Predicting the committee 16

[Vowelguy]

To be announced Thursday night during halftime of SC game.

First and foremost, I assume they will incorporate all results through tonight. BUT if they dont, then things will look nutty.

1. SC (#1 last time)
2. Stan (2)
3. NC St (3)
4. Lou (5)
5. Mich (9)
6. Ariz (8)
7. Indi (6)
8. Bay (13)
9. Iowa St (10)
10. Tenn (4)
11. UConn (11)
12. Okla (-)
13. Tex (7)
14. Fla (-)
15. LSU (12)
16. Ore (14)

close: ND, Ga, Oh St

Bracket:
NC: 1 SCar // 8 Bayl // 11 CT // 16 Ore
WA: 2 Stan // 7 Indi // 9 IaSt / 15 LSU
CT: 3 NCSt // 6 Ariz // 10 TN // 13 Tex
KS: 4 Loui // 5 Mich // 12 OK // 14 Fla

 

[visitingcock]

Yes, I think last night’s will be incorporated. Your list is pretty solid. I would probably flip Baylor and Iowa state based upon the Joen’s sisters absence from two of their losses (including Baylor)

Good job

 

[visitingcock]

1. SC
2. Stan
3. NC St
4. Lou
5. Mich
6. Ariz
7. Iowa St
8. Bay
9. Indiana
10. UConn
11. Tenn
12. Okla
13. Tex
14. Fla
15. LSU
16. Ore

 

[Plebe]

[Trying again, since my first post had some screwups.]

My stab:

1. SC
2. Stanford
3. NC State
4. Louisville
5. Arizona
6. Michigan
7. Indiana
8. Baylor
9. Iowa State
10. Tennessee
11. Texas
12. UConn
13. Oklahoma
14. LSU
15. Oregon
16. Georgia

Bubble: Notre Dame, Kansas State, Georgia Tech, Maryland

Regional placements:

Greensboro: 1 SC, 2 Baylor, 3 UConn*, 4 Oregon​

Spokane: 1 Stanford, 2 Indiana, 3 Iowa St, 4 LSU​

Bridgeport: 1 NC St, 2 Michigan, 3 Tennessee, 4 Oklahoma​

Wichita: 1 Louisville, 2 Arizona, 3 Texas, 4 Georgia​

​

*In this ranking scenario, the committee would have no choice but to put UConn in Greensboro, since each of the other 3 seeds (ISU, TN, TX) would be barred due to conference affiliation.​

 

[visitingcock]

I wonder if this will jack our SCar /Kentucky tv viewership?

 

[ucbart]

I actually think that they will put some injury consideration into our placement. Yes, Villanova played great, we struggled, and lost-but they can't ignore the blatant fact that our two best players since Paige has been out are Caroline and Olivia, two kids that will be back. I wouldn't be surprised if we were #9 overall seed and the 3-seed in Bridgeport.

 

[KY Card Fan]

I wonder if this will jack our SCar /Kentucky tv viewership?

It should. I'll be at the Louisville-UVA game but am recording SCar-UK just for that reason.

Not much positive happening over in Lexington. I'm sorry to see that. The Walz-Mitchell matchups were always interesting. I hope that Elzy can turn things around.

 

[southie]

NET rankings:

NET Ranking - Women's College Basketball | WarrenNolan.com

2022 Women's College Basketball NET Ranking: NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET) a ranking of teams based on five factors, team value index, net efficiency, winning percentage, adjusted winning percentage, and scoring margin.

www.warrennolan.com

 

[triaddukefan]

[Trying again, since my first post had some screwups.]

My stab:

1. SC
2. Stanford
3. NC State
4. Louisville
5. Arizona
6. Michigan
7. Indiana
8. Baylor
9. Iowa State
10. Tennessee
11. Texas
12. UConn
13. Oklahoma
14. LSU
15. Oregon
16. Georgia

Bubble: Notre Dame, Kansas State, Georgia Tech, Maryland

Regional placements:

Greensboro: 1 SC, 2 Baylor, 3 UConn*, 4 Oregon​

Spokane: 1 Stanford, 2 Indiana, 3 Iowa St, 4 LSU​

Bridgeport: 1 NC St, 2 Michigan, 3 Tennessee, 4 Oklahoma​

Wichita: 1 Louisville, 2 Arizona, 3 Texas, 4 Georgia​

​

*In this ranking scenario, the committee would have no choice but to put UConn in Greensboro, since each of the other 3 seeds (ISU, TN, TX) would be barred due to conference affiliation.​

Let me rumble through my closet

 

[visitingcock]

NET rankings:

NET Ranking - Women's College Basketball | WarrenNolan.com

2022 Women's College Basketball NET Ranking: NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET) a ranking of teams based on five factors, team value index, net efficiency, winning percentage, adjusted winning percentage, and scoring margin.

www.warrennolan.com

But the selection committee looks at MUCH more. The NET is merely a guide.

