NET Rankings Tracker

Post by **treesap32** » December 4th, 2023, 10:06 am

Post by **treesap32** » December 4th, 2023, 10:07 am

I'm pinning this post as the images in it are dynamic and are updated every 2 hours. They link to the Aggie specific page and the conference page for NET info at Bracketologists.com.

Post by **AGinNEIowa** » December 4th, 2023, 11:47 am

I'm getting "503 Service Unavailable" when I click the link and the Images
is your server experiencing issues, or is my work's filters?

slcagg · Post by **slcagg** » December 4th, 2023, 11:53 am

AGinNEIowa wrote: ↑
December 4th, 2023, 11:47 am
I'm getting "503 Service Unavailable" when I click the link and the Images
is your server experiencing issues, or is my work's filters?

Same thing for me. But I’m also at work.

Post by **treesap32** » December 4th, 2023, 12:08 pm

Server is getting hammered. We're trying to optimize things...

MrBiggle · Post by **MrBiggle** » December 4th, 2023, 1:14 pm

I guess that is a good problem to have right? When do the ads start to kick on?

Post by **treesap32** » December 7th, 2023, 6:47 am

Up to #31 today.

MrBiggle · Post by **MrBiggle** » December 10th, 2023, 8:49 am

Nevada had a HUGE drop due to getting RUTs’d last night. Also, St. marys had the biggest jump I have ever seen, 147 to 85!

Post by **treesap32** » December 10th, 2023, 10:07 am

Interesting change today. Everyone from #8-59 moved except us. We're standing pat at #31.

scotlandog · Post by **scotlandog** » December 10th, 2023, 2:47 pm

treesap32 wrote:Interesting change today. Everyone from #8-59 moved except us. We're standing pat at #31.

Yeah I was expecting at least a few spots up with all the losses ahead of us. Weird.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jpswensen · Post by **jpswensen** » December 17th, 2023, 9:03 am

Our win bumps us up to 29, but unfortunately send SF below 50, so it isn't a Q1 win. We need all the Q1 wins we can get for when it comes to Selection Sunday.

Aggies1888 · Post by **Aggies1888** » December 17th, 2023, 10:07 am

jpswensen wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 9:03 am
Our win bumps us up to 29, but unfortunately send SF below 50, so it isn't a Q1 win. We need all the Q1 wins we can get for when it comes to Selection Sunday.

San Fran is about to run off 7 wins in a row, maybe 8, I'm not impressed with SMC. They'll be alright. Should be right back to Q1 shortly.

LarryTheAggie · Post by **LarryTheAggie** » December 17th, 2023, 10:21 am

Aggies1888 wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 10:07 am

jpswensen wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 9:03 am
Our win bumps us up to 29, but unfortunately send SF below 50, so it isn't a Q1 win. We need all the Q1 wins we can get for when it comes to Selection Sunday.
San Fran is about to run off 7 wins in a row, maybe 8, I'm not impressed with SMC. They'll be alright. Should be right back to Q1 shortly.

The problem is winning quad 4 games are not going to move them up and if they win close they might actually drop. Slip up on one of those games and they are toast.

Post by **ProvoAggie** » December 17th, 2023, 12:08 pm

LarryTheAggie wrote:
Aggies1888 wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 10:07 am

jpswensen wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 9:03 am
Our win bumps us up to 29, but unfortunately send SF below 50, so it isn't a Q1 win. We need all the Q1 wins we can get for when it comes to Selection Sunday.
San Fran is about to run off 7 wins in a row, maybe 8, I'm not impressed with SMC. They'll be alright. Should be right back to Q1 shortly.

The problem is winning quad 4 games are not going to move them up and if they win close they might actually drop. Slip up on one of those games and they are toast.

