2024-2025 Polls/NET/RPI

[peavy]

new coaches poll SDSU gains 36 points (35->71) putting them at 24

20. Alabama 174
21. FSU 98
22. MSU 85
23. OSU 72
24. SDSU 71
25. Creighton 51
26. Baylor 41
37. Cal 36
28. Vandy 20

[peavy]

Jeff Linder has SDSU 23 in his latest poll, and Eden Laase has SDSU as 25 in her poll

A Fairfield assistant coach, Blake Dudonis actually went to bat for SDSU on Monday regarding votes. An AP voter tweeted it out saying he's been voting for the team.



and some mid-major coaches engaged in a NET conversation on Tuesday.

DuDonis tweeted something out about the NET being biased toward p4's and suggested things need to be tweaked to get the best possible 68 teams in. He retweeted a video from a JMU presser. They played against Ball State in a game between the top 2 teams in 2 diff conferences (SunBelt/X challenge), and Ball State lost and moved up 2 spots (51), and JMU stayed the same (53)

The Belmont Associate HC (Jamey Givens) then put this out along with the video (same video from DuDonis tweet above)

Givens added this, "We have a double digit head-to-head win over a team, more quad 2/3 wins than them, and no losses outside q1 and q2 and are somehow ranked 5 spots below them?"

[peavy]

New AP poll SDSU gains one point to put them at 7 total

22. MSU 86
23. FSU 78
24. Creighton 61
25. Baylor 48
26. Cal 38
27. Illinois 22
28. Vandy 20
29. Utah 14
30. SDSU 7
31. Michigan 6
32 Richmond 5

SDSU gains 10 points (from 7) to put them at 17 total. 3 voters moved the team up (20, 20, 23) and 2 new people put the team at 25

22. MSU 131
23. Creighton 96
24. Oklahoma State 90
25. Illinois 53
26. California 48
27. Utah 43
28. Louisville 28
29. SDSU 17

[peavy]

SDSU gains 10 points (from 7) to put them at 17 total. 3 voters moved the team up (20, 20, 23) and 2 new people put the team at 25

22. MSU 131
23. Creighton 96
24. Oklahoma State 90
25. Illinois 53
26. California 48
27. Utah 43
28. Louisville 28
29. SDSU 17

SDSU gains 5 points (from 17) to put them at 22 points total, good for 27th on this poll

22. Creighton 121
23. Michigan State 104
24. Florida State 64
25. Louisville 46
26. Georgia Tech 32
27. South Dakota State 22
28. Utah 19
29. Illinois 14

[peavy]

gained 20 points putting them at 42 points total. Good for #25
https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-wom...asketball-poll

20. KSTATE 220
21. Oklahoma State 189
23. Creighton 83
24. Michigan State 67
25. South Dakota State 42
26. Louisville 40
27. Richmond 21

[GoJacks2011]

Good to see. I think a strong conference tournament should keep us in the top 25 here on out. Hoping this helps bump us up to a 7 seed at least in the NCAA tourney. God forbid, safety net for an at large is definitely there this year.

[jackdaniel]

Good to see. I think a strong conference tournament should keep us in the top 25 here on out. Hoping this helps bump us up to a 7 seed at least in the NCAA tourney. God forbid, safety net for an at large is definitely there this year.

Any seed but the dreaded 8-9 seed is great.

[Carolina010]

Good to see. I think a strong conference tournament should keep us in the top 25 here on out. Hoping this helps bump us up to a 7 seed at least in the NCAA tourney. God forbid, safety net for an at large is definitely there this year.

