NCAA Preseason Top-10 | Page 2 | The Boneyard

NCAA Preseason Top-10

This is why relying on loss of starters is not always reliable - especially in this game compared to others. It's the most overrated criteria.

UConn, Notre Dame, and Mississippi State are the only 3 teams to be ranked in the final top 5 in each of the last 3 years. No team has been ranked in the final top 5 for the last 4 years except UConn - last 14 years.

And none of those are in that top 6. I shan't take this poll seriously.
 
Alydar said:
Michele is hunting clicks, not being honest.



True, but is it honest? And if that is so important to mention why not tell us how long it's been for the other teams. This is what Michele seems to feel is honest journalism. I say she has a fallback career as a shill in a carnival. Too harsh? She is well aware that of the 6 teams she picks in front of UConn only Baylor has won one in the last 10 ten years. UConn has won 5. In the previous 10 years Maryland has one, UConn has 5. So if she wants to pick UConn 7th she should at least have some serious reasons to do so. The one she uses isn't.

I know they do this to incite UConn fans. And it works. What annoys me is that when the final four rolls around they never go back and grade themselves on this kind of astute "analysis". So I'll save this article and will retieve it in April, for better or worse.
Expand ...
Boy did you take the words right out of my mouth. UConn hasnt won a NC in 3 years LOL and how many of the rest have??? Based on talent UConn looks really good with ONO CW CD and MW. As Ive continued to say our 5th starter will be as good or better then most and yes we have a couple of girls coming in that are pretty good off the bench and we havent had much of a bench in the past few years. Adebayo has experience as does Makurat at a higher level and Griffin should be developed and be fine. Ive got UConn top 3 and as they develop well who knows. Geno can work wonders because Geno knows how to get his team to play BB. TAM has one player who can turn it on or be turned off in Kennedy. Theres a reason why players left the team and that has shown imo an attitude problem . That does not fit well for a team game. MD is talented but has never played any really good defense and looking at the past few years you can see why they havent been in the FF . Now Stanford is talented and recovering from injuries and has inexperienced freshman much like UConn however Makurat and Adebayo do have experience at a higher level . There are alot of questions marks this season for every team except Oregon. Oregon has experineced players and they have star players so naming them number 1 is right on. The rest of WCBB has question marks and only Geno has answered those question marks when graduating top players in the past. I expect no difference. This poll as many other polls seem to me as if the pollsters are trying to give other teams a chance by listing UConn out of the top 4.
 
This past season the NCAA Selection Committee had the temerity to give UConn a #2 seed. Lou had some colorful comments about that decision and the Huskies rallied around their injured senior to roll over Louisville into their 12th consecutive FF. When the final buzzer sounded, the Huskies celebrated with a level of joy and satisfaction that only happens when a team proves to themselves and all the doubters that, “You underrate us at your peril.”

Somewhere in Storrs, CT a short Italian guy is smiling at this and other preseason polls that sell the Huskies short. Don’t think for a second that UConn’s preseason practices won’t be punctuated with jibes from Geno to his team that, “Nobody thinks you guys are very good this year.”

It’s never a smart move to poke the bear or, in this case, to poke the Husky.
 
Alydar said:
Michele is hunting clicks, not being honest.



True, but is it honest? And if that is so important to mention why not tell us how long it's been for the other teams. This is what Michele seems to feel is honest journalism. I say she has a fallback career as a shill in a carnival. Too harsh? She is well aware that of the 6 teams she picks in front of UConn only Baylor has won one in the last 10 ten years. UConn has won 5. In the previous 10 years Maryland has one, UConn has 5. So if she wants to pick UConn 7th she should at least have some serious reasons to do so. The one she uses isn't.

I know they do this to incite UConn fans. And it works. What annoys me is that when the final four rolls around they never go back and grade themselves on this kind of astute "analysis". So I'll save this article and will retieve it in April, for better or worse.
Expand ...

PS Baylor has won 2 in past 10 years :) 3 in last 15. :)
 
.-.
Maybe when the Sun have finished up their finals run they can lend #disrespeCT to the Huskies.
 
What strikes me is that it seems like Michelle Smith talks about offseason developments of injured players and incoming freshman, but makes no note of Adebayo, Griffin, or the possibility for Camara to be healthy. She also seems to miss Megan Walker entirely. Especially since she went into such detail about incoming/transfer players for both Stanford and Mississippi State, it just seems like a shot at UConn. The “it’s been three years since UConn won a title” bit seems wildly out of place given the no. 1 team has never won a title. I’d be more understanding of her analysis of UConn if she went through the loss of scoring/rebounding/assists/steals/blocks with the graduation of KLS sand Collier. But, since she makes no mention of it, I say the NCAA should take this article down for the lack of journalistic integrity.
 
southofnorth said:
What strikes me is that it seems like Michelle Smith talks about offseason developments of injured players and incoming freshman, but makes no note of Adebayo, Griffin, or the possibility for Camara to be healthy. She also seems to miss Megan Walker entirely. Especially since she went into such detail about incoming/transfer players for both Stanford and Mississippi State, it just seems like a shot at UConn. The “it’s been three years since UConn won a title” bit seems wildly out of place given the no. 1 team has never won a title. I’d be more understanding of her analysis of UConn if she went through the loss of scoring/rebounding/assists/steals/blocks with the graduation of KLS sand Collier. But, since she makes no mention of it, I say the NCAA should take this article down for the lack of journalistic integrity.
Expand ...


