2025-2026 - NET, Rankings, Polls, Awards

[Section9_RowD]

George Mason on the board with a single 25th place vote

NCAA College Basketball Rankings: AP Top 25 Basketball Poll

The official page for the AP Top 25 men's college basketball poll. Keep up to date and view the latest NCAA men's basketball ranking updates each week for the 2025-26 season.

apnews.com

 

[Spider17]

Here's a breakdown of our quad opportunities both OOC and in A10 play and what I anticipate by end of season.

OOC: I am going to make the following assumptions with OOC. 1) W&M will move down from Q2 once CAA play starts but they will be good enough to remain Q3. 2) I think Belmont will move from Q1 to Q2 by end of season. 3) I think Furman will move to Q3 by end of season. 4) Southern Illinois will be Q3 game

So with the assumptions above and everything else the same, here's the breakdown:

Q1 - None
Q2 - 1 (@ Belmont)
Q3 - 3 (vs. W&M, vs. Southern Illinois, @Elon)
Q4/Non-D1 - 9

A10 play: I'll make 2 assumptions. 1) @ Rhode Island ends up a Q3 game (not Q1 as currently listed) and vs. Dayton will be a Q2 game. Otherwise, I am sure there will be other changes with NET rankings in the end with some teams moving up and others down so hard to account for that. The 2 above are what I am most confident in.

With those assumptions, here's the breakdown below:

Q1 - 3 games
Q2 - 7 games
Q3 - 5 games
Q4 - 3 games

I know that I am preaching to the choir here, but that is why it is so incredibly disappointing that we have such a lackluster schedule. 10 Q1/Q2 games in A10 play is excellent! Other than Fordham and La Salle who are always bad, only Loyola and Saint Joseph's have been a disappointment, maybe Duquesne too. Not only are there likely 10 opportunities for Q1/Q2 but limiting Q4 games is great. I can also see Saint Joe's and Loyola sneaking into Q3 by the end too and maybe Rhode Island as a Q2, but am not entirely sure.

Still, the A10 portion of the schedule gives us opportunities to be an at-large.

Unfortunately, our atrocious OOC with having one of the worst strength of schedule is going to hinder us. What is going to hinder us the most is not the lack of Q1 games, but the 9 (!) Q4/Non-D1 games we have. If we had scheduled even decent mid majors like Belmont and only 1 power conference team, we could be looking at 4 Q1/Q2 opportunities in OOC. Add that with A10 play and a total of 14 Q1/Q2 opportunities will be there for us, which is enough - that if we win most of those games and not lose to any Q4s - would put us in the at-large conversation.

Instead, even if we finish 11-1 in OOC and 15-3 in A10 play (like we did 2 years ago) I don't think we have a strong enough case for an at-large. All we needed was to have even a mediocre OOC and it would've been good enough that we could all have hope for at-large since this year's team does seem to have the talent to win meaningful games.

 

[sman]

Instead, even if we finish 11-1 in OOC and 15-3 in A10 play (like we did 2 years ago) I don't think we have a strong enough case for an at-large.

this is probably true. it's also a pipe dream. we weren't good enough to beat Furman on a neutral court. we're not going 11-1, 15-3.

 

[Spider17]

this is probably true. it's also a pipe dream. we weren't good enough to beat Furman on a neutral court. we're not going 11-1, 15-3.

2 years ago we were 8-5 in OOC — granted against better competition. Still, no one expected us to do as well as we did in A10 play after being picked 11th preseason with a team of new transfers, a year after having a bad season. Lots of similarities to this year’s team.

 

[sman]

I hope you're right. it's early.

our losses in 2023 were @ BC, vs #18 Colorado, @ Wichita St, @ N Iowa, and "neutral" vs Florida. we beat UNLV.
every one of those games is better than anyone we play this year.

we've already lost to Furman and slipped past W&M and Charlotte. if we handle Belmont I'll get back on the "positive train".

 

[*23*]

2 years ago we were 8-5 in OOC — granted against better competition. Still, no one expected us to do as well as we did in A10 play after being picked 11th preseason with a team of new transfers, a year after having a bad season. Lots of similarities to this year’s team.

One key difference is...drumroll....Defense.

That team had Quinn in the middle. I was never super impressed with his foot speed but he was big , smart, and could affect shots. Dji, Bigs, and Tyler Harris were athletic, tough wing defenders. Dlo was good defender and King was savvy.

I think this team has some potential on that side of the ball , but not on that teams level yet.

 

[SFspidur]

is right.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1995926563301589298

 

[sman]

that doesn't fit the narrative.

 

[fan2011]

is right.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1995926563301589298

Kenpom has Walz as 27th in the country in offensive rebounding rate, and 23rd in defensive rebounding rate.

 

[Urmite]

Kenpom has Walz as 27th in the country in offensive rebounding rate, and 23rd in defensive rebounding rate.

We need to find Beagle 20 seconds more per game…
So he will show up…as 4th in OR

 

[*23*]

David Thomas is 80th in the country in 3pt percent, at 50%.

 

[*23*]

Wow, per Kenpom - Argabright is 15th in the country in Foul Drawn per 40 minutes, at 8.4. Pretty impressive. I have noticed with his quickness he takes advantage when someone is out of positition and forces the foul call.

 

[Spiders4ever]

is right.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1995926563301589298

But for how long Jim, how long?

 

[Section9_RowD]

Wow realizing NET changes so much early on didn't expect us to get to 77 after the win. Belmont drops to 68.

 

[97spiderfan]

Wow realizing NET changes so much early on didn't expect us to get to 77 after the win. Belmont drops to 68.

That is an impressive 50 plus point jump. Our next 5 games are against 2 Q3 teams and 3 Q4 teams. IF we were to win all of those games, I think we would roll into the conference with a NET probably in the 60's. Which would make the conference season mighty interesting.

The problem is our schedule leaves us zero room for error, one loss and we probably are back around triple digit terrority. Also William and Mary NET right now is at 50, which is obviously unsustainable but my goodness.

 

[*23*]

Yes, great to see the super NET rating....my fear is that if we somehow game this into an autobid, or on the bubble - wait until the poo poo platter of a schedule next season!

 

[SFspidur]

But for how long Jim, how long?

0 offensive rebounds between the two of them last night.

 

[sman]

77 NET and we haven't knocked ourselves out of the conversation early for a change.
unfortunately, this may be seen as validation of CM's current scheduling philosophy.

 

[*23*]

unfortunately, this may be seen as validation of CM's current scheduling philosophy

This is a fear I have as well.

 

[Spider17]

Yes, great to see the super NET rating....my fear is that if we somehow game this into an autobid, or on the bubble - wait until the poo poo platter of a schedule next season!

77 NET and we haven't knocked ourselves out of the conversation early for a change.
unfortunately, this may be seen as validation of CM's current scheduling philosophy.

I think the opposite potentially. What I can see happening is we do well in A10 with maybe a 13-5 record or so with solid wins and no bad losses, but get left out of at large discussion because of our bad OOC strength of schedule. The A10 has done its part this year so far in terms of setting itself up as a multi bid league:

It’ll be a wake up call that had we scheduled even a halfway decent schedule this year - and good likelihood of winning those games since this team seems legit - we could be talking at large.

If this does in fact happen where we get left out of at large after having good A10 record and Richmond schedules yet another awful OOC next year, that’ll be 3 years in a row and will tell me that Richmond actually doesn’t care about making the NCAAs, we just want to feel good about ourselves with a high winning percentage beating up on bad teams.