For instance, look at Texas’ team sheet. You will see 2 losses to quad two teams. That will drop them a good deal. Note how high the NET has UNC. The committee will not have them near that level

 

[BobbyJ]

I wonder if this will jack our SCar /Kentucky tv viewership?

Maybe for 20 minutes. Game might be over by halftime.

 

[visitingcock]

Maybe for 20 minutes. Game might be over by halftime.

Might not be. Amihere and Cardosa are not playing, so if Kentucky can get Boston in foul trouble . . .

 

[southie]

But the selection committee looks at MUCH more. The NET is merely a guide.

For instance, look at Texas’ team sheet. You will see 2 losses to quad two teams. That will drop them a good deal. Note how high the NET has UNC. The committee will not have them near that level

Texas had those 2 losses prior to the first reveal. and the committee ranked them at #7 overall. Not sure where Kansas and Texas Tech were ranked then compared to now.

 

[Plebe]

I actually think that they will put some injury consideration into our placement. Yes, Villanova played great, we struggled, and lost-but they can't ignore the blatant fact that our two best players since Paige has been out are Caroline and Olivia, two kids that will be back. I wouldn't be surprised if we were #9 overall seed and the 3-seed in Bridgeport.

I'm skeptical that the committee would completely overlook the Villanova loss to move UConn up to #9 as of today, but even if they do, their ability to place UConn in Bridgeport could still be hamstrung depending on who are the teams around them on the 2 and 3 seed lines. The requirement to separate conference rivals could figure prominently in where everyone ends up.

 

[Vowelguy]

I actually think that they will put some injury consideration into our placement. Yes, Villanova played great, we struggled, and lost-but they can't ignore the blatant fact that our two best players since Paige has been out are Caroline and Olivia, two kids that will be back. I wouldn't be surprised if we were #9 overall seed and the 3-seed in Bridgeport.

Injuries typically get factored in IF the player is back and playing well , thus the missed game was an aberration. We know nothing about CD nor ONOs status.

 

[Ralph]

ESPN loving us as usual, wrote up the game, how well Villanova played, how we lost, then at the end mentioned "oh yeah, Liv and CD did not play. No big deal." I think someone else missed the game. Dorka's foot, what foot???

 

[Plebe]

ESPN loving us as usual, wrote up the game, how well Villanova played, how we lost, then at the end mentioned "oh yeah, Liv and CD did not play. No big deal." I think someone else missed the game. Dorka's foot, what foot???

Your characterization of the article is a bit distorting.

The discussion of player absences begins pretty much right in the middle of the article. And the first half of the piece was about much more than Villanova; it also recounted a lot of the historical stats related to UConn's streak of conference dominance, including how our last loss in a conference game to ND preceded our beating them in the national semis and then starting a run of 4 national titles in a row. That was pretty ancillary to the news of the loss and hardly portrayed UConn in a negative light.

People are so oversensitive to every little article. Be glad a UConn loss is considered newsworthy, because the alternative would surely not be preferable.

 

[Monte]

I'm skeptical that the committee would completely overlook the Villanova loss to move UConn up to #9 as of today, but even if they do, their ability to place UConn in Bridgeport could still be hamstrung depending on who are the teams around them on the 2 and 3 seed lines. The requirement to separate conference rivals could figure prominently in where everyone ends up.

6:00 PM Thursday, Feb. 10: UCONN NOT a #2 any more

 

[visitingcock]

Your characterization of the article is a bit distorting.

The discussion of player absences begins pretty much right in the middle of the article. And the first half of the piece was about much more than Villanova; it also recounted a lot of the historical stats related to UConn's streak of conference dominance, including how our last loss in a conference game to ND preceded our beating them in the national semis and then starting a run of 4 national titles in a row. That was pretty ancillary to the news of the loss and hardly portrayed UConn in a negative light.

People are so oversensitive to every little article. Be glad a UConn loss is considered newsworthy, because the alternative would surely not be preferable.

Butthurt is the new American way

 

[JoePgh]

So I missed the halftime of the Ky-SC game, and I am now watching the third quarter. Did they show the 2nd Top 16 reveal at halftime? If so, where was UConn placed? If not, did they say when it will be shown? Why is no one talking about it?

 

[MilfordHusky]

VG got the top 4 and 15 of the 16. ND is in instead of Florida.

We are in Bridgeport as a 3, with NC State, Michigan, and Texas.

 

[Vowelguy]

So I missed the halftime of the Ky-SC game, and I am now watching the third quarter. Did they show the 2nd Top 16 reveal at halftime? If so, where was UConn placed? If not, did they say when it will be shown? Why is no one talking about it?

UConn was #11 again
This time as 3 in bridgeport

 

[MilfordHusky]

UConn was #11 again
This time as 3 in bridgeport

I have no complaints about being in Bridgeport or being a 3 vs. 2 Michigan and then potentially getting the winner of NC State v. Texas.

That NC State v. Texas game should be in the 50s.