What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

CU MBB Rankings/NET/KenPom/Bracketology Catch-All

Best case scenario is not just CU winning all our remaining conference games, but also includes UCLA losing at least a game. Otherwise, we are the 4 seed and probably knocked-out in the Semis in the PAC 12 Tourney, which means fewer quality wins needed to get an NCAA Tourney bid. Beating WSU on a neutral court could be meaningful to our NET ranking.
In short, we need a bit of help, but can certainly play our way into a 3-seed and beat WSU in the semis. We do that, Zona in the Final would be for hardware, bragging rights and Dance seeding.
 
Arizona State at 14-14 got 17 votes in the AP poll. Bobby Hurley has so much pull with national writers it's crazy due to his name and that alone.

Washington at 15-13 got 4.

Colorado at 18-9 and above both the teams above in conference standings with nothing.
It's so ridiculous I can't even be mad.
 
We can project and predict all we want, but if we don't beat both Cal and Stanford and/or we go on the road next week and lose two, it's over. Win 3 of 4 and one in the tourney and then pray. It's as simple as that.
If we can't be Cal at home, good grief.
 
So...the committee replaced RPI with NET as the primary sorting metric prior to the '18-19 season. There have been 3 teams with a NET ranking higher than 40 to miss the tournament since then (discounting the weird COVID season), but they were all in that initial '18-19 season. Since that time, the highest ranks to miss the tournament were 40 (last season's Rutgers team), 42 ('21 Penn State), and 43 (last year's Okie Lite).

What say the people who follow this more closely than I do?

is a top 40 ranking "safe" as the new norm? Or would the committee snub a top 40 team again based upon the 2019 precedent?
 
So...the committee replaced RPI with NET as the primary sorting metric prior to the '18-19 season. There have been 3 teams with a NET ranking higher than 40 to miss the tournament since then (discounting the weird COVID season), but they were all in that initial '18-19 season. Since that time, the highest ranks to miss the tournament were 40 (last season's Rutgers team), 42 ('21 Penn State), and 43 (last year's Okie Lite).

What say the people who follow this more closely than I do?

is a top 40 ranking "safe" as the new norm? Or would the committee snub a top 40 team again based upon the 2019 precedent?
It's more complicated than that, but top-40 NET is a good mental baseline.
 
So...the committee replaced RPI with NET as the primary sorting metric prior to the '18-19 season. There have been 3 teams with a NET ranking higher than 40 to miss the tournament since then (discounting the weird COVID season), but they were all in that initial '18-19 season. Since that time, the highest ranks to miss the tournament were 40 (last season's Rutgers team), 42 ('21 Penn State), and 43 (last year's Okie Lite).

What say the people who follow this more closely than I do?

is a top 40 ranking "safe" as the new norm? Or would the committee snub a top 40 team again based upon the 2019 precedent?
n = 4 for selection Sundays using NET as the primary metric.

I'd say there's about a 20% chance a new record for best NET ranking left out will be set this year, and that by the time we have enough data to make confident proclamations about NET thresholds, NET might be replaced by something else.

I would be surprised if the record was shattered and a team with like #33 NET was left out.
 
Lunardi still has us the fourth team out behind Utah.
I just cannot understand this guy- is it just because he's a slave to BPI?

For example, FAU is ranked 36th in NET, 35th Ken Pom, has 1 Q1 win and 2 Q4 losses, and he has them as a 9 seed. Compare with CU, who is 32nd NET, 30th KenPom, 1 Q1 win, 0 Q4 losses, and is the last in his first 4 out. Pretty similar resumes- very different seeding.

Then you look at BPI, and BPI has FAU 28th and Colorado 51st. That seems to be the major difference to me.
 
Thanks, captain.
Sure Thing Pilot GIF by Alaska Airlines
 
Wake Forest lost too. Just means ESPN will push us down into Next Four Out.

Their NET dropped from 25 to 27 but by ND getting the win this bumped Wake's loss from a quad 3 loss to only a quad 2 loss. And since ND has been playing much better recently this loss might not end up hurting Wake that much in the eyes of the committee.
 
Last edited:
A couple of key games in the SEC tonight involving teams squarely on the bubble right there with us.

Ole Miss taking on Alabama
Texas A&M taking on South Carolina

Roll Tide!
Go Cocks!
 
A couple of key games in the SEC tonight involving teams squarely on the bubble right there with us.

Ole Miss taking on Alabama
Texas A&M taking on South Carolina

Roll Tide!
Go Cocks!

Both Bama and USC (no, not that one) won.

Richmond got a road win at St Louis. They came in at 72 NET, so that neutral win over the Spiders is looking better and better on the resume.
https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-net-rankings
Richmond up to 70 in NET after last night. Buffs now in the top 30 at 29!
 
Back
Top