BYU is ranked #3 playing mostly Q4 games. The key is you need to run up the score.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

flying_scotsman2.0 · Post by **flying_scotsman2.0** » December 17th, 2023, 12:35 pm

ProvoAggie wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 12:08 pm

LarryTheAggie wrote:
Aggies1888 wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 10:07 am

jpswensen wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 9:03 am
Our win bumps us up to 29, but unfortunately send SF below 50, so it isn't a Q1 win. We need all the Q1 wins we can get for when it comes to Selection Sunday.
San Fran is about to run off 7 wins in a row, maybe 8, I'm not impressed with SMC. They'll be alright. Should be right back to Q1 shortly.

The problem is winning quad 4 games are not going to move them up and if they win close they might actually drop. Slip up on one of those games and they are toast.
BYU is ranked #3 playing mostly Q4 games. The key is you need to run up the score.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

WHOA WHOA! Pump the brakes! Running up the score has NOTHING to do with it. The key is improving both offensive and defensive efficiency. Let’s not confuse that with score. They are immeasurably different.

Post by **treesap32** » December 17th, 2023, 9:08 pm

RUTS'ing sub-300 teams by 45 or 50 points each does wonders. BYU is case in point.

Attn: StanfordAggie (this happens because it also does wonders for their offensive and defensive efficiencies).

trevordude · Post by **trevordude** » December 18th, 2023, 8:05 am

Houston's schedule is interesting. Beat the Q1's, murder the Q4's, nothing in between

Aggie in Boise · Post by **Aggie in Boise** » December 21st, 2023, 2:36 am

treesap32 wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 9:08 pm
RUTS'ing sub-300 teams by 45 or 50 points each does wonders. BYU is case in point.

Attn: StanfordAggie (this happens because it also does wonders for their offensive and defensive efficiencies).

For sure. San Fran beat NAU by 40 and is a Quad 1 win for us again. Net 44 after that win.

Post by **treesap32** » December 21st, 2023, 6:31 am

Aggie in Boise wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 2:36 am

treesap32 wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 9:08 pm
RUTS'ing sub-300 teams by 45 or 50 points each does wonders. BYU is case in point.

Attn: StanfordAggie (this happens because it also does wonders for their offensive and defensive efficiencies).
For sure. San Fran beat NAU by 40 and is a Quad 1 win for us again. Net 44 after that win.

NICE!

Usu0505 · Post by **Usu0505** » December 21st, 2023, 7:56 am

The more I look at the teams around and in front of us, I begin to believe 3 and 4 quad games are great to schedule. As long as you can get them at home and beat them by 20+ the net rankings love it. Maybe it will even out by the end of the year if you win a lot of Q1 games but being 2 and 1 in Q2 and 1 and 0 in Q1 games seems like it should put us ahead of A LOT of the teams in front of us who are 0fer in Q1 games or don’t even have any. Then they are .500 or below in Q2 games. It’s dumb.

Aggie in Boise · Post by **Aggie in Boise** » December 21st, 2023, 8:06 am

treesap32 wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 6:31 am

Aggie in Boise wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 2:36 am

treesap32 wrote: ↑
December 17th, 2023, 9:08 pm
RUTS'ing sub-300 teams by 45 or 50 points each does wonders. BYU is case in point.

Attn: StanfordAggie (this happens because it also does wonders for their offensive and defensive efficiencies).
For sure. San Fran beat NAU by 40 and is a Quad 1 win for us again. Net 44 after that win.
NICE!

We need to RUTS on East Tennessee State. When BSU beat Northwestern State (#359) by 41points BSU moved from #114 to #80 immediately after.

scotlandog · Post by **scotlandog** » December 21st, 2023, 8:24 am

Usu0505 wrote:The more I look at the teams around and in front of us, I begin to believe 3 and 4 quad games are great to schedule. As long as you can get them at home and beat them by 20+ the net rankings love it. Maybe it will even out by the end of the year if you win a lot of Q1 games but being 2 and 1 in Q2 and 1 and 0 in Q1 games seems like it should put us ahead of A LOT of the teams in front of us who are 0fer in Q1 games or don’t even have any. Then they are .500 or below in Q2 games. It’s dumb.

It’s great for the ranking but we know from last season that it’s the Q1/Q2 games that matter in the end. There was a lot of talk that we would be the highest ranked team(again!) to not make the tourney if we didn’t get a Q1 win. Luckily we did.

