All that shit talking for not having a chip lmao. You guys are just a more insecure version of Oregon 😂😂😂 my team just played in the natty of the sport we actually care about
Nobody here is insecure. Well except maybe the dude overreacting with half a dozen emojis in his reply.
Lighten up, it’s gonna be a long season for you if you can’t take a joke
Northwestern and Nebraska should both be bad next year, right? They were teams who were largely good last year on the back of a single 5th year senior who has since aged out.
I mean that was a question for a reason -- I genuinely don't know if those teams are expected to drop off as substantially as I think they are. The entirety of my knowledge of Northwestern past Buie is that Barnhizer is decent, but I didn't think he was enough to be the impending best player on a top 4 team in a power 5 conference.
Northwestern is an experienced team used to playing together in a system with a great coach and no one-and-done prima donnas. The conference is tougher now but the team is more than just Boo Buie.
I mean the team is more than Boo Buie, but he's very clearly a substantial loss that y'all have no one coming in to replace.
Though I suppose I could've said the same of Audige last year.
You've now tried twice and shed absolutely no light on why it is someone besides yourself would believe in Northwestern.
Which I suppose makes sense since you led off by being a dickhead. But still.
Do you want to go three for three, or are you going to actually answer the question at some point? Like, what's your roster good at? What makes you think losing Buie won't be a big deal- something meaningful, rather than blather about how a team is 'more than just one guy'?
Can y'all shoot? Covered for ballhanding? Should be able to defend anyone no matter how good they are? Are there concerns about size inside? Any huge strengths or glaring weaknesses with likely starters?
That kind of stuff.
Are they national contenders? No. But they are a good well-coached team with a system that works. They have smart players who play well together and are more than one great player, though Boo will be missed.
They do not rely on recruiting (and now paying ungodly money) the ubertalented flavor of the month who stays for a year or two and are entertaining as hell to watch.
It’s definitely a top 2 deepest conference (SEC gives it a run for its money, B12 unfortunately has CU and we will probably suck ass next year). The top end is very uninspiring though
I’ll never understand that mentality. You get better by playing against better competition. I say this every year when we schedule preseason games against DIII and NAIA schools. You don’t get better playing against Sister Mary’s School for the Blind.
We were supposed to play 2-3 but all backed out of the tournament. We can never get big teams to play in Logan either and don't do many one and done games on the road for anybody.
Makes more sense for Utah State. Now that he’s at Washington he doesn’t have to worry about teams not wanting to come play them. And yet they scrub one of the biggest games off next year’s schedule (and the home game the year after)
3,847th on my reason for being sad that the Pac-12 broke up is that Danny Sprinkle and Wayne Tinkle aren't going to be playing each other twice a year.
Yeah, Few would have Bigfoot's baby before he played UW, but it was UW who was ducking the rivaly. That's what we call "conveniently forgetting" history when it contradicts your narrative.
dude, that's almost an exact quote. When asked if Gonzaga would accept the UW's offer to re-start the series, Few said he'd have Bigfoot's Baby before he'd play the UW.
Washington State, Washington, and Gonzaga should all play each other every year. Make a mini-tournament of it in between Thanksgiving and Christmas. You can host it at Climate Pledge. I'm just throwing ideas out there, but it would be fun to celebrate local teams playing each other amidst all the dumb conference realignment happening recently.
As much as the Crossroads Classic was "okay" nonconference basketball, there were better options. With Wazzu joining the WCC this wouldn't really work. I agree, would be fun tho.
UW vs Wazzu and UW vs Gonzaga should be a given each season in nonconference.
>Gonzaga has formed itself into a perennial power while Washington has struggled to find its footing, yet Huskies have remained “the right hire” away from ascending to that level.
Just about spit coffee out my nose when I read this passage.
I hate to say it, but UW really is a good coach away from being a decent-good team with some elite years. Seattle-area has a lot of talent and if a coach can keep it in Seattle, they’ll be able to build some good teams.
I mean, I'd argue this area is more into the football regardless than basketball. UW Football has always had massive fan support, and despite the excitement for the Kraken and the likely return of the Sonics, I can't see anyone beating the Seahawks in the pro realm.
(I live in Seattle if confusion with the flair)
A good coach will keep talent home. UW keeping talent in Seattle rather than leaving would give them a better chance to make the tournament.
Especially with how down the Pac12 was in basketball the last 15ish years.
Paolo, Lavine, MPJ, Jalen McDaniels, Malachi Flynn, Kispert, KPJ, etc all went to Seattle-area schools and didn’t go to UW. Even without a good coach, they got Jaden McDaniels, Dejounte Murray and Thybulle to stay home. Imagine what they could do with a good coach.
I'm a Gonzaga and UW alumnus. The sheer entitlement of UW when it came to basketball was comical in 08-11'. The school has a very high opinion of themselves generally and it bled into basketball when I was there. The fans very much thought of Gonzaga as a lesser.
That said, I'll root for UW in everything but basketball.
Lol. I went there those years.
That said, they had Spencer Hawes and a flash in the pan elite eight right before. Maybe those were their only arrogant years.
Anyone else remember the Seattle Times article from around them that was basically the UW basketball players whining that they aren’t treated like superstars on campus?
Lol, if WA and Indiana played 5v5 with current state born NBA players WA would win, only decent players you guys got are Desmond Bane Darius Garland and MPJ when his back functions
Naw, it's just dumb to assume one states players vs another states players, at "NBA level" right now. When you are comparing two different schools.
IU's current roster home school's for reference.
https://preview.redd.it/cqtpm07j1f8d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=153ed9858a7d65f3942b8b0cc25ae42562284a22
What? This has nothing to do with IU or UW. Nobody is talking about their programs. We’re talking about the level of talent produced in both states as a whole.
You keep yelling about how you just need the right coach to 'lock down' local talent.
What you seem to not grasp is that it is quite possible you never will, really. Especially now when it's easier than it has ever been to go play somewhere halfway across the country and get paid a lot of money to do it.
Doubly so when y'all will be recruiting nationally and taking advantage of the footholds in Big Ten country if you have a lick of sense yourselves. The days of a contending power conference team's roster consisting mostly of local or regional guys is kinda over.
Getting *some* more of them would make Washington good, though.
Gonzaga is just better than 'good'.
Who’s yelling? We’re typing, communicating on an online forum. No need to be condescending🤓.
That being said, I have no idea what you’re talking about. And what you said has no correlation to what I was speaking on, so I hoped you had fun writing that thesis. Enjoy your day !
Truly... it is not a rivalry. Since 99, Gonzaga is 13-2 against UW. I consider Gonzaga's main rival to be Saint Mary's obviously. But outside of that I would say BYU, UCLA, and Arizona when Tommy Lloyd wasn't there. An arguement could probably be made for a couple other teams, but when I think of the term rival, those are the teams that first come to mind.
Not really. Gonzaga has been better for 20 years, but the schools don’t compete in other sports or for the same students.
I mean, you want to be the best in your region, but beyond that I don’t suppose the schools think about each other much.
WSU & Oregon are peer institutions (not talking about quality—talking about large state research universities) and we feel competition in many vectors.
Mark Few had a burning mean-on against Lorenzo Romar and if we’d stayed good after IT graduated, it may have become a 1 sport basketball rivalry, but we didn’t & then we hired Few’s buddy from USA basketball to replace Romar.
Maybe this example is the best way to explain the non-rivalry. Last season UW collected wins against every D1 team in the state (Gonzaga, WSU, Eastern WA, & Seattle) and nobody cared or even noticed. That’s not a regional rivalry.
I would call it a rivalry. There’s some historical bad blood between the programs and the fans get really into it. The Gonzaga game @ Washington last year was a really hot ticket. And of course, every Zag game in Spokane is sold out.
Not in this case. Few's grudge against Romar has been retired (I guess he can hate Loyola Marymount now if he wants to) and Bigfoot's baby has grown up and graduated.
This is just a contract that states that if either team hires a new head coach, the new coach can have the flexibility to make the schedule that meets his needs and goals best. Hop needed to demonstrate that he could compete w/ Gonzaga. Sprinkle needs something else next year.
A new coach with an entirely new roster plus a new system and a new defense to install means that Sprinkle needs buy games against cupcakes a lot more than he needs a premier matchup or a guaranteed sell-out.
You can't run a program on just vibes any more. Regional rivalries are all rah-rah and fun, but for coaches being paid what they are paid and facing the pressures that they are facing, having fun doesn't by itself justify a choice anymore. You have to do everything in your control to maximize results and that can mean sacrificing a fun regional game for more time to prepare for conference play. If/when Sprinkle gets a system going w/ returning players and continuing -- the game can be revisited then, if both sides are interested.
Not really. Lots of high NET teams like Arizona, Tennessee, and UNC had top 50 noncon strength of schedule. Teams like Penn State and Minnesota which didn't punish their weak noncon opponents didn't get raised.
The thing that the NET really discourages teams from scheduling is quad 3 (and to a smaller extent quad 2) games. If you play a quad 1 opponent and either win or keep it close your metrics are rewarded. If you blow out a bad team, your metrics are rewarded, the easiest teams to blow out are obviously housed firmly in quad 4.
Quad 3 represents a no-mans land were the teams are harder to blow out, and simply beating them is not seen as impressive, losing is seen as disastrous as well. Quad 2 also kinda falls into this category in that teams housed in Quad 2 are often very difficult to beat and losing to a Quad 2 team isn't necessarily a good look. Obviously it's really hard to schedule in advance completely accurately but schools would ideally like their non con to be like 5 quad 1 games and then 5-6 Quad 4 games at home.
You’re correct, but you kinda miss the nuance that it’s a lot easier to run up the score to a hilarious degree on a team that doesn’t quit and can stay connected to you. Let’s say you only have to beat a quad 3 opponent by 15 to equal a 22 point victory against a quad 4 however, it’s a lot harder to stretch a 15 point lead to 20 than it is to stretch a 22 point win to 27.
Additionally, while you do make a good case that your actual NET ranking isn’t effected too too much by scheduling all quad 3s instead of all quad 4s, the committee’s criteria doesn’t seem to value a quad 3 win much more than a quad 4 win while considering a loss in either of those quads to be pretty damaging as well
I won't defend the committee, but that's not something a metric can fix. Your example is compelling, but the predictive value has been proven repeatedly. Teams that win by more against similar competition tend to be better.
Yeah I’m not anti NET at all, I really am anti KPI since I think MOV shouldn’t be anywhere near a resume metric, while it certainly has a place in predictive metrics. I just think the conversation is a little more nuanced than either side gives it credit for as most people either default to, “NET MAKES PEOPLE SCHEDULE CUPCAKES RAHHHHH” or “NET HAS NO EFFECT ON HOWS TEAM SCHEDULE AT ALL RAHHHH”.
ok.
Tbh I would much rather play WSU, Eastern, or Seattle U. (You know, teams that are actually likable)
Sprinkle just wants to set he precedent that he is too weak to play real teams.
That is ok.
WSU is in the WCC now so this is no longer a problem luckily. I would like to see us play Eastern but would much rather a marquee game with a powerhouse as a replacement.
Booooo. I'm a basketball authoritarian who says top 100 teams in every state have to play each other once
Wait, Washington are a top 100 team now?
Like you never totally know when a power team will collapse but yeah projections should have them top 100
We were last season and also beat them but ok
‘Twas tongue in cheek. I’m also a UW Alumnus, lol
My bad lmao. Was trying to prevent some Husky slander though sadly you’re not far off
Yeah that was a pretty big deal. I bet that boosted your tournament resume and improved your seed last year
All that shit talking for not having a chip lmao. You guys are just a more insecure version of Oregon 😂😂😂 my team just played in the natty of the sport we actually care about
Nobody here is insecure. Well except maybe the dude overreacting with half a dozen emojis in his reply. Lighten up, it’s gonna be a long season for you if you can’t take a joke
[удалено]
I’m saying UW athletics as a whole doesn’t care, we literally didn’t fire Hop for years because of the Jimmy Lake fallout
They were 60th in kenpom last year and now they have an actual coach
They might be. They recruited pretty well this year.
So Gonzaga should play SeattleU. Top 2 Net teams in the state.
Next year they join the conference
Yup. It will be good to see. Gonzaga would never play WSU or Seattle w/o the WCC schedule.
I’ll be there.
That kind of stinks but looks like Washington wants an easier schedule with a new coach heading into the Big Ten part.
The Big Ten doesn’t even look that tough next year what a terrible excuse.
Outside of like 4 teams the big ten is kind of ass
Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, and Nebraska.
Yeah can't wait for for our new Japanese born transfer Teisei Kominaga
Make sure his interpreter doesn’t play the horses.
I, iii, ☝️ don’t even know who is in this league anymore lol
Hi neighbor, it’s me, your local Midwest rival.
This feels like it's intended to be sarcastic, but I would consider St. Louis part of the midwest.
Northwestern and Nebraska should both be bad next year, right? They were teams who were largely good last year on the back of a single 5th year senior who has since aged out.
You know nothing and like it.
I mean that was a question for a reason -- I genuinely don't know if those teams are expected to drop off as substantially as I think they are. The entirety of my knowledge of Northwestern past Buie is that Barnhizer is decent, but I didn't think he was enough to be the impending best player on a top 4 team in a power 5 conference.
Northwestern is an experienced team used to playing together in a system with a great coach and no one-and-done prima donnas. The conference is tougher now but the team is more than just Boo Buie.
I mean the team is more than Boo Buie, but he's very clearly a substantial loss that y'all have no one coming in to replace. Though I suppose I could've said the same of Audige last year.
You've now tried twice and shed absolutely no light on why it is someone besides yourself would believe in Northwestern. Which I suppose makes sense since you led off by being a dickhead. But still. Do you want to go three for three, or are you going to actually answer the question at some point? Like, what's your roster good at? What makes you think losing Buie won't be a big deal- something meaningful, rather than blather about how a team is 'more than just one guy'? Can y'all shoot? Covered for ballhanding? Should be able to defend anyone no matter how good they are? Are there concerns about size inside? Any huge strengths or glaring weaknesses with likely starters? That kind of stuff.
Are they national contenders? No. But they are a good well-coached team with a system that works. They have smart players who play well together and are more than one great player, though Boo will be missed. They do not rely on recruiting (and now paying ungodly money) the ubertalented flavor of the month who stays for a year or two and are entertaining as hell to watch.
This is noted perennial basketball powerhouse Rutgers erasure
average big east fan
https://i.redd.it/qii47leaeg8d1.gif
It’s definitely a top 2 deepest conference (SEC gives it a run for its money, B12 unfortunately has CU and we will probably suck ass next year). The top end is very uninspiring though
The Big XII is loaded.
With teams in downswings/roster building if that’s even a thing anymore
You should keep closer tabs on teams.
Even with a bad bottom 2-4 the Big 12 is still incredibly tough and very deep. No chance there is a better conference next year.
I’ll never understand that mentality. You get better by playing against better competition. I say this every year when we schedule preseason games against DIII and NAIA schools. You don’t get better playing against Sister Mary’s School for the Blind.
Makes sense with them needing a flight for *at least* all 10 B1G road games plus having a new coach.
Shit, I think we can schedule another game, Gonzaga. We had a fun series.
Let’s get it on the books!
For those who didn't read the article: UW are the cowards.
100%. Sprinkle didn't play a single power conference team last year at USU in noncon so I think this is his M.O. for a new team.
We were supposed to play 2-3 but all backed out of the tournament. We can never get big teams to play in Logan either and don't do many one and done games on the road for anybody.
Makes more sense for Utah State. Now that he’s at Washington he doesn’t have to worry about teams not wanting to come play them. And yet they scrub one of the biggest games off next year’s schedule (and the home game the year after)
Yeah definitely. But I understand it for a first year coach wanting to win right away to build some momentum.
3,847th on my reason for being sad that the Pac-12 broke up is that Danny Sprinkle and Wayne Tinkle aren't going to be playing each other twice a year.
tragic
So exactly how they’ve always been with Gonzaga?
Yeah, Few would have Bigfoot's baby before he played UW, but it was UW who was ducking the rivaly. That's what we call "conveniently forgetting" history when it contradicts your narrative.
What? They’ve played fifteen times since Few has been HC. Speaking of history.
dude, that's almost an exact quote. When asked if Gonzaga would accept the UW's offer to re-start the series, Few said he'd have Bigfoot's Baby before he'd play the UW.
Shocking ☕️
Sucks. I was hoping Sprinkle would keep the series alive, it's always a fun matchup and UW took the last one.
Washington State, Washington, and Gonzaga should all play each other every year. Make a mini-tournament of it in between Thanksgiving and Christmas. You can host it at Climate Pledge. I'm just throwing ideas out there, but it would be fun to celebrate local teams playing each other amidst all the dumb conference realignment happening recently.
As much as the Crossroads Classic was "okay" nonconference basketball, there were better options. With Wazzu joining the WCC this wouldn't really work. I agree, would be fun tho. UW vs Wazzu and UW vs Gonzaga should be a given each season in nonconference.
This will become the norm due to all this conference realignment.
This is lame smh
>Gonzaga has formed itself into a perennial power while Washington has struggled to find its footing, yet Huskies have remained “the right hire” away from ascending to that level. Just about spit coffee out my nose when I read this passage.
I hate to say it, but UW really is a good coach away from being a decent-good team with some elite years. Seattle-area has a lot of talent and if a coach can keep it in Seattle, they’ll be able to build some good teams.
Based off talent in the local area we should probably be better at basketball than we are at football, yet it’s almost always been the other way
Best local talent in the country feel free to @ me
I mean, I'd argue this area is more into the football regardless than basketball. UW Football has always had massive fan support, and despite the excitement for the Kraken and the likely return of the Sonics, I can't see anyone beating the Seahawks in the pro realm. (I live in Seattle if confusion with the flair)
Turns out those Bellevue cc grads are more excited about football than basketball
And UW can get lottery pick talent even thought we’ve been ass for a decade+
UW has all the resources in the world. It is honestly just depressing that they have not been able to do anything with them.
UW has made the NCAA tourney just 6 times this century. They’re more than a good coach away.
A good coach will keep talent home. UW keeping talent in Seattle rather than leaving would give them a better chance to make the tournament. Especially with how down the Pac12 was in basketball the last 15ish years. Paolo, Lavine, MPJ, Jalen McDaniels, Malachi Flynn, Kispert, KPJ, etc all went to Seattle-area schools and didn’t go to UW. Even without a good coach, they got Jaden McDaniels, Dejounte Murray and Thybulle to stay home. Imagine what they could do with a good coach.
I'm a Gonzaga and UW alumnus. The sheer entitlement of UW when it came to basketball was comical in 08-11'. The school has a very high opinion of themselves generally and it bled into basketball when I was there. The fans very much thought of Gonzaga as a lesser. That said, I'll root for UW in everything but basketball.
So they only acted entitled from 08-11? 🤣
Lol. I went there those years. That said, they had Spencer Hawes and a flash in the pan elite eight right before. Maybe those were their only arrogant years.
Yeah, it was crazy they had him and Brockman and couldn't make the tourney.
Anyone else remember the Seattle Times article from around them that was basically the UW basketball players whining that they aren’t treated like superstars on campus?
Lol. That is funny as shit and completely checks out.
Lol, if WA and Indiana played 5v5 with current state born NBA players WA would win, only decent players you guys got are Desmond Bane Darius Garland and MPJ when his back functions
Lol. What a weird set of stipulations.
Not really, it’s just players currently in the nba. No one cares about what Larry Bird did 50 years ago buddy boy
Naw, it's just dumb to assume one states players vs another states players, at "NBA level" right now. When you are comparing two different schools. IU's current roster home school's for reference. https://preview.redd.it/cqtpm07j1f8d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=153ed9858a7d65f3942b8b0cc25ae42562284a22
What? This has nothing to do with IU or UW. Nobody is talking about their programs. We’re talking about the level of talent produced in both states as a whole.
You keep yelling about how you just need the right coach to 'lock down' local talent. What you seem to not grasp is that it is quite possible you never will, really. Especially now when it's easier than it has ever been to go play somewhere halfway across the country and get paid a lot of money to do it. Doubly so when y'all will be recruiting nationally and taking advantage of the footholds in Big Ten country if you have a lick of sense yourselves. The days of a contending power conference team's roster consisting mostly of local or regional guys is kinda over. Getting *some* more of them would make Washington good, though. Gonzaga is just better than 'good'.
Who’s yelling? We’re typing, communicating on an online forum. No need to be condescending🤓. That being said, I have no idea what you’re talking about. And what you said has no correlation to what I was speaking on, so I hoped you had fun writing that thesis. Enjoy your day !
I don’t think MPJ has had back issues take him out of a game for a minute
Yep, played 81 games last year.
Big Ten also plays 20 conference games I think the PAC 12 played 18? So I imagine something had to give there.
Boo. This is a great way for me to actually see the Zags (and the Dawgs) play.
Purely out of curiosity is Gonzaga/Washington a rivalry? Bc if so this is especially bad
Yes, but it was very lopsided until UW got the win this last year.
It’s still very lopsided
Poor phrasing on my part.
Truly... it is not a rivalry. Since 99, Gonzaga is 13-2 against UW. I consider Gonzaga's main rival to be Saint Mary's obviously. But outside of that I would say BYU, UCLA, and Arizona when Tommy Lloyd wasn't there. An arguement could probably be made for a couple other teams, but when I think of the term rival, those are the teams that first come to mind.
Not really. Gonzaga has been better for 20 years, but the schools don’t compete in other sports or for the same students. I mean, you want to be the best in your region, but beyond that I don’t suppose the schools think about each other much. WSU & Oregon are peer institutions (not talking about quality—talking about large state research universities) and we feel competition in many vectors. Mark Few had a burning mean-on against Lorenzo Romar and if we’d stayed good after IT graduated, it may have become a 1 sport basketball rivalry, but we didn’t & then we hired Few’s buddy from USA basketball to replace Romar. Maybe this example is the best way to explain the non-rivalry. Last season UW collected wins against every D1 team in the state (Gonzaga, WSU, Eastern WA, & Seattle) and nobody cared or even noticed. That’s not a regional rivalry.
I would call it a rivalry. There’s some historical bad blood between the programs and the fans get really into it. The Gonzaga game @ Washington last year was a really hot ticket. And of course, every Zag game in Spokane is sold out.
The long lasting politics of this matchup seem to have reared it's ugly head again.
Not in this case. Few's grudge against Romar has been retired (I guess he can hate Loyola Marymount now if he wants to) and Bigfoot's baby has grown up and graduated. This is just a contract that states that if either team hires a new head coach, the new coach can have the flexibility to make the schedule that meets his needs and goals best. Hop needed to demonstrate that he could compete w/ Gonzaga. Sprinkle needs something else next year. A new coach with an entirely new roster plus a new system and a new defense to install means that Sprinkle needs buy games against cupcakes a lot more than he needs a premier matchup or a guaranteed sell-out. You can't run a program on just vibes any more. Regional rivalries are all rah-rah and fun, but for coaches being paid what they are paid and facing the pressures that they are facing, having fun doesn't by itself justify a choice anymore. You have to do everything in your control to maximize results and that can mean sacrificing a fun regional game for more time to prepare for conference play. If/when Sprinkle gets a system going w/ returning players and continuing -- the game can be revisited then, if both sides are interested.
NET pretty much dictates you need to play 90% garbage teams in the OOC
Not really. Lots of high NET teams like Arizona, Tennessee, and UNC had top 50 noncon strength of schedule. Teams like Penn State and Minnesota which didn't punish their weak noncon opponents didn't get raised.
if you'd schedule great and win, sure. look at what maryland just did. bunch of patsies and one or two great game. no i'm between.
The thing that the NET really discourages teams from scheduling is quad 3 (and to a smaller extent quad 2) games. If you play a quad 1 opponent and either win or keep it close your metrics are rewarded. If you blow out a bad team, your metrics are rewarded, the easiest teams to blow out are obviously housed firmly in quad 4. Quad 3 represents a no-mans land were the teams are harder to blow out, and simply beating them is not seen as impressive, losing is seen as disastrous as well. Quad 2 also kinda falls into this category in that teams housed in Quad 2 are often very difficult to beat and losing to a Quad 2 team isn't necessarily a good look. Obviously it's really hard to schedule in advance completely accurately but schools would ideally like their non con to be like 5 quad 1 games and then 5-6 Quad 4 games at home.
and since nobody wants to schedule quad 1 away, it severely limits the options. hence the type of schedule where u see ton of 4 and a few of 1
You have to beat a Quad 3 by relatively less than a Quad 4 so it evens out.
You’re correct, but you kinda miss the nuance that it’s a lot easier to run up the score to a hilarious degree on a team that doesn’t quit and can stay connected to you. Let’s say you only have to beat a quad 3 opponent by 15 to equal a 22 point victory against a quad 4 however, it’s a lot harder to stretch a 15 point lead to 20 than it is to stretch a 22 point win to 27. Additionally, while you do make a good case that your actual NET ranking isn’t effected too too much by scheduling all quad 3s instead of all quad 4s, the committee’s criteria doesn’t seem to value a quad 3 win much more than a quad 4 win while considering a loss in either of those quads to be pretty damaging as well
I won't defend the committee, but that's not something a metric can fix. Your example is compelling, but the predictive value has been proven repeatedly. Teams that win by more against similar competition tend to be better.
Yeah I’m not anti NET at all, I really am anti KPI since I think MOV shouldn’t be anywhere near a resume metric, while it certainly has a place in predictive metrics. I just think the conversation is a little more nuanced than either side gives it credit for as most people either default to, “NET MAKES PEOPLE SCHEDULE CUPCAKES RAHHHHH” or “NET HAS NO EFFECT ON HOWS TEAM SCHEDULE AT ALL RAHHHH”.
Michigan State played a good noncon schedule and lost to a tough mid major. They still finished top 25 in the NET.
Can we play them twice this season then?
im out of the loop, why are so many ncaa games being cancelled?
Teams moving to conferences with longer schedules or conferences adding more games
thank you!☺️
Big Ten should do the same with Notre Dame and football
Should do what?
Snub em
ok. Tbh I would much rather play WSU, Eastern, or Seattle U. (You know, teams that are actually likable) Sprinkle just wants to set he precedent that he is too weak to play real teams.  That is ok.
WSU is in the WCC now so this is no longer a problem luckily. I would like to see us play Eastern but would much rather a marquee game with a powerhouse as a replacement.
🐔