Latest (2/12) Bracketology

[Fightin Choke]

I just looked over the whole bracket, and my general feelings are, should it hold up, I like the way it unfolds for UConn. MS St, Baylor, ND & Oregon all are placed on the opposite side of the bracket, so UConn would potentially only face one of them in the National Championship. Louisville would be the top potential opponent in the national semi-finals, and I'm OK with that. If Louisville stumbles, TX or TN are the most likely suspects to replace the Cardinals.

After UConn takes care of whomever during the 1st two rounds in Storrs, they travel to the friendly confines of the TUC in Albany, where UConn fans have pretty much purchased all of the tickets available for sale and would likely face either NC St or TX A&M in the Sweet 16 game and UCLA or SC in the Elite 8 game. I don't see any of those teams presenting a problem for the Huskies in Albany.

This is always confusing to people but at the top of Charlie's bracket, it reads "Note: Regions not reflective of Final Four pairings".

That means that he is not attempting to assign which bracket winners face other bracket winners. Thus you cannot assume that UConn would only have to worry about Louisville being in UConn's bracket. (Maybe Louisville from the Lexington bracket would face Kansas City winner and UConn would face the Spokane winner, for example.)

 

[Fightin Choke]

I'd like to see Texas in the Miss State bracket. See if their post depth can help get McCowan in foul trouble and on the bench. Also, put Higgs/Atkins on Vivians and McCarty on William.

I just think it would be a great game and UT will have already 6'7 center 2-3 times, so it wouldn't be something knew for them. If Holmes and White are playing well they could cause some trouble for Miss State.

I kind of want BU as a 1 or 2 vs ND. I don't know why but I do. However, I would like to maybe travel and get out of KC region.

I think a lot of Baylor folks feel that way, but how well has Mulkey done against Muffet since Griner graduated? I know Baylor has height on Notre Dame (and every team except the one in Starkville), but Muffet is a great strategist. It's the same reason why I hope Notre Dame avoids Stanford this year.

 

[oldude]

This is always confusing to people but at the top of Charlie's bracket, it reads "Note: Regions not reflective of Final Four pairings".

That means that he is not attempting to assign which bracket winners face other bracket winners. Thus you cannot assume that UConn would only have to worry about Louisville being in UConn's bracket. (Maybe Louisville from the Lexington bracket would face Kansas City winner and UConn would face the Spokane winner, for example.)

That’s correct. The committee tries to keep the four #1 regional seeds as close to home as possible. Hence UConn is a lock for Albany. But with UConn the overall #1 seed, if the favorites all advanced, the Huskies would face the overall #4 seed, whichever region that seed came from.

 

[Fightin Choke]

If two teams have played three times, they should never have to face each other till the championship game. We've seen a couple of times in the not-too-distant past (TAMU and Baylor; UConn and Notre Dame) that it's really hard to beat a team a fourth time in one season. I'm pretty sure those were both finals, but not certain.

I agree with your point, but none of the games you mentioned were finals. In 2011, Texas A&M beat Baylor in the Elite 8 after losing the first 3 meetings. In the same year, Notre Dame beat UConn in the Final Four after losing the first 3 meetings. In 2013, UConn returned the favor; in the Final Four, UConn beat Notre Dame after falling to them the first 3 times they met that season.

 

[Fightin Choke]

That’s correct. The committee tries to keep the four #1 regional seeds as close to home as possible. Hence UConn is a lock for Albany. But with UConn the overall #1 seed, if the favorites all advanced, the Huskies would face the overall #4 seed, whichever region that seed came from.

But at the time of your post, wouldn't that have been Notre Dame (Spokane) and not Louisville who faced UConn in the Final Four? I thought you interpreted the bracket as if the brackets on the left met in the FF (and the teams that won the right 2 brackets met in the other FF game). That is, of course, the way it works when the actual bracket is published, but Charlie is intentionally not predicting that (for whatever reason).

 

[Bigboote]

I agree with your point, but none of the games you mentioned were finals. In 2011, Texas A&M beat Baylor in the Elite 8 after losing the first 3 meetings. In the same year, Notre Dame beat UConn in the Final Four after losing the first 3 meetings. In 2013, UConn returned the favor; in the Final Four, UConn beat Notre Dame after falling to them the first 3 times they met that season.

Thanks, mon.

 

[Fightin Choke]

I am a little skeptical that ND will garner a #1....But we will see.

Why are you skeptical? Is it that you do not believe that their resume is presently sufficient for a 1-seed? Or that you think Louisville will beat them in the ACC tournament? The tournament committee has downgraded teams because of injuries (which is why sometimes teams hide injuries or lie about their severity as we approach March), but Notre Dame has arguably played their best ball of the season after they adjusted from their last personnel loss (Lili Thompson). Sure the adjustment came after getting stomped at Louisville, but I'm sure that ND is excited for that rematch.

 

[oldude]

But at the time of your post, wouldn't that have been Notre Dame (Spokane) and not Louisville who faced UConn in the Final Four? I thought you interpreted the bracket as if the brackets on the left met in the FF (and the teams that won the right 2 brackets met in the other FF game). That is, of course, the way it works when the actual bracket is published, but Charlie is intentionally not predicting that (for whatever reason).

I probably did not look very closely at the brackets. My working assumption is that the overall seeding will eventually have UConn #1, MS St #2, Baylor #3 and either ND or Louisville #4. Of course the ACC champion could well displace Baylor, but again my working assumption is that if Baylor wins out they will get the #3 overall seed.

 

[Fightin Choke]

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.

There are a few points that I believe require consideration here. First, the reason they use the RPI and not Massey or Sagarin is because they do not want margin of victory (MOV) included in the ranking they use, as it would encourage teams to run up scores. Thus we need to use rankings such as RPI or ELO Chess that ignore MOV. I guess you could argue whether or not that's a sound reason, but as of now, that is the methodology employed. Baylor is currently 5th in RPI and 4th in ELO Chess while MOV ratings hold them in the highest regard (Massey 2nd, Sagarin 2nd).

Second, Mulkey KNOWS that they use the RPI and that they will penalize you if you play too many hopelessly overmatched teams (cf Maryland 206-17), but she scheduled her murders' row of Lilliputians anyway. Why? Possibly because teams that were ranked a bit higher can request home-and-homes instead of just playing in Waco. Which leads to...

...Third, Baylor will have played 16/29 (55%) games at home this season (11 road 38%, 2 neutral 7%). Miss. St. is similarly bad: 55%, 31% 17%, as is Louisville: 55%, 45%, 0%. . In contrast UConn's numbers are 41%, 45%, 14%. Notre Dame is 45%, 45%, 10%. Creating a quick metric by adding the % home game to .5 x % neutral games, here are the "most homey" schedules of the top 16 teams in RPI (listed by how homey their schedule is):
61.7 Miss. St.
58.6 Baylor
58.6 Duke
58.1 Oregon
56.9 Tennessee
56.9 Mizzou
55.2 UCLA
55.2 Texas
55.0 Ohio St.
54.8 Louisville
53.4 Maryland
53.3 Stanford
50.0 Notre Dame
50.0 Green Bay
48.3 UConn
48.3 Florida St.

This is one list where you wanted to be ranked low, as it means that you play more games in hostile locations. So not only does Baylor have one of the most home dominant schedules of the top teams, but they also play a lot of very bad teams (see point 2 above). That's a double whammy.

Fourth, even if you argue that only games against top teams matter (as you do), Baylor has played fewer top 50 teams than the other top contenders.
Top 50 opponents (counts all games schedule in regular season)
16 Notre Dame
15 Stanford
15 Oregon
15 UCLA
14 UConn
13 Louisville
13 Tennessee
12 Ohio St.
12 Miss St.
12 Florida St.
11 Duke
11 Texas
10 Maryland
9 Mizzou
8 Baylor
5 Green Bay

The eye test suggests that Baylor is excellent, and woe is the team to have them as their 2-seed (if the Baylor fails to be awarded a 1-seed). But didn't many people feel that way about Maryland last season and that didn't work out well for Maryland. I would be disappointed to have Baylor as Notre Dame's 2-seed, but I still think that the Irish could beat them.

 

[Golden Husky]

I probably did not look very closely at the brackets. My working assumption is that the overall seeding will eventually have UConn #1, MS St #2, Baylor #3 and either ND or Louisville #4. Of course the ACC champion could well displace Baylor, but again my working assumption is that if Baylor wins out they will get the #3 overall seed.

This makes sense to me. ..which probably means we're both off our meds again, Dude.

 

[PAHuskeyFan]

Sure is a lot of discussion about a Bracket that means VERY LITTLE. Charlie Creame's Bracketology is accomplishing what it's designed to do I suppose...get people to talk about his "projection"... As we have seen year after year, Charlie's brackets do not really match up with what the NCAA Women's Basketball Tournament Committee will do in their final seedings. And, Charlie has not followed some of the basic "rules" the committee follows... such as Teams from the same conference are never (??) put in the same bracket unless there are more than 4 teams from a conference that make the tournament, thus it's impossible to not have more than one. For example...even if the "S" curve seeding would put USF in UConn's bracket, if they are the only 2, or 2 of 3 AAC teams in the tournament, the Committee would change USF with another similar seeded team (i.e., a 6 seed for a 6 seed) so that they wouldn't see each other until the final 4.

I don't get too excited about Charlie's brackets as they really don't mean much in the end.

 

[Fightin Choke]

Sure is a lot of discussion about a Bracket that means VERY LITTLE. Charlie Creame's Bracketology is accomplishing what it's designed to do I suppose...get people to talk about his "projection"... As we have seen year after year, Charlie's brackets do not really match up with what the NCAA Women's Basketball Tournament Committee will do in their final seedings. And, Charlie has not followed some of the basic "rules" the committee follows... such as Teams from the same conference are never (??) put in the same bracket unless there are more than 4 teams from a conference that make the tournament, thus it's impossible to not have more than one. For example...even if the "S" curve seeding would put USF in UConn's bracket, if they are the only 2, or 2 of 3 AAC teams in the tournament, the Committee would change USF with another similar seeded team (i.e., a 6 seed for a 6 seed) so that they wouldn't see each other until the final 4.

I don't get too excited about Charlie's brackets as they really don't mean much in the end.

Charlie is not wrong to place USF in UConn's bracket, as he is partially going off recent history. In both the 2015 and 2016 NCAA tournaments, USF has been placed in UConn's bracket (see 2015 and 2016).

Charlie doesn't know too much about women's basketball, but he really does understand NCAA bracketing principles. But he has trouble projecting the bracket because the committee changes which rules they follow. Sometimes it's because there are conflicting rules, and sometimes it's because they come up with a different S-curve than him. He analyzes their projections (the reveals) because it tells him how this particular seeding committee evaluates data, which should improve his brackets. He honestly doesn't do too bad, as his final bracket is usually fairly close. Now his early brackets are sort of ridiculous, but at least they get us talking.

 

[DallasBUFan]

I'm shocked we only have 1 loss. This was truly going to be a rebuilding year and the fact that we could be a top 8 seed, I'm cool with it. Young and lack of depth. These girls may very well be playing better than last years squad. They all seem to work together better.

I want ND and I don't care who is no.1 or no.2. Neither have depth, they history of beating each other in the finals, and I feel the best about beating them. However, I felt that way about Oregon State and we see how that turned out.

So what happens if Miss State loses? Their schedule is similar to BUs other than conference being stronger. Do they drop to a 4 seed?

 

[Bear11]

There are a few points that I believe require consideration here. First, the reason they use the RPI and not Massey or Sagarin is because they do not want margin of victory (MOV) included in the ranking they use, as it would encourage teams to run up scores. Thus we need to use rankings such as RPI or ELO Chess that ignore MOV. I guess you could argue whether or not that's a sound reason, but as of now, that is the methodology employed. Baylor is currently 5th in RPI and 4th in ELO Chess while MOV ratings hold them in the highest regard (Massey 2nd, Sagarin 2nd).

Second, Mulkey KNOWS that they use the RPI and that they will penalize you if you play too many hopelessly overmatched teams (cf Maryland 206-17), but she scheduled her murders' row of Lilliputians anyway. Why? Possibly because teams that were ranked a bit higher can request home-and-homes instead of just playing in Waco. Which leads to...

...Third, Baylor will have played 16/29 (55%) games at home this season (11 road 38%, 2 neutral 7%). Miss. St. is similarly bad: 55%, 31% 17%, as is Louisville: 55%, 45%, 0%. . In contrast UConn's numbers are 41%, 45%, 14%. Notre Dame is 45%, 45%, 10%. Creating a quick metric by adding the % home game to .5 x % neutral games, here are the "most homey" schedules of the top 16 teams in RPI (listed by how homey their schedule is):
61.7 Miss. St.
58.6 Baylor
58.6 Duke
58.1 Oregon
56.9 Tennessee
56.9 Mizzou
55.2 UCLA
55.2 Texas
55.0 Ohio St.
54.8 Louisville
53.4 Maryland
53.3 Stanford
50.0 Notre Dame
50.0 Green Bay
48.3 UConn
48.3 Florida St.

This is one list where you wanted to be ranked low, as it means that you play more games in hostile locations. So not only does Baylor have one of the most home dominant schedules of the top teams, but they also play a lot of very bad teams (see point 2 above). That's a double whammy.

Fourth, even if you argue that only games against top teams matter (as you do), Baylor has played fewer top 50 teams than the other top contenders.
Top 50 opponents (counts all games schedule in regular season)
16 Notre Dame
15 Stanford
15 Oregon
15 UCLA
14 UConn
13 Louisville
13 Tennessee
12 Ohio St.
12 Miss St.
12 Florida St.
11 Duke
11 Texas
10 Maryland
9 Mizzou
8 Baylor
5 Green Bay

The eye test suggests that Baylor is excellent, and woe is the team to have them as their 2-seed (if the Baylor fails to be awarded a 1-seed). But didn't many people feel that way about Maryland last season and that didn't work out well for Maryland. I would be disappointed to have Baylor as Notre Dame's 2-seed, but I still think that the Irish could beat them.

I realize that Baylor hasn't played quite as difficult a schedule as some of the top teams. My point is that the arbitrary and archaic RPI makes Baylor and the entire Big 12 look worse than they really are. I do think Baylor and Notre Dame would be an intriguing matchup that could go either way.

 

[Plebe]

So what happens if Miss State loses? Their schedule is similar to BUs other than conference being stronger. Do they drop to a 4 seed?

You think Mississippi St would drop from #2 overall to outside the top 12 after just one loss?

 

[Phil]

I probably did not look very closely at the brackets. My working assumption is that the overall seeding will eventually have UConn #1, MS St #2, Baylor #3 and either ND or Louisville #4. Of course the ACC champion could well displace Baylor, but again my working assumption is that if Baylor wins out they will get the #3 overall seed.

I think they deserve the overall 2 seed.

They are better than MS State, and have played a tougher schedule.

 

[easttexastrash]

There are a few points that I believe require consideration here. First, the reason they use the RPI and not Massey or Sagarin is because they do not want margin of victory (MOV) included in the ranking they use, as it would encourage teams to run up scores. Thus we need to use rankings such as RPI or ELO Chess that ignore MOV. I guess you could argue whether or not that's a sound reason, but as of now, that is the methodology employed. Baylor is currently 5th in RPI and 4th in ELO Chess while MOV ratings hold them in the highest regard (Massey 2nd, Sagarin 2nd).

Second, Mulkey KNOWS that they use the RPI and that they will penalize you if you play too many hopelessly overmatched teams (cf Maryland 206-17), but she scheduled her murders' row of Lilliputians anyway. Why? Possibly because teams that were ranked a bit higher can request home-and-homes instead of just playing in Waco. Which leads to...

...Third, Baylor will have played 16/29 (55%) games at home this season (11 road 38%, 2 neutral 7%). Miss. St. is similarly bad: 55%, 31% 17%, as is Louisville: 55%, 45%, 0%. . In contrast UConn's numbers are 41%, 45%, 14%. Notre Dame is 45%, 45%, 10%. Creating a quick metric by adding the % home game to .5 x % neutral games, here are the "most homey" schedules of the top 16 teams in RPI (listed by how homey their schedule is):
61.7 Miss. St.
58.6 Baylor
58.6 Duke
58.1 Oregon
56.9 Tennessee
56.9 Mizzou
55.2 UCLA
55.2 Texas
55.0 Ohio St.
54.8 Louisville
53.4 Maryland
53.3 Stanford
50.0 Notre Dame
50.0 Green Bay
48.3 UConn
48.3 Florida St.

This is one list where you wanted to be ranked low, as it means that you play more games in hostile locations. So not only does Baylor have one of the most home dominant schedules of the top teams, but they also play a lot of very bad teams (see point 2 above). That's a double whammy.

Fourth, even if you argue that only games against top teams matter (as you do), Baylor has played fewer top 50 teams than the other top contenders.
Top 50 opponents (counts all games schedule in regular season)
16 Notre Dame
15 Stanford
15 Oregon
15 UCLA
14 UConn
13 Louisville
13 Tennessee
12 Ohio St.
12 Miss St.
12 Florida St.
11 Duke
11 Texas
10 Maryland
9 Mizzou
8 Baylor
5 Green Bay

The eye test suggests that Baylor is excellent, and woe is the team to have them as their 2-seed (if the Baylor fails to be awarded a 1-seed). But didn't many people feel that way about Maryland last season and that didn't work out well for Maryland. I would be disappointed to have Baylor as Notre Dame's 2-seed, but I still think that the Irish could beat them.

Mulkey scheduled the way she did to bring her team along slowly, which obviously worked. If you watch Baylor I will guarantee you that you do NOT want to be in their region. I truly hope that Baylor is the 2 seed in ND's region. Nothing is a better motivator than disrespect. And it will be fascinating to see how Muffett guards two bigs like Brown and Cox. I think Brown will have career numbers against a rather small ND team. Brown and Cox are a major match-up problem for just about every team.

Notre Dame will have to rely on outside shooting and here are some rather dismal 3-point shooting percentages. Good luck beating Baylor shooting like this.
Mabry 34%
Young 28%
Ogunbwale 35.7%

Baylor has 4 players who are shooting the three as well or better than ND's best 3-point shooter...PLUS Cox, Brown and Cohen in the middle.
Wallace 35.4
Morris 52.6
Landrum 44%
Chou 36%

 

[Plebe]

Mulkey scheduled the way she did to bring her team along slowly, which obviously worked. If you watch Baylor I will guarantee you that you do NOT want to be in their region. I truly hope that Baylor is the 2 seed in ND's region. Nothing is a better motivator than disrespect. And it will be fascinating to see how Muffett guards two bigs like Brown and Cox. I think Brown will have career numbers against a rather small ND team. Brown and Cox are a major match-up problem for just about every team.

Notre Dame will have to rely on outside shooting and here are some rather dismal 3-point shooting percentages. Good luck beating Baylor shooting like this.
Mabry 34%
Young 28%
Ogunbwale 35.7%

Baylor has 4 players who are shooting the three as well or better than ND's best 3-point shooter...PLUS Cox, Brown and Cohen in the middle.
Wallace 35.4
Morris 52.6
Landrum 44%
Chou 36%

After the recent history of the past two years, I would sure be a lot more cautious about talking thusly if I was a Baylor fan.

In each of the past two years, Baylor has looked veeeeeewy scaaaaaawy in romping through the Big 12 schedule, only to die out with a whimper in an Elite Eight upset to a less talented but more composed team.

I don't believe it would be an upset if Baylor were to win. Baylor should win that game, given the matchups. But Baylor should've also beaten Oregon State.

 

[Fightin Choke]

Mulkey scheduled the way she did to bring her team along slowly, which obviously worked. If you watch Baylor I will guarantee you that you do NOT want to be in their region. I truly hope that Baylor is the 2 seed in ND's region. Nothing is a better motivator than disrespect. And it will be fascinating to see how Muffett guards two bigs like Brown and Cox. I think Brown will have career numbers against a rather small ND team. Brown and Cox are a major match-up problem for just about every team.

Notre Dame will have to rely on outside shooting and here are some rather dismal 3-point shooting percentages. Good luck beating Baylor shooting like this.
Mabry 34%
Young 28%
Ogunbwale 35.7%

Baylor has 4 players who are shooting the three as well or better than ND's best 3-point shooter...PLUS Cox, Brown and Cohen in the middle.
Wallace 35.4
Morris 52.6
Landrum 44%
Chou 36%

It's true that Notre Dame hasn't shot the 3-ball very well this season. Baylor's 3-pt. shooting is excellent overall, but a lot of those gaudy numbers occurred vs. that weak OOC schedule. Let's look at the numbers each team produced from 3 during their conference seasons:

Mabrey 37%
Young 40% (but low shot attempts)
Ogunbowale 37%

Overall Team 3-pt in conference 37%

Wallace 29%
Morris 56%
Landrum 34%
Chou 33%

Overall Team 3-pt in conference 33%

So Notre Dame has shot the long ball BETTER than Baylor by 4% (37 vs 33) in conference season whereas Baylor shot the 3-ball much better in the OOC schedule (42% vs 31% for ND). Couldn't part of the difference be attributable to the difference in schedule difficulty?

 

[easttexastrash]

It's true that Notre Dame hasn't shot the 3-ball very well this season. Baylor's 3-pt. shooting is excellent overall, but a lot of those gaudy numbers occurred vs. that weak OOC schedule. Let's look at the numbers each team produced from 3 during their conference seasons:

Mabrey 37%
Young 40% (but low shot attempts)
Ogunbowale 37%

Overall Team 3-pt in conference 37%

Wallace 29%
Morris 56%
Landrum 34%
Chou 33%

Overall Team 3-pt in conference 33%

So Notre Dame has shot the long ball BETTER than Baylor by 4% (37 vs 33) in conference season whereas Baylor shot the 3-ball much better in the OOC schedule (42% vs 31% for ND). Couldn't part of the difference be attributable to the difference in schedule difficulty?

So it’s basically a wash in the three point category and a flood in the post play. This match-up still favors Baylor “bigs” time.

 

[Plebe]

It's true that Notre Dame hasn't shot the 3-ball very well this season. Baylor's 3-pt. shooting is excellent overall, but a lot of those gaudy numbers occurred vs. that weak OOC schedule. Let's look at the numbers each team produced from 3 during their conference seasons:

Mabrey 37%
Young 40% (but low shot attempts)
Ogunbowale 37%

Overall Team 3-pt in conference 37%

Wallace 29%
Morris 56%
Landrum 34%
Chou 33%

Overall Team 3-pt in conference 33%

So Notre Dame has shot the long ball BETTER than Baylor by 4% (37 vs 33) in conference season whereas Baylor shot the 3-ball much better in the OOC schedule (42% vs 31% for ND). Couldn't part of the difference be attributable to the difference in schedule difficulty?

I must say I enjoy it when someone's sophomoric use of stats gets eviscerated well done Choke.

 

[easttexastrash]

It's true that Notre Dame hasn't shot the 3-ball very well this season. Baylor's 3-pt. shooting is excellent overall, but a lot of those gaudy numbers occurred vs. that weak OOC schedule. Let's look at the numbers each team produced from 3 during their conference seasons:

Mabrey 37%
Young 40% (but low shot attempts)
Ogunbowale 37%

Overall Team 3-pt in conference 37%

Wallace 29%
Morris 56%
Landrum 34%
Chou 33%

Overall Team 3-pt in conference 33%

So Notre Dame has shot the long ball BETTER than Baylor by 4% (37 vs 33) in conference season whereas Baylor shot the 3-ball much better in the OOC schedule (42% vs 31% for ND). Couldn't part of the difference be attributable to the difference in schedule difficulty?

Now, let's compare post play.
Brown 20.3 point and 10.1 rebounds per game
Cox 15.0 points, 9.4 rebounds
Cohen 11.3 points and 6.6 rebounds per game

Now you go...

See what I did there. I sucked you in with the comparison of the three-point stats and then wham, I hit you with the post stats.

 

[HGN]

Why are you skeptical? Is it that you do not believe that their resume is presently sufficient for a 1-seed? Or that you think Louisville will beat them in the ACC tournament? The tournament committee has downgraded teams because of injuries (which is why sometimes teams hide injuries or lie about their severity as we approach March), but Notre Dame has arguably played their best ball of the season after they adjusted from their last personnel loss (Lili Thompson). Sure the adjustment came after getting stomped at Louisville, but I'm sure that ND is excited for that rematch.

Choke, you guessed it. After the severe beating UL gave ND I think they will beat them again in the ACC Tournament. Especially if the Tournament is going to be held on a neutral , or non home team , court.

 

[triaddukefan]

If any of yall NOW want to see a ND vs Baylor matchup in the Elite 8.... raise your hand

 

[stwainfan]

I think for Tennessee right now is a #3 seed. That means they would host first and second rounds. I think that's important for this team.

 

[southie]

Even if Notre Dame (#2 RPI) were to lose to Louisville (or FSU) in the ACC tourney, they aren't gonna drop out of the top 4 in RPI, in my opinion, as Louisville is currently at #4 RPI and FSU is at #5 RPI. Yes, they would end up with 3 losses, but all to teams in the Top 5 RPI. Same script if it's Notre Dame who wins out.

If Baylor wins out, beating Texas once and maybe twice, Texas probably stays out of the Top 10 RPI (currently at #11). So, can't really compare a 1 loss Baylor team to a 3 loss Notre Dame or Louisville team. The two ACC teams' resumes are just a lot better in all areas.

For Baylor, they should hope that it is Notre Dame who wins out, and hope Louisville loses prior to the ACC championship.

 

[Phil]

At the moment, Louisville is closer to Oregon in the Massey ratings than they are to Baylor. Even if they win out (assuming Baylor wins out) they will have a weaker overall rating and a weaker strength of schedule. I don't think they would deserve a one rating at the expense of Baylor. If they win out, maybe they get a one seat along with Baylor and Notre Dame with three losses has to get a two seed.

I get that the Notre Dame losses qualify as quality losses, but one was an absolute blowout, and I don't see how you can pick a team that doesn't win their conference ahead of the team that wins the toughest conference in the country and has only a single loss.

If Notre Dame manages to beat Louisville, then selection is much easier. Notre Dame has a strong RPI a strong strength of schedule and wins the conference which should give them the nod over Louisville who should then go to Lexington as a two seat behind Mississippi State.

I get that Baylor's schedule should've been better, but Baylor is playing better now than Mississippi State Notre Dame or Louisville and may be even better than Connecticut. If they don't get a one seed it will be a travesty.

 

[Centerstream]

During the Alabama at Tennessee game that's on the SEC Network now, Debbie Antonelli said that she has TN as a 3 seed in her bracketology but in the Albany region. She thinks the possible UConn/TN would be a good idea.

 

[southie]

At the moment, Louisville is closer to Oregon in the Massey ratings than they are to Baylor.

Hasn't it already been confirmed that Massey is not one of the tools used by the selection committee?

 

[Plebe]

I get that Baylor's schedule should've been better, but Baylor is playing better now than Mississippi State Notre Dame or Louisville and may be even better than Connecticut. If they don't get a one seed it will be a travesty.

You say that now, but how about after they lose a game? They have struggled to put away three different lesser teams in just the past couple weeks.