Updated NET Rankings

[Rocky Style]

4 minutes ago, USFBulls12 said:

This year's team, on the court in matchup vs 2012's NCAA tournament team --> this year's team is better.

I remember that team being more of defensive team.  But I like defense.  

Raining 3s and jumpers is sure fun though.

Edited March 6 by Rocky Style

[flsportsfan83]

7 minutes ago, USFBulls12 said:

Take out the computer metrics for a second. This year's team, on the court in matchup vs 2012's NCAA tournament team --> this year's team is better. We got in the tournament after a mediocre/ okayish Big East season (amazing season for us) during 2012 because we were in the Big East still and presumably had better computer metrics because of that. But in a game on the court, this team, regardless of who our schedule forced us to play this season, is better and deserves to be playing in the tournament.

that 2012 team was better imo. They had much more impressive wins. Including a real good Louisville team. 

[GoBulls84]

39 minutes ago, USFBulls12 said:

Take out the computer metrics for a second. This year's team, on the court in matchup vs 2012's NCAA tournament team --> this year's team is better. We got in the tournament after a mediocre/ okayish Big East season (amazing season for us) during 2012 because we were in the Big East still and presumably had better computer metrics because of that. But in a game on the court, this team, regardless of who our schedule forced us to play this season, is better and deserves to be playing in the tournament.

That 2012 team did better than "mediocre/okayish" in the Big East. We finished 12-6 in conference play and in a 3-way tie for 3rd place in a league that put 9 teams in the tournament. But as someone else said, that team's mindset was wholly different from this year's. It wasn't as explosive offensively, but they had a way of grinding other teams' offense to a halt. It would be interesting to watch for sure.

[CousinRicky]

1 hour ago, USFBulls12 said:

The people who matter at the NCAA never said this. Some guy on X said this. Also, Joe Lunardi isn't the NCAA tournament committee who decides either. Don't get yourself all up in a tizzy over talking heads, it's all opinions and speculation.

Can't help but compare him to Mel Kiper who is wrong 90% of the time with draft picks.

[Leviathan]

7 hours ago, USFBulls12 said:

The people who matter at the NCAA never said this. Some guy on X said this. Also, Joe Lunardi isn't the NCAA tournament committee who decides either. Don't get yourself all up in a tizzy over talking heads, it's all opinions and speculation.

The problem is that, as far as I know, none of the experts are saying we are likely to get an at-large. Also, you really think the selection committee will have that much of a different opinion than the experts? They are all looking at the same metrics. Unless USF can move into the top-60s in NET it’s not looking good for an at-large. 

Edited March 7 by Leviathan

[USFBulls12]

7 hours ago, GoBulls84 said:

That 2012 team did better than "mediocre/okayish" in the Big East. We finished 12-6 in conference play and in a 3-way tie for 3rd place in a league that put 9 teams in the tournament. But as someone else said, that team's mindset was wholly different from this year's. It wasn't as explosive offensively, but they had a way of grinding other teams' offense to a halt. It would be interesting to watch for sure.

12-6 in conference play, sure, but lost FOURTEEN games, we were only 8 games over .500 that season. Additionally, Big East basketball at that time was like the SEC/ ACC/ Big Ten of football, it was expected that they put in a lot of teams because those were some of THE teams and it was one of THE premier conferences. We had no business in that conference for basketball.
 

8 hours ago, flsportsfan83 said:

that 2012 team was better imo. They had much more impressive wins. Including a real good Louisville team. 

Yes, they had more "impressive wins" because they had the opportunity to have those wins as a member of the Big East. But if you look back closer at the matchups and results, we fed off having one of the weaker conference schedules and beating up on the Big East teams who were having a down season or were traditionally weak. We didn't beat any ranked OOC teams but did get hot toward the end of the season against Louisville and Cincinnati. We scored less than 60 points in 20 of 36 games (55.6%).

