You may have a point. I was thinking tOSU could lose to Okla (or those others) without it really seeming like a shocking upset. Or they could win. I meant that this is their peer group, not the top-5 teams. But IU does look to me like a top-5 team.
I watched the game. KB is not really an offensive threat against another solid BIG like Kitley. However, KB is a very solid defender in the low post, as was evident in the game last night. KB was as responsible as any of the Duke players for the victory last night. Duke is going to be a very tough out in the NCAA Tournament on their defense alone. If Duke's offense continues to improve, watch out.
Just checking their schedule, what looked like a decent OOC with TN ranked 5 and Louisville ranked 18 and then Oregon ranked 18 no longer looks so special with all three out of the rankings now. It leaves them with only one win against a currently ranked team - Michigan at #13.
Why do the computers love Oregon so much every year? They are 5-5 in conference, they are mediocre. 2 years ago I couldn't figure out why all the formulas had them ranked so high as they kept losing to every good team they played. It's weird.
Net ranking is only one of 14 factors the committee takes into account when seeding teams. That is why Charlie is seeding Oregon as a 7 seed even though the Net has them ranked 14.
I second your question. They have only won two games against Quad one teams. They have lost 6 games. That gives them a dismal minus four Quad one record. They do not deserve to be ranked.
.
That was me, and I share your doubts about NET, and your sense of the need for other factors. It is imperfect. But it is the primary tool they use, as I read the “rule book.” You could call that “the starting point,” but if the committee departs too far from it, they risk being accused of partiality.
