Interesting turn of events

[Chicago-bound Hoosier]

disclaimer- I didn't spend hours on this so my math might be off.

I looked at the current standings, who the other teams still have left to play, and unless Iowa wins their last game against Illinois (who is looking very good right now), if IU wins these next 2 games, we'll actually finish at 10-10 and in tie for 6th place, and based on head-to-head results against other potential 10-10 teams (vs Iowa, Minny and MSU) would have the tiebreaker go in IU's favor in each case. Which would put us as the 6th seed in the B1G tourney.

The game up in Minny will not be easy. And Sparty gave PU a tough fight this weekend, so winning these last 2 will be a very tall task.

Weird to see teams like Neb and NW up near the top of the standings while teams like IU, Mich, OSU, even MSU, lag far behind. All that NIL $$ isn't buying as many wins as you would hope.

 

[Tammany Hall]

When NIL came along, I was hopeful it would help us. IU never cheated on the scale of the other big time bball programs, and now we could pay for players within the rules. And we have a lot of NIL.

Unfortunately, we fumbled NIL so far. Not surprising.

The B1G records can me misleading. I stick to NET and KenPom. We are still 101 Net and 95 KP after our last two wins against mediocre teams. Is what it is.

It will be interesting if we keep up this little run.

 

[MTBRider22]

When NIL came along, I was hopeful it would help us. IU never cheated on the scale of the other big time bball programs, and now we could pay for players within the rules. And we have a lot of NIL.

Unfortunately, we fumbled NIL so far. Not surprising.

The B1G records can me misleading. I stick to NET and KenPom. We are still 101 Net and 95 KP after our last two wins against mediocre teams. Is what it is.

It will be interesting if we keep up this little run.

Wow, I know our last two wins haven't been against great teams, but still a bit stunned we're still so low on the Net & KP. It would be really interesting to know what our rankings would be if we had either won the IL or KS game. Not both, just one. It would also be interesting to know what we would be ranked if we would have won some of our early season games by 15-20 vs. 2-5 points. Personally I think that's a bit of a BS metric, but it definitely matters.

 

[Chicago-bound Hoosier]

When NIL came along, I was hopeful it would help us. IU never cheated on the scale of the other big time bball programs, and now we could pay for players within the rules. And we have a lot of NIL.

Unfortunately, we fumbled NIL so far. Not surprising.

The B1G records can me misleading. I stick to NET and KenPom. We are still 101 Net and 95 KP after our last two wins against mediocre teams. Is what it is.

It will be interesting if we keep up this little run.

we shit on our Net early this year with those bad performances, both squeaking by the cupcakes and getting bitchslapped by the real contenders. Honestly, is making the final 8 in the NIT any different than getting beat by 20+ in the first round of the NCAAs?

The only angle there would be that getting into the NCAA happened because we actually won the B1G tourney. I would love to get that monkey off our backs once and for all.

 

[Chicago-bound Hoosier]

Wow, I know our last two wins haven't been against great teams, but still a bit stunned we're still so low on the Net & KP. It would be really interesting to know what our rankings would be if we had either won the IL or KS game. Not both, just one. It would also be interesting to know if what we would be ranked if we would have one some of our early season games by 15-20 vs. 2-5 points. Personally I think that's a bit of a BS metric, but it definitely matters.

yeah me too...weren't both of those wins considered Q1?
If so, scratching my head as to why our Net only moved a couple clicks.

 

[Tammany Hall]

Wow, I know our last two wins haven't been against great teams, but still a bit stunned we're still so low on the Net & KP. It would be really interesting to know what our rankings would be if we had either won the IL or KS game. Not both, just one. It would also be interesting to know if what we would be ranked if we would have one some of our early season games by 15-20 vs. 2-5 points. Personally I think that's a bit of a BS metric, but it definitely matters.

Agree. I don’t know how to calculate (nor do I have the will to learn) what would happen if we won those games. Would be interesting.

 

[achoosier]

Wow, I know our last two wins haven't been against great teams, but still a bit stunned we're still so low on the Net & KP. It would be really interesting to know what our rankings would be if we had either won the IL or KS game. Not both, just one. It would also be interesting to know if what we would be ranked if we would have one some of our early season games by 15-20 vs. 2-5 points. Personally I think that's a bit of a BS metric, but it definitely matters.

