Our Bracket and UCLA

[southie]

While head to head matchups are certainly a seeding component, I think it all comes down to the conference tournament where Vandy was badly beaten by Ole Miss, while LSU thumped OK and then played SC tough.

I don’t know about consecutive year issues. What I do know is that TX & SC will be one seeds and LSU & Vandy will be 2 seeds. The higher 2 seed (LSU?) will end up in UCLA’s region assuming that UCLA is seeded lower than UConn, while Vandy will end up in UConn’s region under that scenario.

And, that's the recency bias which does affect many committees' decisions. Even though Vandy played poorly in the first half last week against Ole Miss, they certainly played a much better second half and the final margin of loss was only 10 points. Did the committee members watch only the first half, the entire game, or did they simply pay attention to the final score? That one game doesn't negate Vandy's win over LSU. I'm definitely curious to see the seedings of those two teams.

 

[1974yankees]

First, the brackets aren't set. We have no idea who will be in our bracket.

As to UCLA, they are good, no question. So are we. But I will remind people that no team is guaranteed to make it to the final four. Many a #1 seed has fallen along the way.

The talking heads are pushing the "UCLA is this and that." The heads have to generate interest. Ignore it. UConn has fallen along the road to the final four a few times.

Could not agree more with what you just said.

How in the world does anyone know who will be or will not be in our bracket if the brackets haven't been announced yet.

Do some people have some inside information that the rest of us aren't privy too?

Personally, I dont care who is in our bracket because I think we are the best team regardless of what people are saying about UCLA/Texas or S.C.

Sooner or later we are going to face one or more of those teams anyway. I seriously doubt that Uconn will win a championship without meeting one of those teams somewhere down the road.

 

[Gus Mahler]

However the overall seeds play out, I would much rather play Vanderbilt than LSU. LSU is an elite team with several good offensive players. They are dangerous.

I'm reminded of the LSU-Iowa championship game when a player came off the bench for LSU and went absolutely nuts from three. Sure, you could say any team could have a player go off from three, but . . . ugh.

 

[southie]

Could not agree more with what you just said.

How in the world does anyone know who will be or will not be in our bracket if the brackets haven't been announced yet.

Do some people have some inside information that the rest of us aren't privy too?

Personally, I dont care who is in our bracket because I think we are the best team regardless of what people are saying about UCLA/Texas or S.C.

Sooner or later we are going to face one or more of those teams anyway. I seriously doubt that Uconn will win a championship without meeting one of those teams somewhere down the road.

Because the committee has released two reveals already with their Top 16 teams and how they would seed them as of that date. Charlie Creme builds his projected bracket with those reveals as his starting point. With rules in place about avoiding intra-conference pairings among the Top 16 national seeds, it's not too difficult to predict with confidence that UConn will draw either Vanderbilt or LSU as its 2-seed. And, Creme might even be able to accurately predict who the 3-seed and 4-seed in UConn's region will/could be just based on which B1G teams can't be paired with 1-seed UCLA, and which SEC teams can't be paired with 1-seeds Texas and South Carolina.

 

[my2cents]

I predicted last week that LSU would be our number 2 seed, and am sticking by that .
I also think that if the committee puts out the top 16 reveals, it should stick by that, where #1 plays #8 in the elite 8.
If a conference has 8 teams in the tourney, then by math, 2 each have to be in the same regions.
So stay by the numeric seeds.

 

[southie]

I predicted last week that LSU would be our number 2 seed, and am sticking by that .
I also think that if the committee puts out the top 16 reveals, it should stick by that, where #1 plays #8 in the elite 8.
If a conference has 8 teams in the tourney, then by math, 2 each have to be in the same regions.
So stay by the numeric seeds.

IIRC, a big reason that intra-conference matchups try to be avoided is because many years ago UConn and Rutgers played each other 3 times in the Big East, and then were matched up in the Elite 8 round which UConn also won to advance to the Final Four.

Then, the same thing happened between Baylor and Texas A&M in the Big 12 with Baylor winning the 3 conference games and A&M pulling off the upset in the Elite 8 to advance to their first Final Four and eventually win the national title.

Right or wrong, there are reasons why such rules were put in place. Conversely, women's volleyball and softball don't have rules avoiding intra-conference pairings at the Sweet 16 and Elite 8 rounds; the committees lets the seeds fall where they may and use an S-curve; and, not surprisingly, many coaches and fans want them to follow the same intra-conference rules which basketball employs. You just can't make everyone happy.

 

[WiseWillie]

Did I miss it; are the brackets out? Where can I find them so that I can better understand the context of this thread?

You didn't miss a thing. This is another Boneyard interesting topic with a host of very reasoned and informed comments (with the usual unsupported opinions thrown in just for fun) keeping us busy until the brackets come out.

 

[hoophuskee]

Automaticaly assuming Baylor and Vandy will be the toughest of the 2 seeds imo isn't worth fretting over So much of these games comes down to momentum.

 

[packwrap]

Another reason the bracket separates conference teams is to fuel the debate as to which is the best conference. If the conference members play each other early in the tourney, there would be no chance of a league putting 3 teams in final 4. 😁

Fan interest in conference bragging rights dates back at least to the late 70s for men.

For women the Old Big East had 2-3 teams make it, as did Old Pac12. Recently, SEC has had 2 teams reach Final Four.

 

[Bald Husky]

The NCAA has to get rid of the non-conference rule regarding the second round matchups. Since the Big10 is now 18 schools, and the SEC is around 16, it is just too hard to avoid the conference foe. Penalizing a top seed to play a better team than they should because of conference affiliation is wrong and should be changed. Rankings are done because of their body of work during the season, so changing that would not be in the spirit of the draw. You should play who your record says you should play and that is that. Texas played SC 4 times last year, and in the past UConn has played ND 4 times in the past, in fact multiple times. The rule has to change. As an example, you can't tell me that Vandy is the worst #2 seed, in fact they may be the best. Has to change to make it fair, and it's their own fault for having a huge super conference.

 

[oldude]

Another reason the bracket separates conference teams is to fuel the debate as to which is the best conference. If the conference members play each other early in the tourney, there would be no chance of a league putting 3 teams in final 4. 😁

Fan interest in conference bragging rights dates back at least to the late 70s for men.

For women the Old Big East had 2-3 teams make it, as did Old Pac12. Recently, SEC has had 2 teams reach Final Four.

In 2013 the old Big East could legitimately claim to be the best WBB conference in the country as UConn, ND & Louisville all made it to the FF, with UConn first beating ND in the semifinals then Louisville in the championship. Unfortunately, the BE soon thereafter started to fall apart as the major football schools began departing for greener pastures.

 

[LETTERL]

UConn Women's Basketball Forum

Unfortunately, the BE soon thereafter started to fall apart as the major football schools began departing for greener pastures.

Y'all have my permission take Pitt, BC and Notre Dame back.

 

[sno-cat]

When seeding LSU, don’t forget to take into account their coaches attire. That bumps them up a couple of places!

 

[DemonDeac22]

I’m not worried. We will take on the opponents who are in front of us, one game at a time. This team has not peaked yet and we won’t be facing 3 number 1 seeds in a row.

 

[ConnMotors]

UConn Women's Basketball Forum


Y'all have my permission take Pitt, BC and Notre Dame back.

Only if you throw Syracuse in as well. LOL

 

[The CDR-Ret]

The NCAA has to get rid of the non-conference rule regarding the second round matchups. Since the Big10 is now 18 schools, and the SEC is around 16, it is just too hard to avoid the conference foe. Penalizing a top seed to play a better team than they should because of conference affiliation is wrong and should be changed. Rankings are done because of their body of work during the season, so changing that would not be in the spirit of the draw. You should play who your record says you should play and that is that. Texas played SC 4 times last year, and in the past UConn has played ND 4 times in the past, in fact multiple times. The rule has to change. As an example, you can't tell me that Vandy is the worst #2 seed, in fact they may be the best. Has to change to make it fair, and it's their own fault for having a huge super conference.

Agreed, but the NCAA historically does NOT change the rules in WCBB when it would benefit UCONN, but with a new head of the NCAA, it may be a "Brave New World."

On another note, we (the Huskies) have to win three games before being concerned with whom the Huskies will be facing in the Elite 8, and Geno, CD, and Co. are the all-time best in two day turn arounds. No worries, mate!!!

Go Huskies!!!

 

[broooce]

I think the committee will keep UConn #1 and UCLA #2. This puts UCLA in Sacramento, which is good for them and their fans (about six hours north). That should be sufficient to keep that venue packed along with South Carolina. It then sets up a potential rematch of Texas-UCLA if they both make it to the FF: UCLA's chance to avenge their only regular season loss.

It also sets up a UConn-South Carolina FF semifinal game as well, a 2025 finals rematch and a continuation of this rivalry.

 

[oldude]

While Charlie Creme is certainly not perfect, compared to some other media sources who try their hand at bracketology, he’s a freakin genius. This morning I looked at the NY Times bracket. They had UConn as the #1 overall seed. As the #2 in UConn’s region, they had LSU. So I assumed they must have flipped LSU & Vandy. So I looked at UCLA’s region where I expected to see Vandy. But no, they had Duke or Iowa, I forget which one, as the #2 in UCLA’s region.

So than I started a search for Vandy. Where did I find them? Well, there they were as the #2 seed in SC’s region, which is absolutely incorrect, as anyone who knows the basic seeding requirements relative to conference affiliation can tell you.

If such a mistake was made by some hack on-line sports site, I wouldn’t pay much attention. But you would hope that the NY Times would get someone to do their bracketology predictions who possessed at least some rudimentary understanding of how the brackets are put together by the Selection Committee.

 

[Bills Fan]

I think the committee will keep UConn #1 and UCLA #2. This puts UCLA in Sacramento, which is good for them and their fans (about six hours north). That should be sufficient to keep that venue packed along with South Carolina. It then sets up a potential rematch of Texas-UCLA if they both make it to the FF: UCLA's chance to avenge their only regular season loss.

It also sets up a UConn-South Carolina FF semifinal game as well, a 2025 finals rematch and a continuation of this rivalry.

At this point I would hope to avoid UCLA at any cost. I just read the CBS draft projection and it is kind of scary. Azzi is projected at number 3 but the concerning part is that UCLA has 4 of the top 9 draftee projections. Betts, Rice, Kneepkens (sp?) and Jaquia (sp?). That's a lot of talent and experience. Even with Sarah as a likely number 1, pushing everyone down one place, it doesn't take away from the fact that UCLA is loaded with both talent and experience. (Sidepoint, they will have big problems next year, probably falling into the middle, or lower, of the Big Ten)

 

[BRS24]

At this point I would hope to avoid UCLA at any cost. I just read the CBS draft projection and it is kind of scary. Azzi is projected at number 3 but the concerning part is that UCLA has 4 of the top 9 draftee projections. Betts, Rice, Kneepkens (sp?) and Jaquia (sp?). That's a lot of talent and experience. Even with Sarah as a likely number 1, pushing everyone down one place, it doesn't take away from the fact that UCLA is loaded with both talent and experience. (Sidepoint, they will have big problems next year, probably falling into the middle, or lower, of the Big Ten)

IMO players' success in college is not directly translatable to the pros. I wouldn't worry about it until we see them in the tourney.

 

[H Dog]

At this point I would hope to avoid UCLA at any cost. I just read the CBS draft projection and it is kind of scary. Azzi is projected at number 3 but the concerning part is that UCLA has 4 of the top 9 draftee projections. Betts, Rice, Kneepkens (sp?) and Jaquia (sp?). That's a lot of talent and experience. Even with Sarah as a likely number 1, pushing everyone down one place, it doesn't take away from the fact that UCLA is loaded with both talent and experience. (Sidepoint, they will have big problems next year, probably falling into the middle, or lower, of the Big Ten)

Their “experience” includes being shellacked by Our UConn Huskies in the Final Four last year. Bring them or anyone on! I must that I can’t agree more with the sentiment expressed by some BYers on this thread that it is unfair and wrong that the # 1 and # 2 over-all seeds etc. aren’t bracketed to play the #7 and # 8 overall seeds etc. due to conference affiliation. Thats just ridiculous to literally punish high seeded teams and rewarding lower seeded ones based upon the perceived strength of their conferences when to be fair and correct it should be seeded and bracketed straight up by the true seedings.

 

[fomalhaut]

Connecticut has by far the best defense in Division 1 and the best they've had for a while. Relax.

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

At this point I would hope to avoid UCLA at any cost. I just read the CBS draft projection and it is kind of scary. Azzi is projected at number 3 but the concerning part is that UCLA has 4 of the top 9 draftee projections. Betts, Rice, Kneepkens (sp?) and Jaquia (sp?). That's a lot of talent and experience. Even with Sarah as a likely number 1, pushing everyone down one place, it doesn't take away from the fact that UCLA is loaded with both talent and experience. (Sidepoint, they will have big problems next year, probably falling into the middle, or lower, of the Big Ten)

There are more pertinent datapoints than that:

• UConn has more and better scorers than UCLA;
• UConn has more and better facilitators than UCLA;
• On the supposed dominant “archetypes” (disruptor UConn vs glass crusher UCLA), UConn’s seems to be more reliable;
• UCLA’s vulnerability to disruption was exposed early by TX; turnover differential (and the resultant FGA differential) was the key difference in UCLA’s loss &1 to TX;
• Close still seems to be concerned with this as she had the Top 7 (and three key ball handlers) still playing practically the entire 4th quarter against Iowa &2 in the Big Ten Finals, when Iowa conceded the game, closing the game with a misleading 29-9 fourth quarter;
• As a senior-laden team, Close chose to rely on a Top 6 (now Top 7 with Sienna Betts); for the regular season, Close has played 107 rotations vs 158 rotations for UConn;
• Above portends to UConn’s rotations (and bench) being a little-bit more developed;
• I don’t know if UCLA is prepared for UConn’s relentless defense &0, but Geno and CD will sure harp on UCLA’s rebounding guards;
• &0 UConn’s opponents counteract UConn’s relentless defense by substituting much more frequently and with more bodies (not quite TN but trending there); endurance is a key UConn prioritized skill as Blanca attests.

UConn | Torvik Schedule

• 3/7/2026: UConn vs. Georgetown
• 3/8/2026: Creighton vs. UConn
• 3/9/2026: Villanova vs. UConn

UCLA | Torvik Schedule

• &1 11/26/2025: UCL 65, TEX 76 - FINAL
• 3/6/2026: UCLA vs. Washington
• 3/7/2026: #5 Ohio State vs. #1 UCLA
• &2 3/8/2026: #2 Iowa vs. #1 UCLA

 

[southie]

Their “experience” includes being shellacked by Our UConn Huskies in the Final Four last year. Bring them or anyone on! I must that I can’t agree more with the sentiment expressed by some BYers on this thread that it is unfair and wrong that the # 1 and # 2 over-all seeds etc. aren’t bracketed to play the #7 and # 8 overall seeds etc. due to conference affiliation. Thats just ridiculous to literally punish high seeded teams and rewarding lower seeded ones based upon the perceived strength of their conferences when to be fair and correct it should be seeded and bracketed straight up by the true seedings.

So, which is it? "Bring on anyone" ? Or, "it is unfair and wrong" ? 🤣

 

[Rudy1927]

If you read my original post we will have Vandy or LSU as our #2 seed. That will happen. Fair or unfair. The 3 and 4 #1 seeds (Texas and SC) will get a combo of Duke, Iowa or probably Baylor).

 

[Bills Fan]

IMO players' success in college is not directly translatable to the pros. I wouldn't worry about it until we see them in the tourney.

I'm not worried about it, but being a top nine draft choice, certainly is a strong indication of how good you are and having four of the top nine is surely an indication of the skill level of a team.

 

[The Deuce]

The fans are the only ones who care about the brackets. Teams play the cards they’re dealt. The goal is to win the games and get the prize.

Not true. Teams and coaches do care about seeds. Fatigue sets in when a team plays hard to the last second in a semi-final game. From my perspective, recent years' March Madness brackets have been set to give SC and LSU easier Elite 8 and Final 4 matchups than UConn has had.

 

[sun]

There's such thing as "perfect seeding" as long as the schedules for each team are unequal.
The NET equation isn't perfect either.
Next folks will complain that the refs aren't perfect.
Maybe one team plays on a basketball court that's tilted in their favor, or only they know about a bump on the court?

 

[H Dog]

So, which is it? "Bring on anyone" ? Or, "it is unfair and wrong" ? 🤣

Well…. it’s both, those are 2 different topics and thoughts lol. Bring on UCLA or anybody but to be fair to everyone each year the selection committee should bracket it straight regardless of conference affiliation.

 

[southie]

Well…. it’s both, those are 2 different topics and thoughts lol. Bring on UCLA or anybody but to be fair to everyone each year the selection committee should bracket it straight regardless of conference affiliation.

I'll copy/paste what I posted on Thursday in this thread:

a big reason that intra-conference matchups try to be avoided is because many years ago UConn and Rutgers played each other 3 times in the Big East, and then were matched up in the Elite 8 round which UConn also won to advance to the Final Four.

Then, the same thing happened between Baylor and Texas A&M in the Big 12 with Baylor winning the 3 conference games and A&M pulling off the upset in the Elite 8 to advance to their first Final Four and eventually win the national title.

Right or wrong, there are reasons why such rules were put in place. Conversely, women's volleyball and softball don't have rules avoiding intra-conference pairings at the Sweet 16 and Elite 8 rounds; the committees lets the seeds fall where they may and use an S-curve; and, not surprisingly, many coaches and fans want them to follow the same intra-conference rules which basketball employs. You just can't make everyone happy.