forums

Great news! The NET rankings are out

Advertisement
Advertisement
Calm Down Al Pacino GIF


Got a few months to go, boys. Let things play out.
 
I disagree it is too early to matter. We saw this play out last year. Every metric had us ranked extremely low and because of that we were Co-ACC champions and got a 5 seed.

We’ve got a bunch of cupcake game coming up (minus Colorado) so those won’t help this metric.
 
Miami04 said:
I disagree it is too early to matter. We saw this play out last year. Every metric had us ranked extremely low and because of that we were Co-ACC champions and got a 5 seed.

We’ve got a bunch of cupcake game coming up (minus Colorado) so those won’t help this metric.
Click to expand...

We’re ranked 15th in the poll that matters. All we need to do is win.

Also… ironically (and why I hate the efficiency metric based ranking systems) if we beat the cupcakes by 40-50 that would help our ranking. But we won’t do that because that’s not generally how L coaches.
 
Advertisement
Miami04 said:
I disagree it is too early to matter. We saw this play out last year. Every metric had us ranked extremely low and because of that we were Co-ACC champions and got a 5 seed.

We’ve got a bunch of cupcake game coming up (minus Colorado) so those won’t help this metric.
Click to expand...
Don't follow your logic. The rankings had nothing to do with being Co-Champs. An auto correct or mistype?
 
Glad they got Kentucky in the challenge. Now gotta start playing in more prestigious tournaments to help the noncon
 
SPAMM said:
Don't follow your logic. The rankings had nothing to do with being Co-Champs. An auto correct or mistype?
Click to expand...
Last year we had low metrics in the out of conference portion of the schedule so even though we were co-ACC champions we still had low enough metrics to only get a 5 seed.

Winning the league and playing in the ACC did not raise our metrics enough to warrant a top 3 seed that we should have been.
 
Advertisement
Unfortunately these stupid metric rankings factor in probably more than they should.

Starting off at 63rd is not an ideal situation. We can move up, but i feel like losses will ding us. Clemson is the highest rated ACC team in the NET at #18, which also isn't good for us.
 
gacaneaddict said:
Unfortunately these stupid metric rankings factor in probably more than they should.

Starting off at 63rd is not an ideal situation. We can move up, but i feel like losses will ding us. Clemson is the highest rated ACC team in the NET at #18, which also isn't good for us.
Click to expand...
We are actually the SIXTH ACC team (behind Pittsburgh) in the NET. Do other coaches run up the score on cupcakes or what? ...makes no REAL sense, and if it means we get a 12th seed rather than a 5 or 6 its pretty hurtful. But yeah its still way way early.
 
Advertisement
Stan The Bat said:
This team is a work in progress. Call us on February 1st for a poll update.
Click to expand...


No.

Or else don't do November-December polls.

Miami lost a road game to a Top 15 ranked P5 team? Dropped us 7 spots in the rankings.

Kentucky lost a home game to an unranked non P5 ream? Dropped them 4 spots in the rankings.

Bull. And. ****.
 
Sadly what we’re doing to LIU tonight is what the efficiency metrics reward. We’re not a better team by beating them by 70 vs 30… but that’s how the efficiency metrics rank. It’s so stupid.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top