POLL: Should NET Ranking be A “Rebuttable Presumption" in the selection process?

[visitingcock]

As it is, NET ranking is only one of numerous selection committee factors. It carries no greater weight than the others even though it is the most objective of all the criteria.

I would propose that the committee should be required to follow the NET except where the other criteria, in sum, outweigh the NET: And, for the top 16 selections, the committee should be required to reveal WHAT rebuttal Factors justify upward or downward movement from the NET presumption

Those other Rebuttal Factors are:

• Availability of talent (injured or unavailable players)
• Bad losses
• Common opponents
• Competitive in losses
• Conference record
• Early competition versus late competition
• Head-to-head outcomes
• 
  
• Non-conference record
• Overall record
• Regional Advisory Committee region rankings
• Significant wins
• Strength of conference
• Strength of schedule

 

[sun]

Perhaps it's useful to know some background about the committee and who serves on it.

The committee was recently expanded from 10 to 12 members, and there was significant turnover of it membership in 2020 with 5 members resigning, & with 2 members being reappointed for an additional year including chair Nina King, Duke athletic director.

Members of the committee include:

In addition to Nina King (Duke AD), Debbie Richardson (senior associate commissioner of the Atlantic 10 Conference) and Beth Goetz (committee vice chair from Ball State), members of the 12-member committee for 2021-22 will include Deneé Barracato, deputy director of athletics at Northwestern; Amanda Braun, athletics director at Milwaukee; Greg Burke, director of athletics at Northwestern State; Kurt McGuffin, director of intercollegiate athletics at UT Martin; Lisa Peterson, deputy athletics director at Oregon; Derita Ratcliffe Dawkins, deputy athletics director at Arkansas; Janice Ruggiero, deputy director of athletics and senior woman administrator at New Mexico; Jill Shields, deputy athletics director at Kansas State and Lynn Tighe, senior associate athletics director and senior woman administrator at Villanova.

With 12 people on the committee, IMO they shouldn't need to justify anything in writing as if they were court judges.
They probably operate more like a jury and simply vote their conscience after discussion and debate.
And they probably accept recommendations made by other members about which options to follow.
One can only wonder if there's any lobbying & deal making going on behind the scenes.

Nina King to continue as NCAA Division I Women’s Basketball Committee chair in 2021-22; Beth Goetz named to chair committee in 2022-23

Duke’s Nina King will continue in her role as chair of the NCAA Division I Women’s Basketball Committee in 2021-22, while Beth Goetz of Ball State has been named vice chair for the coming season before stepping into the chair position in 2022-23.

www.ncaa.com

Three new members named to NCAA Division I Women’s Basketball Committee for 2021-22

The Division I Women’s Basketball Committee announced that two existing members will have their terms extended for one year, while three new committee members will be added for the 2020-21 season.

www.ncaa.com

The 12-member Division I Women’s Basketball Championship Committee is made up of athletic directors and conference commissioners. They are responsible for selecting, seeding and bracketing the field for the NCAA tournament.

2024 NCAA women's basketball selection show: Date, schedule

The 2023 NCAA DI Women's Basketball March Madness bracket will be revealed during the Selection Show on Sunday, March 17.

www.ncaa.com

 

[veryolddog]

With all of these posts about seeding of UConn, it looks like people are going through some sort of psycho withdrawal that the women cannot be a number one see. Bottom line: what difference does it make. If they are great team, they will get to the final four and win the National Championship. Sit back and enjoy the tournement and watch them and others play great basketball.

 

[npignatjr]

With all of these posts about seeding of UConn, it looks like people are going through some sort of psycho withdrawal that the women cannot be a number one see. Bottom line: what difference does it make. If they are great team, they will get to the final four and win the National Championship. Sit back and enjoy the tournement and watch them and others play great basketball.

Yes, but if not placed in Bridgeport I will not go.

 

[Boreifs]

Analytics has taken over professional sports, but NET is only one measure. Professional teams use dozens.

 

[Glenn]

Many of your factors are already part of the NET, such as strength of schedule and bad losses. Some of your factors should not be included--like strength of conference (which is already in strength of schedule). So the Committee would have to say they are weighing them more heavily than implicit in the formula which would require that the Committee understand the NET, but i like the idea.

 

[Plebe]

LOL I am just loving the fact that the phrase "rebuttable presumption" made a Boneyard thread title. That's all.

 

[visitingcock]

Many of your factors are already part of the NET, such as strength of schedule and bad losses. Some of your factors should not be included--like strength of conference (which is already in strength of schedule). So the Committee would have to say they are weighing them more heavily than implicit in the formula which would require that the Committee understand the NET, but i like the idea.

ALL of my factors are presently included along with the NET. That's a cut and paste.

 

[Sifaka]

Just in case visitingcock, plebe, The Great Pumpkin and I aren't the only ones who wondered, here is some NCA word salad that doesn't tell you precisely what the NET is, but does give some useful generalities:

“The women’s basketball NET includes adjusted net efficiency and team value index. Adjusted net efficiency is a measure of a team’s overall performance during the regular season, determined by the difference between offensive efficiency (points per possession) and defensive efficiency (opponents’ points per possession). Adjusted net efficiency also accounts for strength of opponents (as measured by their adjusted net efficiency) and location (home/away/neutral) of the games (against Division I opponents only). Team value index is the results-oriented component of the NET, ranking more highly those teams that played and beat other good teams, factoring in opponent, location of the game and winner.

In both adjusted net efficiency and team value index, the same performance against the same opponent will be valued more on the road than at a neutral site, and more at a neutral site than at home.”

More at the source: NCAA Evaluation Tool to replace RPI as team sorting tool for women's college basketball

 

[mbr33ct]

If the NET ranking carries no greater weight in seeding the tourney teams why have they come up with this "new" ranking to begin with, they could have stayed with the "old" RPI and SOS.

 

[Vowelguy]

You are trying to make a process that is inherently subjective be condensed into a single fool proof number. It’s not possible.

And once folks accept that, they will be happier. Tho I know that will never happen.

 

[Drumguy]

With all of these posts about seeding of UConn, it looks like people are going through some sort of psycho withdrawal that the women cannot be a number one see. Bottom line: what difference does it make. If they are great team, they will get to the final four and win the National Championship. Sit back and enjoy the tournement and watch them and others play great basketball.

For those of us who spent $150 for 2 tickets to the Bridgeport regional it makes a huge difference. For UConn's chnaces, doesn't matter.