Feb 28 Committee Rankings

[slepers]

The eighth seed will put them against SC anyways, they need to be 7 at least.

 

[southie]

I'm skeptical a team is going to fall 3 spots just because it lost to a top 5 team, considering it is 1 of 29 games.

Considering Iowa State now has 4 losses to Texas by 18 and 25 points, and to Baylor by 26 and 20+ points, the likelihood they beat both those teams on consecutive days in the Big 12 tourney in Kansas City in a couple of weeks is slim (unless they get OU in the semi-finals instead of Texas).

So, I can see UConn moving up ahead of ISU if the above plays out.

 

[triaddukefan]

View attachment 73876

I'm ready for UCONN to come to Greensboro. I just have to wash it.

 

[SECbbfan24]

I saw Baylor v. Michigan at Mohegan Sun and came away unimpressed with both. Baylor looks much better tonight. I haven't seen Iowa State before tonight, and they sure don't look like a 2 seed.

Baylor was always a pretty strong team coming into this year, granted the depth is extremely thin which leaves not much room for error but its a talented, senior heavy team led by Smith. Kim gave Baylor a nice little present before leaving adding Jordan Lewis before taking the LSU job. They haven't played to their capabilities until recently though

 

[msf22b]

Has anyone considered that the current disposition
is not an anti-UConn bias at all...
but one aimed at South Carolina

 

[southie]

I will say, seeing your Longhorns paired with us in Spokane at the moment was my biggest concern. Never fun having to match up with you guys.

I'd rather not have to try and beat Stanford a second time this season. While we've done well against the Cardinal in regular season games, not so much in the post-season.

 

[jchusky]

Considering Iowa State now has 4 losses to Texas by 18 and 25 points, and to Baylor by 26 and 20+ points, the likelihood they beat both those teams on consecutive days in the Big 12 tourney in Kansas City in a couple of weeks is slim (unless they get OU in the semi-finals instead of Texas).

So, I can see UConn moving up ahead of ISU if the above plays out.

from the men's standpoint I'm told the losses don't matter and how by how much doesn't matter either. Quad 1 wins are the most important factor for the committee, that's why Uconn is where they are. Their best quad 1 win is Tenn. Had they won vs Louisville or at Oregon or even Gtech they would be a 2 seed, but when 4 of your 5 toughest matchups you lose they won't get a pass.

 

[GoCardinal]

I'd rather not have to try and beat Stanford a second time this season. While we've done well against the Cardinal in regular season games, not so much in the post-season.

I think what worries me most is the way y’all just get after it defensively. All I can think of is the way y’all shut down Maryland’s high powered offense last year and only allowed us to score 56 this year. I do think we have figured a lot of things out since then, but still Texas when everyone is locked in defensively is just so tough.

 

[DEpup]

Not only is UConn a #3 seed (the top #3 seed, it should be noted), but the committee agreed with Charlie Creme that it should be in Greensboro rather than Bridgeport.

I still think that will change in the final seedings unless UConn should lose in the Big East tournament (quite unlikely). UConn isn't far away from a #2 seed, and certainly by the recent eye test, it looks better than current #2 seeds Michigan and Iowa State (at least).

I agree. I think they are just setting it up for UConn to win itself to a 2 seed by pulverizing BE opponents....

 

[LwrcasefaN]

These seedings aren't going to hold. Some of these teams are clearly headed in the opposite direction.

 

[darkstar1]

UCONN will end up being a 2 seed. Iowa St getting embarrassed at home right now, down near 20 points to Baylor. They will drop.

Crème says no.

 

[MilfordHusky]

I know these are subject to change, but I don’t see Louisville surviving Iowa and Baylor.

 

[CTGirl15]

I can only imagine how unhappy South Carolina will be if they have to face a healthy, full strength UConn in the EE to get to the Final Four after they only had 1 loss all year.

And after watching games this weekend and today, neither Iowa State nor Michigan look like 2 seeds to me. I still think its possible UConn ends up in Bridgeport, either as the 2 or 3 seed, depending on how the other conference tournaments shake out. All UConn can do at this point is take care of business and see what happens elsewhere.

If I could pick one matchup for the committee to try and set up in the Sweet Sixteen or Elite Eight, I would LOVE Baylor vs. LSU as the 2/3 in one region (or 1 vs 2). Seem unlikely with this reveal, but that would be some game.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Crème says no.

Actually, Charlie says not quite. He says Baylor inches up, closing the gap against Louisville. He says Iowa State is still a 2, but vulnerable. He said an impressive BET could vault the Huskies.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

The eighth seed will put them against SC anyways, they need to be 7 at least.

Which puts us in Spokane against Stanford.

 

[hoophuskee]

I am stunned how Charlie could with a straight face not have UCONN jump Iowa State. I think it laughable to have Iowa State ahead of UCONN, and to have UCONN and SC in same region. . . But whatever. SC is getting burned if this happens regardless of future outcome.

 

[bballnut90]

Whoever gets Baylor or UCONN as their 2 seed is in for a very tough road to the Final Four. After a slew of injuries, UCONN finally has everyone healthy just in time for the tournament, and Baylor is peaking at the right time after a tough middle stretch.

 

[stamfordhusky]

Crème says no.

Crime has been wrong many times over the years.