It's just an opinion and their is no need to start trying to remove opinion articles. Nothing more and nothing less and FWIW, I believe Michelle is arriving at her opinion honestly. Just because her arguments may be incomplete and/or inconsistent or simply not satisfy everyone does not mean she is trying to pull one over. I tend to favor being underrated since it will light a fire under the program.
 
Smith writes, "It's been a while since we've seen Geno Auriemma’s team ranked this low to start a season. But it’s also been three years since the Huskies last won a title. " I guess that being in the Final Four during those years somehow diminishes them. I also feel that given our past records we have earned entrance into the "They don't rebuild, they reload" club.
 
PAC-12HoopFan said:
Very difficult to believe, Westbrook or not, that UConn shouldn't be included in any preseason Top 4 until the Huskies fail to make a Final Four.
Expand ...

Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

UConn lost its top two players (by far) off a team with a short bench and a decent but hardly blockbuster recruiting class. Lots of questions. Westbrook is key.
 
.-.
eebmg said:
It's just an opinion and their is no need to start trying to remove opinion articles. Nothing more and nothing less and FWIW, I believe Michelle is arriving at her opinion honestly. Just because her arguments may be incomplete and/or inconsistent or simply not satisfy everyone does not mean she is trying to pull one over. I tend to favor being underrated since it will light a fire under the program.
Expand ...

I don't, and the uneven way in which she described each team reveals her bias. I don't think she dislikes UConn. But she is acting like a carnival barker, trying to get fans excited. Picking UConn in the top 4 is boring. So she focused on negatives for UConn and Pollyanna-like optimism when it comes to Maryland and to a lesser degree with Stanford. I can see Stanford in a FF, despite their issues, but Maryland? What has Brenda done to earn her team's ranking? I'd say Michele had to include a B1G team for the sake of diversity. Maryland will likely be ranked high for that reason alone and if Brenda has scheduled her usual patsies from the DelMarVa peninsula the Turtles will stay high until the NCAA's where they will lose to the first top 10 team they face.
 
vowelguy said:
Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

UConn lost its top two players (by far) off a team with a short bench and a decent but hardly blockbuster recruiting class. Lots of questions. Westbrook is key.
Expand ...

2016 - UConn loses their top 3 players, AA's all and all top WNBA selections. ESPN writes: "rebuilding year". Result: UConn enters the NCAA's undefeated as the No 1 team in wcbb.

2018 - UConn loses 2 starters who also go high in the draft. ESPN says "rebuilding". result: another final four.

Michele is just being a huckster for ESPN and if she is comfortable in that role then good luck to her. She's not alone. ESPN is full of em.
 
vowelguy said:
Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Expand ...

But when your past performance includes 11 championships and 12 straight Final Fours, some deference to history is warranted.
 
The deviation among the number of mentions is interesting. Stanford gets eight, while Maryland and Texas A&M get just one? I think 95% of the BY could have written a better article, quite honestly:

Oregon
- Current players mentioned: 5
- Former players mentioned: 1
Baylor
- Current players mentioned: 4
- Former players mentioned: 0
Stanford
- Current players mentioned: 8
- Former players mentioned: 0
Texas A&M
- Current players mentioned: 1
- Former players mentioned: 0
Maryland
- Current players mentioned: 1
- Former players mentioned: 0
Oregon State
- Current players mentioned: 4
- Former players mentioned: 0
Connecticut
- Current players mentioned: 3
- Former players mentioned: 0
Mississippi State
- Current players mentioned: 2
- Former players mentioned: 1
South Carolina
- Current players mentioned: 1
- Former players mentioned: 0
UCLA
- Current players mentioned: 4
- Former players mentioned: 0
 
I love that we're ranked 7th... love it..
Looking forward to how things fall come March..

Let the Madness begin.. We get to the Final 4 every friggin year.. and yet we still get branded like we're no longer any good.. LOVE IT! Love the bulletin board material...
 
.-.
By the way, is everyone aware that Michelle Smith evidently developed her expertise on WBB as a college softball player at OK St? While an individual can certainly become knowledgeable in sports they did not compete in, Smith is obviously out of her depth attempting to rank the top 10 WBB teams without an in depth understanding of the game.
 
DaBball said:
The deviation among the number of mentions is interesting. Stanford gets eight, while Maryland and Texas A&M get just one? I think 95% of the BY could have written a better article, quite honestly:

Oregon
- Current players mentioned: 5
- Former players mentioned: 1
Baylor
- Current players mentioned: 4
- Former players mentioned: 0
Stanford
- Current players mentioned: 8
- Former players mentioned: 0
Texas A&M
- Current players mentioned: 1
- Former players mentioned: 0
Maryland
- Current players mentioned: 1
- Former players mentioned: 0
Oregon State
- Current players mentioned: 4
- Former players mentioned: 0
Connecticut
- Current players mentioned: 3
- Former players mentioned: 0
Mississippi State
- Current players mentioned: 2
- Former players mentioned: 1
South Carolina
- Current players mentioned: 1
- Former players mentioned: 0
UCLA
- Current players mentioned: 4
- Former players mentioned: 0
Expand ...

So, current players mentioned:

4 PAC 12 teams: 21
6 Others: 12
 
eebmg said:
It's just an opinion and their is no need to start trying to remove opinion articles. Nothing more and nothing less and FWIW, I believe Michelle is arriving at her opinion honestly. Just because her arguments may be incomplete and/or inconsistent or simply not satisfy everyone does not mean she is trying to pull one over. I tend to favor being underrated since it will light a fire under the program.
Expand ...
Normally I’d agree, except that this “opinion” piece uses facts and justification for every team except UConn, which makes it hard to stomach as just someone’s opinion. Besides that my issue wasn’t with her opinion, it was with her lack of journalistic integrity. She mentioned over half the players on Stanford’s roster and yet can barely speak on two of UConn’s players. It shouldn’t be taken down for where she has UConn places—she may very well be right in where she put them. However, it should be taken down when it shows bias and is written for an organization (NCAA) that is supposed to look without bias. Like I said, she justifies every other ranking, but can’t be bothered to include facts to back up her UConn placement. It’s poor journalism.
 
nwhoopfan said:
West Coast bias is so annoying isn't it? :rolleyes:
Expand ...
Michelle Smith does her share of writing for the PAC-12, so I am not surprised that her understanding of PAC-12 teams comes through fairly clearly in her preseason rankings at the expense of the other projected Top 10 teams.
 
.-.
southofnorth said:
Normally I’d agree, except that this “opinion” piece uses facts and justification for every team except UConn, which makes it hard to stomach as just someone’s opinion. Besides that my issue wasn’t with her opinion, it was with her lack of journalistic integrity. She mentioned over half the players on Stanford’s roster and yet can barely speak on two of UConn’s players. It shouldn’t be taken down for where she has UConn places—she may very well be right in where she put them. However, it should be taken down when it shows bias and is written for an organization (NCAA) that is supposed to look without bias. Like I said, she justifies every other ranking, but can’t be bothered to include facts to back up her UConn placement. It’s poor journalism.
Expand ...

Kind of reminds one of the selection committee's comments after the bracket is posted. They have different reasoning behind every decision. No consistency.
 
southofnorth said:
What strikes me is that it seems like Michelle Smith talks about offseason developments of injured players and incoming freshman, but makes no note of Adebayo, Griffin, or the possibility for Camara to be healthy. She also seems to miss Megan Walker entirely. Especially since she went into such detail about incoming/transfer players for both Stanford and Mississippi State, it just seems like a shot at UConn. The “it’s been three years since UConn won a title” bit seems wildly out of place given the no. 1 team has never won a title. I’d be more understanding of her analysis of UConn if she went through the loss of scoring/rebounding/assists/steals/blocks with the graduation of KLS sand Collier. But, since she makes no mention of it, I say the NCAA should take this article down for the lack of journalistic integrity.
Expand ...


She did mention Westbrook. Does anyone expect any of Camara/Adebayo/Griffin to make a significant impact for UCONN this year? I don't. A bit surprised there is no mention on Walker but honestly the article seemed rushed and doesn't make me think the writer knows WCBB very well.
 
bballnut90 said:
She did mention Westbrook. Does anyone expect any of Camara/Adebayo/Griffin to make a significant impact for UCONN this year? I don't. A bit surprised there is no mention on Walker but honestly the article seemed rushed and doesn't make me think the writer knows WCBB very well.
Expand ...

Dang, Adebayo drops 28 on your squad and still gets no respect!:rolleyes:
 
soxfan23 said:
Dang, Adebayo drops 28 on your squad and still gets no respect!:rolleyes:
Expand ...

Not notable enough to be mentioned as an impact player in a hurried top 10 article.
 
soxfan23 said:
Dang, Adebayo drops 28 on your squad and still gets no respect!:rolleyes:
Expand ...
bballnut90 said:
Not notable enough to be mentioned as an impact player in a hurried top 10 article.
Expand ...
I guess if Evelyn had dropped 28 on a top team like say East Carolina, that might of earned her a mention in the article. :rolleyes:

But against the LV’s not so much. ;)
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,035
Messages
4,550,422
Members
10,430
Latest member
Books&Ball


Top Bottom