I think IU’s best win this season is Wisky @ home. They are 0-6 vs. ranked teams. Explains a lot of it.

 

[Tammany Hall]

yeah me too...weren't both of those wins considered Q1?
If so, scratching my head as to why our Net only moved a couple clicks.

I thought we would have moved more too.

Perhaps it’s because other teams are also winning and relative to them we aren’t moving as much as we think. Plus we didn’t really beat very good teams as others point out.

 

[YOTHN]

When NIL came along, I was hopeful it would help us. IU never cheated on the scale of the other big time bball programs, and now we could pay for players within the rules. And we have a lot of NIL.

Unfortunately, we fumbled NIL so far. Not surprising.

The B1G records can me misleading. I stick to NET and KenPom. We are still 101 Net and 95 KP after our last two wins against mediocre teams. Is what it is.

It will be interesting if we keep up this little run.

IU is not going in as an at-Large even if they win out until the B1G title game. Even then, that would likely place Indiana's NET in the mid-70s. Rutgers is the lowest ranked NET team to ever make the tourney at 77 and they had 6 quad 1 wins (6-6vs all Q1). IU is sitting at 3-8 vs Q1 and only have MSU at home left. We wouldn't finish .500 even if we won the entire tournament.

The point being, all of this is fun to watch just because it takes away from it being miserable. I don't think they are going to put themselves in position for it to be a concern anyways but regardless, it would be too little, too late.

 

[Chicago-bound Hoosier]

I think IU’s best win this season is Wisky @ home. They are 0-6 vs. ranked teams. Explains a lot of it.

yes we still have yet to register what I would call a resume-enhancing win. We may have another shot next week in the B1G tourney, but I've learned never to expect happy endings in the B1G tourney.

 

[Tammany Hall]

IU is not going in as an at-Large unless they add at least 3 more Quad 1 wins....aka, win out until at least the B1G title game. Even then, that would likely place Indiana's NET in the mid-70s. Rutgers is the lowest ranked NET team to ever make the tourney at 77 and they had 6 quad 1 wins (6-6vs all Q1). IU is sitting at 3-8 vs Q1 wins and only have MSU at home left. We wouldn't finish .500 even if we won the entire tournament, we'd finish under .500 vs Q1.

The point being, all of this is fun to watch just because it takes away from it being miserable. I don't think they are going to put themselves in position for it to be a concern anyways but regardless, it would be too little, too late.

Spot on. Honestly all this is doing is complicating getting rid of Woody, which is what the program needs to do because he is not remotely close to being good.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

IU is not going in as an at-Large unless they add at least 3 more Quad 1 wins....aka, win out until at least the B1G title game. Even then, that would likely place Indiana's NET in the mid-70s. Rutgers is the lowest ranked NET team to ever make the tourney at 77 and they had 6 quad 1 wins (6-6vs all Q1). IU is sitting at 3-8 vs Q1 wins and only have MSU at home left. We wouldn't finish .500 even if we won the entire tournament, we'd finish under .500 vs Q1.

The point being, all of this is fun to watch just because it takes away from it being miserable. I don't think they are going to put themselves in position for it to be a concern anyways but regardless, it would be too little, too late.

Too little too late.

NIT it is.

 

[Chicago-bound Hoosier]

IU is not going in as an at-Large unless they add at least 3 more Quad 1 wins....aka, win out until at least the B1G title game. Even then, that would likely place Indiana's NET in the mid-70s. Rutgers is the lowest ranked NET team to ever make the tourney at 77 and they had 6 quad 1 wins (6-6vs all Q1). IU is sitting at 3-8 vs Q1 wins and only have MSU at home left. We wouldn't finish .500 even if we won the entire tournament, we'd finish under .500 vs Q1.

The point being, all of this is fun to watch just because it takes away from it being miserable. I don't think they are going to put themselves in position for it to be a concern anyways but regardless, it would be too little, too late.

shows how costly choking away that KU game was back in December. If everything else remained the same (as miserable as it has been at times), just that win alone would make a substantial difference.

