Big East NET Rankings

[JwittersPAC]

I used punctuation symbols "?" that are called question marks and meant to indicate that the sentence is a question, and a request for information. There is no need to get upset when I am simply asking if anyone has actually reviewed these models.

The analysis in your link shows:

1) That the models appear to be tightly correlated to each other, which cuts both ways in assessing their credibility and usefulness.
2) There are no benchmarks included making that analysis meaningless. Did the models do better or worse than a more straightforward analysis like RPI?
3) It is likely that a significant percentage of games have easily predictable outcomes, which creates a confirmation bias in an analysis like that one.
4) NET was not assessed in that analysis.

I am not a statistician, but I have a little game when it comes to assessing models since I have spent most of my career in and around technology and financial services. The link you provided is helpful if these models were just being used for entertainment purposes, but is not remotely acceptable as a validation tool for the accuracy of any model or algorithm that is used for major decisions that have significant financial impacts. There are dozens (or possibly hundreds when you include independent contractors) of credible firms that could do an assessment of the accuracy and predictive value of the NET algorithm, because they do stuff like this all the time for all kinds of companies. Did the NCAA engage one or more of these firms?

I have not seen any reference to an independent validation of NET. This shouldn't be controversial. This is basic stuff that any large entity should do for a key algorithm whose outcome has a significant financial impact on third parties. Was it done?

I am not a statistician but I pretend to be an expert on judging statistical models…..lol

 

[Scrutineer]

It’s amazing to me that based on our resume which seems to me to be a top 3 resume of all teams in college ball at worst that the net has us 8th. We are very clearly one of the best 3-4 teams this year

It puzzled me why Villanova has such a low NET so I looked at their schedule. Two things stood out. They only played a couple terrible teams while we played five and, while their schedule did not have as many powerhouse opponents, it did have a number of high level opponents.
So, at least based on the schedules UConn and Villanova have played, it appears we are penalized to a degree for playing so many Columbias and New Havens.

 

[auror]

It puzzled me why Villanova has such a low NET so I looked at their schedule. Two things stood out. They only played a couple terrible teams while we played five and, while their schedule did not have as many powerhouse opponents, it did have a number of high level opponents.
So, at least based on the schedules UConn and Villanova have played, it appears we are penalized to a degree for playing so many Columbias and New Havens.

Biggest games improving their net:
Road win at Seton Hall. Neutral win over Wisconsin by 10 (even though OT, I'm not positive how NET treats OT but many of the models just consider it as the real margin because possessions are possessions). Sacred Heart win by 34, and Penn win by 27.

The Michigan beatdown hurt them and the Old Dominion win wasn't great, but they haven't had any real stinkers.

 

[RuffRuff]

Biggest games improving their net:
Road win at Seton Hall. Neutral win over Wisconsin by 10 (even though OT, I'm not positive how NET treats OT but many of the models just consider it as the real margin because possessions are possessions). Sacred Heart win by 34, and Penn win by 27.

The Michigan beatdown hurt them and the Old Dominion win wasn't great, but they haven't had any real stinkers.

They played BYU fairly tough.

I think that needs to be a schedule adjustment - flipping to a higher degree of non high major. It’s probably better for the team and the fans.

 

[pepband99]

I am pointing out a problem with the newer analytics, which are not nearly as clever as they make themselves out to be.

No, you’re just pointing out that you still don’t understand how these metrics work.

To help you, try flipping your argument around. If, say, Duke, beat CCSU by 2 in Cameron, you wouldn’t find that result compelling? You don’t think it reflects on either teams resume?

Your precious RPI would treat that as any home win.

 

[RuffRuff]

No, you’re just pointing out that you still don’t understand how these metrics work.

To help you, try flipping your argument around. If, say, Duke, beat CCSU by 2 in Cameron, you wouldn’t find that result compelling? You don’t think it reflects on either teams resume?

Your precious RPI would treat that as any home win.

Clawing for supporting data points when logic and common sense prevail.

 

[NHUConnfan]

It’s amazing to me that based on our resume which seems to me to be a top 3 resume of all teams in college ball at worst that the net has us 8th. We are very clearly one of the best 3-4 teams this year

And we haven't even really played very clean ball yet. I'm okay with that if it gives us tape to work on so we're humming by February.

 

[businesslawyer]

No, you’re just pointing out that you still don’t understand how these metrics work.

To help you, try flipping your argument around. If, say, Duke, beat CCSU by 2 in Cameron, you wouldn’t find that result compelling? You don’t think it reflects on either teams resume?

Your precious RPI would treat that as any home win.

So take that one step further. If the Yankees sweep a 3 game set against the Nationals at home, winning each game by 1 run, and the Red Sox sweep the Nationals at home winning each game by 10, would the margin be relevant in trying to predict who would win a Yankees--Red Sox series the following week? Of course it would be relevant. Not determinative, but certainly relevant.

On the other hand, no one would seriously propose that, in the standings, the Sox should get more wins for their sweep than the Yankees get from theirs. So when folks object to putting much weight on the KenPom/Net type numbers that's all they're saying. Because schedules in college sports are far less balanced than in a professional league, it's fine to reward and punish teams for their strengths of schedule when you compare their records, but just because margins are useful in making predictions doesn't mean they should be used in ranking teams for anything meaningful.

