19-10 (10-8) against the 20th hardest schedule

[benjams77]

The arbitrary, moving numbers are stupid as well... WF's loss to ND is a quad 2 and our loss to Ga Tech is quad 3.. in NET ND is 132 and GA Tech us 138... its so dumb... If NC state won last night Cuse would have gained quad 1 and quad 2 wins... By that single victory NC st would have moved up past 75. instead there 78 and 3 spots away from our resume being different... Again very stupid.. The Net this year is going to be an issues for the selection committee.. I have a feeling we will be on the right side of things if we win these last 2 games

 

[blust2i3d4]

How do you leave a team out based on average point margin?

This is crazy.

They give auto berths to terrible teams just because they happen to win a couple lucky games

And team that wins more than the math predicts they ought to is ignored.

Predictions are great, these ratings are good for it. But tournament spots aren't predictions, if some great player is hurt all year and comes back at the end, they'd be predicted to be good but the fact is they weren't.

They play a very hard schedule and they won enough.

The argument is that we lack the blow out victory and we won many games because of luck.

 

[jordoo]

The argument is that we lack the blow out victory and we won many games because of luck.

LOL, Luck would not be so consistent.

 

[pwong]

Our resume looks a lot better with winning out. Would get us close to .500 in Q1/Q2 (over if NC State can get into top 75) and one game under .500 in road/neutral games.

Without the road Clemson win its tough to see a path without winning the whole ACCT. Maybe a finals appearance with 2 wins over some combo of UVA/Wake/Clemson/Duke/UNC?

Yeah @Lville is big because you can’t afford to lose that game or else we are off the bubble. @ Clemson is probably last Q1 opportunity.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

The argument is that we lack the blow out victory and we won many games because of luck.

Luck don't matter, game results do.

 

[djcon57]

If you took away the GT loss, I'd be much more vocal about complaining.

With it, I really feel like we need to win the last 2, then if we go 1-1 in the ACC tourney (or lose to Clemson and go 2-1 in the ACCT), I'll join in with the complaining

 

[benjams77]

More issues with tjis crappy system.. We know Pitt beat Vatech at home by last week and moved up 11 spots in NET and we won at home over the same Vatech team by 13 and only moved up 3 spots in NET..

I just looked back at Virginias win at Louiville when UL was 231 in NET on Jan 27th. Virginia moved up from 55 to 48 in NET (7 spots) after that win by 17... So if we win by 15ish at UL who is now ranked 206 in NET, should we get a 7-10 spot boost.. We will see but now counting in it

 

[Millhouse]

The argument is that we lack the blow out victory and we won many games because of luck.

Luck factors into how well I predict a team will do in the future but it shouldn't factor into whether they qualify for post season.

 

[Orangezoo]

If you took away the GT loss, I'd be much more vocal about complaining.

With it, I really feel like we need to win the last 2, then if we go 1-1 in the ACC tourney, I'll join in with the complaining

I’ll swap that with the FSU loss. Road losses to lesser opponents are normal in small volume. Home losses to lesser opponents are a different animal.

 

[Cusefan0307]

The BC loss killed us too. Starling falling on his head completely changed the course of that game.

 

[jncuse]

How do you leave a team out based on average point margin?

This is crazy.

They give auto berths to terrible teams just because they happen to win a couple lucky games

And team that wins more than the math predicts they ought to is ignored.

Predictions are great, these ratings are good for it. But tournament spots aren't predictions, if some great player is hurt all year and comes back at the end, they'd be predicted to be good but the fact is they weren't.

They play a very hard schedule and they won enough.

We aren't being left out because of NET though (yet)

We are being left out because we are behind in what the committee has always focused on:
2-7 in Q1
4-1 in Q2,
2 bad losses (which is neither good nor bad)

That being said we have an opportunity to get our Q1+Q2 record into something more "discussable" with a win at Clemson, and then if we can get one Q1+Q2 win in the ACC tourney. We are not far from it, but until we get there we can't blame the NET itself.

And yes I have seen many claiming the ACC is as good as everybody else. That is just not correct, although the gap vs a conference like the Big 12 was not that big (as compared to 2023 when the gap between us and the best conferences such as the B12 was quite huge) I did a data check. We did not have a great OOC as a conference and its hurting us. It hurts that the B12 has found a way to help get in an extra team or two by dominating Q4 teams (not just winning, but stomping).

 

[jncuse]

I’ll swap that with the FSU loss. Road losses to lesser opponents are normal in small volume. Home losses to lesser opponents are a different animal.

Either one would have been huge. At least the Georgia Tech game could come back to Q2.

 

[djcon57]

I’ll swap that with the FSU loss. Road losses to lesser opponents are normal in small volume. Home losses to lesser opponents are a different animal.

Yeah, might just be in my head that we should have won GT game and once we got behind vs FSU, we folded. So skews my thoughts

 

[UnknownOrange]

Lets hope Bubba Cunningham (on the selection committee, UNC AD and Vice Chair) holds a lot of weight

and our ole pal Mark Coyle is also on the committee

Feeling good if we get two wins in the ACCT but would feel a LOT better if we take down Clemson

 

[CusefanATL]

Do we know the committee will use avg point margin as much of a criterion?

they use metrics like NET which we are ranked in the 80's based almost entirely on our avg point margin.