7 Games vs Ranked Teams:
#15 Kansas (L), #9 UCONN (L), #24 Seton Hall (W), #17 Marquette (L), #9 Georgetown (L), #2 Syracuse (L), #19 Louisville (W)

6 Losses by 10+ Points:
-> By 23 pts at VCU (we only scored 46 pts)
-> By 28 pts at #15 Kansas (we only scored 42 pts)
-> By 12 pts at Auburn (we only scored 40 pts)
-> By 11 pts at Notre Dame (only scored 49 pts)
-> By 20 pts at #17 Marquette (only scored 47 pts)
-> By 30 pts at #9 Georgetown (only scored 45 pts)

Our 12 Conference Wins:
1. Rutgers (6-12, 14-18, .438) *Losing Record*
2. at Villanova (5-13, 13-19, .406) *Losing Record*
3. #24 Seton Hall (8-10, 21-13, .618) *Good Win*
4. St. John's (6-12, 13-19, .406) *Losing Record*
5. at DePaul (3-15, 12-19, .387) *Losing Record*
6. Providence (4-14, 15-17, .469) *Losing Record*
7. Pittsburgh (5-13, 22-17, .564) *Okay Win*
8. at Providence (4-14, 15-17, .469) *Losing Record*
9. Villanova (5-13, 13-19, .406) *Losing Record*
10. at Pittsburgh (5-13, 22-17, .564) *Okay Win*
11. Cincinnati (12-6, 26-11, .703) *GREAT WIN*
12. at Louisville (30-10, 10-8) *GREAT WIN*

-- 7 out of 12 conference wins came against teams who finished with losing records and were basement dwellers in the conference standings that season.

-- We also took down a Pittsburgh team twice that was not good that season. We matched up well against them and their style of play. This isn't a great win as they finished 5-13 in conference and near the bottom of the standings.

-- 1 of our other wins came against #24 Seton Hall (SH ranked at game time), which was a home game. They finished under .500 in conference but did beat up on OOC teams and finished 21-13 so I'll categorize that as a good win --> I didn't evaluate the strength of their OOC wins, maybe good wins, maybe cupcakes.

Our only great wins came at the end of the season in back to back games vs. Cincy at home and then Louisville on the road.

We went on to beat a bad Villanova team for a 3rd time in the conference tournament but then lost to #23 Notre Dame for the 2nd time this season by 4 pts in OT (lost by 11 in the first matchup).

* We were fortunate that season to be a member of the Big East power conference, have double matchups against bottom feeders Pittsburgh, Villanova, and Providence, got to avoid double matchups against Syracuse, Louisville, Marquette, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Georgetown, West Virginia, and UCONN. We played more games against the weaker part of the conference but took care of business in those games. Our "NET" or "RPI" was likely high that season for having been a member of the Big East conference but in all honesty, we kind of squeaked out our place in the tournament because of circumstance, not because we were a great team. So to me, I'd say we were "okayish". If we had a tougher OOC schedule and a tough draw in our conference double matchups, that season goes a much different route. Remove 1 win from the games vs Pitt, Villanova, and Providence and assign us an extra loss for having played Syracuse, Marquette, and Georgetown a second time and suddenly we're middle of the pack at 9-9 in conference. We lucked into that scheduling draw.

 

Edited March 7 by USFBulls12

[USFBulls12]

2012 Quad Matchups vs. 2024 Quad Matchups

Quad 1-A
2012: 1-5 (Opportunity due to strength of conference)
2024: 0-0 (No opportunity due to weakness of conference)

Quad 1
2012: 2-9 (Opportunity, but lost 9 of them)
2024: 1-0 (No opportunity because of conference strength)

Quad 2
2012: 4-1
2024: 5-3 

Quad 3
2012: 9-3
2024: 8-0

Quad 4
2012: 4-0
2024: 9-2 (2 bad losses early season)


Net Ranking
2012: 52
2024: 74 (as of 3/6/24)

ELO Ranking
2012: 46
2024: 25

[Bull Matrix]

8 hours ago, flsportsfan83 said:

that 2012 team was better imo. They had much more impressive wins. Including a real good Louisville team. 

I won’t be shocked to see USF make it to the ELITE 8. Then USF becomes truly ELITE!!

[206BULL]

8 hours ago, GoBulls84 said:

That 2012 team did better than "mediocre/okayish" in the Big East. We finished 12-6 in conference play and in a 3-way tie for 3rd place in a league that put 9 teams in the tournament. But as someone else said, that team's mindset was wholly different from this year's. It wasn't as explosive offensively, but they had a way of grinding other teams' offense to a halt. It would be interesting to watch for sure.

It sure wasn’t pretty. More like a trip to the dentist.

Edited March 7 by 206BULL

[USFBulls12]

9 minutes ago, 206BULL said:

It sure wasn’t pretty. More like a trip to the dentist.

"Like having a root canal", as Coach Rick Pitino once said.