Coaches Agree with Writers Stanford Ranked #1

[Wbbfan1]

WBCA - Link

 

[EricLA]

Congrats to Stanford. No biggie really. Of course I disagree - but that's irrelevant. We will see when UCONN plays Stanford in December...

 

[meyers7]

Dumb.

You don't jump two undefeated team when you knock off a #1 without their AA. Just dumb.

Means the initial poll meant nothing (ok not helping my point there am I?).

Granted I don't care and neither does UCONN, but it just bugs me to see people do dumb things.

 

[Lynx23]

I certainly agree with all of the posters before me. Plus, we annihilated Texas A&M without Bria Hartley. Just like the media, the coaches need to pay more attention. I expect they soon will!

 

[connboy77]

UCONN needs to take care of business on December 29TH and there will be no doubt who is #1.

 

[Drumguy]

The road to the championship goes through UConn. Doesn't amtter what polss say anyway as they are just opinions not reality.

 

[pppggg]

I guess the coaches never heard about letting sleeping dogs as in Huskies lay. While they might not care about ranking, the Huskies will use this as motivation. Nothing sweeter than knocking off #1 on their home court.

 

[Vowelguy]

Dumb.

You don't jump two undefeated team .

It's 2 games in; undefeated doesnt mean much.

Baylor was the clear #1 and NC favorite -- the main debate was whether they could go undefeated again. I for one thought no one even had a shot at beating them except UConn. Thus knocking off such a team is going to get a lot of attention. Had they done it against Sims, there'd be no doubt. But without her, yes, I dont think I'd put Stan as #1.

 

[meyers7]

It's 2 games in; undefeated doesnt mean much.

Means they haven't lost yet. They are doing just what they are expected to do. No reason to think they are worse than the team that jumped them.

The only reason to have them ahead of UCONN is because Hartley is injured now. However, if any voter looked that far into it (which I'm pretty sure none did/would), 1) they would see UCONN is still playing as well as expected without her 2) they would have to look at the Stanford win with Baylor without they're AA (which would diminish the win somewhat).

Dumb. Just dumb. (one of my pet peeves, dumbness)

 

[Vowelguy]

They are doing just what they are expected to do.

Perhaps. Perhaps not.
If Duke had beaten both Presbyterian & Iona in double overtime, I would not say they were "doing just what they are expected to do."

No reason to think they are worse than the team that jumped them.

No reason to think they are better than the team that jumped them.
Unless you're convinced that the pre-season rankings were 100% completely accurate.

Some pollsters (the good ones imho) rank teams freshly each week based on who they think is the best.

 

[chrissaran]

WBCA - Link

The difference between Division One football and Division One basketball is that basketball has a tournament to decide who's champion; whereas, football is a popularity contest where the number one team isn't always the best. The tournament will sort everything out. Is there any doubt that UConn will be a number one seed? There's no doubt in this mind.

 

[easttexastrash]

The fact that TAMU is 0-3 and now ranked 24 is a determining factor for many voters I think. I don't think that the win over the Aggies was considered as impressive as it would have been a couple of years ago. They did not look to be a very good team.

 

[meyers7]

Perhaps. Perhaps not.
If Duke had beaten both Presbyterian & Iona in double overtime, I would not say they were "doing just what they are expected to do."

But they didn't. They won easily, just like they were expected to do. So they are exactly what the voters thought they were. Which was better than Stanford.

Perhaps. Perhaps not.
No reason to think they are better than the team that jumped them.
Unless you're convinced that the pre-season rankings were 100% completely accurate.

Not relevant whether it was accurate or not. Nothing has changed to think Stanford is better than Duke or UCONN. Stanford hasn't improved anymore than Duke or UCONN since the preseason polls.

Some pollsters (the good ones imho) rank teams freshly each week based on who they think is the best.

Again there is no reason to think Stanford has improved or Duke or UCONN have gotten worse such that Stanford is all of a sudden better.

Dumb voters.

 

[easttexastrash]

The issue will soon be settled Dec 29. If UCONN wins by 20+, which i think you will, how far will Stanford drop?

 

[Wonkster]

The fact that TAMU is 0-3 and now ranked 24 is a determining factor for many voters I think. I don't think that the win over the Aggies was considered as impressive as it would have been a couple of years ago. They did not look to be a very good team.

Your argument is rubbish.

A&M has been beaten by three teams, each of whom was ranked higher than them at gametime, EXACTLY what should have happened. They barely lost a road game to #8 Louisville as the final buzzer went off. There is no justification for the voters to downgrade TAMU for losing games to higher ranked teams.

