Well because I think everyone is battling for the 4th #1 seed. Iowa just won the head to head giving them the advantage over them.Maryland is not out of the running. Why would a loss to Iowa hurt their seeding?
Well because I think everyone is battling for the 4th #1 seed. Iowa just won the head to head giving them the advantage over them.Maryland is not out of the running. Why would a loss to Iowa hurt their seeding?
The fourth one seed? I think the final two one seeds are up for grabs.Well because I think everyone is battling for the 4th #1 seed. Iowa just won the head to head giving them the advantage over them.
No. The Big will not get two one seeds. No conference will. The big will get at least one two seed. Maybe two though that second one will be in jeopardy if Oklahoma can run the table.Well because I think everyone is battling for the 4th #1 seed. Iowa just won the head to head giving them the advantage over them.
Maryland was a full seed line higher than Iowa before that game. Creme and Gauer both had UMD as 1s after the loss.Well because I think everyone is battling for the 4th #1 seed. Iowa just won the head to head giving them the advantage over them.
Lol at Oklahoma. Seriously?No. The Big will not get two one seeds. No conference will. The big will get at least one two seed. Maybe two though that second one will be in jeopardy if Oklahoma can run the table.
Politics:
SCar (SEC)
Indiana (Big10)
Stanford (PAC)
UConn (BigE)
VTech (ACC)
Then three more from these
Iowa
Utah
LSU
Maybe Oklahoma
Sorry but you never provide evidence to back up your claims, or bother to look at recent history it seems. See as recently as last year when NC State and Louisville from the ACC both got 1-seeds.No. The Big will not get two one seeds. No conference will.
I'm not using Creme or anybody else. I was going solely off of what the Committee has released for my personal reasoning.Maryland was a full seed line higher than Iowa before that game. Creme and Gauer both had UMD as 1s after the loss.
Sorry but you never provide evidence to back up your claims, or bother to look at recent history it seems. See as recently as last year when NC State and Louisville from the ACC both got 1-seeds.
If and only if they run the table. Remember, the Big 12 tournament hasn’t started yetLol at Oklahoma. Seriously?
They weren't even in the last top 16.If and only if they run the table. Remember, the Big 12 tournament hasn’t started yet
If they can pull it off, it would be a sight to see. But if not, they’ve pretty much fitted themselves out for a 5 seed or worse.Ohio State going to need to break yesterday's comeback record to win today: 44-15 Iowa, 5:01 left in 2nd.
They might after the showing last year from the BE in the tournament. I think they get 4 teams. I think St. Johns ends up the odd one out, but they have that UConn win on their resume so you never know. But I think the Big East has 3 definite tournament teams, 1 'should be in' and 1 'might make it in'.The BE looks to me have three teams that are at least an 8 seed: Villanova Marquette and Creighton. And UConn is a credible #1 seed or at worst a solid 2 seed. But will the committee let 4 BE teams in? I fear not.
7 by my count:Its happened quite a few times. The ACC has probably had four cases of getting double #1 seeds
7 by my count:
2006 Duke/UNC
2007 Duke/UNC
2008 Maryland/UNC
2009 Duke/Maryland
2018 Louisville/ND
2019 Louisville/ND
2022 Louisville/NC State
Only 1 title has emerged in those 7 years, with it ironically being Maryland winning in 2006 when they were a #2 seed.
Stop it. Oklahoma has not even been in the Top 16 in any reveal. Even if they win the conference tourney, that won't add any wins over Top 10 NET teams.If and only if they run the table. Remember, the Big 12 tournament hasn’t started yet
No, they have not (though Texas is NET 11). I admit that my mention of Oklahoma was a shock tactic to draw outrage. I also doubt the Big 12 gets a top 8 seedStop it. Oklahoma has not even been in the Top 16 in any reveal. Even if they win the conference tourney, that won't add any wins over Top 10 NET teams.
Several of us have been saying on here for the last couple of weeks that no Big 12 team will get a Top 8 national seed.
No, they have not (though Texas is NET 11). I admit that my mention of Oklahoma was a shock tactic to draw outrage. I also doubt the Big 12 gets a top 8 seed
BUT
In my opinion, Oklahoma is being royally screwed by the NET algorithm and the committee will probably continue to screw them.
They are the Big 12 regular season co-champion and are ranked only 36th by the NET algorithm. By contrast, the other Big 12 co-champ, your Longhorns are ranked 11th by the same algorithm and Iowa State is ranked 14th.
Oklahoma is 24-5 overall and 14-2 in conference play
TeXas is 23-8 overall and 14-2 in conference play
Iowa State is only 19-9 overall and only 11-5 in conference play
I guess (according to Alexis Phillipou of ESPN) the women's committee does not place importance on Quad records like the men's committee does (topic for different day) But I want to look at the Quad records to show how these three teams did against top-50-ish teams.
Oklahoma has played twelve Quad One Games and is 8-4 but also has a one Quad Two loss for a Q1 wins minus losses net of plus 3.
Texas has played fourteen Quad One Games and is 7-7 but also has one Quad Two loss for a Q1 wins minus losses net of -1
Iowa State has played fourteen Quad One games and is 6-8 but also has one Quad Two loss for a Q1 wins minus losses net of -3.
So, it looks like Texas is and Iowa State get a rankings boost for playing two more Q-1 teams even though they lost thse games!
At the present NET ranking, Texas and Oklahoma State would get 1st/2d round games at home but Oklahoma would not.
Of course, the Big 12 Tournament will change these number and the results remain to be seen but The NET Algorithm rewards Texas and Iowa State while penalizing the Conference Co-Champ. (BTW, if Oklahoma wins out, add three more Q-One wins, which would put them in the top 8 Q-One minus losses net wins. )
NET is an algorithm and has no bias against Oklahoma; however, the result is illogical. Some over emphasis in the algorith has to be adjusted in the future. I hope the committee adjust Oklahoma's actual seeding - especially if they win out
I'm not saying they are the best in the conference, but just that the 36th rank is way too LowOklahoma is presently 17th per Massey, which is about right, if a little high. The problem is that if you sort their wins by Massey rank, they are 2-5 against top teams, they had two blowout losses to Texas, a massive blowout to Utah, and two ~10pt losses to Baylor and Iowa State. And their only two top 30 wins are a 3pt home win vs. Iowa State and a 2pt OT win at Baylor. That's an awfully thin resume, and especially for NET, which factors in margin of victory. That they also have the 231st(!!) ranked defense doesn't help suggest they're a particularly top squad...