Latest (2/12) Bracketology | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Latest (2/12) Bracketology

southie said:
No, they don't. Mulkey chose Baylor's non-conference schedule, not the committee.

The Big 12 is actually hurting Baylor (and Texas) more than in year's past. Only Baylor and Texas will be among the Top 16 seeded teams from the Big 12. The ACC and SEC are much deeper at the top. OU comes in at #30 in RPI, OSU is at #44, and WVU at #52. Oklahoma State is a very good team, but they also didn't help themselves or the Big 12 by scheduling very poorly in OOC; same for WVU, and TCU. OU did the best job; unfortunately, too many OOC losses may cost them a tournament bid.

Rating Percentage Index (RPI) Live 2017-2018 Women's College Basketball - WarrenNolan.com

Lots of games to be played still, so anything can happen as team jockey for seeds.
Expand ...


I can't believe I am about to say this but I kinda agree with Southie.

I think Kim thought the UCLA, Stanford, and Kentucky would be enough for a young team and shorter bench than she is used to . However, I don't think she thought everything would have played out the way it did. Not being present and not having Cox at UCLA, Kentucky being a total wash this season, and Stanford barely being a top 25 team.

Then OKST actually being good helps, but WV would have been a top 16 seed without injury plague. So although Texas is a top 10 ten it's kinda just them and BU. After last several seasons, I won't focus too much on seeding. Just show up and keep winning.
 
DallasBUFan said:
I can't believe I am about to say this but I kinda agree with Southie.

I think Kim thought the UCLA, Stanford, and Kentucky would be enough for a young team and shorter bench than she is used to . However, I don't think she thought everything would have played out the way it did. Not being present and not having Cox at UCLA, Kentucky being a total wash this season, and Stanford barely being a top 25 team.

Then OKST actually being good helps, but WV would have been a top 16 seed without injury plague. So although Texas is a top 10 ten it's kinda just them and BU. After last several seasons, I won't focus too much on seeding. Just show up and keep winning.
Expand ...
I don't know all that goes into determining SOS/RPI, but it could be that Baylor played too many OOC teams with RPI's worse than #200. That hurts tremendously. I'm sure you can look up which opponents fall into that category.

I think there has to be a good "balance" when making that OOC schedule, and part of it has to be avoiding certain teams at the very bottom. I think Texas has a couple of those > #200 RPI teams, too, and I see no benefit whatsoever in scheduling those opponents.
 
Phil said:
My first thought is, as I've expressed elsewhere, and continue to believe is that Baylor deserves a one seed and Louisville does not (let's revisit this in a few hours).

I put Mississippi State and Lexington as the one seed and Louisville as the two seed. Send Baylor to Kansas City as the one seed.

I get that Charlie is not telling us what he thinks makes sense, he's trying to predict what the NCAA selection committee will do. They dinged Baylor early on but that was early on. Baylor's strength of schedule per Massey is 12th in the nation. That's better than Mississippi State's. I don't see a lot of people running around whining and moaning about how bad the Mississippi State strength of schedule is and why that's going to cost them a one seed. I know, I know, undefeated is undefeated and Mississippi State will get a one seed. I'm fine with that I just think Baylor deserves one as well.
Expand ...
I really don't think the committee uses Massey to judge SOS. They use RPI, flaws and all.

Notre Dame is 5-2 vs. the RPI top 25, and 12-2 vs. the top 50.
Miss St is 6-0 vs. the RPI top 25, and 11-0 vs. the top 50.
Baylor is 2-1 vs. the RPI top 25, and 5-1 vs. the top 50.
 
Last edited:
It really is a shame that RPI is still emphasized by the committee in any form. It is a horribly misguided system, especially given the nature of women's basketball. At the level we are talking about here, only a team in the top 40 or so has any chance to upset a top 5 team. After that, the result is essentially predetermined. It doesn't matter if your opponent is number 100 or number 300, it will be a blowout either way. The good computer ranking systems take this into account, and don't penalize a team for a blowout over a bad team. The only games which truly matter in nonconference for the elite teams are the few games against other elite teams. All the other games are just there to fill out the schedule, and can essentially be disregarded. Unfortunately, the RPI weights all games equally, so a blowout win over a team with a bad record is tremendously damaging. This makes it possible to "game" the RPI, by playing a lot of middling teams that will finish the season with strong records, but aren't major threats to actually beat you. Given the computer power available to us today, it is said that a pen-and-paper method like RPI is still given any weight at all.

Sorry for the rant, I am a big fan of advanced metrics and can't stand the dinosaur that is the RPI.
 
I think it will be tough for UConn, ND, MSU, and Louisville not to end up being the four #1 seeds no matter what the teams behind them do.
 
southie said:
I think it will be tough for UConn, ND, MSU, and Louisville not to end up being the four #1 seeds no matter what the teams behind them do.
Expand ...
If Baylor wins out I believe they will be a #1 seed.
 
.-.
Centerstream said:
My initial impression was us having the possibility of playing teams that we played during the season. I was under the impression that the Committee was against that but I guess the geography consideration has impacted that.
Expand ...

If this were the actual bracket, UConn would have the easiest path to the final four. I would also get my wish of seeing Baylor and Mississippi State play each other. :)
 
Louisville and Notre Dame each have a loss on the road at the #1 overall seed, UConn; that doesn't even register as a negative in the committee's eyes. Louisville didn't even move down one single spot in the RPI rankings with tonight's loss; their non-conference SOS went up.

Louisville and Notre Dame will be co-champs of the strongest RPI conference in the country. As long as neither suffers a loss before the finals of the ACC conference tourney, they will remain #1 seeds, IMO.

Big 12 is currently at #4; could drop behind PAC as it is really close right now.

2017-2018 Women's College Basketball Conference RPI - WarrenNolan.com
 
Last edited:
southie said:
Louisville and Notre Dame have each have a loss on the road at the #1 overall seed, UConn; that doesn't even register as a negative in the committee's eyes. Louisville didn't even move down one single spot in the RPI rankings with tonight's loss.

Louisville and Notre Dame will be co-champs of the strongest RPI conference in the country. As long as neither suffers a loss before the finals of the ACC conference tourney, they will remain #1 seeds, IMO.

Big 12 is currently at #4; could drop behind PAC as it is really close right now.

2017-2018 Women's College Basketball Conference RPI - WarrenNolan.com
Expand ...

Ultimately BU and UT both will/have lost the no.1 seeds on their own. BU schedule and actually losing. UT just losing. Had they won against Tennessee, TCU, and BU they would be considered a no.1 seed still. BU didn't have the OOC that Texas had so they can't really even lose 4 games and still be a no.2 seed like Texas currently is. So both just need to accept the seeds they are given, play ball, and win. Just Win 4 games in the tourney and then you can throw that seed out. Then you will be in the FF and it won't matter. Both have FF potential.
 
easttexastrash said:
ND has two losses, one to UCONN and one a 30+ point blowout to #4 Louisville. Their best wins are over #11 Tennessee and #12 FSU. Baylor has 1 loss to #7 UCLA (without Cox or Mulkey) and a win over #6 Texas, with the chance of beating Texas again next week. But Notre Dame has more quality wins than Baylor.

The committee may have it out for Baylor this season due to the OOC schedule, despite the overall SOS being much better due to playing several top 25 teams in conference. It doesn't really matter to me as I think that Baylor and ND will most likely be in the same region and will have to play each other anyway. Doesn't really matter if they are 1 or 2.[/
easttexastrash said:
ND has two losses, one to UCONN and one a 30+ point blowout to #4 Louisville. Their best wins are over #11 Tennessee and #12 FSU. Baylor has 1 loss to #7 UCLA (without Cox or Mulkey) and a win over #6 Texas, with the chance of beating Texas again next week. But Notre Dame has more quality wins than Baylor.

The committee may have it out for Baylor this season due to the OOC schedule, despite the overall SOS being much better due to playing several top 25 teams in conference. It doesn't really matter to me as I think that Baylor and ND will most likely be in the same region and will have to play each other anyway. Doesn't really matter if they are 1 or 2.
Expand ...
ETT , you make a good point. Committee certainly may punish Baylor for OOC schedule, and rightly so. And being 1 or 2 may not matter. I just think Baylor is a better team and would win a head to head with ND. Baylor's size is a factor against anybody. Especially against a ND team with its best player , and Big, sitting on the bench.
Expand ...
 
southie said:
I think it will be tough for UConn, ND, MSU, and Louisville not to end up being the four #1 seeds no matter what the teams behind them do.
Expand ...
I think the 3 teams who might benefit from losing to Uconn are Texas, Notre Dame and maybe Louisville.
 
.-.
cbraarj said:
I think the 3 teams who might benefit from losing to Uconn are Texas, Notre Dame and maybe Louisville.
Expand ...
IF UCLA wins out (@ OSU, UO, home vs Utah & Colorado) + wins PAC12 tourney, and Notre Dame, Louisville, Texas stumble, then UCLA could very well be a #1 seed.
 
Phil said:
My first thought is, as I've expressed elsewhere, and continue to believe is that Baylor deserves a one seed and Louisville does not (let's revisit this in a few hours).

I put Mississippi State and Lexington as the one seed and Louisville as the two seed. Send Baylor to Kansas City as the one seed.

I get that Charlie is not telling us what he thinks makes sense, he's trying to predict what the NCAA selection committee will do. They dinged Baylor early on but that was early on. Baylor's strength of schedule per Massey is 12th in the nation. That's better than Mississippi State's. I don't see a lot of people running around whining and moaning about how bad the Mississippi State strength of schedule is and why that's going to cost them a one seed. I know, I know, undefeated is undefeated and Mississippi State will get a one seed. I'm fine with that I just think Baylor deserves one as well.
Expand ...
The basic problem is that as good as Baylor looks by the "eye test" the selection committee has adopted a "show me" attitude regarding scheduling (which I personally agree with). If you are that good, demonstrate it by playing a better schedule: they aren't saying you have to have a UCONN like OOC schedule, but play at least 3 ranked opponents out of conference. Especially since the Big12 (at least this year) is basically TX and Baylor as far as really strong teams go.
 
mudcat said:
The basic problem is that as good as Baylor looks by the "eye test" the selection committee has adopted a "show me" attitude regarding scheduling (which I personally agree with). If you are that good, demonstrate it by playing a better schedule: they aren't saying you have to have a UCONN like OOC schedule, but play at least 3 ranked opponents out of conference. Especially since the Big12 (at least this year) is basically TX and Baylor as far as really strong teams go.
Expand ...

Baylor had Stanford, UCLA and Kentucky, usually three consistent top teams, on the schedule. So there are your three ranked teams. UCLA is currently 7 and Stanford is currently ranked 14th.
 
easttexastrash said:
Baylor had Stanford, UCLA and Kentucky, usually three consistent top teams, on the schedule. So there are your three ranked teams. UCLA is currently 7 and Stanford is currently ranked 14th.
Expand ...
I’ll give you Stanford & UCLA, but KY isn’t a top team this season. More to the point, Baylor hasn’t scheduled any top teams from the BIG, SEC, ACC and obviously they have a break from UConn this season.

So if you’re on the committee, and you’re trying trying to gauge how good Baylor is outside of the Big 12, you’ve got a 14 pt loss at UCLA and a 24 pt win over a young Stanford team that fell out of the Top 25 soon thereafter, although the Cardinal have gotten it together since.

That’s not much of an OOC resume.
 
oldude said:
I’ll give you Stanford & UCLA, but KY isn’t a top team this season. More to the point, Baylor hasn’t scheduled any top teams from the BIG, SEC, ACC and obviously they have a break from UConn this season.

So if you’re on the committee, and you’re trying t
Expand ...

Well they don't get to pick their opponents in the Big 12 SEC Challenge.
 
.-.
DallasBUFan said:
Well they don't get to pick their opponents in the Big 12 SEC Challenge.
Expand ...
Yes that’s true, but Kim has complete authority to schedule all other OOC games.
 
Like it has been said. I think initially when scheduled it wasn't bad. UCLA, Stanford, and Kentucky. With a young team she had her own idea of how she wanted to get them ready, which I think was build confidence and challenge them sporadically.
Conference she was expecting UT and WVU to be the top from conference and the both Oklahoma schools to be top 25 or close too.
However, it didn't turn out that way.

They currently only have 8 players that are playing with 2 injured. One out for the year and the starter Chou not sure on return time. I think she had gotten used to depth, but lost that after last season. Next season we will have 13 players on the roster with 9 being freshman and sophomores. I bet the OOC will look better next season.
 
easttexastrash said:
And as the saying goes, "if a frog had wings..."
Expand ...
Agree, a stretch, but UCLA is a lot better than I originally thought. If they get through the Oregon schools this weekend with victories in both, that may be enough! Of course, being an OSU graduate and superfan, I hope we wreck that plan Friday night in Corvallis.
 
I have several objections to the way in which the bracket is drawn. First, I think that a conference should not be given more than one #1 seed. The ACC champion should get the #1 and Baylor should get the fourth #1 seed. Either Louisville or Notre Dame should get a #2 along with Oregon, Texas, and South Carolina. I would go with UCLA and Maryland as #3 seeds, but I think Tennessee and Florida State are weak choices. Tennessee gave up 99 points to Marquette, lost to LSU, and only beat Wichita State by 12. Florida State defeated such powerhouse teams as Florida, Iowa, ASU, and Creighton and lost to Texas. I think that none of the #4 seeds have earned the seeding. The non-conference records for the four teams are not impressive. NC State defeated Alabama, Tulane, Georgetown, and Vanderbilt, but lost to Rutgers. Stanford has lost 8 games including twice to Ohio State. Georgia defeated Virginia and Georgia Tech (barely) and lost big to Texas. Missouri defeated Cal, Kansas State, Indiana, Xavier, and Illinois.

I have focused only on the #1 through #4 seeds because they have home court advantage through the first two rounds. This leads to my second objection, that these 16 spots are owned by UCONN (justifiably) and 15 P5 conference teams. I would prefer to give each P5 conference 2 slots and for one for UCONN. That leaves five for teams like DePaul, Green Bay, FGCU, Central Michigan, and a South Dakota team. I know it won't happen, because the P5 conferences have a lock on the home court, but it could make a few upsets more likely. I also think that it would be much more fair to spread the home court around.

Finally, I wanted to compare several conferences based on the composite non-conference records of conference members. I looked at the P5 conferences, the Big East, and the AAC only considering games between those seven conferences. Not surprisingly, the ACC and the SEC had the best win-lost records: 41-29 and 39-29 respectively. The Big 10 and Big 12 were next at 31-32 and 21-19. The Pac 12 and Big East were weak at 16-24 and 17-21. The Pac 12 teams scheduled the fewest games against other P5 conferences, the Big East and the AAC. Oregon State, Utah, USC, and Colorado only scheduled two games each and Arizona only one game. The AAC was 18-29 or 7-29 without UCONN wins. Based on this I would say that the Big 12 deserves more recognition and the Pac 12 much less.
 
FridaFriend said:
I have several objections to the way in which the bracket is drawn. First, I think that a conference should not be given more than one #1 seed.
Expand ...

Really? So you think that UConn in 2013 should have been a #2 seed?

FridaFriend said:
I would prefer to give each P5 conference 2 slots and for one for UCONN.
Expand ...

Teams are selected and seeded on an individual basis. I'm not sure why people think conferences should be apportioned seats as if it were the House of Representatives.

FridaFriend said:
The Pac 12 teams scheduled the fewest games against other P5 conferences, the Big East and the AAC. Oregon State, Utah, USC, and Colorado only scheduled two games each and Arizona only one game. The AAC was 18-29 or 7-29 without UCONN wins. Based on this I would say that the Big 12 deserves more recognition and the Pac 12 much less.
Expand ...

The Pac-12 teams are geographically isolated from all of the other conferences you included, and it's not necessarily easy for them to find East Coast teams who want to travel west as part of a home-and-home. The per-conference game totals you cite are also skewed by two other facts: (a) the other four P5 conferences are forced to play in the conference "challenges," thus inflating the number of inter-P5 games they play; (b) the Pac-12 has fewer teams than the other P5 conferences except the Big 12.
 
Last edited:
easttexastrash said:
Baylor had Stanford, UCLA and Kentucky, usually three consistent top teams, on the schedule. So there are your three ranked teams. UCLA is currently 7 and Stanford is currently ranked 14th.
Expand ...

Since you like to point out constantly that UCLA beat Baylor w/out Mulkey and Cox and thus it doesn't really count, Baylor's victory over Stanford also doesn't really count because their leading scorer McPhee was out w/ an injury. I'm fairly sure Baylor still would've beaten Stanford if McPhee had played, but she didn't and I'm just using your rules.
 
.-.
LOTRADER said:
Agree, a stretch, but UCLA is a lot better than I originally thought. If they get through the Oregon schools this weekend with victories in both, that may be enough! Of course, being an OSU graduate and superfan, I hope we wreck that plan Friday night in Corvallis.
Expand ...

I was fairly stunned when Stanford won in Corvallis and Eugene. I will be even more stunned if UCLA pulls off the road sweep in Oregon.
 
nwhoopfan said:
Since you like to point out constantly that UCLA beat Baylor w/out Mulkey and Cox and thus it doesn't really count, Baylor's victory over Stanford also doesn't really count because their leading scorer McPhee was out w/ an injury. I'm fairly sure Baylor still would've beaten Stanford if McPhee had played, but she didn't and I'm just using your rules.
Expand ...

They still had their head coach though....
 
Does the committee look at the games and who played or didn't, or that Coach was away? I really don't think so, I think they look at wins and losses.... and go from there.
 
PAHuskeyFan said:
Does the committee look at the games and who played or didn't, or that Coach was away? I really don't think so, I think they look at wins and losses.... and go from there.
Expand ...
Actually they do (or at least can) consider availability of personnel.

The following page from the NCAA website lists "availability of talent" as one of the criteria considered by the committee:
Women's Basketball Selections 101 - Selections
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,368
Messages
4,568,497
Members
10,472
Latest member
MyStore24


Top Bottom