Baylor lost to a lower ranked team. BIG difference.

UConn makes a lot of good teams look "not very good." Getting tromped by UConn is not going to be a rarity this season. Get used to it.

 

[Vowelguy]

Nothing has changed to think Stanford is better than Duke or UCONN. Stanford hasn't improved anymore than Duke or UCONN since the preseason polls.

In your opinion.

Some would say that beating the #1 team shows that they are much better than previously thought.

 

[meyers7]

In your opinion.

Some would say that beating the #1 team shows that they are much better than previously thought.

And under the circumstances, they would be wrong.

Dumb and wrong.

 

[Phil]

Again there is no reason to think Stanford has improved or Duke or UCONN have gotten worse such that Stanford is all of a sudden better.

Dumb voters.

Sorry, but I disagree with the premise. It isn't like Stanford was unranked, won, and got #1 votes. They were already considered one of the best teams in the land. Both UConn and Stanford reached the same level in the tournament last year, with Stanford losing to the National champion, while UConn lost to a team that lost to the National Champion. So why did Stanford get a lower initial ranking than UConn? Almost certainly because Stanford lost a lot in Nneka. It is perfectly reasonable for the voters to think that Stanford deserved a lower ranking than UConn. But, this isn't based on knowing how good the teams are, it is extrapolating based upon the last years teams and guesses about gains and losses. Putting Stanford at 4th isn't "right" in an absolute sense of the word, it was a guess.

Now some data is in. But there's more data on Stanford than UConn. UConn won, but not against top ten teams. Stanford beat the team that some thought might not lose a game this year. It isn't that voters think Stanford got better, it is simply that their initial estimate they might be as "low" as 4th may have been too pessimistic. They are revising their estimate of how good the team is, not necessarily claiming that Stanford got better.
(I now see I missed an intervening post, making the same point.)

 

[Phil]

In your opinion.

Some would say that beating the #1 team shows that they are much better than previously thought.

I hadn't seen this when I wrote my response; obviously, I agree with you.

 

[Icebear]

But the conversation with many sports writers said it was Baylor, UCONN and then separation to the other teams. Thus Stanford made a leap similar to super heroes jumping Duke, the gap and UCONN, as well as, Baylor. Rather odd given all the ink shared preseason on the separation. But expecting sports writers to be rational is expecting too much.

 

[Tonyc]

Good points and arguements on both sides. If UConn was better then Stanford (as of the ranking) before the game and Baylor was without Simms. Then UConn is still better and will be better with Hartley back. Perhaps after this holiday week UConn will be number 1 in the polls. Either way December will be a big month for UConn and Stanford and big for Baylor as they find out when Simms comes back and if she is 100% . Stanford plays Tenn and UConn. UConn plays Purdue Maryland PennState Stanford and Jan 5 ND.

 

[Wonkster]

.
This whole argument is a little off base. Has anyone looked at the point differential between the #1 and #2 positions in these two polls? It's razor thin, much smaller than the point differential between the #2 and #3 slots.

The poll results this week are next to meaningless, just on a mathematical basis alone. It's essentially a tie. All you need is one lazy or underinformed writer/coach to hurriedly send in his vote without due consideration and you have a tiebreaker.

I'd go with Stanford, myself, simply by virtue of their having played and won 5 games. After UConn gets past their tournament, that differential evaporates.

 

[meyers7]

It isn't that voters think Stanford got better, it is simply that their initial estimate they might be as "low" as 4th may have been too pessimistic. They are revising their estimate of how good the team is, not necessarily claiming that Stanford got better.
(I now see I missed an intervening post, making the same point.)

Wrong!!!

They thought UCONN was better than Stanford (same for Duke). Now they think Stanford is better then UCONN and Duke. They would have had to get better to do that or UCONN/Duke have gotten worse. There is no reason to think Stanford could beat UCONN or Duke. UCONN and Duke have done nothing to lower themselves to below Stanford.

IF they had beaten a full strength Baylor, then maybe, possibly Stanford could have moved up more. But they didn't.

Dumb!!! DUMB!!!! Dumb!!!

But then nobody said voters were very bright.

 

[meyers7]

.
This whole argument is a little off base. Has anyone looked at the point differential between the #1 and #2 positions in these two polls? It's razor thin, much smaller than the point differential between the #2 and #3 slots.

The poll results this week are next to meaningless, just on a mathematical basis alone. It's essentially a tie. All you need is one lazy or underinformed writer/coach to hurriedly send in his vote without due consideration and you have a tiebreaker.

Exactly.

And the whole post was good up to the point I copied.