 

[Janner]

The argument is that we lack the blow out victory and we won many games because of luck.

Its one of the inherent flaws in the NET because it doesn't take game winning strategy into consideration. What i mean by that is during end of game situations come coaches know the analytics of time vs points scored (JB was very good at this). If you're up 10 pts with 3:30 seconds left you eat the clock on offense and, subsequently, take lower % shots at the end of the shot clock. The opposing team may/may not come down and score, but they are usually taking higher % shots (and the defense doesn't want to give up 3s or and-1s so the defense gives up better 2pt looks) either way you do the same thing next possession. Often times the team thats down will cut into the lead but the goal ultimately is to WIN. Weather thats by 4 pts or 12pts doesn't matter to the coach. NET on the other hand does care and that is an issue. Now also factor in end of game situations when the game is out reach (like last night). NET wants us to score on those last possessions and run up the score, this is bad basketball etiquette and coaches hate that. It also results in higher risks of fights and other issues that are bad for the sport. JMHO

 

[pokercuse08]

More issues with tjis crappy system.. We know Pitt beat Vatech at home by last week and moved up 11 spots in NET and we won at home over the same Vatech team by 13 and only moved up 3 spots in NET..

I just looked back at Virginias win at Louiville when UL was 231 in NET on Jan 27th. Virginia moved up from 55 to 48 in NET (7 spots) after that win by 17... So if we win by 15ish at UL who is now ranked 206 in NET, should we get a 7-10 spot boost.. We will see but now counting in it

The swings are bigger earlier in the season because each new data point is a bigger chunk of the pie. But the Pitt/VT game is a weird one. They beat VT at home by 15, started higher than we were before that game, and moved up 11 spots. We beat VT at home by 13, moved up 3.

What this indicates is that there was a big gap in NET rating between us at 85 and the teams at 81 and above, whereas Pitt jumped a bunch of closely rated teams.

The other thing is that our win wasn't the only input. NC State losing hurt us, Pitt losing hurt us, and LSU only winning by 1 against Georgia hurt us. We need NC State and Pitt in particular to finish strong. People are worried because they're potential bubble competition too, but we swept both of them, so in theory if they're on the bubble that's good for us. Tough to put them in and leave us out.

We have two wins over #78 NC State, one neutral W over #62 Oregon, one home win over #90 LSU, one over #93 Cornell.

If NC State moves up to 75 or better, we have a Q3 -> Q2 and Q2 -> Q1. If Oregon moves up to 50th or better, we get a Q2 -> Q1. If LSU or Cornell move up to the top 75, we add a Q2. I think if Cornell wins the Ivy League tournament, that can happen.

We have bad losses at home to #91 Florida State (probably not going to make it to the top 75 we need without hurting us in other ways), and on the road against #137 Georgia Tech. In particular if GT can move up to 135 or higher, that becomes a Q2 and we only have one bad loss on the resume.

NC State being top 75 and Georgia Tech top 135 are both VERY much within reach and VERY important to our resume.

 

[Red2003]

We get hurt by the committee removing the "last 10 games" part of the resume. I understand wanting to acknowledge a complete resume, but in the context of an entirely sophomore team, peaking at the right time needs to account for something. Let's stay hot and keep winning, we do that it should take care of itself.

There’s a real narrative to discussed. In January our team of sophomores lost by 35 to UNC and a month later we beat them by more than any other team this season except UConn. That matters.

 

[upperdeck]

for Cornell to win the IVY they have to beat yale/princeton at least twice more so thats as much as you can hope for.

 

[Cusefan0307]

We get hurt by the committee removing the "last 10 games" part of the resume. I understand wanting to acknowledge a complete resume, but in the context of an entirely sophomore team, peaking at the right time needs to account for something. Let's stay hot and keep winning, we do that it should take care of itself.

It’s been gone for at least a decade. There were other years we would have been hurt by that. It was also hard to compare 10 games from team to team with unbalanced schedules in 16 team conferences.

 

[MikeSU02]

If we were to win out, including ACCT, what would our seed be?

 

[Cusefan0307]

If we were to win out, including ACCT, what would our seed be?

25-10? Have to think we beat at least one of UNC or Duke. I’ll say a 6 or 7.

 

[DPCuse]

NET in theory makes sense but only in theory.

If I'm 20-10 and my 10 losses were all by 1 point and you compare me to another team in the same league who is 20-10 but their losses are by an average of 20, who would you want to avoid in a one game playoff?

The problem with NET is that is loses its effectiveness and accuracy once the early season rankings are established.

 

[Orangezoo]

If we were to win out, including ACCT, what would our seed be?

This is a fun sub thread… i would say anywhere from 4 to 7. If the path was Wake, Duke then UNC I would say as high as 4 given two wins over a 1 seed(or two seed).

 

[JustPherU]

If we were to win out, including ACCT, what would our seed be?

Would be in the dreaded 8-9 matchup