*2019-20 other games of interest*

[06panther10]

MSU loses at home to Little Rock on opening night. Yikes...

[BCPanther]

The Bradley loss to St Joe's isn't exactly great either...

[BCPanther]

Grand Canyon got beat by DII Davenport 82-73 last night. Yikes.

[DownGoesKansas]

Grand Canyon got beat by DII Davenport 82-73 last night. Yikes.

A loss that won't impact our RPI! Great news!

[sivert]

A loss that won't impact our RPI! Great news!

Do we know for sure that D-2 games don't get figured into NET?

With Google Analytics AI, sometimes we legitimately don't know how the computer calculates what it knows.

For instance, a Google computer has learned to differentiate male and female retinas. And we don't know what it is seeing that tells us gender from retina photos.

[clenz]

Do we know for sure that D-2 games don't get figured into NET?

With Google Analytics AI, sometimes we legitimately don't know how the computer calculates what it knows.

For instance, a Google computer has learned to differentiate male and female retinas. And we don't know what it is seeing that tells us gender from retina photos.

Unless they build a standard "non D1 loss" multiplier I'd put a ton of money it doesn't.

Why? Because you'd need to build every D2 into the system to account for how much that game should matter/impact the rank. On top of that should a D2 play a D3 or NAIA you'd need to build the NAIA and D3 into the system as well.

Hell, an NAIA beat Hampton last night, so the NAIA would have to be built in as well.

That's simply far more effort that is worth, especially for the selection committee. They are far better off making sure it's a highlighted note on the team sheet is far more useful. Afterall, a loss to a sub D1 is bad but is that loss in November the first game of the season still meaningful in March?

[sivert]

...That's simply far more effort that is worth, especially for the selection committee. ...

Normally, yes, but the data for D2 and D3 games are available from the NCAA. So while it would take people a LOT of effort, it would take the Google computers almost no time to include all of it.

I have been suspicious that the obscurity in the description of what is in the NET was little more than, "Trust us, the P5 teams are the best." But the more I learn about how AI works, I am more leaning towards suspecting that the implementers and coders simply don't know what is in it.

[clenz]

Normally, yes, but the data for D2 and D3 games are available from the NCAA. So while it would take people a LOT of effort, it would take the Google computers almost no time to include all of it.

I have been suspicious that the obscurity in the description of what is in the NET was little more than, "Trust us, the P5 teams are the best." But the more I learn about how AI works, I am more leaning towards suspecting that the implementers and coders simply don't know what is in it.

Sure the computer does the work once everything is coded in and built

You think it's worth the effort to build/code another 1,0005 schools (D2, D3, NAIA 1&2) for the .0001% of the time a loss happens to a sub D1 in a regular season game?

[sivert]

"Is it worth it?" isn't really a relevant question. If the data is available to the AI software, then it decides what data is helpful. And it will do it without regard to effort or difficulty.

[clenz]

"Is it worth it?" isn't really a relevant question. If the data is available to the AI software, then it decides what data is helpful. And it will do it without regard to effort or difficulty.

Call the committee and volunteer your time to program 1000 schools in then....for that .0001% of the time it happens.

Honestly, .0001 might actually be high.

Last night there was 150 games. 2 of them resulted in a sub D1 win - that's .01%

Over the course of an entire OOC schedule which involves something like 3,500 OOC games, even if we keep the .01 as the mark that it happens at that is 35 games impacted. The reality is we might...maybe...maybe...get 10 total, which is .002% of games.

So no, it's not worth the time it takes to code them in.

[sevelev711]

Last night there was 150 games. 2 of them resulted in a sub D1 win - that's .01%

Quick correction, it's 1.3%, not 0.01%. 2/150 is 0.013. 0.01% would be 1.5/15000. Following your extrapolation we get 0.2%, which while seemingly insignificant, is not insignificant enough that it should be thrown away, imo. That being said, I agree they're probably not currently factoring that in.

Won't matter too much because if GCU is getting beat by D2 schools, they're going to drop to plenty of D1 schools as well.

[Gboom23]

If you lose a game to a non-D1, you have 0.00000000000000000000001% chance of being relevant on Selection Sunday. That's why it isn't worth it.

[sevelev711]

Nice little comeback from ISUr to avoid losing to Belmont at home, in the only MVC game of the night. "Mixed" results so far from the MVC, but if this game was a loss it would certainly be "bad" results, so good on 'em.

[sivert]

Redbirds got a nice win over Belmont tonight.

[PantherAlum09]

Redbirds got a nice win over Belmont tonight.

That was a quality win for Illinois St. As was the win for Valpo over Toledo. I truthfully don't even think Little Rock beating Missouri St. is that huge of an upset. Missouri St. was crowned before a good chunk of their team has even played together. They will look a lot different by the end of the year.