If you just play the Q3/4 games you better have a bunch of Q1 opportunities in conference or your screwed. For us, I think we have a good amount of Q1/2 games in conference to be ok but still need to get some tough games OOC to maximize our opportunities. The MWC is criticized for “gaming” the system but I think the larger conferences do it worse. They only play home games against bad competition and get their numbers up high. They know they have almost all Q1/2 games in conference play.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Usu0505 · Post by **Usu0505** » December 21st, 2023, 8:41 am

scotlandog wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 8:24 am

Usu0505 wrote:The more I look at the teams around and in front of us, I begin to believe 3 and 4 quad games are great to schedule. As long as you can get them at home and beat them by 20+ the net rankings love it. Maybe it will even out by the end of the year if you win a lot of Q1 games but being 2 and 1 in Q2 and 1 and 0 in Q1 games seems like it should put us ahead of A LOT of the teams in front of us who are 0fer in Q1 games or don’t even have any. Then they are .500 or below in Q2 games. It’s dumb.
It’s great for the ranking but we know from last season that it’s the Q1/Q2 games that matter in the end. There was a lot of talk that we would be the highest ranked team(again!) to not make the tourney if we didn’t get a Q1 win. Luckily we did.

If you just play the Q3/4 games you better have a bunch of Q1 opportunities in conference or your screwed. For us, I think we have a good amount of Q1/2 games in conference to be ok but still need to get some tough games OOC to maximize our opportunities. The MWC is criticized for “gaming” the system but I think the larger conferences do it worse. They only play home games against bad competition and get their numbers up high. They know they have almost all Q1/2 games in conference play.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very good point. I still think the committee stands by NET and goes off if it. We play in a tough enough league that if we played all Q3 and 4 games and could be in the teens going into conference we’d be just fine with a few Q1 and 2s in conference. Here’s to hoping we beat the (I can't express myself without swearing) out of ETSU!

Roy McAvoy · Post by **Roy McAvoy** » December 21st, 2023, 8:49 am

Usu0505 wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 8:41 am

scotlandog wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 8:24 am

Usu0505 wrote:The more I look at the teams around and in front of us, I begin to believe 3 and 4 quad games are great to schedule. As long as you can get them at home and beat them by 20+ the net rankings love it. Maybe it will even out by the end of the year if you win a lot of Q1 games but being 2 and 1 in Q2 and 1 and 0 in Q1 games seems like it should put us ahead of A LOT of the teams in front of us who are 0fer in Q1 games or don’t even have any. Then they are .500 or below in Q2 games. It’s dumb.
It’s great for the ranking but we know from last season that it’s the Q1/Q2 games that matter in the end. There was a lot of talk that we would be the highest ranked team(again!) to not make the tourney if we didn’t get a Q1 win. Luckily we did.

If you just play the Q3/4 games you better have a bunch of Q1 opportunities in conference or your screwed. For us, I think we have a good amount of Q1/2 games in conference to be ok but still need to get some tough games OOC to maximize our opportunities. The MWC is criticized for “gaming” the system but I think the larger conferences do it worse. They only play home games against bad competition and get their numbers up high. They know they have almost all Q1/2 games in conference play.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very good point. I still think the committee stands by NET and goes off if it. We play in a tough enough league that if we played all Q3 and 4 games and could be in the teens going into conference we’d be just fine with a few Q1 and 2s in conference. Here’s to hoping we beat the (I can't express myself without swearing) out of ETSU!

It’s time to be massive San Francisco fans. I think if we’re top 40 NET & can accumulate 3 Q1 wins we are locks for the tournament.

As long as San Fran stays Q1, we only need to pick up 2 more Q1 wins in conference and then just mostly win what we’re supposed to and we can stay top 40 NET.

