Might as well weigh in - these are observations in no particular order:
Uconn - no question at #1, but after that I really really have no clue. I agree with the usual suspects being in the mix, but ...
Duke - they always seem to disappoint. On paper they are strong and they usually have strong regular seasons with a few real clunkers thrown in. NCAAs have been a consistent disappointment in that they always lose a round or two before they should.
Maryland - I was actually really impressed with their play last year - I thought they made a commitment to defense and given the losses in their backcourt performed much better than they should have. I think that should help them next year with the players returning from injury.
UNC - lots of new talent, but ... they are going to have serious growing pains and I don't think their coaching is strong enough to build a really good team. They will beat up on weak teams because of talent but will struggle against good teams.
ND - agree that chemistry and coaching are strong points and losing Diggins will be a blow to that - she was much more than her stats in terms of leading the team. They have good talent and Muffet has done a really good job of balanced recruiting over the last 'x' years so that continuity is maintained even with significant graduations. They should be strong, but how strong depends on how well Diggins leadership is passed on to ?
TN - I was really impressed with Graves on team USA - better and tougher player than I had thought (just haven't seen her play enough.) The question mark as always with TN is their guards and their offensive system. I was impressed with Holly's results last year in a very difficult transition. Again, didn't see them play enough to get a feel for the offense - no knock on Pat here, but if Holly has actually installed a system better than toss it at the rim and then rebound like crazy, I think TN could be very strong. But are the guards good enough to execute a disciplined half court offense?
Kentucky - they win based on defense, steals, and fast break - works great against weak teams and undisciplined teams - fails against good passing teams that do not give up the transition baskets. When they have to win in the half court, they don't.
Louisville - great run and they do get some injured players back, but ... Jeff is a very good coach and he overachieves with the talent - he has a huge roster, but few really really good players. Hard to win it all without at least one superstar.
Baylor - love Sims and I think Kim is a good coach, but I think she got too much credit for Griner. It is going to be a tough year with all the losses - will be really surprised, even with a weak schedule and maybe a less strong Big 12 if they get ranked above say 8 and they could drop out of the top 10.
Stanford - they just keep rolling. Tough recent loss, but they have talent and a superstar and a perhaps easier road out west. It remains really tough for west coast teams re scheduling - to play the strength of WCBB they either have long road trips across multiple time zones, or have to convince those strong teams to make the reverse long trip. I really don't understand why they have been unable to raise the level of the PAC the way Uconn was able to spread the wealth in the BE.
Oklahoma - Don't really know how Cole does it year after year - since the Paris sisters she never seems to hit the jackpot in recruiting, but her teams always seem to overachieve - maybe she is a really good coach?
PSU - could be very good - seem to have their act together after years of languishing. Is there enough in the BIG to challenge them?
