Bracketology | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Bracketology

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,376
Reaction Score
54,907
Is Stanford in the discussion/dilemma every year??

The PAC is the weakest its been in the last few years. In 2009 (or 10?), both Cal & Ariz St were very good teams. Last year, UCLA was. This year, not so much.

Plus the Cardinal used to have 1 or 2 other solid non-conference games on their schedule.

This year, their best road win is against Texas. Yawn.

Unless they sweep the PAC, I think there's a good chance they get a 2 seed. (This will also help balance the regions more, otherwise the West likely ends up with the overall #4, #8, #12, and #16.)
 

Phil

Stats Geek
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
4,461
Reaction Score
5,838
The PAC is the weakest its been in the last few years. In 2009 (or 10?), both Cal & Ariz St were very good teams. Last year, UCLA was. This year, not so much.
PAC RPI is better than the ACC and they are closer to third place than they are to sixth. Which doesn't make you wrong, I'd have to check to see where they've been over the last few years.

Edit
They were sixth in 2011, 2010,2009 and 2008, so they are actually stronger this year.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,376
Reaction Score
54,907
PAC RPI is better than the ACC and they are closer to third place than they are to sixth. Which doesn't make you wrong, I'd have to check to see where they've been over the last few years.

Edit
They were sixth in 2011, 2010,2009 and 2008, so they are actually stronger this year.

Overall conference RPI is not the relevant stat here. It's the number of high-quality teams in the league. The bottom of the PAC is better, but there is also no other team in the RPI top 25. Thus no chance for Stan to rack up a quality win.
 

triaddukefan

Tobacco Road Gastronomer
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,858
Reaction Score
60,964
PAC RPI is better than the ACC and they are closer to third place than they are to sixth. Which doesn't make you wrong, I'd have to check to see where they've been over the last few years.

Edit
They were sixth in 2011, 2010,2009 and 2008, so they are actually stronger this year.

Thats disappointing, though I'd figure most anyone would bet on the ACC in a head to head matchup between the two leagues.
 

ochoopsfan

OC Hoops Fan
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
4,744
Reaction Score
19,196
Things are different for Stanford this year and could be the same going forward. With their expanded conference, they play more conference games and fewer out of conference.
That isnt correct. Pac12 plays unbalanced schedule. Everyone doesnt play each other twice. Example USC/UCLA dont go to the two Oregon schools and dont host Colorado or Utah. Pac 12 teams still play 18 conference games

The Pac-12 won't test them, 99% correct, especially with Cal, who were recently hyped to challange them, falling apart this weekend in So Cal. Had USC not gone ice cold for 8 minutes in second half they "could" have beat Stanford. .so the UConn and Tennessee games are the only tough ones for them. For at least the prior 3 years, they were clearly 1-seed worthy. There is some feeling that this Cardinal team is not as good as last year's.I agree So the question is how to handle the weak schedule? Saragin has Stanford at 5 SOS and Maryland at 86. I will be willing to say that even with a so called weak Pac 12, Stanfords SOS will still be way ahead of Maryland. I'd rate them down if they had lost to Tennessee or if Maryland matches their 1-loss record. I think they are the 4th best team, so I expect them to get a 1. If they get a 2, so long as it is in the West, it won't hurt them.

Going back 8-10 years, Stanford had one of the best records most years but exited the tourney earlier than expected. When they got talent like Appel, Pedersen, and the O sisters, that changed. They can now compete with anyone.
 

Phil

Stats Geek
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
4,461
Reaction Score
5,838
Thats disappointing, though I'd figure most anyone would bet on the ACC in a head to head matchup between the two leagues.

I know I would, I was surprised at the numbers.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
365
Reaction Score
732
I like the initial top 16 seeds other than Virginia and Nebraska.

My take is that Maryland is more likely a 3 than a 1. For Maryland to get a 1, they would need a major collapse by one of the top 4 and/or a lot of help from Duke and Miami. My best guess is that Stanford has 1-2 losses going into the NCAAs and Maryland has 3-4.

Not likely, but suppose that UConn or ND loses to the other 3X then loses one more--that could cost them a 1 seed. Most likely, the 1 seeds are the top 4 in the polls now. They really do look like the best 4 teams. Depending on NCAA matchups, I think Baylor, UConn, ND, and Stanford will lose only to each other this year--no team outside this group.

I'm not sure the Big East will get two number one seeds. ND has a pretty tough schedule with most of their games against the top ranked conference foes on the road (RU, Louisville & G'town), plus they have to play TN. If they have to play UConn three times prior to the NCAA's, two of those games will be on UConn's home courts. Most of UConn's tough conference games are at home, but they do have to play Duke at Cameron, @ Louisville and one game @ ND. I think it will come down to the number of losses either of those teams have as compared to Stanford, the ACC champion, or even possibly Ohio State if they keep winning.
 

semper

Paleographer
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
2,223
Reaction Score
1,852
A lot is going to depend on whether the top four seeds loose only to each other, or to someone outside the top 4. I think if ND beat UConn and Uconn beats ND, that it doesn't matter. They are 2 and 3, and in order to drop either of them will have to loose to someone besides the other. What is on the horizon? ND will have to beat Tenn, that's for sure. Besides ND who else do we fear in conference play? The Rug I guess and G-town, but I think we'll beat them and ND probably will too.
 

