness it's what the selection committee primarily uses for tourney selection purposes

28. Wyoming
32. Boise State
35. sheep
45. utags
54. SDSU
56. Fresno
111. UNLV

MWC is strong this year. I see three definite NCAA tourney teams. I just don't think they'll give us four.

I'm pretty confident we'll get 4. Agree that the NET is a solid ranking system. I very much enjoy checking out bracketologists.com because they focus on the NET rankings, but still give KenPom, BPI, Sagarin, KPI, and T-Rank rankings for each time. Interesting to see how much they differ.

 

[seattlecowboy]

They use the NET mainly for seeding purposes.

For some reason BPI hates Wyoming and for the most part the MWC this year.

They use KPI a lot also which we are very high in.

Sagarin doesn’t like Wyoming as much either for some reason.

We have a high SOR also which is good. I think we are 19th in it last I checked.

You can see every metric if you go to bracketologists.com …. It will let you compare every teams tournament resume.

 

[Itsux2beaewe]

Because of the “doesn’t likes”, I only see 3 from the MW. I think the conference could be a bit more active, but Craig doesn’t seem to be pro-active with anything.

 

[stymeman]

4 sounds great, but lets continue our run thru conference season and then a solid run thru the tourney and even win the damn thing just to be sure 100%...Go Pokes!!