Bracketology - week of March 11

[MSGRET]

Not true. Gonzaga will not only be selected, they'll be a 4 or 5 seed. Princeton and UNLV would also be in the tournament even if they'd lost.

"One of the criteria" does not equate to "deciding criterion".

So you are in favor of teams that can't have a winning record in their own conference getting in without winning their tournament. Both Arizona and Miami have losing conference records.

Are you saying a maximum of 2 teams per conference?

There's 32 conferences and maybe half the regular season winners won the tournament so there wouldn't be enough teams to fill the 68 team bracket. But maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

No I believe that the MAX should be no more than 7 from any conference and none with a losing Conference record unless they win the conference tournament.

 

[BRS24]

Ok, so here's a look at the AQ vs regular season champs. Out of 32 leagues, 19 teams won both the RS and conference tourney.

 

[BRS24]

Final bracketology per CC.

Women's Bracketology: First look at 2026 has familiar teams on top line

South Carolina, UConn, UCLA and Texas are the No. 1 seeds in our first projection of the 2026 bracket.

www.espn.com

 

[Plebe]

So you are in favor of teams that can't have a winning record in their own conference getting in without winning their tournament. Both Arizona and Miami have losing conference records.

No I believe that the MAX should be no more than 7 from any conference and none with a losing Conference record unless they win the conference tournament.

I'm not in favor or disfavor per se. I'm just speaking of how the committee tends to see things. Projection and advocacy are two different things.

If more-exclusionary criteria such as what you propose were to be adopted, it would need to be done between seasons and not on the eve of selection.

 

[Scooter]

No Albany for UConn.

 

[Bone Dog]

Late season injuries are never confirmed so the committee can't use them.

I read somewhere that they don’t use injuries to determine who’s in the field — they focus on the entire season as a résumé of work. But they can use them to fine tune the seeding.

I think you must be right especially in cases where the coaches don’t reveal the extent of very late season injuries. But I’m also thinking of a case like Aubrey, who helped us win some OOC games, like the Louisville game, and is no longer available. This is different from the injuries to Azzi Ayanna Caroline or Jana, which were known very early. Data alone doesn’t fully capture the impact of losing Aubrey to the team.

 

[AgStatesman]

To win it all
Jackson St
Syracuse
Ohio St.
Southern Cal
Iowa
South Carolina

 

[maple]

To win it all
Jackson St
Syracuse
Ohio St.
Southern Cal
Iowa
South Carolina

Sure, should be no problem ...

Maybe UConn can get some breaks like in 2013.

 

[MSGRET]

To win it all
Jackson St
Syracuse
Ohio St.
Southern Cal
Iowa
South Carolina

I think it's the easiest bracket that they could wish for. I just feel sorry for all of the fans that bought tickets for Albany.

 

[Centerstream]

Ok, so here's a look at the AQ vs regular season champs. Out of 32 leagues, 19 teams won both the RS and conference tourney.
View attachment 97796

You tricked me...why is the SEC above the line?

But seriously, I really, really appreciate the work that you put into every table you create!

 

[ochoopsfan]

Someone who is happy with a play in game

 

[HoopsGuy09]

I am genuinely pleased with our bracket. I was expecting the post-season to end somewhat early due to running into a post we just couldn’t compete with height wise. However, we avoided Cardoso of South Carolina, Brinks of Stanford, Beers of Oregon State, and Betts of UCLA until at least the F4. Marshall of USC is good — and 6’4 — but the biggest thing I saw derailing a potential run was a height disadvantage. That aside, I’d give our talent a fighting chance head for head against anyone else.

 

[darrell]

 

[HuskyNan]

The bracket is announced. There is no more bracketology