Here is the part that baffles me:
Iowa is ranked #22, we are ranked #27. That includes all games played last night.
I know not all these stats are relevant, but geez:
- We are 15-5, they are 14-6
- We play in the higher rated conference by everyone who does such ratings
- Schedule strength is extremely comparable (we are 79, they are 69)
- We have 6 quad 1 wins (6-4) - tied for MOST IN THE COUNTRY. They have ZERO (0-5)
- They have more pattycake wins (quad 3 and quad 4) at 10 then we do (8)
- We pummeled them on the court by 20 points
How does this algorithm that the NET uses possibly have them ranked 5 spots ahead of us??? Does it somehow get its starting point from last year? That's the only thing I can think of.
| 22 | 20 | Iowa | Big Ten | 14-6 | 2-4 | 1-0 | 11-2 | 0-5 | 4-1 | 3-0 | 7-0 |
| 23 | 29 | Saint Mary's (CA) | WCC | 15-4 | 4-2 | 2-2 | 9-0 | 2-4 | 3-0 | 3-0 | 7-0 |
| 24 | 24 | Alabama | SEC | 13-7 | 1-4 | 3-2 | 9-1 | 5-4 | 2-1 | 6-2 | 0-0 |
| 25 | 26 | Colorado St. | Mountain West | 15-1 | 2-1 | 4-0 | 9-0 | 2-1 | 2-0 | 4-0 | 7-0 |
| 26 | 25 | Loyola Chicago | MVC | 15-3 | 5-0 | 2-2 | 8-1 | 1-2 | 2-1 | 5-0 | 7-0 |
| 27 | 27 | Iowa St. | Big 12 | 15-5 | 2-3 | 2-0 | 11-2 | 6-4 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 8-0 |
Iowa is ranked #22, we are ranked #27. That includes all games played last night.
I know not all these stats are relevant, but geez:
- We are 15-5, they are 14-6
- We play in the higher rated conference by everyone who does such ratings
- Schedule strength is extremely comparable (we are 79, they are 69)
- We have 6 quad 1 wins (6-4) - tied for MOST IN THE COUNTRY. They have ZERO (0-5)
- They have more pattycake wins (quad 3 and quad 4) at 10 then we do (8)
- We pummeled them on the court by 20 points
How does this algorithm that the NET uses possibly have them ranked 5 spots ahead of us??? Does it somehow get its starting point from last year? That's the only thing I can think of.
Last edited:
