Can't get too excited about Charlie's brackets...they don't match the Committee that often, and there is just too many more games to play.Charlie's latest has UConn in Albany with Syr, SC, ORST, and ND... Wow
Charlie's latest has UConn in Albany with Syr, SC, ORST, and ND... Wow
He's just putting what many here (I think) believe is cr*p just so he creates a discussion and gets his paycheck.
Look at it this way, if his brackets matched the Committee brackets exactly, then the Committee would become unnecessary
I watched a presser where Geno said there were teams that if they played their A game and UConn plays their A game there is no way UConn wins. It is a matchup dilemma for all the teams, some team you just do not match well against. So, IMHO, it does matter what teams are in you regions.Bottom line, it will be what it will be. Geno has said numerous times things along the line of "It doesn't matter who we play in March/April. You still have to beat 6 really good teams to win the NC"...
Also, ND will likely play L'ville in the ACC tourney. If ND wins, it could push them to a 1 seed and drop L'ville to a 2 seed. Honestly, ND is the team I'd least like to face of the possible 2 seeds, even tho we beat them at ND earlier in the season.
IMHO Baylor, Oregon, UCONN and ND have the most complete and talented rosters in the country. But give Walz credit for doing what he's done with L'ville, who lacks the sheer volume of AA's that UCONN, Baylor and ND have on their roster.
Same goes for Graves at Oregon. I watched Heberd as a freshman and thought "Meh. Has some potential, but we will see how she develops". Well, "meh" has turned into "wow". I think much of the credit has to go to the coaching and how they developed/pushed her.
Lastly, and it's a bit OT, but since I mentioned coaching...
UCONN fans often talk about how the coaching at UCONN is the best in the nation. While I largely agree, there are other programs that seem to be developing players just as successfully as UCONN. Look at what Walz has done at L'ville. Graves with Heberd, etc at Oregon. Muffet with Shephard etc. Mulkey with Cox etc. Tara with Smith. Schaffer with McCowan. The list goes on and on. I still think UCONN is the best, but there's not much that separates numerous top coaches in how they develop players.
I tend to cringe a little at comments about how "X player would be SO much better had she come to UCONN". That's true of any player who goes to play for Warlick especially (Fargas and McCallie also immediately spring to mind), or any of those other coaches who do so much less with more, but UCONN has also had its' share of duds (comparatively speaking) who were never really developed under Geno...
Lastly, Heberd injured her knee against OSU the other day. Last I checked, there was no official word. If anyone hears I'd love to know. Losing her would be like UCONN losing Walker.
I have no idea who Joe Lunardi is because I don't have any interest in men's basketball but I would just wonder if his brackets were close to the men's Committee's brackets. But I really don't care what the answer is.I guess Joe Lunardi and the men's bracketology is then superfluous.
Playing devil's advocate...
Interesting how ESPN know has bracketology for the women, yet many people dismiss the bracket as unnecessary or "cr*p."
Like @Centerstream I don't follow Men's College BB... and suppose Joe Lunardi's "bracketology" is intended to do much the same as Charlie Creme's... give people something to ponder, talk about, worry about, hope for, and so on. None of it matters. None of it makes one bit of a difference since as we all know too well, it's the Bracket unveiled by the Committee on Selection Monday (??) that matters....and I suspect Charlie Creme will have some reactions about that Bracket like he did on the first reveal. IF they followed the "standard S curve"... it's easy to figure out the brackets and pairings...assuming we know what they use for their 1 - 64 rankings... but no one will be able to predict the "variations" that always happen.I have no idea who Joe Lunardi is because I don't have any interest in men's basketball but I would just wonder if his brackets were close to the men's Committee's brackets. But I really don't care what the answer is.
ESPNW has his brackets but in my opinion they are unnecessary because they can change daily, they have no bearing on the real brackets and the NCAA actually has seeding announcements during the season.
Good news out of Oregon: Ruthie Hebard's MRI revealed no structural damage and she's questionable for this weekend's game. Oregon is probably not as interested in ranking and S curves than most as they are almost certainly going to be in the Portland Regional whether as a 1 or a 2. (WNBA Fans Nation)
I heard Tony Dungy saying that the rematch favors the team that lost the initial encounter because the losing team makes changes and the winning team is reluctant to alter what was a successful game plan. He was speaking about football, of course, but if that theory relates to basketball, as well, then UConn probably would be better off facing Louisville in in a regional final than meeting Notre Dame again.
Well then I would be worried if I was a fan of Baylor or Louisville if they happen to meet us in the Big Dance...I absolutely agree. Last year, UConn was ousted by Notre Dame, whom they beat during the year. Year before it was Mississippi State, whom they'd drubbed a year earlier. For a few years before their run, I think each time they lost in the NCAAs it was to a team they'd played (and I believe beaten) during the season.
I have no idea who Joe Lunardi is because I don't have any interest in men's basketball but I would just wonder if his brackets were close to the men's Committee's brackets. But I really don't care what the answer is.
ESPNW has his brackets but in my opinion they are unnecessary because they can change daily, they have no bearing on the real brackets and the NCAA actually has seeding announcements during the season.
I guess I now fall into this category and I am now wondering why I even posted anything in this thread, so I apologize.I for one am grateful ESPN has someone doing bracketology for the women's game. For those of us who enjoy analyzing and speculating how teams are likely to be seeded and placed into the bracket, Creme's work serve as a nice touchpoint for discussion, whether we agree or disagree. Those who don't enjoy geeking out on bracketology, or who find it silly or pointless, can and should assert their right to ignore such discussion.
The cottage industry of bracketology is an outgrowth of the increased fan interest in the NCAA tournament and, more specifically, in the selection committee's decisions that fill out the bracket. Folks like Lunardi, Palm and Creme are simply greasing the skids of that fan interest.
I for one am grateful ESPN has someone doing bracketology for the women's game. For those of us who enjoy analyzing and speculating how teams are likely to be seeded and placed into the bracket, Creme's work serve as a nice touchpoint for discussion, whether we agree or disagree. Those who don't enjoy geeking out on bracketology, or who find it silly or pointless, can and should assert their right to ignore such discussion.
The cottage industry of bracketology is an outgrowth of the increased fan interest in the NCAA tournament and, more specifically, in the selection committee's decisions that fill out the bracket. Folks like Lunardi, Palm and Creme are simply greasing the skids of that fan interest.
Good news out of Oregon: Ruthie Hebard's MRI revealed no structural damage and she's questionable for this weekend's game. Oregon is probably not as interested in ranking and S curves than most as they are almost certainly going to be in the Portland Regional whether as a 1 or a 2. (WNBA Fans Nation)
Have you tried doing a screen shot of the bracket, and then printing out the screen shot? (If that sounds like Greek to you, let us know and we can guide you through it.)What pi--es me off big time is that you can't print up Creme's brackets, as all the brackets come out on the left side of the page, so I have to write up each set of brackets! A real pain! But it's worth it to set up the possible choices!
Have you tried doing a screen shot of the bracket, and then printing out the screen shot? (If that sounds like Greek to you, let us know and we can guide you through it.)