Usu0505 · Post by **Usu0505** » December 21st, 2023, 8:56 am

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 8:49 am

Usu0505 wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 8:41 am

scotlandog wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 8:24 am

Usu0505 wrote:The more I look at the teams around and in front of us, I begin to believe 3 and 4 quad games are great to schedule. As long as you can get them at home and beat them by 20+ the net rankings love it. Maybe it will even out by the end of the year if you win a lot of Q1 games but being 2 and 1 in Q2 and 1 and 0 in Q1 games seems like it should put us ahead of A LOT of the teams in front of us who are 0fer in Q1 games or don’t even have any. Then they are .500 or below in Q2 games. It’s dumb.
It’s great for the ranking but we know from last season that it’s the Q1/Q2 games that matter in the end. There was a lot of talk that we would be the highest ranked team(again!) to not make the tourney if we didn’t get a Q1 win. Luckily we did.

If you just play the Q3/4 games you better have a bunch of Q1 opportunities in conference or your screwed. For us, I think we have a good amount of Q1/2 games in conference to be ok but still need to get some tough games OOC to maximize our opportunities. The MWC is criticized for “gaming” the system but I think the larger conferences do it worse. They only play home games against bad competition and get their numbers up high. They know they have almost all Q1/2 games in conference play.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very good point. I still think the committee stands by NET and goes off if it. We play in a tough enough league that if we played all Q3 and 4 games and could be in the teens going into conference we’d be just fine with a few Q1 and 2s in conference. Here’s to hoping we beat the (I can't express myself without swearing) out of ETSU!
It’s time to be massive San Francisco fans. I think if we’re top 40 NET & can accumulate 3 Q1 wins we are locks for the tournament.

As long as San Fran stays Q1, we only need to pick up 2 more Q1 wins in conference and then just mostly win what we’re supposed to and we can stay top 40 NET.

I want teens! I want no questions for just one stinking year!

Usu0505 · Post by **Usu0505** » December 21st, 2023, 8:58 am

Usu0505 wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 8:56 am

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 8:49 am

Usu0505 wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 8:41 am

scotlandog wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 8:24 am

Usu0505 wrote:The more I look at the teams around and in front of us, I begin to believe 3 and 4 quad games are great to schedule. As long as you can get them at home and beat them by 20+ the net rankings love it. Maybe it will even out by the end of the year if you win a lot of Q1 games but being 2 and 1 in Q2 and 1 and 0 in Q1 games seems like it should put us ahead of A LOT of the teams in front of us who are 0fer in Q1 games or don’t even have any. Then they are .500 or below in Q2 games. It’s dumb.
It’s great for the ranking but we know from last season that it’s the Q1/Q2 games that matter in the end. There was a lot of talk that we would be the highest ranked team(again!) to not make the tourney if we didn’t get a Q1 win. Luckily we did.

If you just play the Q3/4 games you better have a bunch of Q1 opportunities in conference or your screwed. For us, I think we have a good amount of Q1/2 games in conference to be ok but still need to get some tough games OOC to maximize our opportunities. The MWC is criticized for “gaming” the system but I think the larger conferences do it worse. They only play home games against bad competition and get their numbers up high. They know they have almost all Q1/2 games in conference play.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very good point. I still think the committee stands by NET and goes off if it. We play in a tough enough league that if we played all Q3 and 4 games and could be in the teens going into conference we’d be just fine with a few Q1 and 2s in conference. Here’s to hoping we beat the (I can't express myself without swearing) out of ETSU!
It’s time to be massive San Francisco fans. I think if we’re top 40 NET & can accumulate 3 Q1 wins we are locks for the tournament.

As long as San Fran stays Q1, we only need to pick up 2 more Q1 wins in conference and then just mostly win what we’re supposed to and we can stay top 40 NET.
I want teens! I want no questions for just one stinking year!

And I want a 5 seed or better with a matchup against another mid major team. That is my Christmas list folks.

Post by **treesap32** » December 21st, 2023, 9:04 am

We gotta RUTS the crap out of ETU. This might be our last chance for a 40+ point win and major meaningless boost to our NET before conference play. Pretty lame that RUTS'ing horrible teams has such a big affect on your NET. Beating a sub 300 team by 40 or 50 points doesn't really prove much to me, but it does to the NET.

