southie
Longhorn Lover
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2012
- Messages
- 2,930
- Reaction Score
- 6,605
That's why I know it's tough on the committee as not all Q1 wins are created equal.But this is what I'm saying. Who deserves to be higher? It's a comparison game and the resumes outside the top 10 are all very flawed or weak in one way or another. (Even some of the top 10 resumes are problematic, as you know.)
Maryland at least has a win over Baylor (now a top 5 team) and they don't have any bad losses. I sure as heck like their resume better than Tennessee's or any of the other teams that might be considered to move ahead of them. Arizona was deservedly ahead of them until they lost to like 4 bubble teams in a row.
Maryland is actually 5-8 in NET Q1 wins/losses (3-8 in RPI Q1 wins); NET ranking = 13; RPI ranking = 10
Iowa State is 4-5 in Q1 wins/losses; NET ranking = 11; RPI ranking = 7
Some teams below them as of the recent reveal:
Oklahoma is 8-5 Q1 in wins/losses (with 2 wins over Baylor); NET ranking = 34; RPI ranking = 12
Not among the Top 16 recent reveal:
Oregon is 8-8 in Q1 wins/losses; NET ranking = 12; RPI ranking = 17
Georgia is 7-6 in Q1 wins/losses; NET ranking = 27; RPI ranking = 28
Notre Dame is 6-7 in Q1 win/losses; NET ranking = 20; RPI ranking = 19
So, I must be missing something as I thought there was supposed to an emphasis on Q1 wins. Maybe the committee penalizes a team more for a bad loss than they do for a Q1 win. Or, perhaps they still value RPI rankings more than anything else . . .
The NET Nitty Gritty Report for NCAA Women's College Basketball | WarrenNolan.com
The NET Nitty Gritty Report for 2022 NCAA Women's College Basketball. This Is a Duplication of the Report Used by the Tournament Selection Committee to Determine At-Large Teams with Quadrants
www.warrennolan.com
Last edited: