KenPom 2023-2024 KenPom Rankings Thread

[jimmykc]

In other words, the lesson college should teach young adults is that once an opponent is beaten, he should be pummeled until unconscious and then kicked in the groin for good measure.  

[Navin R. Johnson]

24 minutes ago, jimmykc said:

In other words, the lesson college should teach young adults is that once an opponent is beaten, he should be pummeled until unconscious and then kicked in the groin for good measure.  

 

Yup.  I dislike it because you are not going to play your younger guys or your bench as much for fear of not winning the game by a certain amount.  Kids will not get valuable experience.

[hskr4life]

I hate it too, but unfortunately we need to game it until it is changed.  We unfortunately also don’t get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to resumes.

[cornfed24-7]

1 hour ago, jimmykc said:

In other words, the lesson college should teach young adults is that once an opponent is beaten, he should be pummeled until unconscious and then kicked in the groin for good measure.  

 

[HuskerFever]

2 hours ago, jimmykc said:

In other words, the lesson college should teach young adults is that once an opponent is beaten, he should be pummeled until unconscious and then kicked in the groin for good measure.  

 

Or maybe it's less sinister. The more games that are played across the league, the more penalized a team like this will be even with a single additional loss.

 

When you have so few data points to work with, weird things can show up. I'm a big proponent of absolutely zero Top 25 rankings or any stats for the early part of a season. I haven't dug deep into it or invested the time yet, but how many times early rankings were absolutely wrong is astonishing; all performative to the fans. Take TCU football last year as a prime example.

[49r]

1 hour ago, cornfed24-7 said:

 

 

[Huskerpapa]

Yeah...so we Nebraska fans go from being happy with any win, to only being happy with a 40 point curb stomping...uh-huh.  

 

 

Edited December 20, 2023 by Huskerpapa

[49r]

Here's the thing.  I'm all for sportsmanship and whatnot, but the NCAA Tournament is like a private club.  If you aren't a member (like @jimmykc's favorite team Kansas is) you aren't gonna get invited to the dance just by doing the bare minimum to qualify...and Nebraska is most certainly NOT a member of that privileged club.  We only get in if they are forced to take us.

 

Programs like Indiana or UCLA are going to get in on name recognition alone.  If they manage 16 or 17 wins and a NET somewhere approaching the 40's then it's "oh yes, NET #51?  That's pretty good, you really pass the EYE TEST *wink wink* this year...come on in, here's your 9 seed.  Let me punch your membership card on your way in".

 

For us to be safely invited into the dance without a conference championship, it will take a minimum 21 wins and a NET somewhere in the low 30's to upper 20's...and even then we're looking at probably at best a 10 seed.  Almost entirely because of the name on the front of our jerseys.  The committee will find any excuse possible to keep us out...especially if they need to make room for Arkansas or Mizzou.  In our case it's "I'm sorry NET #40 Nebraska, you had a great season and all and we really wanted to have you in this year but, gosh, there were just so darn many tough choices that needed to be made and, unfortunately we just didn't have room for, uh, YOU at the dance.  Better luck next year though."

 

So for us to get where we want we need to really open eyes and force the doors open.  We do that by just ripping the ever loving crap out of our overmatched opponents, and when we have an opportunity to embarrass an NCAA Tournament country club member like KSU on their home court, we need to take every opportunity to make that game as much of a blowout as possible.

 

Like it or hate it, this is our reality.  We are the red-headed stepchild of college hoops.  Everybody hates us and they all want to see us suffer and stay mediocre to bad where we "belong" to ensure plenty of room for the privileged ones.  We have a different set of rules to play by, which means we need to be half again as good just to have the same opportunities that they have.

 

But, you know, go ahead.  We can definitely be happy to squeak by mid- to low-major opponents by a dozen points and celebrate our wins like they mean something.  But just remember that that alone is not good enough for us to do the thing that I think we all agree we want to do, and that is to make the NCAA Tournament, and God forbid, actually win when we get there.

[Art Vandalay]

23 minutes ago, 49r said:

Here's the thing.  I'm all for sportsmanship and whatnot, but the NCAA Tournament is like a private club.  If you aren't a member (like @jimmykc's favorite team Kansas is) you aren't gonna get invited to the dance just by doing the bare minimum to qualify...and Nebraska is most certainly NOT a member of that privileged club.  We only get in if they are forced to take us.

 

Programs like Indiana or UCLA are going to get in on name recognition alone.  If they manage 16 or 17 wins and a NET somewhere approaching the 40's then it's "oh yes, NET #51?  That's pretty good, you really pass the EYE TEST *wink wink* this year...come on in, here's your 9 seed.  Let me punch your membership card on your way in".

