Indiana & other top teams go down (merged thread)

[HuskyNan]

Creme just posted and then deleted a tweet saying:
'Well really, we had TN properly ranked back in the preseason, so a #4 v #5 match up can really go either way and LSU should not be penalized for being on the losing end. I said all along that TN should be a top 10 team and at worst a 4 seed.'

Another opinion-

 

[MSGRET]

Creme just posted and then deleted a tweet saying:
'Well really, we had TN properly ranked back in the preseason, so a #4 v #5 match up can really go either way and LSU should not be penalized for being on the losing end. I said all along that TN should be a top 10 team and at worst a 4 seed.'

Need to get a shovel to get rid of all the BS Charlie has been spewing this weekend.

 

[darrell]

Creme just posted and then deleted a tweet saying:
'Well really, we had TN properly ranked back in the preseason, so a #4 v #5 match up can really go either way and LSU should not be penalized for being on the losing end. I said all along that TN should be a top 10 team and at worst a 4 seed.'

LSU isn’t the team that they’ve tried convincing us that they are. Losing to Tennessee comes as surprise to no one, really.

Convinced that I, too, could be a “Bracketologist”. He hasn’t a clue what he’s doing.

 

[RedStickHusky]

Angel was ok until she extended her arm

Classic left arm clear out; should get called more than it does.

 

[fomalhaut]

I doubt the committee thinks this way, but in my view you generally shouldn't be a number 1 seed unless you at least make the tournament finals in a strong conference, because it means at least two teams in your conference are playing better than you are (going into the NCAA tournament). Obviously a team as (mostly) dominant as South Carolina is an exception (or powerhouses like Connecticut and Tennessee in previous years): South Carolina could have lost their first SEC tournament game and wouldn't even have been pushed out of the #1 overall seed. And you need to have a strong enough resume up to that point (so forget Tennessee or Washington State).

The candidates still standing for 1 seeds in my opinion should be South Carolina (obvious), Iowa, Virginia Tech, Connecticut, Ohio State (injury issues there too in some of their losses); maybe even Texas, Oklahoma, and UCLA. To be honest the string of upsets opened the door wide open.

 

[Tonyc]

I saw UConn was ranked 9th. Well that all changes now with Caroline and Azzi back and a 30 pt blowout. This UConn team isnt the team that lost 5 games. This is a different team and I think the next 2 games will show that. We must stay healthy. We have the shooters/scorers we were missing, we have the bench we were missing, we will have alot less TO's now and we have the power to score alot of points. It may take a couple of games for our walking wounded to get going. Remember we are playing in CT this weekend and next weekend which will give us time to rest and practice with a full squad. We are gonna be a very tuff team to play against. Really Tuff.

 

[wingsfan055]

As I've said before, UConn is easily the most battle-tested (mentally & physically) for the Tourny. Top teams are losing recently because of injuries, fatigue, and the inability to adjust. UConn has been facing this literally since Day 1. Now that we have our Top 7 back, if UConn wins the BET, they definitely deserve one of the #1 seeds based on SoS. The fact that Charlie cant see this shows how much of an "expert" he is.

 

[RSHERMVIKES]

At this time of the year NO ONE is a favorite! Even SoCar can be vulnerable IMHO!
The team that is healthy and playing hot can go the furthest!
UCONN has to remain healthy and we can go far!
If UCONN wins the Big East Tournament the NCAA HAS TO give them a #1 seed!

 

[Cuango]

Notre Dame and Duke fell with less than 40, is this High School Basketball ???

Duke’s high in their last three games is 41! Something seriously wrong with their offense!

 

[Bone Dog]

Talk of “resumes” is only part of the picture, as we all know. It’s much more what are you capable of right now. The NET has us at 3, but also has LSU as 2. Obviously that won’t stand. If the committee drops LSU, they’ll probably drop us too. It’s only a question of how far.

They’ll want some statistical measure to point to, like SoS, but they’ll mainly be relying on the dreaded eye test. They could decide Indiana Stanford and Utah have better records than us, and maybe even Iowa or tOSU, whoever wins the B10 tournament.

Are we playing better than any of those teams? It’s arguable, and if we sweep the BE tournament it’ll be a much stronger argument. And if Azzi plays even better in the next few games, and Aaliyah and Dorka feast on opposing frontcourts like they did today. That will be hard to ignore.

