IUHoosierJoe

He just learned about the NET.

That would be best for all parties

That’s Nail. Slot. Coffin.

Yes, plus they have three 40-50 point wins over D-1 bottom-feeders that boost them. Never mind, I see that was mentioned already, lol

Beard with the Bob Knight reference during his halftime interview.

Wow. Stevens is going to have a hell of a staff if he’s bringing DeVries as an assistant. :D

It seems that way, lol.

This is his COVID year and he got hurt, only played 9 games. So he’ll certainly get next year.

He’s been hurt. Only played 9 games this year, I’m pretty sure.

My son's a freshman there as well, and we're hoping for the same thing.

I get what you guys are saying, and there's a lot of people who share that opinion. I just don't think we're your normal, average program that's been down. It's more like we've underachieved for 25 years since Knight. Those that are a little older will remember Alabama football from Bear Bryant (1982) to Nick Saban (2007). Just like our past 25 years (except they won a championship, and we only played for one). We can pretend there's no potential here, or we can go get our Nick Saban like Alabama did. It's entirely up to us how much longer we want to suck.

He wouldn't be at the very top of my list, but I do like him. :)

Steve Alford was 76-26 his first three years at New Mexico. Let’s throw him in, too.

Wisconsin 82, Indiana 72

People have been comparing Miller and May here as if they are the same person over and over and over. Are you sure you know what “strawman argument” means? And I said Grant sucked “at Alabama,” which is a fact. He’s done a good job at Dayton. So have a few other coaches who failed at P5.

Anthony Grant sucked at Alabama, so that’s not really relevant. That being said, not only would they have made the tournament the COVID year, they probably would have been a #1 seed. Dayton is a winning, well-established program. Those who want to compare what a coach accomplished at Dayton to what a coach accomplished at Florida Atlantic, as if those two schools are in the same universe, just doesn’t make sense.

Mine used to be part of that, but I don't have a website anymore, lol.

For those who prefer purely result-based metrics, ESPN Resume/SOR and Colley Matrix (I believe it's colleyrankings.com) are two I look at.

Yes. It would be nice if the NET published the actual numerical rating values. The reason for what you noticed is because the rating values for the top 10 teams are naturally a little more spread out. Once you get down into the pack, the numerical rating values are bunched closer together, so you jump over more teams with, say, a 0.5 increase in your rating value

Yes, I said the result-based is the small portion. I can basically reproduce the formula. The result-based is about 10%.

I need to study WAB more, so forgive me if this is a dumb question: How does WAB determine who the bubble teams are?

The bigger question with NET is not necessarily if they win, but if they perform better than the NET expected--i.e., who did they play, where did they play, and what was the score margin. There is a small portion of result-based metric in the NET, but not a whole lot.

OK, gotcha. I'm fine with it too. They were probably 11 or 12-point dogs in the NET and lost by 5. That's not a whole lot of difference, and they've played 22 games now, so it seems fair to just move up 2.

Do you think they should have dropped from 67 after a 5-point road loss to the #9 team?

I was told we aren't going to pay him what he asked for. But if nobody else does either, I suppose his asking price could come down.