 

For us to be safely invited into the dance without a conference championship, it will take a minimum 21 wins and a NET somewhere in the low 30's to upper 20's...and even then we're looking at probably at best a 10 seed.  Almost entirely because of the name on the front of our jerseys.  The committee will find any excuse possible to keep us out...especially if they need to make room for Arkansas or Mizzou.  In our case it's "I'm sorry NET #40 Nebraska, you had a great season and all and we really wanted to have you in this year but, gosh, there were just so darn many tough choices that needed to be made and, unfortunately we just didn't have room for, uh, YOU at the dance.  Better luck next year though."

 

So for us to get where we want we need to really open eyes and force the doors open.  We do that by just ripping the ever loving crap out of our overmatched opponents, and when we have an opportunity to embarrass an NCAA Tournament country club member like KSU on their home court, we need to take every opportunity to make that game as much of a blowout as possible.

 

Like it or hate it, this is our reality.  We are the red-headed stepchild of college hoops.  Everybody hates us and they all want to see us suffer and stay mediocre to bad where we "belong" to ensure plenty of room for the privileged ones.  We have a different set of rules to play by, which means we need to be half again as good just to have the same opportunities that they have.

 

But, you know, go ahead.  We can definitely be happy to squeak by mid- to low-major opponents by a dozen points and celebrate our wins like they mean something.  But just remember that that alone is not good enough for us to do the thing that I think we all agree we want to do, and that is to make the NCAA Tournament, and God forbid, actually win when we get there.

I actually don’t believe that. Outside of 2017, the years I think we deserved to get in we did and had a reasonable seed (granted that was long ago). I actually think the committee looks for good stories except when that DBag AD from Omaha ran it.

 

just my opinion and I could be wrong

[hskr4life]

The NCAA does love money though and there are a lot of eyeballs in Japan.

[hhcmatt]

Disagree with this 'everyone hates Nebraska' paranoia.

 

There is some value to killing our next two opponents as opposed to just beating them soundly but if I had to choose between beatdown and getting minutes for Rice, Matar, and Boogie because we might need them when we play in conference I'm choosing the latter.

[HuskerFever]

1 hour ago, hskr4life said:

The NCAA does love money though and there are a lot of eyeballs in Japan.

 

Does that include fish eyes as well?

[Vinny]

26 minutes ago, HuskerFever said:

 

Does that include fish eyes as well?

What?

[Ron Mexico]

2 hours ago, 49r said:

Here's the thing.  I'm all for sportsmanship and whatnot, but the NCAA Tournament is like a private club.  If you aren't a member (like @jimmykc's favorite team Kansas is) you aren't gonna get invited to the dance just by doing the bare minimum to qualify...and Nebraska is most certainly NOT a member of that privileged club.  We only get in if they are forced to take us.

 

Programs like Indiana or UCLA are going to get in on name recognition alone.  If they manage 16 or 17 wins and a NET somewhere approaching the 40's then it's "oh yes, NET #51?  That's pretty good, you really pass the EYE TEST *wink wink* this year...come on in, here's your 9 seed.  Let me punch your membership card on your way in".

 

For us to be safely invited into the dance without a conference championship, it will take a minimum 21 wins and a NET somewhere in the low 30's to upper 20's...and even then we're looking at probably at best a 10 seed.  Almost entirely because of the name on the front of our jerseys.  The committee will find any excuse possible to keep us out...especially if they need to make room for Arkansas or Mizzou.  In our case it's "I'm sorry NET #40 Nebraska, you had a great season and all and we really wanted to have you in this year but, gosh, there were just so darn many tough choices that needed to be made and, unfortunately we just didn't have room for, uh, YOU at the dance.  Better luck next year though."

 

So for us to get where we want we need to really open eyes and force the doors open.  We do that by just ripping the ever loving crap out of our overmatched opponents, and when we have an opportunity to embarrass an NCAA Tournament country club member like KSU on their home court, we need to take every opportunity to make that game as much of a blowout as possible.

 

Like it or hate it, this is our reality.  We are the red-headed stepchild of college hoops.  Everybody hates us and they all want to see us suffer and stay mediocre to bad where we "belong" to ensure plenty of room for the privileged ones.  We have a different set of rules to play by, which means we need to be half again as good just to have the same opportunities that they have.