 

[RuffRuff]

So take that one step further. If the Yankees sweep a 3 game set against the Nationals at home, winning each game by 1 run, and the Red Sox sweep the Nationals at home winning each game by 10, would the margin be relevant in trying to predict who would win a Yankees--Red Sox series the following week? Of course it would be relevant. Not determinative, but certainly relevant.

On the other hand, no one would seriously propose that, in the standings, the Sox should get more wins for their sweep than the Yankees get from theirs. So when folks object to putting much weight on the KenPom/Net type numbers that's all they're saying. Because schedules in college sports are far less balanced than in a professional league, it's fine to reward and punish teams for their strengths of schedule when you compare their records, but just because margins are useful in making predictions doesn't mean they should be used in ranking teams for anything meaningful.

100% would be relevant. Scoring differential matters. A 30 point win vs a 50 point win is meaningful - it means a team is that much more dominant, focused and can play through a game without letting down. Kill shots.

 

[GlastonTim]

100% would be relevant. Scoring differential matters. A 30 point win vs a 50 point win is meaningful - it means a team is that much more dominant, focused and can play through a game without letting down. Kill shots.

Or it could mean a team is resting starters and giving bench an opportunity for minutes.

 

[How Sway?!]

Hurley said recently he'd like to only play 3 buy games next season. Not sure that's going to happen but we'll see.

"It's gone so well, next year we may go to eight of these big games, and three buys, because I hate the buy games," Hurley told CBS Sports after UConn's 77-73 win over Florida earlier this week. "When I wake up the day of a buy game, I just want to go die. The anxiety, the fear that your team is — the wrecking of a loss, or just how mad you get at your team when they underestimate a scrappy, loaded mid-major team. I hate those games."

Dan Hurley wants to make UConn's nonconference schedule even tougher next season

Hurley told CBS Sports he also hopes the Big East goes from a 20- to an 18-game schedule to free up more scheduling flexibility

www.cbssports.com

I know people would prefer more quality buy games but I feel this is a fair trade off. 8 top 50 teams and 3 sub 300 teams feels better than 3 top 50 teams and 8 top 150 teams.

 

[RuffRuff]

I know people would prefer more quality buy games but I feel this is a fair trade off. 8 top 50 teams and 3 sub 300 teams feels better than 3 top 50 teams and 8 top 150 teams.

100% - schedule was amazing, but they could amp up the buy games a bit. We are playing 300+ teams - even so much as playing 175-250ish types would help and wouldn't feel that hard.

 

[Icehawk]

True, but Hurley is committed to playing HBCUs as part of the schedule and I support that. This year’s schedule is good, best ever even, so why are you guys still bitching? Oh, right we’re from Connecticut

 

[BuffaloHusky]

100% - schedule was amazing, but they could amp up the buy games a bit. We are playing 300+ teams - even so much as playing 175-250ish types would help and wouldn't feel that hard.

Re: buy games... I just feel that unless Hurley or the coaches have a relationship with the coach like they did with Russo and Northern Arizona a few seasons ago... we should only play regional teams in buy games. I saw the Mississippi Valley State game a few years ago and that was the worst Division 1 team I ever saw and just didn't understand how they got on our schedule. Stick to the Tri-State and New England for your cupcakes. There are plenty to go around.

 

[aceboon]

True, but Hurley is committed to playing HBCUs as part of the schedule and I support that. This year’s schedule is good, best ever even, so why are you guys still bitching? Oh, right we’re from Connecticut

none of the buy games this year were HBCUs

 

[NJHusky]

100% would be relevant. Scoring differential matters. A 30 point win vs a 50 point win is meaningful - it means a team is that much more dominant, focused and can play through a game without letting down. Kill shots.

Is it really? A 30 pt win v a 3 pt win yes. At some point if you're up by 30 human nature is to just slow down play, end the game injury free and move on. I doubt any player cares if they beat a 250 Net team by 30 or 50...

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Re: buy games... I just feel that unless Hurley or the coaches have a relationship with the coach like they did with Russo and Northern Arizona a few seasons ago... we should only play regional teams in buy games. I saw the Mississippi Valley State game a few years ago and that was the worst Division 1 team I ever saw and just didn't understand how they got on our schedule. Stick to the Tri-State and New England for your cupcakes. There are plenty to go around.

Your question was answered before you asked it.

True, but Hurley is committed to playing HBCUs as part of the schedule and I support that. This year’s schedule is good, best ever even, so why are you guys still bitching? Oh, right we’re from Connecticut

 

[uconn_jack]

I hate to do it, but I agree with Nelson on this one. I think straight win margin is a poor statistic to use without serious situational adjustments.

 

[RuffRuff]

Is it really? A 30 pt win v a 3 pt win yes. At some point if you're up by 30 human nature is to just slow down play, end the game injury free and move on. I doubt any player cares if they beat a 250 Net team by 30 or 50...