Roy McAvoy · Post by **Roy McAvoy** » December 21st, 2023, 9:27 am

treesap32 wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 9:04 am
We gotta RUTS the crap out of ETU. This might be our last chance for a 40+ point win and major meaningless boost to our NET before conference play. Pretty lame that RUTS'ing horrible teams has such a big affect on your NET. Beating a sub 300 team by 40 or 50 points doesn't really prove much to me, but it does to the NET.

I agree it’s a flaw in the metric. When you go down and look at team by team and their resume, it’s obvious that running up the score on poor teams has a very positive impact.

slcagg · Post by **slcagg** » December 21st, 2023, 10:11 am

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 9:27 am

treesap32 wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 9:04 am
We gotta RUTS the crap out of ETU. This might be our last chance for a 40+ point win and major meaningless boost to our NET before conference play. Pretty lame that RUTS'ing horrible teams has such a big affect on your NET. Beating a sub 300 team by 40 or 50 points doesn't really prove much to me, but it does to the NET.
I agree it’s a flaw in the metric. When you go down and look at team by team and their resume, it’s obvious that running up the score on poor teams has a very positive impact.

Cough…byu…cough

Real Life Aggie · Post by **Real Life Aggie** » December 21st, 2023, 2:41 pm

treesap32 wrote: ↑
December 21st, 2023, 9:04 am
We gotta RUTS the crap out of ETU. This might be our last chance for a 40+ point win and major meaningless boost to our NET before conference play. Pretty lame that RUTS'ing horrible teams has such a big affect on your NET. Beating a sub 300 team by 40 or 50 points doesn't really prove much to me, but it does to the NET.

Seriously. There's absolutely some incentive to play some of the worst-performing D1 schools to inflate stats/standing. Some of these schools are effectively D2 schools but could be a huge boost to standings. Not a bad way to finagle the system. But I hate that it works out that way.

With that in mind, Stew's teams from back in the day might have gotten a little more respect under the current NET system. Can you imagine how our NET would skyrocket after beating the ever-living s**t out of opponents in the Beehive Classic?

Pacobag · Post by **Pacobag** » December 21st, 2023, 2:56 pm

Does RUTS, against a really bad opponent, have a notable impact on NET after many games have been played? When we look at a team’s NET jump after a lopsided victory, are we considering what that team’s previous opponents may also have accomplished that same day?

Earlier in the season, a team’s win percentage will increase more per win than later in the season. Also, a win will have a bigger impact on the winning percentage of a bad team than it will for a good team. For example a 9-1 team is at .900 and if they win their next game, they only increase to .909 (a 1% improvement in win percentage). Yet a 5-5 team would improve from .500 to .545 (a 9% improvement in win percentage).

jpswensen · Post by **jpswensen** » December 23rd, 2023, 7:35 am

SF turns back into a Q1 win, but our NET has taken a 10 point (and 33%) dive in the last week. Boo!

MrBiggle · Post by **MrBiggle** » December 23rd, 2023, 8:41 am

I dont think the overall Net ranking cares about Q1 wins. It’s an overall body of work. so for a teams opponent (previously played) to go up a few numbers and then be a Q1 win the scale is not changed much by the new Q1 designation. It just makes the eye test look a little better.

flying_scotsman2.0 · Post by **flying_scotsman2.0** » December 23rd, 2023, 9:04 am

MrBiggle wrote: ↑
December 23rd, 2023, 8:41 am
I dont think the overall Net ranking cares about Q1 wins. It’s an overall body of work. so for a teams opponent (previously played) to go up a few numbers and then be a Q1 win the scale is not changed much by the new Q1 designation. It just makes the eye test look a little better.

Exactly. The committee cares about Q1, the computers don’t.

Cuchelain · Post by **Cuchelain** » December 23rd, 2023, 2:47 pm

The computers don’t care about Quad 1 wins. The committee cares about them. The talking heads on television live, breath, dream, obsess and drool over them.

Upcoming Events

Event Results