Another reason FU has a higher NET than UNCG (besides the Nova win) is margin of victory
Look at how many games UNCG barely won while FU won by double digits in nearly every win we had
CBS Sports has Furman and UNCG in the latest 68 team Bracketology. Last 4 In
I think Jerry Palm's bracket is the way it should be. Lunardi's bracket it the way it will be. This year's field will be littered with 13-14-15 loss teams. Take it to the bank.
Clempson lost yesterday and moved up one spot???????
Clempson lost yesterday and moved up one spot???????
Wofford must have hustled more than us. They scheduled 6 games against majors. With an average payout of about $100,000 per game they stood to make more than 1/2 million dollars from their 5 away money games plus they scored a home game against North Carolina, That's more than double what Furman made from their three money games that included only a $40,000 payout against mid-major Loyola who according to the Chicago Tribune contacted Furman in an effort to fill their home schedule.fufanatic wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:28 amOK, but that's a completely different point than saying we paid to play Villanova. I'm sure a lot of coaches at the mid- and low-major level have to hustle to get big games on the schedule. We can't all be Duke that handpicks its games every year. Good on BR for finding that game, and even better for winning it. I hope we pick off a team every year in the same fashion.
Majors need these games very badly to fill out their home schedules and they're willing to pay good money for them. Mid major Davidson even ponied up $85,000 to Winthrop for a short bus ride up I-77. Great negotiating by their AD and pure profit for the university.
Very few schools play only two majors for the simple reason that they're easy to schedule and they're willing to pay about $100,000 per game. Even VMI plays 3 majors. It's hard to find any schools that don't. But you have to have an AD who has the skill and the will to take on a tough non-conference basketball schedule. Great job by Wofford's AD in getting great nation wide exposure while generating huge payouts for the university.
I've never seen so many different opinions on bracketology. The NET rankings aren't jiving very well with the Quadrant wins/losses and that's going to cause a lot of controversy. St. Johns has 5 Quad 1 wins. Three against top 25 teams (Marquette twice and Villonova) and they have a NET ranking of 66. So if you believe the NET rankings they're not even on the bubble. If you emphasize quality wins they're easily in.
Furman has the opposite problem a high NET ranking aided by top 45 offensive and defensive efficiency but a weak schedule heavily weighted with lower Quad wins (15-0 against teams ranked outside of the top 200, only one OOC win against a top 100 and a 2-5 record against the top SoCon teams) The NET puts us on the bubble the Quad says we're out.
What puzzles me is the huge disparity between the NET rankings and some of the other rating systems especially the Sagerin which has Wofford at 37 and Furman at 78. Is this because the offensive and defensive efficiency counts non D-1 games ? It would certainly skew the data quite a bit if you include Wofford's three 50 point plus wins against bible colleges in their offensive and defensive efficiency. That's 10% completely bogus stats compared to teams that don't play non D-1 's and would also explain why Furman, UNCG and ETSU are also much higher in the NET rankings than any other rating system..
Several weeks ago Joe Lunardi commented on how Wofford's NET ranking of 18 despite an 0-4 record against top 50 teams might indicate a flaw in the NET rankings. Furman certainly has a good argument that the NCAA created this metric and should emphasize it heavily but there's going to be a lot of push back from the majors and some others on how this offensive and defensive efficiency rating was determined.
Furman has the opposite problem a high NET ranking aided by top 45 offensive and defensive efficiency but a weak schedule heavily weighted with lower Quad wins (15-0 against teams ranked outside of the top 200, only one OOC win against a top 100 and a 2-5 record against the top SoCon teams) The NET puts us on the bubble the Quad says we're out.
What puzzles me is the huge disparity between the NET rankings and some of the other rating systems especially the Sagerin which has Wofford at 37 and Furman at 78. Is this because the offensive and defensive efficiency counts non D-1 games ? It would certainly skew the data quite a bit if you include Wofford's three 50 point plus wins against bible colleges in their offensive and defensive efficiency. That's 10% completely bogus stats compared to teams that don't play non D-1 's and would also explain why Furman, UNCG and ETSU are also much higher in the NET rankings than any other rating system..
Several weeks ago Joe Lunardi commented on how Wofford's NET ranking of 18 despite an 0-4 record against top 50 teams might indicate a flaw in the NET rankings. Furman certainly has a good argument that the NCAA created this metric and should emphasize it heavily but there's going to be a lot of push back from the majors and some others on how this offensive and defensive efficiency rating was determined.
Furman back on the ESPN bracketology page:
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... acketology
Today we need Villanova to beat Xavier, LSU to beat Florida, and Kentucky to beat Alabama
Also would be good for Ohio St., Nebraska, Memphis and Seton Hall to lose
Plus some other conference faves (ie. Buffalo ect.) need to win to keep bids from being stolen
Also would be good for Ohio St., Nebraska, Memphis and Seton Hall to lose
Plus some other conference faves (ie. Buffalo ect.) need to win to keep bids from being stolen
Thank you !!!!!!!!dinhead wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 1:26 amWofford must have hustled more than us. They scheduled 6 games against majors. With an average payout of about $100,000 per game they stood to make more than 1/2 million dollars from their 5 away money games plus they scored a home game against North Carolina, That's more than double what Furman made from their three money games that included only a $40,000 payout against mid-major Loyola who according to the Chicago Tribune contacted Furman in an effort to fill their home schedule.fufanatic wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:28 amOK, but that's a completely different point than saying we paid to play Villanova. I'm sure a lot of coaches at the mid- and low-major level have to hustle to get big games on the schedule. We can't all be Duke that handpicks its games every year. Good on BR for finding that game, and even better for winning it. I hope we pick off a team every year in the same fashion.