At the beginning of the season, I thought our healthy squad was likely to make the FF and had a good chance at making the NC game. I’d we have that team again — the one that beat Texas, NC St, Duke, Iowa, we’ll be formidable. The next couple days should tell us if we have that team again.

If that’s who we really are, and the committee can’t help but see it, I think that gets us a 2 seed, not a 1 seed. The temptation will be too strong for them to put SC, IU, the B10 winner and Stanford or Utah on the top line.

 

[Hayven]

What’s the rule regarding seeding and not placing teams from the same conference? Is it the regional?

 

[UcMiami]

What’s the rule regarding seeding and not placing teams from the same conference? Is it the regional?

It is trying to keep conference teams from meeting prior to a regional final. And in terms of top 8 (and top 16) separating them so they would only meet in the FF.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Here's my hot take: WAY too much importance is placed on a few days at the beginning of March. Why does one game take more precedence than a 16-20 game conference schedule? I've never liked how worked up everybody gets over conference tourneys. It's been proven that there is little correlation between how teams do in conference tourneys and how they do in the NCAA Tourney, so there is absolutely no reason why it should be treated as some kind of litmus test.

 

[fomalhaut]

Here's my hot take: WAY too much importance is placed on a few days at the beginning of March. Why does one game take more precedence than a 16-20 game conference schedule? I've never liked how worked up everybody gets over conference tourneys. It's been proven that there is little correlation between how teams do in conference tourneys and how they do in the NCAA Tourney, so there is absolutely no reason why it should be treated as some kind of litmus test.

Then why even have them? And why put winners automatically into the NCAA tournament?

 

[nwhoopfan]

Then why even have them? And why put winners automatically into the NCAA tournament?

Good question. I know there have been coaches in both mens and womens hoops who don't like conference tourneys and would rather do away with them.

But I'm sure they make money for the conferences, and the tv networks, and Vegas has to love having a bunch of people rolling into town since they host at least 4 conference tourneys now. I guess that's the best answer as to why have them, because they generate money (and drama and interest too).

As far as giving the auto bid to the tourney winner rather than the regular season champ, that's a decision the conferences make. For P5 conferences they probably look at it as a way to maybe get one more bid for their conference. For mid majors, maybe they get one more bid, or maybe they risk their best team not getting to go to the Tourney. There are some leagues that are just always gonna be only 1 bid, so you could have a terrible team get hot for 3 days and get into the Dance.

 

[Wbbfan1]

Indiana played a weak schedule.. they're like the LSU of the north central

Big 10 is a tough conference. You can make an argument that Big 10 was the best Women's Conference this year. An argument could be made for the PAC 12 as well. Big 10 and PAC 12 were the best Women's Conferences this year.

 

[Pharos]

The question is Tony...
Do we really play and look like a Final-4 team?
Forget (for a second) about the other guys.

We were certainly better today...
Perhaps by default...Who knows?

Look at the shooting percentages. Number of shots taken pretty good. TOs pretty good. OBs also good

 

[SLY63]

I can't believe I am saying this, but I will give Charlie the benefit of the doubt for now. He still has UConn on the 3 line as the #9 overall seed. But if we march through the BE tourney with a healthy roster of 10, I cannot imagine we would be below #5 overall

 

[broooce]

Good question. I know there have been coaches in both mens and womens hoops who don't like conference tourneys and would rather do away with them.

But I'm sure they make money for the conferences, and the tv networks, and Vegas has to love having a bunch of people rolling into town since they host at least 4 conference tourneys now. I guess that's the best answer as to why have them, because they generate money (and drama and interest too).

As far as giving the auto bid to the tourney winner rather than the regular season champ, that's a decision the conferences make. For P5 conferences they probably look at it as a way to maybe get one more bid for their conference. For mid majors, maybe they get one more bid, or maybe they risk their best team not getting to go to the Tourney. There are some leagues that are just always gonna be only 1 bid, so you could have a terrible team get hot for 3 days and get into the Dance.