 

But, you know, go ahead.  We can definitely be happy to squeak by mid- to low-major opponents by a dozen points and celebrate our wins like they mean something.  But just remember that that alone is not good enough for us to do the thing that I think we all agree we want to do, and that is to make the NCAA Tournament, and God forbid, actually win when we get there.

I do believe there is some truth here. I think it is one of those instances where we have to have a better overall resume than what would be required for a blue blood. I don't think it is by design but rather an unconscious bias by the committee. 

 

What frustrates me with NET/RPI is that they are just data points rather than a single score. You can have a 40's NET score and mid to low SOS and be out or 60's NET and below mid SOS and be in. Throw in the Quad wins and it adds to the confusion. A team gets a couple of Q1 upsets, paired with a schedule that wouldn't get them an NIT in most seasons and magically they are in the tourney. It seems that the numbers always work for some teams and never work for others. There is not a single person out there than give me a cut line for NET/SOS/Quad Record. My favorite part of the season is seeing our NET move up and down when we aren't even playing games. You can be a part of a great conference and an outstanding record by all measures and still be out (see below).

 

A 13-5 conference record, a 4th place finish and 22 wins in 2018 and we were a 5 seed in the NIT?!? First time in history that has ever happened to a BIG 10 team. I'll go to my grave believing this was the best screw job in NCAA history.

In 2014 a conference record of 11-7 and finished 4th and barely qualified for the NCAA. We lose to Wiscy and we are on the outside looking in.

How about 1999, finishing with an almost identical record to 1998. '99 team swept KU during conference play (lost to them in 2nd round of conference tourney), and the '98 team was swept by KU (3 losses). We go to the NCAA's that year and Nee isn't fired after the following season. I know there where other "issues", however I don't think they would have mattered had he made it to the tourney in '99. Hard to imagine that he had us playing in the post season for 9 years in a row with 5 of those years being the NCAA's. 

 

Make it make sense.

 

[Handy Johnson]

49 minutes ago, Ron Mexico said:

I do believe there is some truth here. I think it is one of those instances where we have to have a better overall resume than what would be required for a blue blood. I don't think it is by design but rather an unconscious bias by the committee. 

 

What frustrates me with NET/RPI is that they are just data points rather than a single score. You can have a 40's NET score and mid to low SOS and be out or 60's NET and below mid SOS and be in. Throw in the Quad wins and it adds to the confusion. A team gets a couple of Q1 upsets, paired with a schedule that wouldn't get them an NIT in most seasons and magically they are in the tourney. It seems that the numbers always work for some teams and never work for others. There is not a single person out there than give me a cut line for NET/SOS/Quad Record. My favorite part of the season is seeing our NET move up and down when we aren't even playing games. You can be a part of a great conference and an outstanding record by all measures and still be out (see below).

 

A 13-5 conference record, a 4th place finish and 22 wins in 2018 and we were a 5 seed in the NIT?!? First time in history that has ever happened to a BIG 10 team. I'll go to my grave believing this was the best screw job in NCAA history.

In 2014 a conference record of 11-7 and finished 4th and barely qualified for the NCAA. We lose to Wiscy and we are on the outside looking in.

How about 1999, finishing with an almost identical record to 1998. '99 team swept KU during conference play (lost to them in 2nd round of conference tourney), and the '98 team was swept by KU (3 losses). We go to the NCAA's that year and Nee isn't fired after the following season. I know there where other "issues", however I don't think they would have mattered had he made it to the tourney in '99. Hard to imagine that he had us playing in the post season for 9 years in a row with 5 of those years being the NCAA's. 

 

Make it make sense.

 

We blew out Oklahoma in Norman that year (‘99) & they went to the Tournament instead of us. Even with BIG XII POY V Hamilton. None of it makes any sense of course, but it brings to mind a truism that Billy Tubbs used to say RE: running up the score. “That’s NOT my problem, get BETTER”…! 

[hskr4life]

In the latest Bracket Matrix update, we appear in 16/31 brackets and were the first team out in the aggregate.
 

Interesting to note that KSU also appears in 16/31 as well and are an aggregate 11 seed along with MSU in 10/31.  So those could be two nice H2H W’s down the road.

 

http://www.bracketmatrix.com

[AuroranHusker]

38 minutes ago, hskr4life said:

In the latest Bracket Matrix update, we appear in 16/31 brackets and were the first team out in the aggregate.
 

Interesting to note that KSU also appears in 16/31 as well and are an aggregate 11 seed along with MSU in 10/31.  So those could be two nice H2H W’s down the road.

