NET Changes

NCAA drops 3 of 5 factors from evaluation tool for tourney selection
via @ESPN App

Spoiler alert: winning %, adj winning % and scoring margin were dropped.

Does make you wonder about a metric where 3 of the 5 measurements are deemed unnecessary or wrong to include.

1 Like

So the other two measurements are now the bar?

I’m guessing they’re conference affiliation and football team strength.



  1. program blood type (blue or not blue)
  2. logo and/or marketability (i.e. do we think you are good)

I guess SDSU was too high last year so something had to be done like eliminating your W-L record in case some ‘undesirable’ tries to go undefeated.

1 Like

UT can now make the Tourney…feel like Austin is behind this…UH is ranked too much and too often now.


I guess it will be, “They are not as bad as their 9-21 record looks. They play in a power conference which means its tougher to win against other teams with 10-20 records.”


What makes me wonder is why they did not produce a 2020 NET ranking that shows the before and after rankings due to these changes. Something tells me that some of these teams would no longer be in the Top 10 anymore:

And I just picked up on this as well from this link:

This feels all very objective with no room for manipulation (sarcasm).

1 Like

Sounds like a consolidation of power and $$$ by the P5 league programs. Not good for college hoops.


Well The AAC is a power conference in basketball and our league is tough so this could help us as well vs the other G5 bb leagues.

1 Like

Holy subjectivity, Batman!


You are giving UT waaaaay too much credit…they have no stroke in basketball right now.

I think UT would be more pissed that Baylor is significantly outclassing them in basketball and football than us bettering them at basketball.

1 Like

and Texas Tech

(edit: I see you are talking football and basketball…I meant for basketball only)

1 Like

Sounds like quality losses are getting even more important. Beating a 20 win Richmond team by 40 may not be as impressive as losing by 40 to a top 5 Duke, since scoring margin is gone too.

Not that tough…we were a 2 bid conference this past year most likely and UH looks to be the only reasonable lock to be bid worthy this coming season. I expect a couple others can get there but point being this league has declined significantly since first started.

We need Temple to get back to where have been for sure. Memphis needs to figure it out as well. Cincy and Wichita should keep doing well.

1 Like

I suspect Memphis will be right there…or pretty close. They’re bringing back quite a bit of talent who now have a year under their belts. I see the AAC as 1a. Houston and a distant 1b. Memphis. Injuries and guys bolting for the NBA could easily swap those two spots.

Cincy’s future hinges alot on whether Jarron Cumberland returns for his sixth senior season.

1 Like

It sounds like they are giving strength of schedule demerits to schools in non-power 5 conferences like how they do football. Someone here already said it’s about money and trying to get more P5s in the tournament will give P5s more money.


It’s also been shown the NCAA makes more money when more blue bloods make it far in the tournament. The Cinderella story is fun the first weekend, but then people want to see the Duke and Kentucky types play on. I would guess the goal is to bump those good mid major programs down a few seeds to make it harder for them and make all bubble teams the brand names.

1 Like

I’m exactly the opposite. I love seeing 10+ seeds making it to the Sweet 16 and on. Watching Kentucky, Duke and Kansas get there every year is like watching the Patriots wine Super Bowl after Super Bowl.

1 Like

I had tickets to the 2011 Final Four in Houston and I was not excited when it was Butler, UConn, Kentucky and VCU as the field. That was the final where Butler shot 25% from the field and scored 40 points while the two teams battled to a riveting 22-19 (edit: halftime) score…yea. :yawning_face:

1 Like

©Copyright 2017