I think the Ivy League was one of the last to add a conference tournament, which they did in 2017. Only the top 4 of the 8 teams qualify, so at least the season stands for something. This season the league could send two teams to the NCAA tournament, Columbia and Princeton, which I believe is the first time they will have done that for either women or men (Creme's bracketology). IMO the Ivy tournament adds the same kind of excitement and possibility to teams in the league to make the NCAA tournament and in so doing help with overall league recruiting, quality of teams, competitiveness and ultimately some success in the tournament. Last year Princeton upset Kentucky in the first round and lost to Indiana by only one.

The only thing I don't like is that the Ivies decided on a court rotation system for the tournament, that is, over eight years each school will get to host the tournament. To me that's ridiculous and antithetical to a goal of increasing the league's prominence in either the men's or women's game. Really, what is the benefit of having a tournament in a college gym in Hanover, NH, Ithaca, NY, Princeton, NJ or even Providence, RI when you could be playing in a NYC/Philly/Boston area arena? Or at least have a venue like Mohegan Sun or the XL Center? "A rising tide lifts all boats" and the Ivy League can do better and help themselves to build upon their current success. Especially since it seems that their long-standing policy of not offering athletic scholarships could soon change. Like Stanford, many academically strong young women who also happen to be very good athletes might find the Ivies a compelling place to play and get a degree.

 

[UConnCat]

Creme just posted and then deleted a tweet saying:
'Well really, we had TN properly ranked back in the preseason, so a #4 v #5 match up can really go either way and LSU should not be penalized for being on the losing end. I said all along that TN should be a top 10 team and at worst a 4 seed.'

I would hope he'd delete that. He had Tenn preseason #4, as in a 1 seed, not "at worst a 4 seed." He had LSU as #14 or a 4 seed. His favorite phrase is "I was right all along." Not this time.

 

[mbr33ct]

Big 10 is a tough conference. You can make an argument that Big 10 was the best Women's Conference this year. An argument could be made for the PAC 12 as well. Big 10 and PAC 12 were the best Women's Conferences this year.

I can't make an argument the Big10 conference was the best Women's Conference this year, not by a long shot. By all available rankings (these from WarrenNolan) the Big 10 Conf is #5 in RPI, #5 in NET and #5 in ELO...the lowest of the so called P5 conferences, one notch above the Big East. Unless you also call the Big East a tough conference then I'm with you on the Big 10.

...and agree on the PAC-12 as the #1 Conference.

 

[CTinLA]

Creme just posted and then deleted a tweet saying:
'Well really, we had TN properly ranked back in the preseason, so a #4 v #5 match up can really go either way and LSU should not be penalized for being on the losing end. I said all along that TN should be a top 10 team and at worst a 4 seed.'

Seriously? He’s ignoring the entire regular season and reaching back to preseason rankings to justify this garbage. Unbelievable!

 

[Zarathustra]

Disagree. They’re 7th in SOS while LSU is 82nd, they have 10 ranked wins to LSU’s one. Not even close.

Nice clarification, Much appreciated,

 

[Bone Dog]

The conference tournaments seem a little overblown. I’m not sure they’re really necessary.

But since they all have them, from the point of view of the NCAA tournament, it’s one more bit of info on how teams are playing at the right time of year. February games matter more than January games and January matters more than December, etc. March games have to matter at least as much as February games, especially as the give a sort of forecast of how teams will handle the pressure of single elimination.

 

[Bigboote]

Here's my hot take: WAY too much importance is placed on a few days at the beginning of March. Why does one game take more precedence than a 16-20 game conference schedule? I've never liked how worked up everybody gets over conference tourneys. It's been proven that there is little correlation between how teams do in conference tourneys and how they do in the NCAA Tourney, so there is absolutely no reason why it should be treated as some kind of litmus test.

I'd say maybe a little too much importance is given to the Conference tourneys. (If any importance is given to the NET, then I'd say way too much importance is given to the NET.)

Thing is, I think the panel should give more weight to recent games, the "what have you done for me lately" thing. And the conference tourney is what the teams have done lately. Early exits may reveal some flaws in teams that lose to low-quality opponents, and the later rounds can shed light on how some teams (LSU) play against higher-quality opponents. If Ohio State beats Michigan, Indiana, and Iowa three consecutive nights, I don't care whether it's the tournament or not, that should really polish up their resume. Same thing if Washington State wins out against Utah, Colorado, and UCLA. Virginia Tech, OTOH, will only meet one ranked team in the ACC tourney, so I'm not sure if that's enough to get them to a one seed even winning the tournament.