Majors need these games very badly to fill out their home schedules and they're willing to pay good money for them. Mid major Davidson even ponied up $85,000 to Winthrop for a short bus ride up I-77. Great negotiating by their AD and pure profit for the university.
Very few schools play only two majors for the simple reason that they're easy to schedule and they're willing to pay about $100,000 per game. Even VMI plays 3 majors. It's hard to find any schools that don't. But you have to have an AD who has the skill and the will to take on a tough non-conference basketball schedule. Great job by Wofford's AD in getting great nation wide exposure while generating huge payouts for the university.
I agree 1000%
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I do realize we need an OOC schedule that allows a good balance of national exposure, wins (and every game potentially is a win), and a reasonable number of home games.
Also, I believe there are a lot of non-P5 schools that can be considered such as Winthrop, UNCA, UNCW, and Gardner Webb, over non-D1 schools.
I suggest some more home and home contracts with teams like Army and Navy and George Washington University.
But we need about 1 more school on our future schedules (to make a total of 4) such as this year’s LSU, Loyola Chicago, and Villanova and at least 1 fewer of the non-D1s.
Fessor liked this
What's ironic even though I tend to agree with you, is that if we had substituted out a couple of the smaller wins for two more games against top teams and lost them, we would not even be close to in the conversation for an at-large berth. A 23-9 or 22-10 Furman isn't getting in in a million years even if all the losses were to Quad 1 teams. I think this year's schedule was pretty decent. I still would love to eliminate all non-D1 games, or at least get DII teams on the schedule in place of NAIA, but I don't see a great need to play a ton more big schools. Maybe one more against an NC State or Alabama ... in a good year for us that could be an upset win and position us for at-large possibilities while providing an additional pay check.affirm wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:21 amThank you !!!!!!!!dinhead wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 1:26 amWofford must have hustled more than us. They scheduled 6 games against majors. With an average payout of about $100,000 per game they stood to make more than 1/2 million dollars from their 5 away money games plus they scored a home game against North Carolina, That's more than double what Furman made from their three money games that included only a $40,000 payout against mid-major Loyola who according to the Chicago Tribune contacted Furman in an effort to fill their home schedule.fufanatic wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:28 amOK, but that's a completely different point than saying we paid to play Villanova. I'm sure a lot of coaches at the mid- and low-major level have to hustle to get big games on the schedule. We can't all be Duke that handpicks its games every year. Good on BR for finding that game, and even better for winning it. I hope we pick off a team every year in the same fashion.
Majors need these games very badly to fill out their home schedules and they're willing to pay good money for them. Mid major Davidson even ponied up $85,000 to Winthrop for a short bus ride up I-77. Great negotiating by their AD and pure profit for the university.
Very few schools play only two majors for the simple reason that they're easy to schedule and they're willing to pay about $100,000 per game. Even VMI plays 3 majors. It's hard to find any schools that don't. But you have to have an AD who has the skill and the will to take on a tough non-conference basketball schedule. Great job by Wofford's AD in getting great nation wide exposure while generating huge payouts for the university.
I agree 1000%
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I do realize we need an OOC schedule that allows a good balance of national exposure, wins (and every game potentially is a win), and a reasonable number of home games.
Also, I believe there are a lot of non-P5 schools that can be considered such as Winthrop, UNCA, UNCW, and Gardner Webb, over non-D1 schools.
I suggest some more home and home contracts with teams like Army and Navy and George Washington University.
But we need about 1 more school on our future schedules (to make a total of 4) such as this year’s LSU, Loyola Chicago, and Villanova and at least 1 fewer of the non-D1s.
NC State’s non conf schedule ranks 353 out of 353 in the nation...they will be in the Dance.
Wow, that's remarkable. It just goes to show the fundamental unfairness that exists. NC State doesn't have to play tough teams non-conference because it has a dozen built in big games during conference play. Furman, meanwhile, has the opposite problem and had to almost go undefeated in non-conference and perform admirably in conference play to even sniff an at-large bid. Just can't see it changing, so I guess we just have to learn to live with it.
Talking about unfair, St. Johns lost by 32 yesterday and is #72 in the net and they are solidly in. They are 21-12 and we beat their champion.
Yes, it's pathetically weak but no non D-1 games. Can you imagine how bad Furman's non-conference schedule would be if they added Bob Jones to our strength of schedule. Is BJU even in the top 2,000 ? North Greenville and Southern Weslyan wouldn't be in top 500. It's sad but true if you counted these games Furman's non conference schedule would be weaker than NC States.
They are forced to take games...we have no choice in non division I games...life of a mid major
Last edited by soconjohn on Fri Mar 15, 2019 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Uh, no. Once your opponent reaches a certain level of weakness, say #500, dropping down further doesn't make any difference. An automatic win is an automatic win. Those games don't count as a positive, but neither do they have any impact on legit OOC games (i.e., playing Bob Jones has no arithmetic connection to playing Villanova).dinhead wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 12:32 pmYes, it's pathetically weak but no non D-1 games. Can you imagine how bad Furman's non-conference schedule would be if they added Bob Jones to our strength of schedule. Is BJU even in the top 2,000 ? North Greenville and Southern Weslyan wouldn't be in top 500. It's sad but true if you counted these games Furman's non conference schedule would be weaker than NC States.