collapse

Resources

2024-2025 SOTG Tally


2024-25 Season SoG Tally
Jones, K.10
Mitchell6
Joplin4
Ross2
Gold1

'23-24 '22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

Big East Standings

Recent Posts

2025-26 Schedule by marqfan22
[Today at 10:17:54 PM]


Marquette NBA Thread by Billy Hoyle
[Today at 09:32:02 PM]


Recruiting as of 5/15/25 by JakeBarnes
[Today at 08:11:07 PM]


More conference realignment talk by DFW HOYA
[July 03, 2025, 07:58:45 PM]


Marquette freshmen at Goolsby's 7/12 by MU Fan in Connecticut
[July 03, 2025, 04:04:32 PM]


EA Sports College Basketball Is Back by Jay Bee
[July 02, 2025, 11:35:01 AM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address. We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or signup NOW!

Next up: A long offseason

Marquette
66
Marquette
Scrimmage
Date/Time: Oct 4, 2025
TV: NA
Schedule for 2024-25
New Mexico
75

brewcity77

The NCAA will reveal their official Top-16 seeds tomorrow. Today, Cracked Sidewalks looks back at the history of the Reveal to see how it lines up with the official NCAA metrics, both RPI and NET, and predicts what we'll see tomorrow. But unlike the Committee, we go all the way to 68 and beyond with a new S-Curve too.

https://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2022/02/predicting-top-16-reveal.html?m=1

Pepe Sylvia

twitterx: @HBOCEOofTits

TallTitan34


brewcity77

Quote from: TallTitan34 on February 18, 2022, 01:19:16 PM
0-6 Q1 Iowa sucks.  Give me Rutgers instead.

They are tough to evaluate. The Q1 record sucks, but leaving a top-25 high major team in the NET is really hard to do.

cheebs09

Quote from: brewcity77 on February 18, 2022, 02:09:35 PM
They are tough to evaluate. The Q1 record sucks, but leaving a top-25 high major team in the NET is really hard to do.

They will be a nice litmus test for MU. I think MU's Q1 wins could get them higher than their NET would indicate. However, if Iowa is fairly high, that might indicate it's not weighted as much as NET by the committee.

brewcity77


We R Final Four

Brew—-If we had a 6-8 point lead against GT throughout the game and in the final 3 minutes extended the lead to win by 13........would our NET have dropped? Im trying to understand the reasoning. Would we have been better served not to have a big lead at all? It seems we are being punished for getting out to such a big lead (only to lose it). I get the Butler loss, but GT is difficult to understand.

brewcity77

Quote from: We R Final Four on February 19, 2022, 08:35:55 AM
Brew—-If we had a 6-8 point lead against GT throughout the game and in the final 3 minutes extended the lead to win by 13........would our NET have dropped? Im trying to understand the reasoning. Would we have been better served not to have a big lead at all? It seems we are being punished for getting out to such a big lead (only to lose it). I get the Butler loss, but GT is difficult to understand.

No. Final efficiency margin is all it measures. I've heard a proposal that game control should be the primary foundation of the NCAA metric, but as it stands, NET is what we have.

The reason I'm disappointed here is because of what holding the lead like we did in DC would've done. We were on track to improve with the 26-point lead, by a roughly equivalent margin to what we ultimately lost.

PGsHeroes32

Quote from: brewcity77 on February 19, 2022, 09:09:25 AM
No. Final efficiency margin is all it measures. I've heard a proposal that game control should be the primary foundation of the NCAA metric, but as it stands, NET is what we have.

The reason I'm disappointed here is because of what holding the lead like we did in DC would've done. We were on track to improve with the 26-point lead, by a roughly equivalent margin to what we ultimately lost.

Yeah it was rough.

Hopefully we find a way to win out the last 4 to make up for it. I'd imagine if we were to win all 4 at least one of those games would have us massively exceeding efficiency margins.

But it does stink. Shaka has done great this year at managing late game blowouts(whether up or down) to help efficiency. This one got away. We were on track to win that game by 30+.
Lazar picking up where the BIG 3 left off....


We R Final Four

Quote from: brewcity77 on February 19, 2022, 09:09:25 AM
No. Final efficiency margin is all it measures. I've heard a proposal that game control should be the primary foundation of the NCAA metric, but as it stands, NET is what we have.

The reason I'm disappointed here is because of what holding the lead like we did in DC would've done. We were on track to improve with the 26-point lead, by a roughly equivalent margin to what we ultimately lost.
Gotcha—its the final score relative to pre game prediction.
However, this team has been both up huge and down huge throughout the season.
In a lot of those games teams make a run....including our own. Because we were up 26 points early in the second half doesn't necessarily mean a 30 point win........regardless of personnel.

SaveOD238

While we didn't appear in the top 16 reveal, the reveal did show that Marquette will be a tough team to seed this year.  If we end up on the 5 or 6 line the committee might have trouble placing us by virtue of us having played five of the eight 3 and 4 seeds.  Only Texas, Texas Tech, and Tennessee are available as round of 32 matchups.

Prediction: we either get the Texas-Marquette Shaka battle or get bumped to a 7.

Previous topic - Next topic