Following their ugly loss on Tuesday to Wake Forest, the Pitt basketball team took a tumble in the all-important NET Rankings.
That led many to think that Panthers NCAA bubble had burst but that’s hardly the case. After a crazy Saturday in college basketball and an impressive win over Virginia Tech, Pitt made a huge jump in the NET.
Jeff Capel’s squad started Saturday with a NET ranking of 57 but this morning, the Panthers now find themselves sitting at No. 46, a one day climb of 11 spots. That’s something that doesn’t happen too often.
Here are some other teams that made a noticeable move (good or bad) following Saturday: Kansas (moved up 4 spots), Kentucky (moved up 5 spots), New Mexico (dropped 6 spots), Mississippi State (moved up 8 spots), TCU (moved up 7 spots), Colorado (moved up 6 spots), Washington State (dropped 8 spots), Texas Tech (dropped 8 spots), Villanova (dropped 5 spots), South Carolina (moved up 11 spots) and Utah (dropped 7 spots).
Here is the neighborhood that Pitt finds themselves to start Sunday morning.
NET RANKINGS (February 25)
37 Texas Tech
38 Oklahoma
39 Villanova
40 SMU
41 Texas
42 Nevada
43 Nebraska
44 Cincinnati
45 Drake
46 PITT
47 South Carolina
48 Virginia
49 St. John’s
50 James Madison
51 Princeton
52 Northwestern
53 Utah
54 McNeese
55 Providence
You have to get that net into the 30s to have a realistic chance. Does anyone know pitts net ranking last year when the selection took place?
Interesting, you have to be a NET top 30 team to have a chance to make in into a tournament of 68 teams?….
To figure out Pitt’s NET ranking last year, one would probably have to look it up on the internet. You know, the thing that you posted this comment on? How many times are you Boomers gonna destroy the world economy before you learn how to google something?
Take it easy.
They’re not wrong. No team over 37 hasn’t been included in the tourney. Also you have to account for the conference tourney champs who aren’t in the top 68 who take up all the spots. 30s is safe. 40s not so much.
Oh right, the NCAA tournament is full of NET ranked teams 1-37, then the other 31 teams are imaginary.
(Last year Vermont was NET rank 56 and a 13 seed in a tournament)
You’re an idiot. You really don’t know what you’re talking about.
I tried to read “no team over 37 hasn’t been included in the tourney” but then I had a stroke
You’re clearly a jackass not able to infer meaning from a statement in a message board. Shit might not be perfect but it’s easy to figure out the point they’re making. Look in the mirror. You’re the idiot here. Guessing you come out of most conversations in real life half stroked out.
Take your own advice and google how the tournament works, number of AQs, and the selection process. Keep doubling down, but you’re the idiot.
“Interesting, you have to be a NET top 30 team to have a chance to make in into a tournament of 68 teams?….“
I tried to read this and realized you’re a dipshit.
Vermont is like 100 right now. They’ll get a bid. Or worse Maine will.
Off the xanax today or what kid.
Not the xanax, but I did run out of antihistamines. I’m allergic to dumb comments.
I think you’re taking his comment too literally. He is saying they need to get into the 30s to feel safe with their resume. And that is fair and historically true. Obviously teams that are higher than the 30s make it. But many don’t. The top 68 teams don’t make it and the chances decrease the further away you get from the 30 range. There are 32 automatic bids. There are not nearly 32 AQs that are in the top 68 of the NET rankings. Take your own advice and google it.
I see we’ve gone from “must be 30’s or lower to have a realistic chance of making the playoffs” to “must be 30’s or lower to feel safe.”
Two entirely different things but what are words anyway?
It’s called context you dumbass. Not that a social idiot like yourself would understand non-literal communication. This is how it works… you take from context (e.g. Pitt’s resume, history, chances of getting a bid in the 30s vs high 40s) and you understand the obvious point they are making in a couple lines on a message board. It’s basic conversational skill…
Please, explain more about how non-literal communication is useful in a 100% text-based correspondence.
I did in my comment above. Everyone else understood, from context, the point he was making, except you. It’s not us, it’s you.
Literal: (noun) “of, in, or expressed by a letter or the letters of the alphabet”
As you yell upstairs from your basement… “Mom, where’s the meatloaf?””
60 something.
never got above 67….
Phil …. Don’t be a RaDICK
Maybe reply to my comment rather than starting a new thread. We’re gonna run out of nursing homes for you useless sacks in about 15 years…..
You don’t know much about how the NCAA basketball tournament works. There are conference tournaments and the winners of those tournaments get automatic bids. In most years there are around 30-33 open bids into the tournament come selection Sunday. Then when you figure out that the ACC isn’t a very high thought of conference this year, it makes sense that Pitt needs a net ranking in the 30s to have a realistic shot at getting one of those bids, Every other person on this site knew exactly what I was saying, I guess some people just don’t have a clue.… Read more »
So every conference tournament winner is nowhere close to the NET top 30, which leaves the remaining 36 (there’s 36 open bids) wide open for the best 30 – 40 teams in the league?
Simple google search of NET rankings of projected AQs. Take your own advice. Vermont… 100.
I’ll do it for you:
Merrimack – 202
Norfolk State – 228
S Dakota St – 162
Grambling – 289
E Kentucky – 194
UC Irvine – 80
Yale – 83
High Point – 111
There are more. If you’re in the top 30 NET there’s a great chance you’ll get one of those 36 spots. After that the chances decrease because of the Grambling States, and the Vermonts of the world. PITT at 67ish last year was one of the highest to make it in, in the NET era. and that’s under the 68 team field!
So say you have about 22 conference tournament teams that are outside of the to 68 rankings. 10 are in the top 68. 32 total. That leaves 58 teams out of the top 68 teams that aren’t AQs competing for the remaining 36 spots. Some of those conference tournament champs are in the top 25. Which is why a team is safely in the field if they’re ranked into the 30s. After that teams 40-68 are competing for like 15 spots. And this doesn’t count the bid steals. Like if Syracuse were to win the ACC tournament. Duke, UNC, etc… Read more »
And based on the context of all of this (this being a Pitt site so the person is talking about Pitt. Pitt’s shaky resume. Knowing many teams from 38 up get left out each year. the ACC being rated as a weaker conference, etc) I can infer that the original poster was talking about Pitt needing to get into the 30s of the NET to safely get in, or have a chance. Knowing all of this… the 40s aren’t safe, high 40s especially, and certainly not the 50s or 60s, they’d likely get left out or it would be up… Read more »
All this is too long, I didn’t read it.
This is probably why you have trouble grasping context in a given conversation/article/basketball season.
So…you would say that teams 40 – 68….. have a realistic chance?….
Taking in all the context of the entire situation I would say that Pitt, who is the subject of this whole thing, does not have a realistic chance outside of 40 based on their resume. Why do think bracketologists who spend way more time on this stuff than we do have them 8+ spots out of the field with a 46 NET ranking? Honestly, I think Villanova is pushing their luck with a to 40 ranking right now.
Ok boomer
I’m 38. How old are you? 12?