 

[YOTHN]

shows how costly choking away that KU game was back in December. If everything else remained the same (as miserable as it has been at times), just that win alone would make a substantial difference.

There were a lot of opportunities this season, but it's been the story behind CMW. His first year we had game after game after game of chance after chance after chance and always came up short. Last year we certainly won some of those close ones, like Xavier, but we often folded late in games.

 

[IndyResident16]

Wow, I know our last two wins haven't been against great teams, but still a bit stunned we're still so low on the Net & KP. It would be really interesting to know what our rankings would be if we had either won the IL or KS game. Not both, just one. It would also be interesting to know what we would be ranked if we would have won some of our early season games by 15-20 vs. 2-5 points. Personally I think that's a bit of a BS metric, but it definitely matters.

Based on most recent chatter (and issues with NET), IU would be in a much better position if they didn't play the FGCU's, Army's, Wright State's, and Morehead's of the world so close. One of the bigger stories in CBB right now is the Big 12, though unintentionally, almost gaming the system. Majority of the B12 teams played terrible out of conference competition, but really pounded the opposition if not downright ran up the score and because of it they artificially set their initial NET ranking so high before the start of the conference season. And when you have a bunch of teams with a high NET rankings that beat up on each other all season your ranking isn't going to drop a whole lot once you lose.

Getting blown out by the Auburn's, UConn's, Purdue's of the world hasn't helped either, but IU is probably a good 20-30 spots higher in the NET had they blown out their inferior competition.

 

[bailey777]

There were a lot of opportunities this season, but it's been the story behind CMW. His first year we had game after game after game of chance after chance after chance and always came up short. Last year we certainly won some of those close ones, like Xavier, but we often folded late in games.

Most of our big wins are vs big ten bottom feeders. Our best win is against a wisconsin team that has lost 6 or 8 game.

 

[YOTHN]

Based on most recent chatter (and issues with NET), IU would be in a much better position if they didn't play the FGCU's, Army's, Wright State's, and Morehead's of the world so close. One of the bigger stories in CBB right now is the Big 12, though unintentionally, almost gaming the system. Majority of the B12 teams played terrible out of conference competition, but really pounded the opposition if not downright ran up the score and because of it they artificially set their initial NET ranking so high before the start of the conference season. And when you have a bunch of teams with a high NET rankings that beat up on each other all season your ranking isn't going to drop a whole lot once you lose.

Getting blown out by the Auburn's, UConn's, Purdue's of the world hasn't helped either, but IU is probably a good 20-30 spots higher in the NET had they blown out their inferior competition.

I can't disagree with you there. Unfortunately, IU wasn't good enough to blow out the weak competition and that is why the NET is working exactly as it should.

 

[ams66]

If blowing out inferior competition affects the rankings that much, then the rankings are flawed. Many ranking formulas cap a win/loss margin at 10pts (or some limit) to avoid this sort of effect.

 

[HoosierinNebraska]

i miss the days of us being at the top of the sagarin rankings

 

[IndyResident16]

If blowing out inferior competition affects the rankings that much, then the rankings are flawed. Many ranking formulas cap a win/loss margin at 10pts (or some limit) to avoid this sort of effect.

I think that's the next step when they tweak NET which they seem to do every year.

TCU is the perfect example of this. 19-10 overall, 8-8 in conference. On paper everything looks ok but when you break down their schedule, it's wild to think that most experts have them solidly in the field.

3-10 Q1 record with a KenPom non-conference schedule ranking of 356 out of 362 teams. TCU played 1 team that is a lock to make the NCAAT (Clemson) and lost by 8. The only other team they played with an at-large chance is Nevada whom they also lost by 13 points. But they do have wins of 33, 22, 33, 44, 19, 37, and 35 points against a bunch of sub 300 NET teams.

But by blowing those teams out in that fashion it keep their efficiency metrics high and artificially set their NET high before the start of the conference season. TCU is one of 5 or 6 other B12 teams that played this type of non-conference schedule so when these teams inevitably beat up on each other all conference season their NET was never going to take a significant hit with a loss.

Margin of victory should be capped by quadrant. A 45 point win against a Q4 opponent shouldn't be treated different than a 20 point victory against a Q4 opponent.

 

[MTBRider22]

I looked through some NET info and am just kind of scratching my head. Now don't get me wrong, I don't believe we should be near the tourney at this point, but when you just look at the numbers, it's a bit "odd" to say the least. Take a look at these 4 teams and tell me if you think, just by the numbers, there should be a 63 place spread between them?

Record Road Neutral Home Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

15-15

4-7

0-2

11-6

2-8

4-3

2-4

7-0

19-10

5-5

2-2

12-3

3-10

4-0

4-0

8-0

18-12

1-8

4-0

13-4

3-6

2-5

8-1

5-0

16-13

3-6

1-2

12-5

3-8

4-4

3-1

6-0

Team 1 is Maryland and they're at #74 and close to the lowest ever to get in via net. Team 2 is TCU and considered safely in at 38 (and see the info on them above on how they've actually performed). Team 3 is Ohio St. at 60 and now right at the cut line in some projections. And it's now obvious who team 4 is and not even sniffing the tourney. As for SOS....Maryland=38, TCU=22, OSU=41 and IU=45. So that spread isn't even major. Again, not saying we deserve to be in, but the NET just seems off to me.

 

[IUNorth]

IU is not going in as an at-Large even if they win out until the B1G title game. Even then, that would likely place Indiana's NET in the mid-70s. Rutgers is the lowest ranked NET team to ever make the tourney at 77 and they had 6 quad 1 wins (6-6vs all Q1). IU is sitting at 3-8 vs Q1 and only have MSU at home left. We wouldn't finish .500 even if we won the entire tournament.

The point being, all of this is fun to watch just because it takes away from it being miserable. I don't think they are going to put themselves in position for it to be a concern anyways but regardless, it would be too little, too late.

Minnesota could sneak in to being a Quad 1 win, though losing to IU wouldn't help with that. But if they did, and nothing were to drop out of a Quad 1 game...and we also beat MSU...

And if we did make Sunday's Championship game... and beat NW or Nebraska and Illinois in the process...

That'd potentially be 7-8 in Quad 1...7 ish wins in a row...a few conference road wins...

If we played Purdue tough...we'd be sitting at 21-14, 10-10, 7-9 Quad 1, probably 70ish in the NET

If there are absolutely no bid stealers this year heading in to the major conference tournaments...that might get us discussed over the weekend, and on Sunday.

If we were to thump the next few opponents, that wouldn't hurt either.

Lots of IFs...but if the 2nd half yesterday sticks around, none of our next 3-4 opponents are "unlikely" wins in and of themselves.

I know its not going to happen. But I do think if we were to win out, and have some impressive double digit type wins over certain teams, we could play our way in to some discussions.

 

[YOTHN]

Minnesota could sneak in to being a Quad 1 win, though losing to IU wouldn't help with that. But if they did, and nothing were to drop out of a Quad 1 game...and we also beat MSU...

And if we did make Sunday's Championship game... and beat NW or Nebraska and Illinois in the process...

That'd potentially be 7-8 in Quad 1...7 ish wins in a row...a few conference road wins...

If we played Purdue tough...we'd be sitting at 21-14, 10-10, 7-9 Quad 1, probably 70ish in the NET

If there are absolutely no bid stealers this year heading in to the major conference tournaments...that might get us discussed over the weekend, and on Sunday.

If we were to thump the next few opponents, that wouldn't hurt either.

Lots of IFs...but if the 2nd half yesterday sticks around, none of our next 3-4 opponents are "unlikely" wins in and of themselves.

I know its not going to happen. But I do think if we were to win out, and have some impressive double digit type wins over certain teams, we could play our way in to some discussions.

Oh yeah?

 

[GThomas]

Wow, I know our last two wins haven't been against great teams, but still a bit stunned we're still so low on the Net & KP. It would be really interesting to know what our rankings would be if we had either won the IL or KS game. Not both, just one. It would also be interesting to know what we would be ranked if we would have won some of our early season games by 15-20 vs. 2-5 points. Personally I think that's a bit of a BS metric, but it definitely matters.

IU has feasted on B1G doormats, sans Wisconsin and Iowa ... and the Hoosiers are 0-6 against the top 4. And, really, IU hasn't beaten what most would consider a "good" team. I think this squad's NET and KenPom rankings are fairly accurate.