DaddyChoc

Choc Full of UConn
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
12,407
Reaction Score
18,460
Okay, let me whine for a minute. I'd give a lot to be able to buy tickets to two UConn games, blowout or not, that were within an hour or so of my house. Unfortunately, to get to Bridgeport would take about 2500 miles of travel. Each way. Sigh.
just over an hour for me... so nope Im not going!
 

Ruffian75

Uncle Mo of Posters
Joined
Sep 11, 2011
Messages
235
Reaction Score
76
Here are the sub regional sites...there really is a huge void in Big 12 (10) territory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_NCAA_Women's_Division_I_Basketball_Tournament

Where does Baylor go? Closest to farthest. They could end up in Iowa
College Station? Nope. A & M
Norman? Only if Oklahoma doesn't get in.
Little Rock? If Arkansas is an 8 or 9 or misses the dance
Baton Rouge? If LSU is an 8 or 9
Nashville? If is Vandy is 8 or 9
Tallahassee? If FSU is an 8 or 9 or misses the dance
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,376
Reaction Score
54,907
Here are the sub regional sites...there really is a huge void in Big 12 (10) territory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_NCAA_Women's_Division_I_Basketball_Tournament

Where does Baylor go? Closest to farthest. They could end up in Iowa
College Station? Nope. A & M
Norman? Only if Oklahoma doesn't get in.
Little Rock? If Arkansas is an 8 or 9 or misses the dance
Baton Rouge? If LSU is an 8 or 9
Nashville? If is Vandy is 8 or 9
Tallahassee? If FSU is an 8 or 9 or misses the dance

Univ of Arkansas is not in Little Rock. I bet Baylor goes there.
 

Wbbfan1

And That’s The Way It Is
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
9,163
Reaction Score
17,437
There are enough colleges in the Southern California area that if there was some cooperation amongst them there could be a site that hosts the first two rounds every year. Rotate the site between schools every year. As USC and UCLA improve their women's programs those two schools alone could host a site. Although it would be better if more schools were involved. A regional could be held in the same area every two or three years. Sure seems like that would make sense to me. It would also help grow the game in a huge market. Southern Calif. is already a hot bed of Women's HS Basketball.
 

Ruffian75

Uncle Mo of Posters
Joined
Sep 11, 2011
Messages
235
Reaction Score
76
Univ of Arkansas is not in Little Rock. I bet Baylor goes there.

Just map quested..190 miles from U of A to LR. The host team is Ark at LR. You are probably right

Anyway, if WCBB ever wants to turn a profit on the NCAAT, they need to go back to the top 16 teams hosting sub-regionals. Little Rock will sell 6000 tickets for two sessions. Baylor at home would sell 20,000. In the regionals...Fresno v Palo Alto....6000 v 14,000. It will be all Stanford fans anyway. I think they really jumped the gun when they started with the pre-named sub regional sites? '98 or so?

IMO it is a misuse of Title IX. WCBB is the one sport that could generate a good chunk of money to help subsidize what every school has to spend on women's sports through their tourney, but I am sure the bottom line at the end of every season is a huge loss.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,376
Reaction Score
54,907
There are enough colleges in the Southern California area that if there was some cooperation amongst them there could be a site that hosts the first two rounds every year.

IIRC, every tournament that has been hosted in SoCal - whether the NCAA or the PAC tourney - has done abysmally in attendance.
 

ochoopsfan

OC Hoops Fan
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
4,744
Reaction Score
19,196
There are enough colleges in the Southern California area that if there was some cooperation amongst them there could be a site that hosts the first two rounds every year. Rotate the site between schools every year. As USC and UCLA improve their women's programs those two schools alone could host a site. Although it would be better if more schools were involved. A regional could be held in the same area every two or three years. Sure seems like that would make sense to me. It would also help grow the game in a huge market. Southern Calif. is already a hot bed of Women's HS Basketball.

There are a ton of schools in So Cal but a ton more of apathetic fans. So Cal is a hot bed for players. Attendance for the Pac12 tournament is anemic, and the venue for it, USC/Galen Center is great. So would the remodeled Pauley Pavillion be next year. The only other acceptable college venues for a regional or sub regional would be SD State or USD, possibly LB State. No way could UCI, UCR, CSF, CSN, LMU, Pepperdine, or even as far away as UC Santa Barbara host a regional. Of course bigger venues like Staples, Honda Center, LA Sports Arena, Anaheim Arena, or even the new arena in Ontario could be available, but the cost vs the gate might be out of line. There is a handful of good followers of WBB in So Cal. I would go to the games, but I only fill one seat.
 