 

http://www.bracketmatrix.com

 

Going 2-2 in that 4-game stretch worked out fine, since they included a big home win over a highly respected Tom Izzo team as well as a road victory at Tang's House of Pancakes. GBR

 

[kldm64]

Just think what things would look like had we not collapsed in the 2nd half at Minnesota and have another road win.  We'd be 10-1 overall and 2-0 in conference play.  Amazing how 1 game can change so much.

Edited December 20, 2023 by kldm64

[nuhusker7]

7 hours ago, kldm64 said:

Just think what things would look like had we not collapsed in the 2nd half at Minnesota and have another road win.  We'd be 10-1 overall and 2-0 in conference play.  Amazing how 1 game can change so much.

1 game really can change a lot. 
 

I believe we will also sneak out a win in 1 game that, on paper, we shouldn’t win. I think that win can do a lot more good than a road big ten loss can do bad.

[49r]

9 hours ago, nuhusker7 said:

I believe we will also sneak out a win in 1 game that, on paper, we shouldn’t win.

 

I mean, we already have two of those this month.

[49r]

 

Michigan and Northwestern both leapfrog ahead of us, Iowa is hot on our heels now.  Not really a whole lot to talk about today, we just need to get through this holiday break unscathed and then see what happens against Indiana.

 

Ken drops us back to 19-12 (9-11).  Torvik also dropped us to 20-11 (10-10).

 

San José State won their game last night and move up one spot to #170.

 

Okay, here we go.

 

---

 

 

KenPom rankings as of 12-21-23

=======================

 

B1G (1-1):
3. Purdue
12. Illinois
16. Wisconsin
23. Michigan State - W
28. Ohio State
45. Michigan
46. Northwestern
53. Nebraska
55. Iowa
75. Rutgers
80. Maryland
87. Indiana
88. Minnesota - L

111. Penn State

 

 

Non-Conference (9-1):
336. Lindenwood - W

332. Florida A&M - W

---Cornhusker Classic---
277. Rider - W
257. Stony Brook - W

---Sanford Pentagon---
208. Oregon State - W

 

---Cornhusker Classic---

82. Duquesne - W

 

212. Cal State Fullerton - W

17. Creighton - L
69. @Kansas State - W
249. North Dakota - W

339. South Carolina State

[49r]

Big Ten drops below the SEC now for third, we *may* be responsible for that:

 

Ranking of conferences by AdjEM of team that's expected to go .500 in conference play

Conference		Rating	Conference		Rating
1	Big 12 Conference	+17.12	18	Coastal Athletic Association	-3.91
2	Southeastern Conference	+14.51	19	Big South Conference	-4.40
3	Big Ten Conference	+14.50	20	Mid American Conference	-4.43
4	Big East Conference	+14.34	21	Big Sky Conference	-4.67
5	Pac 12 Conference	+11.48	22	Summit League	-4.98
6	Atlantic Coast Conference	+11.32	23	Horizon League	-5.11
7	Mountain West Conference	+8.56	24	America East Conference	-5.86
8	Atlantic 10 Conference	+4.51	25	ASUN Conference	-6.45
9	American Athletic Conference	+3.93	26	Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference	-7.63
10	Missouri Valley Conference	+2.67	27	Ohio Valley Conference	-10.15
11	West Coast Conference	+2.57	28	Southland Conference	-10.72
12	Ivy League	-0.10	29	Patriot League	-11.59
13	Western Athletic Conference	-1.18	30	Independents	-12.50
14	Conference USA	-1.28	31	Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference	-13.53
15	Southern Conference	-1.94	32	Southwestern Athletic Conference	-13.71
16	Big West Conference	-2.08	33	Northeast Conference	-14.20
17	Sun Belt Conference	-2.59

[SkersHoops]

Puke-Birds losing @ home last night probably didn't help things either. 

[Norm Peterson]

Alls I can say is not winning by a lot is a shit ton better than losing by any amount.

 

Failing to administer a beat-down in a win drops us by half a dozen spots; a loss would have dropped us a couple dozen.

[NUdiehard]

30 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

Alls I can say is not winning by a lot is a shit ton better than losing by any amount.

 

Failing to administer a beat-down in a win drops us by half a dozen spots; a loss would have dropped us a couple dozen.

 

Last night's game was a bit of confluence of bad fortune for NU.  Nebraska lost its most important player for the game while ND gained its best player that it hasn't had all year.  Had ND had #4 all year, it would have had a better record and better ranking, and NU wouldn't have been "expected" to win by such a large margin.  Such are the vagaries of early season computer rankings.