RedlessWardrobe said:

---

I'm impressed by those here who have taken the time to dissect the Net Ranking. So maybe someone can give a rough estimate on this question:

We know there are 31 auto bids to the tournament, and 37 at large bids. We also know that there is a slight fluctuation based on a "longshot" winning a conference tournament that can lead to a team making the big dance that otherwise would not have a chance based on NET, (maybe 1 or 2 per year?) That being said, as a guess, what is the cutoff number of the NET ranking that separates the "in" teams from the "out" teams, that would be a guide for the selection committee. Is it say 48? 52? 55? I know it can vary, but does anybody have an estimate number? Just curious.

---

Probably mid 40s. All those other factors you mention really make it weird.

During an interview a couple years ago with someone on the selection committee, this are some of the highlights that stuck in my mind:

1. Rankings are used by the committee to HELP them with selection and seeding. They are NOT determinative.
2. It helps group and identify the programs that require further discussion and analysis. For example, a team NET ranked 55 gets much more discussion than a team ranked 155.
3. All members agree to use the same criteria beyond rankings in their analysis. Such as performance at end of season vs beginning of season.
4. No single criteria, other than automatic bids are absolute. This was re-inforced and there was alot of humor around how Lunardi and others have turned prediction into a business. The committee is very aware of this and therefore avoid these predictions.
5. They spend time agreeing on how to defend their selection and seeding decisions.
6. The NET formula is intentionally opaque, since programs used the old RPI to 'game the system' which led to unfortunate outcomes.
7. The intention is to revise the NET formula every few years based on actual data (how did teams perform relative to seedings).
8. The committee is very concerned with the influence on gambling during March Madness.

Great reply

But keep in mind that it isn't perfect. There is always an outlier based upon just some strange outcomes on the scheduling gods. Baylor's gaudy NET is a case in point and it will be seen as criminal if a 13-10 got in. Where NET feels like it really kicks in is on seeding - which feels like the last thing they do and which gets into the weirdness of the pods and trying to avoid early conference match ups.

But pretty simple - need to do well this road trip, come back and beat Furd and then reevaluate. One game at a time and remember, this year we are really playing wioth House money.