You would think that but I went through the AP Top 25 teams ranked 15 through everyone receiving votes and the rank kind of correlated with the seed for most of the power 4 schools but not any of the non power 4 schools. I used chremes bracketology.

of the 20 teams I looked at 6 schools were seeded 2 lines lower than what there seed should be if you went strictly off rank. 5 of this six were non power 4 schools

15 Maryland 5 seed should be 4 seed -1
16 West Virginia 6 seed (4 seed) -2

17 Baylor 5 seed (5 seed) -
18 Tennessee 5 seed (5 seed) they were a 4 seed -
19 Alabama 4 seed (5 seed) +1
20 Kansas State 4 seed (5 seed) +1

21 Oklahoma State 7 seed (6 seed) -1
22 Florida State 6 seed (6 seed) -
23 Creighton 8 seed (6 seed) -2
24 Michigan State 6 seed (6 seed) -

25 South Dakota State 9 seed (7 seed) -2
26 Louisville 7 seed (7 seed) -
27 Richmond 9 seed (7 seed) -2
28 Mississippi 4 seed (7 seed) moved up to a 4 seed +3

29 Utah 7 seed (8 seed) +1
30 James Madison 12 seed(8 seed) -4
31 Iowa 6 seed (8 seed) +2
32 Fairfield 12 seed (8 seed) -4

33 California 8 seed (9 seed) +1
34 Georgia Tech 9 seed (9 seed) -

Not sure what Charlie Chreme sees in Ole Miss for them to not be ranked in either poll but be a high enough seed to host the first two rounds.

I also understand rankings are just one of many metrics used to seed the field but not real surprising the only schools getting “worse seeds” than their ranks are small school.

[MontanaRabbit]

You would think that but I went through the AP Top 25 teams ranked 15 through everyone receiving votes and the rank kind of correlated with the seed for most of the power 4 schools but not any of the non power 4 schools. I used chremes bracketology.

of the 20 teams I looked at 6 schools were seeded 2 lines lower than what there seed should be if you went strictly off rank. 5 of this six were non power 4 schools

15 Maryland 5 seed should be 4 seed -1
16 West Virginia 6 seed (4 seed) -2

17 Baylor 5 seed (5 seed) -
18 Tennessee 5 seed (5 seed) they were a 4 seed -
19 Alabama 4 seed (5 seed) +1
20 Kansas State 4 seed (5 seed) +1

21 Oklahoma State 7 seed (6 seed) -1
22 Florida State 6 seed (6 seed) -
23 Creighton 8 seed (6 seed) -2
24 Michigan State 6 seed (6 seed) -

25 South Dakota State 9 seed (7 seed) -2
26 Louisville 7 seed (7 seed) -
27 Richmond 9 seed (7 seed) -2
28 Mississippi 4 seed (7 seed) moved up to a 4 seed +3

29 Utah 7 seed (8 seed) +1
30 James Madison 12 seed(8 seed) -4
31 Iowa 6 seed (8 seed) +2
32 Fairfield 12 seed (8 seed) -4

33 California 8 seed (9 seed) +1
34 Georgia Tech 9 seed (9 seed) -

Not sure what Charlie Chreme sees in Ole Miss for them to not be ranked in either poll but be a high enough seed to host the first two rounds.

I also understand rankings are just one of many metrics used to seed the field but not real surprising the only schools getting “worse seeds” than their ranks are small school.

I think Charlie Creme does roughly zero research for the bracketology.

[peavy]

AP voter Eden Laase wrote an article, "NCAA women’s basketball mid-major stars explain why they chose to stay rather than transfer" that talks about and includes quotes from AJ and Brooklyn (and Harvard's Harmoni Turner & Drake's Katie Dinnebier)

She did an ask me anything on the ncaaw subreddit. I should have asked if anyone here had any questions. Others asked about AP voting among other things. I asked about
1) tournament expansion
2) if she's seen the coaches getting angry at the NET/process publicly (lots of teams trying to make their case for March. JMU, Seton Hall, UNLV)
3) her feelings on additional metrics for the women's game (men use a whole bunch. Women have Torvik and HerHoopsStats (but they aren't used). ESPN does BPI for Men not women, and NCAA does wins above bubble (a newer one) for men (actually listed on the NCAA net page) but not women
4) thoughts on conference tournaments since Mulkey had some about it (she doesn't want them - Morrow got injured ) and UNLV coach said things yday in a podcast (UNLV got knocked out and probably won't get an at-large)

[Bozemaniac]

AP voter Eden Laase wrote an article, "NCAA women’s basketball mid-major stars explain why they chose to stay rather than transfer" that talks about and includes quotes from AJ and Brooklyn (and Harvard's Harmoni Turner & Drake's Katie Dinnebier)

She did an ask me anything on the ncaaw subreddit. I should have asked if anyone here had any questions. Others asked about AP voting among other things. I asked about
1) tournament expansion
2) if she's seen the coaches getting angry at the NET/process publicly (lots of teams trying to make their case for March. JMU, Seton Hall, UNLV)
3) her feelings on additional metrics for the women's game (men use a whole bunch. Women have Torvik and HerHoopsStats (but they aren't used). ESPN does BPI for Men not women, and NCAA does wins above bubble (a newer one) for men (actually listed on the NCAA net page) but not women
4) thoughts on conference tournaments since Mulkey had some about it (she doesn't want them - Morrow got injured ) and UNLV coach said things yday in a podcast (UNLV got knocked out and probably won't get an at-large)

You asked some good questions. In theory the NET w/ quadrants that differentiate home/road games sounds really good, but I'm looking at that ranking and it's a giant P4 circlejerk. You get Minnesota going undefeated in OOC against the absolute weakest schedule, allowing them to somehow end up as a Q1 counter for a mediocre Washington team that is sitting above us. And both Minnesota and UW are right on the cut line of the bubble.

The big problem with this is that it looks like it makes the #8/#9 seed the highest ceiling for good mid major programs. I think they switched to NET from RPI in like 2021, and we've been what, 9/9/12 since the switch? Before we've been a 7 and even a 6 in strong years (with 5 losses!). I'd be really bummed if this year's team gets an 8 seed looking at this field and with us ranked in the top 25.

[MontanaRabbit]

You asked some good questions. In theory the NET w/ quadrants that differentiate home/road games sounds really good, but I'm looking at that ranking and it's a giant P4 circlejerk. You get Minnesota going undefeated in OOC against the absolute weakest schedule, allowing them to somehow end up as a Q1 counter for a mediocre Washington team that is sitting above us. And both Minnesota and UW are right on the cut line of the bubble.

The big problem with this is that it looks like it makes the #8/#9 seed the highest ceiling for good mid major programs. I think they switched to NET from RPI in like 2021, and we've been what, 9/9/12 since the switch? Before we've been a 7 and even a 6 in strong years (with 5 losses!). I'd be really bummed if this year's team gets an 8 seed looking at this field and with us ranked in the top 25.

Anything higher than a 6 seed for this Jackrabbit team would be a complete travesty. Our OOC strength of schedule is #10 in the entire country.

[GoJacks2011]

All of the bracketology I'm seeing this year is a joke. We are far better than a 9 seed. NET ranking for us has made zero sense this year. Charlie Creme has been off every year with where we've actually ended up.

I actually am not going to be surprised if we get a 7 and play Nebraska as a 10 in the first round. I'd be okay with that. They've been up and down all year and we know AJ > Amy. Unfortunately, all of the top 16 hosts are going to be out of the Midwest so no regional travel again for us this year.

[98Jackfarmer]

All of the bracketology I'm seeing this year is a joke. We are far better than a 9 seed. NET ranking for us has made zero sense this year. Charlie Creme has been off every year with where we've actually ended up.

I actually am not going to be surprised if we get a 7 and play Nebraska as a 10 in the first round. I'd be okay with that. They've been up and down all year and we know AJ > Amy. Unfortunately, all of the top 16 hosts are going to be out of the Midwest so no regional travel again for us this year.

If the Jacks would get Nebraska in their first game and win, it would kind of be poetic justice for the Jacks to end the career of their one time signee in Markowski.

[Jackrabbit2012]

If the Jacks would get Nebraska in their first game and win, it would kind of be poetic justice for the Jacks to end the career of their one time signee in Markowski.

I think we also recruited their starting guard Callin Hake really hard. Would be enjoyable to get a win against the Huskers and prove the grass isn't always greener at the larger schools.