 

[Vowelguy]

I am stunned how Charlie could with a straight face not have UCONN jump Iowa State. I e.

Charlie does not do the committee bracket.

 

[Plebe]

I am stunned how Charlie could with a straight face not have UCONN jump Iowa State. I think it laughable to have Iowa State ahead of UCONN, and to have UCONN and SC in same region. . . But whatever. SC is getting burned if this happens regardless of future outcome.

There's a tendency to overreact to the latest result. This game was only about 3% of the season. Yes it was a blowout, but it wasn't like they lost to a bad team. Iowa State isn't going to drop 3 spots just based on this one game.

 

[STLCardinal]

I am stunned how Charlie could with a straight face not have UCONN jump Iowa State. I think it laughable to have Iowa State ahead of UCONN, and to have UCONN and SC in same region. . . But whatever. SC is getting burned if this happens regardless of future outcome.

I have always enjoyed watching Iowa St play, even though I am not a fan of the dribbling, but I have never seen them as a No. 2 seed or even a Top 10 team. Not even remotely. So, for me, to have them where they are, even before tonight, brings questions to the committee's credibility or at the very least its method. All you have to do is watch them play and you realize that they don't match up well with other teams they are ranked ahead of. Any agressive defense is going to give them problems. I don't care how you spell it, write it or number it, you have to use some eyeball judgment to be fair in the seeding. And stop already with this rule about not putting teams from the same conference in the same regional. A team plays all year to get the best shot they can and then they get a bad draw because the committee doesn't want to match up two teams from the same conference? Bull nettle. Rank 'em and let the chips fall!

 

[CajunHusky]

1. So Carolina
2. Stanford
3. NC St
4. Louisville
5. Baylor
6. Iowa St
7. LSU
8. Michigan
9. UConn
   
   
10. Texas
11. Arizona
12. Maryland
13. Tenn
14. Iowa
15. Indiana
16. Okla

3 SEC, 2 PAC12, 4 Big 12, 1 Big East, 4 Big 10, 2 ACC = 16

10 of the teams above will lose a game in the conference tournaments.

There will be room for UConn to move up in the seeds.

 

[Jc718]

Really wish I knew anything about seeding and rankings and math so I could understand this thread. I just watch UConn play basketball. How a bracket is made I have no idea

 

[Alydar]

What I find interesting on that list, of the top 15 ranked NET teams, only #1 South Carolina and #15 LSU are ranked. Considering Charlie has 9 teams from the SEC on the brackets I would have expected a couple more SEC teams on that list.

Exactly. SCar is the top, easily, but it looks like only 2 SEC teams will host the 1st 2 rounds. In fact the SEC hasn't been this top heavy in a long time.

The SC specifically states that the NET is their analytic choice for seeding. There are other factors but the NET supply's the framework. The NET has UConn at 5, the best of the 2 seeds. If that holds it gives the committee a perfectly plausible reason to put them in Bridgeport. Or they could make them a 3 and send them to Wichita. Either way they get an AAC team in the E8. Whatever path they get is OK if they are healthy.

 

[EricLA]

I am stunned how Charlie could with a straight face not have UCONN jump Iowa State. I think it laughable to have Iowa State ahead of UCONN, and to have UCONN and SC in same region. . . But whatever. SC is getting burned if this happens regardless of future outcome.

I guess my question to the committee is "where is the logic"?

Earlier in the season, SC lost to an unranked Missouri team who was playing without their best player. Normally that would mean the #1 team automatically drops out of the top spot.

Instead, the voters used logic saying (essentially) that the 2 teams behind SC had more losses, one of them (NC State) had already lost to SC, so "logic" dictated that SC remain #1 in spite of the bad (at that time) loss.

I've also seen, moreso on the men's side, that teams losing a star player (or key player) just before the selection process, will often drop at least 1 spot in the seedings in spite of their body of work during the rest of the season. The "logic" behind this is even the team in question may be a "__" seed, losing a key player severely impacts the strength of the team for the NCAA tourney, and therefore merited a drop in seeding.

So UCONN is FINALLY 100% healthy. Paige has only been back 2 games. The team is still getting acclimated to having Paige back and she's not played more than 15 minutes in a game yet, but has shown flashes of being ready to be one of the best players in the country again.

So my question - where is the logic? UCONN has been building and rolling. Sure 2 blowouts against middle to lower Big East teams do not merit much in the way of changes, but we only beat PC by 8 a bit ago still missing players. This weekend we blew them out by 50. Earlier in the season, missing players, we only beat SJU by 18. This weekend we beat them by 50.

Earlier in the season we beat Marquette (missing players) by 14 (that game it was ONO, Ducharme and Bueckers). In the rematch, even without Paige, we slaughtered them by 31.

I obviously don't understand the "net" - how they compile it, etc. I know they use it when deciding on seeding, but I don't see any logic being applied. This seems to be one of those seasons where UCONN has WAY improved in the last 2 weeks due to getting a full healthy team back (sans Griffin).

Every loss we had (except SC) was with a depleted team missing key players. Every close game was the same. Even the loss to SC - while not "missing" players, we did not know it at the time, but both Azzi and Nika were injured. Now we are fully back. Maybe a romp thru the BET will change some minds, but either way, I'm disappointed there seems to be no logic applied.