“One Bid” league

[Policarp]

Yes, of course.

But FAU is a 9 and Charleston is a 12. FAU beat Florida by 1. Charleston beat Virginia Tech by 1. FAU lost at Ole Miss. Charleston lost at North Carolina. I'll point out that Charleston's win over VT was at home.

Both teams were 31-3 with two losses in conference.

So why the huge discrepancy? Many of Charleston's OOC wins were by very close margins. FAU beat the tar out of their OOC opponents.

Strength of victory is a lot more important than we think. And, it's the reason why the SBC has suggested playing teams at home that you can throttle as a way to improve the NET ranking.

The numbers say they're right on.

Interesting......so we need to do what the SEC does. Buy a bunch of easy win blowout games.....my CDS has arrived, and we need to remember to blow them out.

Gonna be a lot of teams bidding for those SWAC & MEAC home games.

[zephyr]

Yes, of course.

But FAU is a 9 and Charleston is a 12. FAU beat Florida by 1. Charleston beat Virginia Tech by 1. FAU lost at Ole Miss. Charleston lost at North Carolina. I'll point out that Charleston's win over VT was at home.

Both teams were 31-3 with two losses in conference.

So why the huge discrepancy? Many of Charleston's OOC wins were by very close margins. FAU beat the tar out of their OOC opponents.

Strength of victory is a lot more important than we think. And, it's the reason why the SBC has suggested playing teams at home that you can throttle as a way to improve the NET ranking.

The numbers say they're right on.

How can that truly improve your Net ranking if you are beating the crap out of crappy opponents? If that was the case, we'd just schedule cupcakes all day and win.

[zephyr]

And just for discussion purposes FAU has 2 Quad I wins and 4 Quad II wins. Charlotte has 0 Quad 1 wins and 2 Quad 2 wins. So while they have the same records, FAU's resume is better. They clearly are looking at Quad wins and losses.

This is their major criteria. In listening to the person from the committee they are minimizing the eye test arguments and looking more at data specifically those Quad 1 and 2 wins but also the quad 3 and 4 losses.

[zephyr]

This just means the conference tournament importance is magnified. How many mid majors got at large bids. I can think of Houston and St. Mary’s off the top if my head but those team’s tournament finals were meaningless and in basketball their conferences are not really mid major

FAU

[Policarp]

How can that truly improve your Net ranking if you are beating the crap out of crappy opponents? If that was the case, we'd just schedule cupcakes all day and win.

Wins with large scoring margin is a key factor. So beating bad teams bigly is a major plus

[CajunT]

Wins with large scoring margin is a key factor. So beating bad teams bigly is a major plus

No doubt, but you can't disregard quality wins in Quads.?

[BeauCajun]

So you leave your starters in to get a large margin of victory at the cost of getting depth experience? Makes no sense if you want to develop a program.

[Turbine]

Wins with large scoring margin is a key factor. So beating bad teams bigly is a major plus

This is a way to encourage money schools to overlook quality opponents (that historically have cost a few pennies) and schedule the cheapest schools they can bring in.

[Cajunsmike]

So you leave your starters in to get a large margin of victory at the cost of getting depth experience? Makes no sense if you want to develop a program.

I believe there is a limit to the margin of victory standard. It may be something like 15 points. No bonus points for winning by more than that certain number.

[zephyr]

Wins with large scoring margin is a key factor. So beating bad teams bigly is a major plus

There is no way that is a metric. Beating bad teams by a lot is expected. I'd have to imagine that comes into play with wins against Quad 1 and 2 teams.