 

[rocketo]

When NIL came along, I was hopeful it would help us. IU never cheated on the scale of the other big time bball programs, and now we could pay for players within the rules. And we have a lot of NIL.

Unfortunately, we fumbled NIL so far. Not surprising.

The B1G records can me misleading. I stick to NET and KenPom. We are still 101 Net and 95 KP after our last two wins against mediocre teams. Is what it is.

It will be interesting if we keep up this little run.

I think we have done OK with NIL. It helped us keep some really good players and bring in some really good players. What we fumbled is recruiting HS players outside of last minute adds…

 

[MTBRider22]

IU has feasted on B1G doormats, sans Wisconsin and Iowa ... and the Hoosiers are 0-6 against the top 4. And, really, IU hasn't beaten what most would consider a "good" team. I think this squad's NET and KenPom rankings are fairly accurate.

Don’t disagree and I‘ll ask the question again…does it seem like there should be a 60ish spread between them? Who’s TCU beaten? Other than PU, what’s OSU done that earns them 40 spots higher?

 

[IndyResident16]

Don’t disagree and I‘ll ask the question again…does it seem like there should be a 60ish spread between them? Who’s TCU beaten? Other than PU, what’s OSU done that earns them 40 spots higher?

Or even Michigan St at 22. 17-12, 9-9 compared to IU at 16-13, 8-10. Mich St 4-8 Q1 (IU 2-8) and 4-4 Q2 (IU 4-4). Difference is margin of victory in wins/losses.

 

[ButHerEmails]

disclaimer- I didn't spend hours on this so my math might be off.

I looked at the current standings, who the other teams still have left to play, and unless Iowa wins their last game against Illinois (who is looking very good right now), if IU wins these next 2 games, we'll actually finish at 10-10 and in tie for 6th place, and based on head-to-head results against other potential 10-10 teams (vs Iowa, Minny and MSU) would have the tiebreaker go in IU's favor in each case. Which would put us as the 6th seed in the B1G tourney.

The game up in Minny will not be easy. And Sparty gave PU a tough fight this weekend, so winning these last 2 will be a very tall task.

Weird to see teams like Neb and NW up near the top of the standings while teams like IU, Mich, OSU, even MSU, lag far behind. All that NIL $$ isn't buying as many wins as you would hope.

Another consistent 3 pt threat to go with MM and we’re a totally different team with a much better record. We have good post players and a decent PG in XJ. We don’t have a pure SG. Not even close. Unless Leal is going to start playing 30-35 mpg and shooting a whole lot more.

 

[TR32]

Weird to see teams like Neb and NW up near the top of the standings while teams like IU, Mich, OSU, even MSU, lag far behind. All that NIL $$ isn't buying as many wins as you would hope.

It's almost like Knight was onto something when he lectured against the powers that were driving college basketball down. Sadly, a generation later, a good percentage of our fan base wants IU to be just like Kentucky, while Purdue sits there laughing at us while they rack up wins and conference championships.

 

[TR32]

yes we still have yet to register what I would call a resume-enhancing win. We may have another shot next week in the B1G tourney, but I've learned never to expect happy endings in the B1G tourney.

That, plus, like you said, no "resume-enhancing" wins. The reason is because they aren't good enough to beat good teams.

 

[TR32]

The quad wins stuff is overblown. You have to win games period. You don't show up with 15 losses and expect to get in.

 

[Crossblock]

disclaimer- I didn't spend hours on this so my math might be off.

I looked at the current standings, who the other teams still have left to play, and unless Iowa wins their last game against Illinois (who is looking very good right now), if IU wins these next 2 games, we'll actually finish at 10-10 and in tie for 6th place, and based on head-to-head results against other potential 10-10 teams (vs Iowa, Minny and MSU) would have the tiebreaker go in IU's favor in each case. Which would put us as the 6th seed in the B1G tourney.

The game up in Minny will not be easy. And Sparty gave PU a tough fight this weekend, so winning these last 2 will be a very tall task.

Weird to see teams like Neb and NW up near the top of the standings while teams like IU, Mich, OSU, even MSU, lag far behind. All that NIL $$ isn't buying as many wins as you would hope.

