2019-2020 NET rankings & team sheets
 

This thread will be moderated to stay on topic. Keep discussions limited to rankings, team sheets, and resumes. Off topic posts will be moved to the open thread.

In the first release of the NET rankings this season, UC is 110. A good resource is Warren Nolan: warrennolan.com/basketball/2020/schedule/Cincinnati

Quadrants:

Q1: Home 1-30 / Neutral 1-50/ Away 1-75
Q2: Home 31-75 / Neutral 51-100 / Away 76-135
Q3: Home 76-160 / Neutral 101-200 / Away 136-240
Q4: Home 161+ / Neutral 201+ / Away 241+

Our current quadrant records:

Q1 0-2
Q2 0-0
Q3 3-1
Q4 3-1

Colgate (177) is a Q4 loss, but can move to Q3 if they improve to 160. Bowling Green (113) is a Q3 loss, but can move to Q2 if they improve to 100. Our next four games are against Q1 or Q2 opponents.

I think our NET ranking gives a much more accurate depiction of where we currently stand amongst our peers than our KenPom ranking (62nd).

10 games in and we have 0 good wins, 2 bad losses, and need to improve our playing form considerably to re-enter the conversation of becoming a potential NCAA tournament team again.

We win the the next 3 games and I think you right the ship.

2 out of 3 are at home.

It’s not impossible. But it will take 2nd half defense

We're currently 0-3 Q1, 1-0 Q2, 2 bad losses. Here's how the schedule looks right now:

Q1
3 @Ohio St
11 Wichita St
11 @Wichita St
12 Memphis
12 @Memphis
35 @Temple
43 @Houston
23 Iowa
48 @Xavier

Q2
35 Temple
43 Houston
67 Tennessee
79 @UConn
93 @UCF
134 @Tulane

Q3
77 SMU
79 UConn
89 Vermont
93 UCF
121 Tulsa
142 Colgate
156 Valpo
158 Drake
164 Bowling Green
165 @USF
176 Illinois St
230 @ECU

Q4
166 UNLV
230 ECU
298 Alabama A&M

We'll want ECU and Tulsa to lose every game, since neither of them are going to give us a Q1/2 opportunity. USF is probably in the same boat.

If we win out, we are probably a 1-2 seed though. I think we should try that.

I'll try to make this a weekly update.

Q1
14 @Ohio St
10Wichita St
10 @Wichita St
24 Memphis
24 @Memphis
67 @Temple
38 @Houston
43 Iowa
54 @Xavier

Q2
60 SMU
67 Temple
38 Houston
68 Tennessee
88 @UConn
105 @UCF
116 @Tulane

Q3
88 UConn
103 Vermont
105 UCF
113 Tulsa
133 Colgate
169 Valpo
139 Drake
177 Bowling Green
137 @USF
236 @ECU

Q4
163 UNLV
212 Illinois St
236 ECU
296 Alabama A&M

plenty of opportunities, we must make the most of them.

Yeah, we only have 4 games left that aren't Q1 or Q2, and one of those (@USF) is very close to being Q2.

I still think 12-6 is the absolute minimum for us to be in the bubble conversation if things fall our way (meaning UConn, Houston, USF, and Vermont move up a quadrant). 13-5 probably puts us on the wrong side of the bubble with current rankings, and 14-4 on the right side of the bubble.

We have 3 games left where T-rank has the spread at +5 points or more

We have 5 games left where we are -5 or better.

Let's say all of that goes according to probability.

We have 7 games left where the spread is -2.2 to +2.2. We would need to take 5 of 7 of them to be at 12-6. Let's call those 50-50 games and we need to win 71% of them. Anything better than that may be on the right side of the bubble and anything worse would be on the wrong side. 12-6 would probably be a toss up.

I can't remember the last time I heard about a "strong bubble". It almost always seems to be weak for some reason...lol!

And I don't remember....maybe someone can clue me in. Will the committee take into account recent form vs early form or is this just a straight up comparison of team sheets. When deciding on bubble teams will a late surge help or things like player injury hurt?

I seem to remember that it doesn't affect the decisions...but it has to be in the back of committee member minds when deciding.