I keep up with the NET standings during the season, since that is what the committee uses. As a kid, I paid attention to AP or coaches polls, nowadays it always surprises me when people get a reaction from those polls one way or the other.
Can't argue with looking at NET. I do, too, at some point in the season. But I've been following Pomeroy for many years and like how he does things. To me, NET is basically a less-full-featured copy of Pomeroy. But it does have the important advantage of being used by the committee, as you pointed out. Unsurprisingly, they agree a lot.
Pomeroy is particularly user-friendly early on in that he gives us a measure that matches up pretty well with the quad ratings. We could figure out some of that ourselves, but he's done the work for us.
So, for example, at this too-early stage of the season, we can already see that we will face 6-7 A-rated (~Quad 1) contests before the new year (depending on our late-round foes in Maui). Duke faces 6. Wake 6. NC State 4. Clemson 3. Pitt 2.
I like having the extra data. I like seeing it change as the season plays out. It's part of the fun of being a fan. Other people don't care. That's fine. But why belittle the work product or people who like using it?