2022-23 NET/Bracketology Discussion

[scottdude8]

First, an important disclaimer:

In this thread, we will be discussing the NET rankings and projections of the NCAA Tournament field, and speculating about their potential impact on Duke's resume and seeding come March. Many find this a fun topic to debate and discuss. Others find it silly project things so far in advance. (Some fall in both of the previous camps.) Many on this board feel quite strongly that such discussions are unnecessary distractions. Some are quite loud about this latter opinion, but are completely justified in their feelings.

All that said, this is a thread to discuss the NET/Bracketology, not to discuss the value of such discussions. No one is making you read or participate in this thread. Perhaps we can make another thread where we hate on Joe Lunardi and the silliness of the quadrant system, but the (perhaps unfortunate) reality is that they are major parts of the college basketball landscape as it currently stands, so there should certainly be a place on this board to have fun discussing and speculating on these topics.

Second, a reminder about the quadrant system:

The committee splits a team's resume into games falling into four quadrants to facilitate comparison. Games at home against NET 1-30, at a neutral site against NET 1-50, and away against NET 1-75 are "Quadrant 1 (Q1)" games. "Quadrant 2 (Q2)" games are home 31-75, neutral 51-100, and away 76-135. Q3 and Q4 go farther down the rankings.

Generally speaking, a team's Q1 record has been very relevant when it comes to selecting the top seeds in the tournament. Avoiding "bad" losses in Q3 and 4 has been another seemingly important factor. That said, we know the whims of the committee change year to year, so take that all with a grain of salt.

With that out of the way, I started the thread today because the first edition of the NET rankings are out. These should be read with a MAJOR grain of salt, as historically there tend to be major outliers in the NET rankings early on. This year is no exception: while the Top 4 are quite reasonable, No's 5 and 7 (Mississippi State and Sam Houston, respectively) are way off from the consensus. Duke comes in at No. 17, which seems quite reasonable given where we stand in the polls.

Some interesting things to note as it pertains to our resume moving forward (here's our Team Sheet):
-Xavier starts out at No. 48 in the NET, meaning our neutral site win over them just squeaks into Q1 territory. I imagine we'll be rooting fairly hard for Xavier in the Big East.
-Similarly, Ohio State is NET No. 28... our home victory over them will be Q1 if they stay in the Top 30.
-Jacksonville is a nice surprise at No. 103 in the NET, making one of our "cupcake" games a Q3 rather than Q4. Not a big deal by any means, but it does help our SOS. Unfortunately, Oregon State is down at NET #224... since we played them on a neutral site, they'd need to get inside No. 200 for that to move to Q3.
-Both of our losses are firmly in Q1: Purdue is NET No. 3, and Kansas is NET No. 18.
-The ACC is down, but at first glance perhaps not quite as bad as last year. Our ACC schedule currently provides us 5 fairly secure Q1 opportunities: @UVA, @UNC, @Va Tech, @Miami, and @NC State. Our home games against UNC, Va Tech, and Miami have the potential to become Q1 (UNC is No. 39, Va Tech No. 41, Miami No. 47). Road contests at Wake (No. 86) and Clemson (No. 88) also could make it to Q1.
-Iowa is Net No. 20, meaning our game on Tuesday provides the opportunity for a solid Q1 win that should stand up barring a collapse from the Hawkeyes in Big Ten play.

Let the discussion begin!