How about if you're deep? Or you're just that good you overpower the competition quick & early? And that playing 80% still overpowers the comp. I do agree that 3 vs 30 is a much bigger diff, but I don't think 30 to 50 is nothing.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

There was no question mark in your statement: "I simply disagree with the principle that different levels of blowouts are meaningfully predictive or that they should be significant drivers of the models' results." That was entirely where my first paragraph was directed, which I used punctuation symbols known as "quotation marks" to reference your "disagree" statement so that you would have the context clues to understand that. I'm not upset, I said it was comical. You "disagreeing" with a "principle" with absolutely nothing to back it up but your good old gut feeling and contrarian can-do attitude makes me chuckle.

I proceeded to then help you start getting answers to some of your questions. But the key phrases I used were "start here" and "do a google". My link definitely does not answer everything. The answers to the thoughts you posed with your "question mark punctuation symbols" and the subsequent ones in your follow-up are probably all out there if you're interested enough. Good luck. Start your research. The only thing I'll answer is that of course all modern models that are empirically-derived and back-tested do better than the RPI. The RPI is unsound and arbitrary. That and yes the NET is on that site, but you have to uncheck the hide box since it doesn't release at the start of the season.

Why would I do an extensive research project for a debate on a message board when I know there are people that have already found what I am looking for?

Thanks for the heads up on how to use the site. When the RPI is included, it emphasizes the problem of how tightly bunched all of the assessments are. The RPI is only included for a couple of years, which is strange, but even the two years that are included provide enough evidence that these predictive models are somewhat better than the RPI for predicting the outcome, but not by a big margin. And why is predicting the outcome of the next game the decisive factor about which source to use for selecting and seeding the tournament field anyway? Isn't tournament seeding about who actually won more games against better competition?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

No, you’re just pointing out that you still don’t understand how these metrics work.

To help you, try flipping your argument around. If, say, Duke, beat CCSU by 2 in Cameron, you wouldn’t find that result compelling? You don’t think it reflects on either teams resume?

Your precious RPI would treat that as any home win.

I don't object, or care, whether gamblers want to use these tools, and they do appear to have some value for that, but final scores in blowouts captures a lot of things beyond just relative quality of teams.

Your example is a stupid strawman. How about this example: Butler beats South Carolina State 70-55 because Matta gives a starter the night off and pulls the rest of the starters up by 30 with 12 minutes left to protect them against injury and give his bench some game time. A week later, South Carolina beats South Carolina State by 60 because the SC coach leaves his starters on the court until a minute left. By your logic, South Carolina should gain ground on Butler in the NET because South Carolina beat the same team by 4 times as much even though neither game was ever in doubt. If it was up to me, just playing more than 2 non-conference teams outside the top 300 would count as a home loss to a mid-major for the purposes of tournament selection and seeding. I would probably add a separate limit for teams outside the Top 200. There is no competitive reason for >5 games against teams that bad to have any positive factor at all in tournament selection or seeding.

Throwing these absurd games into an efficiency stew and thinking there is any way to make a game against South Carolina State remotely comparable to even an A10 or MWC opponent is ridiculous.

Also, there was nothing stopping the committee from evaluating a 2 point win over CCSU negatively for seeding in the RPI era. They just had enough intellectual honesty back then not to pretend there was a way to elevate unholy blowouts against terrible, D1-in-name-only, programs to approach wins against majors or mid-majors. RPI hammered teams for playing terrible schedules, and those teams deserved it.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Missouri Men's Basketball Schedule Scores & Stats | WarrenNolan.com

The 2026 Men's Basketball Schedule for the Missouri Tigers with today’s scores plus records, conference records, post season records, strength of schedule, streaks and statistics.

www.warrennolan.com

Let's not talk in the abstract. Missouri has a NET of 96 and a KenPom of 64. Missouri is 1-3 against team ranked in the top 216 of NET. 7 of its 10 wins are against teams ranked 280 or worse. Its RPI is 133, which is a lot more appropriate for a team with a schedule like this.

 

[HooperScooper]

I saw the Mississippi Valley State game a few years ago and that was the worst Division 1 team I ever saw and just didn't understand how they got on our schedule.

The Southwestern Athletic Conference is a collegiate athletic conference headquartered in Birmingham, Alabama, which is made up of historically black colleges and universities in the Southern United States.

https://swac.org/

 

[businesslawyer]

100% would be relevant. Scoring differential matters. A 30 point win vs a 50 point win is meaningful - it means a team is that much more dominant, focused and can play through a game without letting down. Kill shots.

Right. I already agreed with that. You’re not going to address what I said in the second paragraph of my earlier post?

 

[RuffRuff]

Right. I already agreed with that. You’re not going to address what I said in the second paragraph of my earlier post?

On the other hand, no one would seriously propose that, in the standings, the Sox should get more wins for their sweep than the Yankees get from theirs. So when folks object to putting much weight on the KenPom/Net type numbers that's all they're saying. Because schedules in college sports are far less balanced than in a professional league, it's fine to reward and punish teams for their strengths of schedule when you compare their records, but just because margins are useful in making predictions doesn't mean they should be used in ranking teams for anything meaningful.

Do we know how much a big blowout win is even weighted?