I pointed this out on another thread, so bear with Me if this is repetitive. During halftime of our game Sunday, the guys on the studio Show referenced the Mountain West Conference. One of the guys said He expected as many as 6 Teams from the Mountain West to make the Tournament. If I remember the screen shot correctly, they have at least 5 teams with 20 Wins already.

This isn't the old days of the NCAA Tournament where the NCAA would give a bid to the winner of the Mountain West and tell them They would fill up the field with 7 teams from the Big Ten and ACC as "legacy" Programs. Talent is spread more widely, NIL Money makes a difference, and in recent Years, teams that weren't expected to get to the final four did so (Miami and San Diego State last year). The possibility of an underdog going on a run through the Tournament creates more interest than a stale .500 Indiana Team that would have trouble getting to the second weekend.

 

[Chicago-bound Hoosier]

I pointed this out on another thread, so bear with Me if this is repetitive. During halftime of our game Sunday, the guys on the studio Show referenced the Mountain West Conference. One of the guys said He expected as many as 6 Teams from the Mountain West to make the Tournament. If I remember the screen shot correctly, they have at least 5 teams with 20 Wins already.

This isn't the old days of the NCAA Tournament where the NCAA would give a bid to the winner of the Mountain West and tell them They would fill up the field with 7 teams from the Big Ten and ACC as "legacy" Programs. Talent is spread more widely, NIL Money makes a difference, and in recent Years, teams that weren't expected to get to the final four did so (Miami and San Diego State last year). The possibility of an underdog going on a run through the Tournament creates more interest than a stale .500 Indiana Team that would have trouble getting to the second weekend.

I too said in another thread, at this point is there really a difference, at least in the perception of the IU bball program, in making it to the final 8 in the NIT, vs getting routed by 20+ in the first round of the NCAAs? Honestly I think the latter, while yielding more financial return, is actually a lesser look.
We haven't seen the second weekend of the tourney since 2016 when we got steamrolled by UNC, by making one of the worst 3pt shooting teams that season look like a bunch of Seth Curry clones.

 

[GThomas]

Don’t disagree and I‘ll ask the question again…does it seem like there should be a 60ish spread between them? Who’s TCU beaten? Other than PU, what’s OSU done that earns them 40 spots higher?

Aside from the record, there are three significant factors at play here:

1. Multiple ass-whoopings.
2. Multiple narrow victories vs. weak competition.
3. No "move the needle" wins.

I agree that OSU's net is over-inflated, but IU's is about right.

 

[T.M.P.]

I looked through some NET info and am just kind of scratching my head. Now don't get me wrong, I don't believe we should be near the tourney at this point, but when you just look at the numbers, it's a bit "odd" to say the least. Take a look at these 4 teams and tell me if you think, just by the numbers, there should be a 63 place spread between them?

Record Road Neutral Home Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

15-15

4-7

0-2

11-6

2-8

4-3

2-4

7-0

19-10

5-5

2-2

12-3

3-10

4-0

4-0

8-0

18-12

1-8

4-0

13-4

3-6

2-5

8-1

5-0

16-13

3-6

1-2

12-5

3-8

4-4

3-1

6-0

Team 1 is Maryland and they're at #74 and close to the lowest ever to get in via net. Team 2 is TCU and considered safely in at 38 (and see the info on them above on how they've actually performed). Team 3 is Ohio St. at 60 and now right at the cut line in some projections. And it's now obvious who team 4 is and not even sniffing the tourney. As for SOS....Maryland=38, TCU=22, OSU=41 and IU=45. So that spread isn't even major. Again, not saying we deserve to be in, but the NET just seems off to me.

It was a stupid formula to begin with and adding margin of efficiency (which is causing the difference in the above) made it even dumber. Plus as noted by others, strength of conference is decided in Nov/Dec before teams are truly proficient.

 

[Harpo Marxist]

It's almost like Knight was onto something when he lectured against the powers that were driving college basketball down. Sadly, a generation later, a good percentage of our fan base wants IU to be just like Kentucky, while Purdue sits there laughing at us while they rack up wins and conference championships.

Purdue isnt laughing at "all" of us...just the knuckleheads who pick the head coach. And franky...I'm laughing at them too.