MilfordHusky

Voice of Reason
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
37,448
Reaction Score
127,817
A lot is going to depend on whether the top four seeds loose only to each other, or to someone outside the top 4. I think if ND beat UConn and Uconn beats ND, that it doesn't matter. They are 2 and 3, and in order to drop either of them will have to loose to someone besides the other. What is on the horizon? ND will have to beat Tenn, that's for sure. Besides ND who else do we fear in conference play? The Rug I guess and G-town, but I think we'll beat them and ND probably will too.

I agree totally. Even if ND has as many as 3 losses to UConn and 1 to Baylor, I'd say they are the 3rd or 4th best team in the country--unless Duke or Maryland turns it on an runs the table. I expect ND and UConn to split the 3 games. I hope we get the majority, and especially the last one.
 

Wbbfan1

And That’s The Way It Is
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
9,163
Reaction Score
17,437
I agree that's what happened in the past. What I'm counting on is UCLA and USC improve their fan base with their improved women's basketball program. Both programs are on the upswing. I am hoping that UCLA continues to improve even though they lost Nikki Caldwell as their head coach. As both programs improve the fan base should grow along with it.

IIRC, every tournament that has been hosted in SoCal - whether the NCAA or the PAC tourney - has done abysmally in attendance.
 

MilfordHusky

Voice of Reason
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
37,448
Reaction Score
127,817
Thanks for the correction. I need to read more closely. I thought the expanded conference crowded out the OOC teams.

I agree that they do not play a weak OOC schedule--no cupcakes like Savannah State or Charleston--but I think that this year's was weaker than the prior 2 years.

This year, they played UConn, Tennessee, Texas, Gonzaga, Xavier, Princeton, and ODU.

Last year, they played the same, except had Rutgers and DePaul instead of Princeton and ODU.

The year before, they played Rutgers and Duke.

I think the top 4-5 in the OOC schedule was weaker this year than the last 2. Not enough opportunities for good wins.

I still think they will be a 1 seed on merit. They have made the Final 4 for four years in a row and have arguably the nation's best player.
 

Phil

Stats Geek
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
4,461
Reaction Score
5,838
Just map quested..190 miles from U of A to LR. The host team is Ark at LR. You are probably right

That's my guess AR Little Rock is 5-9 and not going. Wonder why they bid?
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,376
Reaction Score
54,907
That's my guess AR Little Rock is 5-9 and not going. Wonder why they bid?

Why did Fairfield bid?

Because they think there's an opportunity to make some $.
 

Ruffian75

Uncle Mo of Posters
Joined
Sep 11, 2011
Messages
235
Reaction Score
76
IIRC, every tournament that has been hosted in SoCal - whether the NCAA or the PAC tourney - has done abysmally in attendance.

I remember one of the LA schools hosting a sub-regional 6 or 7 years ago and the attendance was in the 12 to 1500 range per session.
 

Phil

Stats Geek
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
4,461
Reaction Score
5,838
Fairfield is likely to make some money. AR Little Rock might hit the jackpot with Baylor, but they didn't know that when they bid.
 

Ruffian75

Uncle Mo of Posters
Joined
Sep 11, 2011
Messages
235
Reaction Score
76
That's my guess AR Little Rock is 5-9 and not going. Wonder why they bid?
Mind boggling isn't it? Why not at least give teams with a proven track record regarding attendance with a good chance of being in the dance the sites? Even if Arkansas gets in, they will not draw anyone from 190 miles away. Last year their average attendance was 1886 per game. Texas Tech and New Mexico should be on the sub-regional list every year. They support WCBB even if they don't have a team in the tourney.

Maybe a way to reward the fans and teams is to look at the 16 teams that had the highest attendance from the year before and let them host the sub-regionals. Teams like Louisville, Kentucky and Baylor that have come a long way in a short time should be rewarded with two home games

Tennessee 12,537
Louisville 10,859
Connecticut 9,496
Iowa St. 9,370
Notre Dame 8,553
Baylor 7,933
New Mexico 7,677
Purdue 7,628
Michigan St. 7,388
Texas Tech 7,043
Kentucky 6,364
Texas A&M 6,104
Iowa 5,823
Oklahoma 5,490
Duke 5,216
Maryland 5,161
---------------
17 ...Stanford
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
22,376
Reaction Score
54,907
Fairfield is likely to make some money. AR Little Rock might hit the jackpot with Baylor, but they didn't know that when they bid.

How do you know?
They are a reasonable distance from SEC and BigXII country - I'm sure they figured they would be within range for several teams there. And given Little Rock's absence from the major sports scene, they probably thought they could generate local interest.

I assure you they did not go into it thinking they'd lose money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
59
Guests online
1,558
Total visitors
1,617

Forum statistics

Threads
159,809
Messages
4,206,154
Members
10,075
Latest member
Nomad198


.
Top Bottom